Again???

Posted: Fri Jul 22, 2005 10:03 am Post subject: Again???

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4706787.stm

NetHosted Customer Joined: 29 Jan 2005 Posts: 287

death's too good for them. The stupid thing is that you just know there will be some expensive and drawn out inquiry over it and there will be loads of 'do-gooders' going on about police tactics

Posted: Fri Jul 22, 2005 1:26 pm Post subject:

Yep, but they would say different if it was someone in their family that got killed.

Guess this means theat the "shoot to kill" is for real

NetHosted Staff Joined: 22 Mar 2004 Posts: 5684

Good, it's about time we showed how serious we are about preventing these things.

Andrew

NetHosted Customer Joined: 29 Jan 2005 Posts: 287

it doesn't help though that the Muslim Council of Great Britain (whatever) now come out and are trying to make a thing about this one, isolated case of shoot to kill and in an extreme case. We must be one of the very few countries in the world where police carry guns anyway.

Posted: Mon Jul 25, 2005 7:51 am Post subject:

Posted: Mon Jul 25, 2005 9:41 am Post subject:

I thought they were introducing stun guns (the ones that fire an electric shock insert technical words here)?

Ah well, when I turn onto a TV program from the US and see some police having a "shoot out" with a convict (especially the "World's Wildest Police Videos", which incidentally, are not "World's" afterall...), makes me glad our police don't carry guns.

Posted: Mon Jul 25, 2005 9:54 am Post subject:

The tazers have been introduced into some forces ( I think Greater Manchester are trying them out) and are probably a good idea. At the moment criminals may carry guns but doubt that they will be shot at. If you know that the police are going to shoot, why not get the first shot in?

NetHosted Customer Joined: 29 Jan 2005 Posts: 287

not a typo, complete cock up missing the word 'not'.

I doubt tasers are much use against someone with a gun and more likely to be used against someone brandishing a knife or just plain threatening and awkward. Why should a police officer get close to someone threatening when a quick zap will suffice to incapacitate them.

I'm sure that gun carrying is a deterrent factor for most police forces around the world. Here we seem to be hanging on to tradition despite the increase in gun crime.

What gets me is that the police are damned whatever th

Posted: Mon Jul 25, 2005 7:21 pm Post subject:

NetHosted Customer Joined: 29 Jan 2005 Posts: 287

stupid forum login

correction:

What gets me is that the police are damned whatever they do.

Posted: Tue Jul 26, 2005 8:56 pm Post subject:

Believe the stun guns are not tazers in the tradtional sense, as they work at a range.

The reason people don't like guns is because they kill people. :] And you should feel bad if you shot someone who walked away from you because a criminal had told him that he would kill his family if he didn't walk away.

A little dramatic I know, but it's possible.

Posted: Wed Jul 27, 2005 1:32 pm Post subject:

A stun gun was used to capture one of the bombers in Birmingham today. Apparently he had a rucksack on when they got to him. At least the police are getting close now.

NetHosted Customer Joined: 29 Jan 2005 Posts: 287

ooh, good, hopefully once they have ID'd and questioned him they will shoot him. Let's face it, that is what the guy wants.

Posted: Wed Jul 27, 2005 4:19 pm Post subject:

Surely it is more punishment to keep him alive as that is the opposite of what a suicide bomber wants. Make him watch Eastenders 24-7

Seriously, lets hope he leads the police to the other 3 bombers

Client Support	Community	Server Status	Contact Us	Client Login
Email Hosting	Website Hosting	Reseller Hosting	VPS Hosting	Dedicated Servers