I live here. I use the train everyday. There is not one station where you can get on now without being searched.

http://www.thesun.co.uk/article/0,,2...330912,00.html

That link proves everything that has been said.

Tell me, how different to things have to get before it is acceptable to have someone down on the ground and it be perfectly acceptable to shoot him 5 times?

when people start blowing themselves up with bombs. Whats the acceptable leval over there?

That time is actually right now, but I imagine you ment "before it is not acceptable".

what is with you? how can you say what they did is not acceptable?
I really hope you are just winding people up, if not then you are just weird.

Look at the link to the sun, that both I and Relish posted, read what actually happened, and if you still think they should have waited to see if he actually did have a bomb and was going to blow it up then I'll give up trying to reason with you.

So everyone is fair game huh? People jump the turnstiles in NYC subways daily. I guess "shoot to kill" should be the order of the day for the transit police.

/Quote from the sun
As the suspect entered the Tube station they were given permission by a senior officer to shoot if they felt the public was in jeopardy.

And when the suspect began to travel down an escalator to the trains the officers yelled ?Police, stop!?

But the man fled, vaulting a ticket barrier and sprinting for the platform.

As he stumbled on to a northbound Victoria Line train the officers closed in.

One of them then opened fire, hitting the man in the head.

Last night police sources said the dead man was not armed or carrying explosives.

He was not thought to be one of the four failed suicide bombers from Thursday?s attacks.

But he IS believed to have close links to at least one terrorist.
/End Qoute

If thats the true,they have reason :2 cents:

They had him down. 5 cops on him, then they shot him. That is acceptable I guess.

Yet this isn't.

So, if I know someone that is a criminal, that makes me a criminal and subject to the same penalties?

If you leave a known terrorist suspects house. Go to the subway on a coat in the middle of summer. If when confronted by police you ignore them and jump the barrier, if the when the armed police chase you and you dont stop. If then when 7 arm police men say "stop or we will shoot" you still run in a known terrorist target area, you stll fail to stop.

Then yes expect to be shot. Clear enough?

By the way how many suspects were shot by US police last year compared to UK police. When your record is 10% as good as ours please come back and feel free to post

Yes if there had been 6 major terrorist attacks on those subways(3 happend on 7/7 and 3 failed on 7/21).
Do you really err on the side of lawlessness?

Those policemen were well within the boundaries of the law, they have a job to protect the general public as a whole which is not outwieghed by your individual rights. When policemen and those that are legally enforcing LAWS tell you to stop, you stop plain and simple. Anything after you disobey them happens to you it is YOUR fault 99.9% of the time plain and simple.

Wonder what will happen to the guys who try get in an aircraft cockpit in USA in future?

After all they are just confused foreigners who dont speak english well and were just dying for a piss after getting on a plane for a pleasant flight.

Next time - will the air marshall politely request that they sit down?

No they didn't, there were not 5 cops on him, again, are you just making things up?

Yes, that is very tragic with the little girl, but no, I don't blame the police, they have to defend them selfs if some one shoots at them.

exactly :2 cents:

I here that happens all the time in NYC. Heaven forbid the pilot pulls out a gun and wastes them.

If you come out of your criminals friends house, the police starts chasing you, tells you to stop your they will shoot and you disobey, then yes, you deserve to be shot! The police are there for a reason, they didn't simply shoot the man just for fun, are you really this blind, or is this some old biker attitude that the "man" is always in the wrong, and everybody should just be able to brake all rules and what ever.

For a man your age you sound like some stupid rebellious teenager

1) He was wearing a padded jacket in the middle of a heat wave.
2) His address was foundin documents in one of the rucsacks from the lasting bombings.
3) When approached by the police and asked to stop he fled.
4) He vaulted a ticket barrier and was trying to get onto a train.
5) He knows exactly what is happening in London at the moment.

He couldnt have tried harder to get shot.

99% of people agree with points 1-5

This chump was lucky he didnt get shot earlier

I just dont understand how other people in this thread cant see why he got shot dead.

Political correctnes?

I think they argue for the sake of an arguement. Seems like they arent really speaking up now after the facts were laid out to them with pictures. Pictures always help children read and understand.

So, if LAPD chases you thru 3 cities, they have the right to blow your brains out at the end of the chase?

Sweet.

If you are not an idiot you dont get shot. Why would an innocent person run through 3 cities? Innocent people tend to talk to the police.

and he 'looked like a terrorist' I think that would be a contributing factor :)

tough call there

Wouldn't they be out of their jurisdiction by then?

hehe, I've never seen you make your self look so bad, I don't think I've seen anyone make them selfs look so bad actually.
You actually make a better job of it than Jay did...

How many people did you endanger during that 3 city chase? Are you a wanted criminal? Did you just come from a bank that was robbed? Did you attempt to grab a little girl before the police caught you? Come on man this is just common sense you are simply being argumentative or ignorant. Normally baddog I give creedence(sp) to what you have to say but you are dead wrong here. No pun intended.

STOP WITH ALL THE STUPID FUCKING REMARKS AND HYPOTHETICAL IDIOCY ALREADY.

we get it! you have no trust for authority. why not just state that simple, obvious truth and stop the ignorance?

the facts so far seem to be that a guy was leaving a house already under surveilence in connection to the first bombings and matched the description of one of the bombing suspects - he was followed by several police. they saw him behaving erradically, they said he had what appeared to be a bomb (wires and something bulky under his jacket - also supported by witnesses) - he was ordered to stop - he ran AND SINCE YOU STILL DONT FUCKING GET IT - THERE IS NOT REALLY TOO MANY CHOICES. IF YOU REALLY BELIEVE A GUY IS ABOUT TO BLOW HIMSELF UP AND SEE EVIDENCE OF IT AND HE BOLTS FOR A TRAIN FULL OF PEOPLE AFTER BEING TOLD TO STOP - YOU KILL THE FUCKER!!!! END OF STORY.

thanks for the psych-ops exercise alexg, you're obviously smarter than the brain dead goys on GFY.

Note my username.

In a high speed chase, dozens if not hundreds are put at risk, do they have the right to execute him at the end of the chase? If not, why not?

And you do not understand at all why I am making the comments I have made . . . . and seem to have missed every other cop vs the criminal thread I have participated in.

Depends on how it goes down. If the guy stops the car and gets down with his hands on his head then the cops would be in the wrong to shoot him.
If the cops feel that he poses a reasonable threat they would be in the right to shoot him.

Not everyone reads all threads and remember who had what stance.
I for one have never read any cop vs. criminal threads that you have participated in. Just had a closer look at the other on you posted above and realise that what I had initially thoug is right, you were trying to make a point by posting ludicrous views.
But you continued to the extent that I thought you were being serious

I just heard on the news that the British police have confirmed that the guy they shot 5 times was not a bomber.

...

I guess terrorism does work after all.

did you actually read the first post?

Or perhaps even just the thread title?
Or do you have any idea what the whole situation actually is?
If you had a clue you would not say terrorism works.

how do you handle the fact that Rich thinks the opposite from you in this case? :)

Sigh. You misunderstood my post. I was referring to the fact that the goal of terrorism, is to make people afraid (ie terrorize). And if armed police are starting to shoot innocent people then they must be afraid - very afraid. Hence my statement "I guess terrorism does work after all."

I forgot that on GFY it's necessary to dummy things down a bit.

You do not need to have read much history to realize that the only reason terrorism does not work is if the terrorists themselves are not sufficiently determined and sufficiently patient.

How much is "sufficiently" depends on the issues and who the terrorists are facing, but is particularly hard for democratic countries to hold out against terrorism. Most of the time it suits politicians to have a dumbed down electorate which prefers reality shows to reality, but peoples' tolerance of fear, cost and inconvenience is necessarily limited when they neither understand nor care about the issues that are involved. Even their initial outrage is mainly instinctive reaction spurred on the rhetoric in the media, which of course soon passes.

As to the shooting of the guy who ran away from the police, I consider that he was responsible for what happened to him. But I don't think you can grow up in a country which used to be largely clear of gun-related violence and not have some concerns about anyone carrying them.

The police are the only ones who carry guns. If you are caught in possession of an illegal firearm you get a 2 year minimum complusory sentance.

No, that statement is not true, the British police have shot people innocent people before, and not so closely after a terrorist attack. If an armed police officer tells you to stop you stop, no matter what the circumstances are.
This guy comming from Brazil of all places, where some of the most trigger happy cops in the world live should have known that, but then again perhaps that was the reason for his actions.

The police is simply under instructions not to take any chances, and have been for years. The shoot to kill policy is not a new thing, England has been under terrorist threat for decades.

The only time when terrorism works is when people attack other people that fit a profile. Like now is happening with muslim people getting attacked in streets, or simply just verbally abused.
The tactics of the terrorists is to create a division between the groups, and a few simple sheep are going along with their plan.

In that sense it does work, but I wouldn't say it works on the police...

too bad thats not how the LAW is.

in LA here we have car chases daily, and cops are told to BACK OFF of the chase if it puts the public at risk, NOT FUCKING SHOOT PEOPLE!

not sure how they do in barcelona

In my opinion under the current terrorist threat in the UK the polie were right to open fire.

Read through this page and see what he did.
http://www.thesun.co.uk/article/0,,2...330912,00.html

Normally he would have just been arrested but he fucked up when we are fearing bomb attacks. I have no sympathy what so ever.

http://www.newsoftheworld.co.uk/stor...ws/news1.shtml

Do you know how big these barriers are?

You're talking about a completely different situation!
If the car chase is causing the suspect to behave in an eaven more reckless manner then ofcourse they should back down, but just that, back down. They will have to stop him eventually, and if when they stop him he puts his hands in his pocket as to reach for something the police should shoot him because they don't know if he has a gun.
Same in this incident, they did not know if he had a bomb.

Same here in Barcelona, same eveywhere, the police can not allow them self the luxury to let a criminal/suspect possibly cause harm to them or the public.
If a suspect disobeys a direct order he is possibly dangerous.
Of course different situations call for different methods, if a man is behaving disorderly and has a knife the police can decide to shoot him in the legs or what ever, if he has a gun/bomb they have to shoot to kill.

Everything else would be reckless behaviour from the police!

this thread is huge

sig spot

By the time the guy was on the ground and hadn't blown up it's pretty obvious he isn't a suicide bomber. I don't see why people here are working so hard to say that what happened is fine and good when the authorities themselves have admitted it was a mistake and issued an apology.

Another thing for you folks vigorously defending them:
Where is the surveilance footage of Mr. Menezes? They have camera shots of all the other suspects in and around trains and busses. Show the clips of this man. Let the world see a comparison of him and the man he was suspected of being. Let us see what constitutes a "heavily padded coat"...

What some of you seem to be missing is the fact that these were undercover policemen that had followed him all the way from where he started out. So if someone follows you from your house then yells I'm a cop are you going to stand there and let them shoot you, then take your shit because they really weren't a cop? As I said in a post last night, since they had followed him all the way from the house they had under surveilance they could have coordinated uniformed policemen to be there during the actual takedown, since some say they are all over the place at the station in question.

Give me one other example where a person in the UK, mistaken for a terrorist or a serious criminal, has had their head blown off by five shots fired in rapid succession at close range by the police.

My point still stands... clearly the shooting of this man, who was not a terrorist, in the manner in which he was shot, proves that the recent acts of terrorism have had the desired effect on the British police and citizens - namely to terrorize them. Not thinking clearly on critical matters is a sign that a person is experiencing terror. Even the London police admit an error was made in this critical life and death situation - it's hard to imagine the same error being made three weeks ago before the recent terrorism. In that sense the terrorist acts have worked. The British police are behaving as if London was fucking Saudia Arabia - mission accomplished for the terrorists.

Furthermore, being in a state of terror may also explain the runner's errors in judgement. Which just reinforces my point; that terrorism works. It causes good people to show poor judgement.

What you dont understand is that he jumped a barrier where there were uniformed police, some with guns.

Do you live here? Everyone that lives in London agrees with him being shot.

You are arguing logic to people who have none :winkwink:

I reckon these police just got into what I call "Starsky And Hutch" mode.... thinking that suddenly they were saving the world.

if they didnt shoot him and he had a bomb what then ???? this guy deserved to be shot and I dont think he is that innocent as they are saying right now, why flee from police, why jump the barrier why the long thick coat, why was he under surveilence why did he run ?? because he was guilty.