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

[Alexander's Horse]

sorry NYE - am I to understand you believe it is currently lawful for police to shoot people who disobey their instructions?

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by Agathon


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.

Originally posted by Alexander's Horse
complete overreaction and hysteria

[Alexander's Horse]

Originally posted by BlackCat

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

he says only days after an innocent person was brutally and deliberately shot to death by a policeman in a summary execution...what planet are you living on?

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by Alexander's Horse
sorry NYE - am I to understand you believe it is currently lawful for police to shoot people who disobey their instructions?

It is when they are a threat to the police themeslves or the safety of the public, yes.

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by Alexander's Horse


he says only days after an innocent person was brutally and deliberately shot to death by a policeman in a summary execution...what planet are you living on?

20 some days after scores died to bombs.

What is the colour of the sky on your planet?

[BlackCat]

Originally posted by Kalius
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.

I might be a little stubborn, but wether those guys that did the actual shooting was SAS, SBS or plain bobbies in plainclothes - does that change any reasons why they acted as thy did ?

[Agathon]

Originally posted by notyoueither

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.

Go look for it yourself. You'll find the fight/flight stress response in any good psychology primer.

[Agathon]

Originally posted by notyoueither

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

No I prefer dead criminals over dead cops, and dead cops over dead innocent civilians. That's how the system works bubs. Police take on a risky job voluntarily – that means they have to be the ones careful about shooting.

Nice to see how much you hate free societies though.

[Agathon]

Originally posted by Kalius
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.

That makes it worse. Military people on the street. Jesus...

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.

No it doesn't. Innocent people flee from the police all the time. Sometimes they have reasons, sometimes they are just experiencing an acute stress response. Just because people behave suspiciously is not just cause for emptying a magazine into their heads.

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

Who's doing that? I'm questioning the adequacy of their evidence and the presumption that looking foreign and strange and running from the police entitles them to shoot you.

[Alexander's Horse]

Originally posted by notyoueither


It is when they are a threat to the police themeslves or the safety of the public, yes.

Even that formulation is quite completely wrong. Go and find out what the law is and then come back and post something accurate.

[BlackCat]

Originally posted by Alexander's Horse
sorry NYE - am I to understand you believe it is currently lawful for police to shoot people who disobey their instructions?

Nope, it isn't allowed for any policeperson to do that, unless of course there has been a row of bombings of subways and a person acts like he may commit yet another such. I.m not that clear about english law, but I guess that if english policemens starts to gun down people at will, then they don't have any legal support. Just as they don't hve it in any other country with an even reasonable legislation.

[Alexander's Horse]

Originally posted by notyoueither


20 some days after scores died to bombs.

What is the colour of the sky on your planet?

yes killed by terrorists - so you want to authorise the police to act like terrorists. brilliant response

[BlackCat]

Originally posted by Alexander's Horse


he says only days after an innocent person was brutally and deliberately shot to death by a policeman in a summary execution...what planet are you living on?

Planet earth, but it seems that you live on a totally different one.

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by Agathon


Go look for it yourself. You'll find the fight/flight stress response in any good psychology primer.

You're the one riding the horse. You should at least be able to display it when asked.

[Agathon]

Originally posted by Alexander's Horse

Even that formulation is quite completely wrong. Go and find out what the law is and then come back and post something accurate.

Hilarious isn't it? I'd ask him what part of Germany he was from, but the Germans would get offended.