ROBLATCH Posted May 7, 2007 Report Share Posted May 7, 2007 What the hell is wrong with this country? Tony Blair dead right mate ! hopefully not for much longer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
il cacciatore Posted May 7, 2007 Report Share Posted May 7, 2007 What the hell is wrong with this country? Tony Blair dead right mate ! hopefully not for much longer Yeh, Gordon Brown! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Highlander Posted May 8, 2007 Report Share Posted May 8, 2007 What I don't quite understand is that this guy must have had a history of bad tempered, violent behaviour so how come he still has an FAC? Police cock up (again!)? Neighbours and his fishing mate (apparently) said he rowed all the time with his gf. No doubt it'll all come out in the report. I'm sorry but if you can't control it (your temper) then don't expect to get/keep an FAC! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pedro Posted May 8, 2007 Report Share Posted May 8, 2007 (edited) What I don't quite understand is that this guy must have had a history of bad tempered, violent behaviour so how come he still has an FAC? Police cock up (again!)? Neighbours and his fishing mate (apparently) said he rowed all the time with his gf. No doubt it'll all come out in the report. I'm sorry but if you can't control it (your temper) then don't expect to get/keep an FAC! Not more police bashing . was it their fault? How long is a "history" of behaviour? Rumour and speculation once again. According to the Telegraph he'd had a boozy night down the local and had been kicked out of the pub. I think this is all missing the point, that is that a PC was shot trying to rescue 2 colleagues who were being held hostage - personally I think he deserves a medal, (to go with the other commendations he'd already won for similair acts). Stop blaming other people for the results of the way someone behaves or acts :unsure: P. Edited May 9, 2007 by Axe Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
naddan28 Posted May 8, 2007 Report Share Posted May 8, 2007 To be fair someone arguing with there gf/missus doesn't make them violent! You haven't seen my gf being told she cant go shopping at bluewater, doesn't mean I shouldn't be allowed a FAC/SGC! In that case 80% of PW would be handing their guns in! If the police have missed something obvious like a assult conviction last month then fair enough, but it seems he was a respectable former gamekeeper, now current pest controller who was a responsible FAC holder and well liked member of the community, just obviously something happened and then he flipped. Will wait for the report before commenting further. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pedro Posted May 8, 2007 Report Share Posted May 8, 2007 :unsure: P. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Axe Posted May 9, 2007 Report Share Posted May 9, 2007 It would be good if the Police could clarify the whole situation. Particularly that of the rifles used. The Police reports stated that the rifle that was used to shoot the unfortunate PC was legally owned. It then goes on to say that a .222 rifle was recovered. It doesnt say that the .222 was the rifle that was used. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SNAKEBITE Posted May 9, 2007 Report Share Posted May 9, 2007 it doesn't matter what rifle was used. If you asked a cross section of the public what a .222 was how many are going to know? Or indeed care? The sad thing is that no matter how well policed the sysem is, as long as there are any guns out there there will always be unfortunate incidents. Banning them will not solve anything. If you banned everything dangerous then there would be nothing left! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Axe Posted May 9, 2007 Report Share Posted May 9, 2007 it doesn't matter what rifle was used.If you asked a cross section of the public what a .222 was how many are going to know? Or indeed care? The sad thing is that no matter how well policed the sysem is, as long as there are any guns out there there will always be unfortunate incidents. Banning them will not solve anything. If you banned everything dangerous then there would be nothing left! No it doesnt matter at all, but it does demonstrate how the media and others jump to conclusions, when the Police do not clearly explain the details at press conferences. :unsure: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SNAKEBITE Posted May 9, 2007 Report Share Posted May 9, 2007 But isn't it only us that are jumping to conclusions (as gun users) as to the calibre etc of the gun? I have not seen any jumping to conclusions by the media on this subject. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Axe Posted May 9, 2007 Report Share Posted May 9, 2007 That all depends on which tabloid you read, news report you listen too, newscast you watch, but yes some of us will no doubt jump to conclusions too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
al4x Posted May 9, 2007 Report Share Posted May 9, 2007 the BBC kept calling it a ratcatcher! means nothing to me. What needs answering is just why the officer didn't put on his protective equipment and obviously ran into the situation a bit too quicklly Looking through his history he had numerous times disarmed people at close quarters which is fine but if you keep doing it someone will shoot you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Axe Posted May 9, 2007 Report Share Posted May 9, 2007 Yes I was quite surprised at his hastey response. The fact that he didnt follow protocol, I wonder if this will effect the case in anyway. Even his family, could his wife possibly loose out on his pension? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
al4x Posted May 9, 2007 Report Share Posted May 9, 2007 I wouldn't say so, they are trying to make it sound heroic rather than too hasty. To my mind he knew he was dealing with an armed man, he should have known what weapons he could be facing and that the guy knew how to use them, so running in half equipped was a very bad idea. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Axe Posted May 9, 2007 Report Share Posted May 9, 2007 I guess we'll never know why he did it, poor sod. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hunter Posted May 9, 2007 Report Share Posted May 9, 2007 it doesn't matter what rifle was used.If you asked a cross section of the public what a .222 was how many are going to know? Or indeed care? The sad thing is that no matter how well policed the sysem is, as long as there are any guns out there there will always be unfortunate incidents. Banning them will not solve anything. If you banned everything dangerous then there would be nothing left! You would be suprised ho many shooters dont know what a .222 is.. A good few hunters in my area just refer to it as 'the rifle' :unsure: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldBill Posted May 9, 2007 Report Share Posted May 9, 2007 I do not know the full circs, but can tell you this. He deployed as part of an Armed Response Vehicle and would have been armed with a Self Loading Pistol and maybe a carbine (MP5/G36). Standing orders across the UK preclude "rushing in". He would have been aware of this and more likely than not told again over the radio. Armed police are allowed to "self deploy" in the event of danger to life, ie the rifle being pointed at someone. Looking at his history (ex military and previous commendations) that would suggest quite conversely to previous suggestions, that his actions were considered and deliberate. He would have been one of at least a pair of officers. No amount of body armour will protect from a head shot. I would imagine that details are deliberatly being witheld as part of the investigation. Once the findings are complete it will be in the public domain and be common knowledge. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Axe Posted May 9, 2007 Report Share Posted May 9, 2007 The report I read suggested that he had left not only his safety gear in the car (including helmet) but also his available firearms. I do agree that I feel details are being held back deliberately. My thoughts are with his family. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SNAKEBITE Posted May 9, 2007 Report Share Posted May 9, 2007 I wouldn't say so, they are trying to make it sound heroic rather than too hasty. To my mind he knew he was dealing with an armed man, he should have known what weapons he could be facing and that the guy knew how to use them, so running in half equipped was a very bad idea. Hind sight is a wonderful thing isn't it? I would say he was reacting as quickly as possible to save lives. I am the first one to moan at the police when they do something daft but on occasions like this I would rather someone like him behind me than someone with your attitude, I could be dead by the time you have stopped faffing about. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
al4x Posted May 9, 2007 Report Share Posted May 9, 2007 its not exactly hind sight its what I'd expect of Firearms officers. Obviously we only go on what we can read in the press but I'd expect a firearms officer dealing with a firearms incident to go fully tooled up. Especially if its to the aid of other unarmed officers who are in trouble with someone in posession of a gun. I'm sure there is more to it than has been released and we may never hear the result as its not front page news any more. If axe is right then its even more amazing but maybe not surprising if you look at the officers awards and commendations Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SNAKEBITE Posted May 9, 2007 Report Share Posted May 9, 2007 Steaming in tooled up isn't exactly going to calm the situation down is it? It might work in the films but i would imagine it would panic some people into making a rash decision. It was probably a judgement call. But you are right, until we know all the details it is hard to make an opinion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Axe Posted May 9, 2007 Report Share Posted May 9, 2007 I agree that one would expect an officer of this calibre to be equipped for the job in hand. For what ever reason, he made a judgement call not to. It was the right call as he saved the lives of his fellow officers. It was also the wrong call for which he has already payed the ultimate price for. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teal Posted May 9, 2007 Report Share Posted May 9, 2007 I doubt we'll ever know what actually happened. From what you guys are saying it sounds like perhaps two deaths could have been avoided, and that is tragic. My first thought was that maybe he didn't intend to kill anyone and it was in panic/emotion that he fired, but then why on earth would he have got his rifle presumably out of the safe- this almost suggest pre-meditated which is very worrying. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deadeye ive Posted May 9, 2007 Report Share Posted May 9, 2007 Not more police bashing . was it their fault? How long is a "history" of behaviour? Rumour and speculation once again. According to the Telegraph he'd had a boozy night down the local and had been kicked out of the pub.I think this is all missing the point, that is that a PC was shot trying to rescue 2 colleagues who were being held hostage - personally I think he deserves a medal, (to go with the other commendations he'd already won for similair acts). Stop blaming other people for the results of the way someone behaves or acts P. No system is fullproof and TBH those that know your character are those closest to you so imagine senario's where by a concerned friend or relative contacted the Police to say they were worried about your behaviour and your firearms were confiscated as a result.......A big call to make and could you make such a call if your own intervention did'nt work :Unfortunately it takes a act of violence as in this case . The man was'nt fit to own a firearm in the first place and managed to hide a part of himself from authorities concerned but if this side showed itself to friends and family on several previous occasions then maybe they should ask themselves some questions . My thoughts go out to the policemans family Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hunter Posted May 9, 2007 Report Share Posted May 9, 2007 I agree that one would expect an officer of this calibre to be equipped for the job in hand. For what ever reason, he made a judgement call not to. It was the right call as he saved the lives of his fellow officers. It was also the wrong call for which he has already payed the ultimate price for. I think you are spot on. For once someone has said something that does not lead to blaming someone for their actions, and showed that it was down to the officers decision at the scene which lead to his fate. We cant all go running around blaming someone for what has happened, the least we can do is trust in the officers decision that he did what he knew was best at the scene. He has spent many years dealing with similar situations before.. yet most of us have never had to deal with something like this before, I think its only fair we wait for further details (providiong the Media has not made up their own as they see fit) before making a judgment on how this officer dealt with this unfortunate situation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.