Worrying Man shot dead by police on tube train: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4706787.stm This is a very shocking item for we Brits who are not used to armed police shootouts. I am listening to eye-witnesses who describe the guy being tackled to the ground and 5 shots being emptied into the "victim" ... curiouser and curioser .... :confused:
Do you think since the terrorist attack they've quietly issued guns to the general police? If that's the case, do you think most Londoners would be horrified or relieved?
I know they haven't. We do have more armed police than is widely believed. This is largely due to the long history of IRA terrorism. I remember the first time I was baulked in trying to take a shortcut thru central London only to find it was closed due to a security scare (early '90's). The (ahem) officer who redirected me was armed with a very efficient looking wire-stocked SLR and he was well-armored, too. I have heard more today on the news that our cops have been retrianing and rewriting their rules of engagement vis firearms since 9/11. In the UK armed police traditionaly must (a) declare their armed status and (b) shoot for the mid-torso, that being the largest target. Obviously shooting a suicide bomber in the chest might be a little counter-productive. The person who was shot at a London tube station this morning was (apparently) shot in the head after being tackled to the floor of a train car. London is one of the most densely filled parts of the planet when it comes to CCTV security cameras. They're on almost the buses, all over the Tube and on every street corner. The cops have released pretty good photo's of the suspects involved in yesterday's bombing attempts. It seems their bombs didn't explode because their homemade explosive had past its explode before date. I'm sorry but I cannot help but smirk slightly at that. Those that survive will face a very hard time in a British jail ... makes me very glad that we don't have the death penalty.
So, did they ever release what they found on the man? In his backpack? Did they give proof to say, "Yes, if we hadn't tripped this man and shot him 5 times in the head, he would have hurt or killed someone?" Because I sortof need to know that. I don't want to think of police in a civilized society going off half-cocked and shooting suspicious-looking people just because they look suspicious. :(
Meanwhile, back in the Paranoid States of America http://www.rrdailyherald.com/articles/2005/07/22/news/news1.txt This is my local newspaper. Even though they talk big, you must understand that we are in the middle of nowhere, and this dam they are talking about is off the beaten path in the middle of nowhere. My husband goes fishing there occasionally. I don't really understand why terrorists would have an interest in it, but the two guys do sound really odd. A lot of people here are upset that they were released. :(
To both your points, Kristal. No we have no further information on the shooting. We will not get any now until the formal coroner's inquest I suspect; our legal system prevent trial by press (as far as that is either possible or desirable) with strong sub judice laws ... I'm not sure how much of a good thing that is it sometimes. The beauty of terrorism is that given sufficient threat it can achieve the eponymous part of its name by establishing an aura of terror within its target communities ... even when the said community is resloutely determined, otherwise to continue life "as normal". The sub-text of Islamist terrorism, it seems to me, is not the openly declared (and vauntingly ambitious aim of destroying 'democracy') but instead the more insidious one of setting honest secular non-moslems directly against the mainstream (honest and non-secular) world of Islam. The ultimate outcome for such a train of thought is rather more uncomfortable than I am willing to consider ... at least in public.
UK police kill Brazilian in blunder 15:46 AEST Sun Jul 24 2005 AAP British police hunting London bombers admitted killing a Brazilian man by mistake - a blunder that dealt a blow to their efforts to track down militants they fear could strike again. Police expressed regret for the tragedy and named the innocent victim as Jean Charles de Menezes, a 27-year-old electrician who had been living in London for three years. Security experts said police had clearly adopted a "shoot-to-kill" policy in confronting suspected bombers. Anti-terrorism expert Robert Ayers of the Royal Institute of International Affairs said police have "demonstrated that they are operating on the premise right now that if they suspect that someone is a bomber, and that the public is going to be endangered by him, they have shoot-to-kill orders". So there you go, an unfortunate accident, this is just a small section of the article relating to this event, but I'm sure you would all know what's happened by now.
Yeah, Sylla. I got the news last night and I wasn't greatly cheered to know that my fears were realised so soon. This is so perfect for the terrorists. To have everyone in a constant state of fear and apprehension. What is a person to do when being chased by a mob of people? What are police to do when on covert surveillance? (Wear bright clothing marked "cops"?) What is an armed cop to do when he or she fears the person they're pursuing is extremely likely to be a suicide bomber? Talk about heads they win, tails we lose! :(
As horrible as I feel to say this, i would prefer 1 dead innocent man than for them to be correct and it be a bomber and do nothing, resulting in a lot of dead innocent people. And I understand why they shot him in the head, no chances can be taken, if it is a suicide bomber then the explosives are strapped around their waist. What choices are there?
