xRAZERx Posted July 22, 2005 Report Share Posted July 22, 2005 Who knows what powers the police have after the Anti-Terrorist Act? Perhaps the rules of engagement are different? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I do Link to post Share on other sites
rizzo Posted July 22, 2005 Report Share Posted July 22, 2005 If you told me, would you have to kill me? Link to post Share on other sites
rizzo Posted July 22, 2005 Report Share Posted July 22, 2005 Hey, why the sad face? Link to post Share on other sites
xRAZERx Posted July 22, 2005 Report Share Posted July 22, 2005 Cos I don't get to off Rizzo Link to post Share on other sites
Ghost_Rider Posted July 22, 2005 Report Share Posted July 22, 2005 5 shots (from one person)would be excessive, but let's assume the intial reports are correct and there were three officers, and each went for the double tap to ensure he went down.....doesn't seem so excessive now.... Link to post Share on other sites
joeking27 Posted July 22, 2005 Report Share Posted July 22, 2005 Who knows what powers the police have after the Anti-Terrorist Act? Perhaps the rules of engagement are different? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Apparently there are guidelines for dealing with suicide bombers now. Link to post Share on other sites
Eddie182 Posted July 22, 2005 Report Share Posted July 22, 2005 I can also say for sure there is not way the RoE will have changed. It simply doesn't need to. Plus chaging the RoE for either the police of military isn't just a case of some senior officer issuing an order, it's quite a long legal process. Besides persons authorised to carry arms & ammunition within the british isles are already authorised to use lethal force. So why would they need to change it. It's always been shoot to kill, to my knowledge you can't shoot someone in a nice way. Just a case of the media making things up/talking ######s again. Link to post Share on other sites
rizzo Posted July 22, 2005 Report Share Posted July 22, 2005 Indeed, Sky News did tell us that on the 7th, the army was on the streets of London... Link to post Share on other sites
azz Posted July 22, 2005 Report Share Posted July 22, 2005 5 shots (from one person)would be excessive, but let's assume the intial reports are correct and there were three officers, and each went for the double tap to ensure he went down.....doesn't seem so excessive now.... <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Its just that the eye witness claimed only one of them had a gun. But do we believe him? In high stress situations your brain can easily confuse "what it thought it saw" with "what it actually saw" Only time will tell. Link to post Share on other sites
xRAZERx Posted July 22, 2005 Report Share Posted July 22, 2005 Exactly. Many times have I been to an incident in the past where there have been tonnes of eye witnesses. Yet none of them told the same thing. At the end of the day, the only witness who doesn't lie is the evidence... Link to post Share on other sites
Eddie182 Posted July 22, 2005 Report Share Posted July 22, 2005 Indeed, Sky News did tell us that on the 7th, the army was on the streets of London... <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Did they? Didn't hear that one. But then I don't have sky, only News 24 and ITV news channel on freeview. They were probably right though, some of the Army/RAF/Navy probably were on the streets of london, given that the MoD main building is in London as are several Army barracks. Of course they were probably just walking home. Link to post Share on other sites
xRAZERx Posted July 22, 2005 Report Share Posted July 22, 2005 Yeah I think some Monkeys were deployed to provide an armed capacity to the MoD building because there were only unarmed MDGS there... Link to post Share on other sites
screamin_weasel Posted July 22, 2005 Report Share Posted July 22, 2005 slightly off-topic my neighbour (RAF Regiment) has just been transferred to NBC duty (from a mortar team leader, and previous to that was counter-terrorism), and is currently in Canada training for it. i suppose it shows the forces are taking extra precautions at least. Link to post Share on other sites
Eddie182 Posted July 22, 2005 Report Share Posted July 22, 2005 ? We've always had a large NBC unit mate. In fact since the end of the cold war it's shrunk down massively. And TBH, the MoD wouldn't have anything to do with a CBRN attack in the UK unless is was so big that the civvi authorities couldn't handle it. Link to post Share on other sites
screamin_weasel Posted July 22, 2005 Report Share Posted July 22, 2005 oh, ok then dude. well, thats whats happened to him anyways. perhaps its just a coincedence then. Link to post Share on other sites
xRAZERx Posted July 22, 2005 Report Share Posted July 22, 2005 Yep and the HO CBRN in Wiltshire is recruiting like mad at the moment. Link to post Share on other sites
demon.b Posted July 22, 2005 Report Share Posted July 22, 2005 All the national ambulance services have trained 10% of staff for CBRN duties. Link to post Share on other sites
snowman Posted July 22, 2005 Report Share Posted July 22, 2005 So which branch of the Police MIGHT have been trailing a suspect and prepared to put 5 shots into one man's head? We've been given the impression that the Police generally use minimal force to stop armed suspects (to reduce 'collateral'), so are there Policemen trained and prepared to 'terminate with extreme prejudice'? It just sounds counter to what we're told Policemen are trained to do... Cheers. Link to post Share on other sites
Eddie182 Posted July 22, 2005 Report Share Posted July 22, 2005 Not really, in this situation the officers obviously decided that lethal force was the minimum level of force required to remove the threat to the public. Sounds perfectly normal to me mate. Link to post Share on other sites
xRAZERx Posted July 22, 2005 Report Share Posted July 22, 2005 So which branch of the Police MIGHT have been trailing a suspect and prepared to put 5 shots into one man's head? Cheers. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Special Branch, SO19 on a pre planned surveillance op, SO13... Link to post Share on other sites
Ghost_Rider Posted July 22, 2005 Report Share Posted July 22, 2005 Would you rather they hadn't shot? If they hadn't shot him he would have got on the train and very possibly detonated a device. Massive casualties, and the police get it in the neck for not acting. I think they did the right thing, and I hope the evidence bears that out. Right now we are relying very much on the news services, and we have no way of verifying the accuracy of those reports. Edit:Spelling. Link to post Share on other sites
azz Posted July 22, 2005 Report Share Posted July 22, 2005 Seconded Most of the stuff on the news is unproven, they just like to hear their own voices. Facts are very thin on the ground. Link to post Share on other sites
snowman Posted July 22, 2005 Report Share Posted July 22, 2005 Would you rather they hadn't shot? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Are you asking me? If so, you'll see from my earlier post that I share your sentiments, entirely. There was no option, I just wondered who would use so MUCH lethal force, rather than the bare minimum, which we're told is normal Police practice (and it seems so, from other incidents). I suppose I was also wondering, following from other threads, if this might have involved other branches of the security services. Sounded a bit like that incident in Gibraltar in some respects. Cheers. Link to post Share on other sites
Ghost_Rider Posted July 22, 2005 Report Share Posted July 22, 2005 More of a rhetoricla question to anyone knocking the police mate Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.