ordnance Posted June 7, 2021 Report Share Posted June 7, 2021 1 minute ago, 12gauge82 said: There's a huge difference between think and believe in legal terms, believe being a much stronger test. By your reasoning of 100% certainty you wouldn't of shot any of the terrorists who attacked London, it's not like the cops have a picture of them, but react to what they see in front of them and form a reasonable bleif that the man in front of them is the terrorist. That does leave a small chance of making a mistake or a breakdown in the chain of command as happened in the Mendez case. And don't worry, I'm no cop. A guy stabbing people while openly wearing a suicide vest, i would have no issue shooting him if i was a firearms officer. Quote The Metropolitan Police is adamant that the Stockwell Tube incident was not a Kratos operation and that it was not how the armed response officers were briefed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
12gauge82 Posted June 7, 2021 Report Share Posted June 7, 2021 49 minutes ago, ordnance said: A guy stabbing people while openly wearing a suicide vest, i would have no issue shooting him if i was a firearms officer. What about the guy reported to you via radio that is carrying a device and about to blow members of the public to pieces? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
12gauge82 Posted June 8, 2021 Report Share Posted June 8, 2021 https://news.sky.com/story/fishmongers-hall-attack-inquest-hears-firearms-officers-trained-to-take-head-shot-in-case-suicide-bomb-was-set-off-remotely-12327884 This backs up alot of what I've said on this thread, particularly around the taking of head shots. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ordnance Posted June 8, 2021 Report Share Posted June 8, 2021 (edited) 1 hour ago, 12gauge82 said: https://news.sky.com/story/fishmongers-hall-attack-inquest-hears-firearms-officers-trained-to-take-head-shot-in-case-suicide-bomb-was-set-off-remotely-12327884 This backs up alot of what I've said on this thread, particularly around the taking of head shots. Knowing that would a real suicide bomber not use a dead man switch, they might be a lot of things but i would not rely on them being stupid. Edited June 8, 2021 by ordnance Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
12gauge82 Posted June 8, 2021 Report Share Posted June 8, 2021 51 minutes ago, ordnance said: Knowing that would a real suicide bomber not use a dead man switch, they might be a lot of things but i would not rely on them being stupid. Maybe, although again it's not a movie, imagine how long a bomber has to carry a device before detonating it, there'd probably be a good chance of it going off prematurely, or a chance of shooting them before they armed it. I think the more likely risk would be a device controlled via a second person using a phone. The point is, the best chance you have to stop a suicide bomber is shooting them in the head like the police did. We can criticise as much as we want, but it's not a movie, they can do their best and that's it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fisheruk Posted June 9, 2021 Report Share Posted June 9, 2021 I’m glad we’ve got these type of folk protecting us from these fanatics. Taking out a frantic lunatic is nothing like stalking. There’s no such thing as overkill dead is dead and the danger eliminated. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scully Posted June 9, 2021 Report Share Posted June 9, 2021 5 hours ago, Fisheruk said: I’m glad we’ve got these type of folk protecting us from these fanatics. But that’s the thing, they can’t protect anyone, not even themselves. If it had been a real suicide vest and it’s wearer had genuine intent, then all concerned would now likely be dead. Regarding shooting anyone in the head….it is doable if the target is static, but bobbing about all over the place as in a fight, the shooter needs to be very very close indeed, close enough to be blown to smithereens alongwith the bomber. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
12gauge82 Posted June 9, 2021 Report Share Posted June 9, 2021 2 hours ago, Scully said: But that’s the thing, they can’t protect anyone, not even themselves. If it had been a real suicide vest and it’s wearer had genuine intent, then all concerned would now likely be dead. Regarding shooting anyone in the head….it is doable if the target is static, but bobbing about all over the place as in a fight, the shooter needs to be very very close indeed, close enough to be blown to smithereens alongwith the bomber. Your of course right, however if you look at some of the recent footage they have done it while in plain clothing from concealment and in that situation they have a chance to stop them. The other thing is once the police become aware of a suicide bomber they obviously must act and the best tactic that is viable is what they've done. I know you haven't criticised them for that, but others on the thread have. I'm still waiting for an answer as to how it could be dealt with better, but I won't hold my breath. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Walker570 Posted June 9, 2021 Report Share Posted June 9, 2021 (edited) Keep shooting till they stop wriggling. Job done. I'll add another slab of beer Mel. Job well done. We had some Americans over and they said that high on drugs they have had criminals still keep coming after a full clip of 357 magnum. They will die eventually but just might take you with them. Unless you have been there in the heat of the moment then do not denigrate those who have. Edited June 9, 2021 by Walker570 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ordnance Posted June 9, 2021 Report Share Posted June 9, 2021 (edited) Quote Unless you have been there in the heat of the moment then do not denigrate those who have. So don't have a opinion and expresses it, unless you have tackled a suicide bomber Quote We had some Americans over and they said that high on drugs they have had criminals still keep coming after a full clip of 357 magnum. They will die eventually but just might take you with them. Is that not common knowledge. Quote The other thing is once the police become aware of a suicide bomber they obviously must act and the best tactic that is viable is what they've done. I know you haven't criticised them for that, but others on the thread have. I'm still waiting for an answer as to how it could be dealt with better, but I won't hold my breath. Start with making sure is is a suicide bomber and not a innocent civilian, once they are sure like on the bridge then do what they did. Edited June 9, 2021 by ordnance Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
12gauge82 Posted June 9, 2021 Report Share Posted June 9, 2021 (edited) 1 hour ago, ordnance said: So don't have a opinion and expresses it, unless you have tackled a suicide bomber Is that not common knowledge. Start with making sure is is a suicide bomber and not a innocent civilian, once they are sure like on the bridge then do what they did. Your missing the point, the commanders stated they were sure, the poor coppers on the ground did their duty and your blaming them for it. It's very easy for you to sit in your arm chair and criticise years down the line, after every decision has been analised one micro second at a time, the cops on the ground had seconds and even fractions of seconds to decide some of there actions at the time. Edited June 9, 2021 by 12gauge82 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GingerCat Posted June 9, 2021 Report Share Posted June 9, 2021 1 hour ago, 12gauge82 said: Your missing the point, the commanders stated they were sure, the poor coppers on the ground did their duty and your blaming them for it. It's very easy for you to sit in your arm chair and criticise years down the line, after every decision has been analised one micro second at a time, the cops on the ground had seconds and even fractions of seconds to decide some of there actions at the time. Your wasting your time. This is pigeon watch, where shooting bunnies with a .22 or roe with a .243 on a leisurely stroll is directly comparable with shooting terrorists in a fast moving situation with scratch Intel in a capital city in peak hours. So comparable in fact that you can criticise group size and use hindsight to second guess guess decision they had microseconds to make based upon what they knew that they heard on 1 of 3 radio channels. The terminator would be hard placed to compare with some on here, even on a good day. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rewulf Posted June 10, 2021 Report Share Posted June 10, 2021 14 hours ago, GingerCat said: Your wasting your time. This is pigeon watch, where shooting bunnies with a .22 or roe with a .243 on a leisurely stroll is directly comparable with shooting terrorists in a fast moving situation with scratch Intel in a capital city in peak hours. So comparable in fact that you can criticise group size and use hindsight to second guess guess decision they had microseconds to make based upon what they knew that they heard on 1 of 3 radio channels. The terminator would be hard placed to compare with some on here, even on a good day. Well said ! On a slightly different note, a few mentioned the excessive 20 rounds fired, i myself mentioned it didnt sound like 20 'bangs' in the video. Its possible that the officers were using burst fire, usually 3 round burst in some weapons, but I believe the HK G36C used by Met police has a 2 round burst mode ? This does in fact sound like one report, so rather than the officers using 20 trigger presses to overcome the target, 2 officers , 5 trigger presses each ? Of course I could be wrong , but it makes more sense this way. https://www.heckler-koch.com/en/products/military/assault-rifles/g36/g36c/technical-data.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDog Posted June 10, 2021 Report Share Posted June 10, 2021 14 hours ago, GingerCat said: Your wasting your time. This is pigeon watch, where shooting bunnies with a .22 or roe with a .243 on a leisurely stroll is directly comparable with shooting terrorists in a fast moving situation with scratch Intel in a capital city in peak hours. So comparable in fact that you can criticise group size and use hindsight to second guess guess decision they had microseconds to make based upon what they knew that they heard on 1 of 3 radio channels. The terminator would be hard placed to compare with some on here, even on a good day. Good one. Don't you get sick of these experts on here? Ones that have never been in the Police Service or Armed Forces but who know how to deal with a terrorist threat or a madman on the loose with a weapon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ordnance Posted June 10, 2021 Report Share Posted June 10, 2021 21 hours ago, 12gauge82 said: Your missing the point, the commanders stated they were sure, the poor coppers on the ground did their duty and your blaming them for it. It's very easy for you to sit in your arm chair and criticise years down the line, after every decision has been analised one micro second at a time, the cops on the ground had seconds and even fractions of seconds to decide some of there actions at the time. They pulled the triggers they are ultimately responsible for his death, having a second to decide before shooting the wrong person might be good enough for your but not for me. Its easy when its some obscure person, I look at it like what if it was my son or other family member would i say no problem they had limited time to decide and were only doing their job. I don't think so, and a bet some on here defending them might think differently if it came to their door. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnfromUK Posted June 10, 2021 Report Share Posted June 10, 2021 7 minutes ago, ordnance said: I don't think so, and a bet some on here defending them might think differently if it came to their door. The inquest verdict was lawful killing; https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-57424420 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
strimmer_13 Posted June 10, 2021 Report Share Posted June 10, 2021 Well I didn't know he got stabbed by a narwhal tusk 10 minutes ago, JohnfromUK said: The inquest verdict was lawful killing; https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-57424420 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Walker570 Posted June 10, 2021 Report Share Posted June 10, 2021 I remember being turned out to a potentila armed robbery attempt at a post office on our patch. As a team of four we turned up at the Station and laid out what we required. Two shotguns and sufficient SSGs plus a semi auto pistol each with a full clip. Our Chief Super turned up and almost fainted. He then instructed that each team member should tak just a pistol and one round. All four of us bid him farewell and walked out of the station. The duty Inspector caught up with us and persuaded us to return and advise as to why we required what we had selected. Eventually common sense prevailed. We didn't need to fire a single shot and the criminals where locked up. Present thinking. Should we have maybe sent a police woman in first to have a chat with them and see if they intended turning nasty. Hmmmmmmm ?????????????????? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ordnance Posted June 10, 2021 Report Share Posted June 10, 2021 48 minutes ago, JohnfromUK said: The inquest verdict was lawful killing; https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-57424420 Looks fair to me, open and shut case. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
12gauge82 Posted June 10, 2021 Report Share Posted June 10, 2021 1 hour ago, ordnance said: They pulled the triggers they are ultimately responsible for his death, having a second to decide before shooting the wrong person might be good enough for your but not for me. Its easy when its some obscure person, I look at it like what if it was my son or other family member would i say no problem they had limited time to decide and were only doing their job. I don't think so, and a bet some on here defending them might think differently if it came to their door. And there's your problem, your looking at this from the standpoint of someone who is accidentally killed. Put yourself in the position of a family member killed because a cop stood by and did nothing as your son was killed by a terrorist for fear of being convicted by someone like you on a jury at trial. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ordnance Posted June 10, 2021 Report Share Posted June 10, 2021 8 minutes ago, 12gauge82 said: And there's your problem, your looking at this from the standpoint of someone who is accidentally killed. Put yourself in the position of a family member killed because a cop stood by and did nothing as your son was killed by a terrorist for fear of being convicted by someone like you on a jury at trial. That would all be fine if they shot a suicide bomber shooting a innocent civilian did not save anyone, if they have a fear of being convicted if they mess up they are in the wrong job. What's the alternative if you shoot the wrong person don't worry about it, immunity from prosecution ? I would be more concerned if police firearms officers did not have a fear of possible prosecution. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
12gauge82 Posted June 10, 2021 Report Share Posted June 10, 2021 6 minutes ago, ordnance said: That would all be fine if they shot a suicide bomber shooting a innocent civilian did not save anyone, if they have a fear of being convicted if they mess up they are in the wrong job. What's the alternative if you shoot the wrong person don't worry about it, immunity from prosecution ? I would be more concerned if police firearms officers did not have a fear of possible prosecution. So you want to see people locked up for acting on a honest held belief that there is an imminent threat to life. All you'll find is no one would do the job and terrorists could act with impunity. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clangerman Posted June 10, 2021 Report Share Posted June 10, 2021 5 minutes ago, 12gauge82 said: So you want to see people locked up for acting on a honest held belief that there is an imminent threat to life. All you'll find is no one would do the job and terrorists could act with impunity. if the menezes lad was shot by accident what is your explanation for paying his family a 100 grand in compensation ruck sacks are not that expensive Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ordnance Posted June 10, 2021 Report Share Posted June 10, 2021 Quote So you want to see people locked up for acting on a honest held belief that there is an imminent threat to life. All you'll find is no one would do the job and terrorists could act with impunity. Only when they get it wrong, they got it right on London bridge. If officers won't do the job because they could be prosecuted, then they shouldn't be in the job in the first place. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scully Posted June 10, 2021 Report Share Posted June 10, 2021 5 minutes ago, clangerman said: if the menezes lad was shot by accident what is your explanation for paying his family a 100 grand in compensation ruck sacks are not that expensive For crying out loud! Why on earth do you keep banging on about the Menedes case? He wasn’t shot by accident! He was shot deliberately, because intelligence identified him as a threat. You make it sound like a negligent discharge! Yes, they got it wrong, but they were acting on information they had received. What were they expected to do? 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.