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.

New MO for muggers in London; just yell I'm a cop, frisk 'em, take whatever you want... shoot 'em if they catch on or resist... order any witnesses away by saying the victim has a bomb and you also need them to not contaminate your "crime scene", make your escape :disgust

Edit: 300 mistaken bombers :winkwink:

exactly, the police would be labelled as incompetent...

If true, that would be further evidence of my point; in the case of these recent terrorist acts in London, terrorism has worked very effectively.

Why dont you come over here and live how we are at the moment?
We may come out with all this "Not Afraid" stuff but the bottom line is that when you get on the tube you are shitting it. I do it every day.

The idiot died because he jumped a barrier. By the time he got to the barrier he would have seen the police and could have gone to them if he was worried about the undercover guys.

Read my post a couple up. Why haven't they released pics or videos of this person? Is it possible the coat wasn't as "heavy padded" as they make it seem and that the guy only favoried the person they "thought" he was as much as any 2 Asians would have common characteristics?

And right now they are being labeled what? :upsidedow

That's why I would like to see the footage around the incident. Maybe the cops at that particular platform were distracted by something else and actually weren't close by? I find this the most suspicious thing, they were so quick to present footage of the "others". Hell, if he was under surveilance seems like the cops should have been shooting their own video for evidence.

He was in Stockwell which has extra security anyway. That footage wont be released untill the inquest is over.

Then maybe some of the people here most vigorously defending the incident would be better off waiting until they see it to judge it. :winkwink:

In my opinion, and I am from London and live 3 miles from Stockwell, you dont fuck around at the moment. He had the MO of a suicide bomber and died the way a suicide bomber should do.

He must have been insane to jump the barrier at the moment especially when he actually had a valid train ticket.

That gives much credence to my opinion that he may have thought the person(s) he saw with a gun were out to harm him and in that fleeting moment of panic undercover cops never came to his mind.

If he didn't see any uniformed cops his best bet was to run into the train with other people. That's why I'd like to see the footage and show me there were uniformed cops there he chose not to run to.

agreed, u gotta be on best behaviour at the moment, dont fuck around, not a good idea right now

Every station has uniformed police by all entrances at the moment. Why dont you understand that all Londons agree the guy got shot because of his own stupidity.

It is only people that dont live here that think he should have been given a slap on the wrist. How could they slap him on the wrist when he was running to the train?

It is a shoot to kill policy now. It worked with the IRA and will work again.

What I understand is that a lot of people are saying what is and what should have been, but of the thousand articles at Google News not one confirming these things and after releasing photos and videos of the others within a day or so, there is nothing released from this incident. OK, so they want to finish their investigation. A single photo of him in a heavy padded jacket running away from uniformed cops would shut a lot of people up, including myself :upsidedow

You can add your own comment on the BBC News website..........

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/talking_point/4711189.stm

www.killpolice.com bitchessss

Mistake is a mistake, guy called it upon him slef, several eye witnesses have supported the claim, and I am sure the footage will be released during the investigation.

If you look at page 5 of this thread you will see loads of examples of people killed as a result of the shoot to kill policy.

Here is a story of a man pointing a wrapped up table leg at the police and getting shot.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3974461.stm

It was clearly an error and they should appoligize, I am not doubting that, but until these police officers have been proven guilty they are innocent. All evidence so far supports their innocence.

The same mistake could very well have been made 3 weeks ago, even 6 months ago. If the police would've had a tip about a potential terrorist, they go and monitor him, the suspect is in a thick jacked during hot weather and going onto clearly the most logical target for a terrorist, they ask him to stop and he runs for the train, would've been the exactly same situation.

Not so long ago in Manchester a police man lost his life when an Al-Qaeda member stabbed him after they arrested him. He was too relaxed, wich is a luxury they can not allow them selfs.

You have to remember that the police officer that shot him followed him beliving that he had a bomb and was just a couple of feet away from him when he opened fire. Thinking all the time that he could detonate a bomb any second, so shooting him 5 times is a good way to make sure that he doesn't. People can live after being shot in the head once (obviously depends where they get shot in the head), they would be knocked out but could regain consciousness, shoot to kill means exactly that, make sure he's dead!

And once again, running away from armed police is always a bad idea, no matter if you are in a country that has never experienced terrorism or has just been attacked. It is stupid, plain and simple.

And to Mardigrass, you have no reason what so ever to not belive that he ran, just because his cousin said it was unlikely what the hell does that prove? Why on earth would the police shoot him if he proposed no threat?

*cough* except umm... you know... that mayor dude
:1orglaugh

NO

The people surfing the BBC News website can add their comments to THIS THREAD :1orglaugh

I'm thinking of buying the newest T-Shirt in London
But then again, maybe I'll pull on my Brazilian football shirt :)