"We are now satisfied that he was not connected with the incidents"

[Agathon]

Originally posted by notyoueither

Then document it, dumbass, and stop polluting this thread with arguments that rely on citations about Rodney King being chased down the freeway by the LAPD.

Go look for yourself. Fight or flight is a widely known fact. The Discovery Channel regularly shows documentaries about policing that deal with this subject. It's also a widely known fact that car chases are frowned upon for this very reason – the same reason that ordinary people run from the police apparently irrationally. Read up on it. The police themselves are interested in it because they want to do a better job and avoid situations like this.

You said that people who run from the police deserve what they get. The problem with that is that the facts regarding human beings under acute stress mean they don't. They aren't responsible in any normal sense of the word, nor are they being stupid. I know this, the cops know it... apparently you don't.

Without factoring this obvious feature of reality into it, your argument is a complete toilet and you've been owned.

[Alexander's Horse]

Originally posted by notyoueither


And a cop won't be prosecuted for blowing you away when you keep your weapon after he has confronted you.

Your point?

No a cop willl be prosecuted for that. Its called manslaughter or unlawful killing. Failure to obey a police instruction does not give the policeman the right to open fire even if you are armed.

And the innocent victim in this case was not armed. Your point?

[Agathon]

Originally posted by notyoueither

Key phrase, 'just cause', learn it.

Congratulations, you are now a fascist. You want to replace the social freedoms we enjoy with respect to our police, and replace them with a crude utilitarian calculus that would erode our social freedoms. That's not how free societies work sonny.

They did not have just cause in this case. If that's what you think just cause is, then I hope to God you never have a position of authority in any society.

It strikes me that you've resorted to bitter ripostes now you know you've been beat. Pretty funny....

[Agathon]

Originally posted by Alexander's Horse


No a cop willl be prosecuted for that. Its called manslaughter or unlawful killing. Failure to obey a police instruction does not give the policeman the right to open fire even if you are armed.

And the innocent victim in this caes was not armed. Your point?

His point is that he knows he's lost but can't admit it.

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by Alexander's Horse

I'm beginning to realise you aren't the sharpest pencil in the case.....

Really? How many mass homicides does London have in any given year that they should be so flippant about these ones?

I'd give a damn what you realised, if you seemed to have the judgement that God and nature gave a chimp.

[BlackCat]

Originally posted by Alexander's Horse


the last time I checked, that is before this incident which you so absurdly defend, ignoring a Policeman was not death penalty offense

And how many has sufferd this "death penalty" the last 14 days ?

Unles I'm wrong, there has onle been one - no other has been even near to such a situation - shortly said, your claim that it has become common police action is simply null an void.

[Agathon]

Originally posted by notyoueither

Really? How many mass homicides does London have in any given year that they should be so flippant about these ones?

This is the price we pay for living in a free society. Go live in North Korea if you don't like it. Like most people, I prefer a free society with a small risk of catastrophe to an unfree society where I am a little bit safer.

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by Agathon

Go look for yourself. Fight or flight is a widely known fact.

Then site it with regard to police in some fashion other than an article about high speed pursuits in North America that use Rodney King as an argument.

[Agathon]

Originally posted by BlackCat


And how many has sufferd this "death penalty" the last 14 days ?

You don't get it. One is too much. It doesn't matter how many people die from suicide bombings – allowing the police to do this sort of thing would fundamentally change the expectations we have of them, and not in a way that most people would like.

[Alexander's Horse]

wrong again Blackcat- the shoot to kill policy remains in place and was confirmed today in London - in other words more innocent people are likely to die

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by Alexander's Horse


No a cop willl be prosecuted for that. Its called manslaughter or unlawful killing. Failure to obey a police instruction does not give the policeman the right to open fire even if you are armed.

Ahem *bull*****, ahem.

And the innocent victim in this case was not armed. Your point?

Oh, quite droll we are today, I see.

Tell me how many barrels does a suicide bomber have visible?

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by Agathon

This is the price we pay for living in a free society. Go live in North Korea if you don't like it. Like most people, I prefer a free society with a small risk of catastrophe to an unfree society where I am a little bit safer.

You prefer dead cops and live criminals. We've already established that. Can we move on?

[Frozzy]

First of all, it is likely these men were not average police. It is more likely they were SAS or SBS. As a result, they are not average bobbies untrained in how to use firearms properly.

Additionally, the man legged it when they shouted "Stop! Police!", hurdled a turnstile and jumped onto a train. He had wires hanging from him (possibly a walkman, but given the puffy jacket also a chance it could be a bomb). His suspicious behaviour, probable struggle on the ground, and his ignoring of police warning means he was doing everything possible to ask to be shot, short of literally asking.

Question their means, I'm sure they do that all the time. But don't question their motives.

[BlackCat]

Originally posted by Alexander's Horse
wrong again - the shoot to kill policy remains in place and was confirmed today in London - in other words more innocent people are likely to die

Of course it is - give one good reason why it shouldn't.

The chance of an innocent going to be killed by police is close to nil.

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by Kalius
Question their means, I'm sure they do that all the time. But don't question their motives.

Indeed.