OT

So you think the police shooting 15yo kids is a joke now..

Nev..
'07 XB12X
'08 DL1000K8

 

shooting at anything other than center of mass in a for real
confrontation is for 2 kinds of marksmen:
1. fools (who will soon be dead or seriously injured)
2. the most skilled and experienced tenth of a percent or so of
marksmen, preferably with an adrenaline bypass.

I'm not entirely convinced (yet) of the story told by the police
(which is, conveniently enough, the only one available) but
criticizing cops for responding as prompted by their training will not
accomplish a thing.

The important thing here is not to question training methods and
procedures which are appropriate and well suited to the situation the
police have described, but to hammer away at their story until it
either falls apart or has demonstrated itself to be reliable

Part of this is the coroners job, our part is to maintain political
pressure so as to ensure the coroners inquiry is rigorous.

 

I'm surprised that they attempted to shoot the alleged offender in the
legs. AFAIK, police are trained to aim for the largest target, which is
the chest area. Two reasons for this - less chance of missing and thus
hitting someone else, and more likely to stop the perp in his tracks.

Pistols (particularly the old .38s) are notoriously inaccurate at
anything over 10 metres.

 

That is very interesting. Why would they do such a thing?
<assumption>Perhaps the victim was further away or coming towards them
slower so 'leg shooter' made a decision to aim there.</assumption>

<more likely assumption>Perhaps it was only rumored to be the case
(i.e. it's not true: the cops followed their training). The benefit
of suggesting this would be to give people the idea they tried to stop
him before just shooting him dead after realising it was clearly
disproportionate force, knowing it will turn out to be untrue after
the public have calmed down a bit.</more likely assumption>

I remember in London when Jean Charles de Menezes was shot dead by the
police (22 July 2005) all kinds of inaccurate stories were floating
about... "He ran, they followed him. They say they gave him a
warning, they then shot him". CCTV footage later showed him walking
into the station, stopping to pick up a paper and using his Travelcard
to go through the barrier (not vault it, as the police said) walking
to his seat and sitting down. His last expression was one of
confusion. His fatal mistake appears to have been standing up and
smiling when asking the police how he could help. He was shot 7 times
including in the head.

How can I find out when the coroner's report is published?

 

You're comparing 4 cops who were on routine patrol and called to a job
involving a bloke with two knives, to an anti-terrorist operation where
the police involved in the operation believed they were dealing with a
terrorist who had a backpack full of explosives and was getting onto a
train full of people where there was a chance he might inflict massive
casualties.

Why are you so determined to believe that these 4 cops went to work that
day with an ambition to kill someone?

Nev..
'07 XB12X
'08 DL1000K8

 

So if the cops had just stood back, and one of them had then been
stabbed - and possibly died as a result - what would you be saying then?

The kid charged at armed police whilst he was himself armed, and was
trying his damnedest to kill at least one of them, even after police had
tried non-lethal methods to stop him.

Why should the life of a homicidal psychopathic racist arsehole be more
valuable to us than the lives of the cops who are there to protect us
from people like him?

-- Posted on news://freenews.netfront.net - Complaints to --

 

Maybe its because they were up against a kid, and despite increasing
danger to themselves, were still trying their very hardest to avoid
taking shots more likely to be lethal?

Can't blame the cops if the kid still kept coming and ultimately left
them no choice, can you?

-- Posted on news://freenews.netfront.net - Complaints to --

 

And I believed then and I believe now that those London police did the
wrong thing and were following very bad procedure.

The difference is that there was no weapon visible then and there was a
weapon visible with the teenager who was shot here.

The important point is proof of existence of a weapon, something the
London police lacked.


G-S

 

I thought they were threatening to kill more kids unless they got
tasers?

 

No, Nev, I am not comparing the two incidents in the way you are
suggesting.

What I said was "I remember when [some other debacle] happened, all
kinds of inaccurate stories were floating around." The implication
being, now another debacle has happened (presuming you agree this is a
disastrous cascade of events) it's quite possible there are a lot of
false truths in circulation, even printed in the Age.

They didn't HAVE to shoot him dead.

 

You're absolutely right. He didn't HAVE to steal two large knives, and
threaten to kill people. If he had stayed home and gone to bed this
would not have happened.

Nev..