It was logical, it was human
I guess by now everybody heard about the Brazilian guy that got shot by London police.
Everybody around the world is blaming the police for this ‘accident’.
But why doesn’t anyone see that policemen are also human?
This guy was ordered to halt. Instead of staying put he jumped the turnstile and made a run for it.
Wouldn’t you think he was indeed a terrorist if YOU were there?
I’ve seen British police in action. It is true that most of the time they don’t carry firearms. They are one of the best police corps in the world and yet one of the least lethal. But when in a situation where everybody is making an effort to prevent further bombings, where everybody is under great stress, in such situation they can’t be expected to react in a different way, if someone runs from them with no apparent reason that is suspicious, plus the guy ran into the tube.
I tell you: if I was there watching that guy run away I’d shoot him too.
Why? Simple: if I can't stop him he will kill a bunch of people.
Deadly mistake? Maybe, but why should he run away if he was innocent? I wouldn't risk letting him get away if I was thinking he was carrying explosives, no one would.
Everybody around the world is blaming the police for this ‘accident’.
But why doesn’t anyone see that policemen are also human?
This guy was ordered to halt. Instead of staying put he jumped the turnstile and made a run for it.
Wouldn’t you think he was indeed a terrorist if YOU were there?
I’ve seen British police in action. It is true that most of the time they don’t carry firearms. They are one of the best police corps in the world and yet one of the least lethal. But when in a situation where everybody is making an effort to prevent further bombings, where everybody is under great stress, in such situation they can’t be expected to react in a different way, if someone runs from them with no apparent reason that is suspicious, plus the guy ran into the tube.
I tell you: if I was there watching that guy run away I’d shoot him too.
Why? Simple: if I can't stop him he will kill a bunch of people.
Deadly mistake? Maybe, but why should he run away if he was innocent? I wouldn't risk letting him get away if I was thinking he was carrying explosives, no one would.
posted by DCveR at 7:27 AM
25 Comments:
I must agree with you. My first thought was the same - if he wasn't guilty he shouldn't run. He did and no one should be blamed.
But there's one 'but' - who shoots five times in the back to the man who were caught and lying on the floor? I can understand - stress etc. But it's a lot of overreacting for me...
And my opinion about british police is the same as yours and it didn't changed.
Easy: more than one cop.
Imagine yourself aiming at someone, will you wait until another guy shoots or will you just try and make sure the guy will not be a threat anymore?
Each policeman must act as if all others around him will miss their target, this is common basic training. Only special teams have 'assigned targets'.
Plus, whenever you shoot at someone you usually fire two rounds in a row (also basic firearm training).
I know the policemen were told to 'shoot to kill' and I couldn't blame them (I agree with you in that matter) - at least if they shoot running man. But they already got him. He was lying on the floor unable to move! (at least as reported by people from train). Despite the fact that he could be way more usable alive.
Look at it this way: suicide bombers sometimes have a switch to detonate their explosives, the policemen thought the guy was carrying explosives in his thick jacket, it was 'logical' to them that even though he was lying on the floor he could still detonate any explosives he was carrying, the proper procedure, hard as it may sound, is to shoot to kill.
Even though you know there will be no chance for questioning that person.
Yup. That's true.
We all don't know how it really happened and I don't want to throw stones. As I said before - I generally understand them and their behaviour. I think it's a fault of the man who tried to run.
I'm just not very sure if it was necesary to kill him when they got him on the floor. There's so many questions. Did he put the arms on the back or were they under jacket? I really understand - stress, adrenaline, real danger, terror in the city, wish to find someone guilty, running man. As a human - they really had the right to think all the things you said and to kill them to prevent further acts of terror. I may even say more - this could be the good sign for all the freaks who wants to do such things. I think no one could stop someone who is suicide killer to don't kill anyone by terrorizing him, but I'm sure it'll stop all idiots who have fun of calling to police with fake bomb reports and watching how they work evacuating half a city (ie - there were 2 fake bombimg reports in Warsaw in following 2 days after 7.07).
I can definitely see your point, dcver.. thanks for offering a different perspective. A tragedy all around.
What happened to human rights? What happened to getting him on the ground and handcuffing him? Shooting him in the head seems a little medieval. Why not injure him in the foot? We can't go around shooting everyone. You may think, "so what, look what the terrorists did." BUT, we don't want to play their game. It makes us no better than the terrorists. Perhaps this is my VERY liberal politics talking, but I don't think we should be shooting anybody.
These types of incidents will continue to happen if we remain reactive rather than proactive. Unfortunately America is really good at being reactive...and look how it's fucking up the world. Look at how much hatred there is for american's right now. Don't justify this behavior because you never know when you're going to be the victim of some fucked up, reactive politics.
i dont understand why they didnt shoot at the legs? if he was inocent than at least he'll live, and guilty they can get information.
kris: yes, a tragedy, and those guys who fired their guns will have to live with killing a guy, they probably keep asking themselves "why did that prick run?!"
jane & ale: if he were a real terrorist the only way to prevent him from detonating any explosives he was carrying would be to make sure he got unconscious fast, the safest way to do so is to shoot his head off, the 'barbaric' policemen had to weight fast his life against their own lifes and the lifes of those around, it is hard to accept but it was not their fault, they acted according to training and to logics, and injured man can still set a bomb off
True. It's everyone's tragedy...
It's just another sad incident in a sad time for the history of the world...
Imagine yourself as a policeman after so many bombings going off, you are in pursuit of a terror suspect who is running away. The things going through your mind...I know top of my mind would be the lives of the innocent bystanders who are unwittingly at ground zero. Like DCvR said, these policemen did what their training told them to do: they secured a highly dangerous suspect before he could take out the entire vacinity.
When the world is under the kinds of threats we live with today, we all lose some of the freedoms we once thought inherent. Like running for no apparent reason.
And here I thought British policemen were all dandies! Not so, apparently. They have a little of Rambo in them, afterall.
It's just so very sad.
I kept asking, why did he run, why did he run?
I'd go with what Ale said, why not go for the legs, and if he was guilty, they'd get information from him.
But then, suppose he had explosives on him...?
Why oh why did he run?
It isn't sad, it's life in the big city after a series of terror bombs hit. The only way this would be sad is if we find out the guy had mental illness. Otherwise, he was just stupid. Sorry, but it's the truth.
i'm with bunnyjo on this one. dude should not have run. he spoke perfect english so there was no reason he should not have stopped when demanded to. he knew what was happening.
I have to agree with you on this one, DC. He shouldn't have run. But I DO think that it is VERY sad! This sort of thing just doesn't happen in the UK... until now. These are very difficult times we live in.
I am STILL planning my trip to Egypt, even though there has been an act of terrorism. YES, I'm nervous, but I won't let terror run my life. (THIS is coming from someone who rides the NYC subway every day!)
BTW, thank you so much for your kind get well wishes for my dad the other day. I really appreciate it, and so did my pop! He's doing MUCH better!
viking: we're living hard times
Bunny Jo: nice to see you're back
tacit: Yes, the guy died. The guy knew it was the police telling him to halt, so that would be no excuse
GG: Some journalists are saying he had an expired visa, but the foreign office didn't say if that was true or not
bees knees: He was a student in London for several years now, so you must be right, language was not an issue
last girl: Glad to know you dad is better now. Egypt has been a risky destination for many years now and yet millions of tourists go there every year and come back safe. We can't give in to fear and hide.
There could be all kinds of reasons why he ran...but just the thought...that he did run, and was shot...in the head, 5 times.
I don't blame the police, D. I don't blame him for running. It is just sad, that this is how we live now.
I dont think the fact that he ran, or the fact that it just had been bombing justifies to kill him. We live in a "democracy", where we demand personal freedom for ourselves and our fellow citizens. It is , as I view it, the darkside of this freedom to choose to cause other people harm. Therefore we have a code of laws and a system of justice; to prevent "evildoers" from harming others and to punish those who do. The risk of this system is, amongst others, that some maniacs decide to become suicide bombers. We still live in a democracy, and the first prinsipal is equality to the law; this guy just got executed for what the police thought he was doing. That is not equallity, thats fascism. Even if a person goes bananas in a kindergarten with a machinegun, he still has constitutional rights....
isa, isae: "if a person goes bananas in a kindergarten with a machinegun" in front of me I will shoot that person without giving it a second thought. I can understand your point of view and even respect it, but I would never live by it. I would never risk sacrificing the life of children or the lifes of a crowd for the rights of one individual that obviously doesn't have that same respect for others. Your stance is a bit like Ghandi's stance, it seems to me.
I totally agree with you on the kindergarden, one should protect oneself and others, bad example perhaps... Anyway Im not a pacifist, and does not agree with Gandhi on very much either. The point, as I see it, with a government is to uphold and protect its citizens from others, and sometimes themselves. I could see the point in shooting this guy too prevent him from blowing himself and others up, but he had not done that. The principle of most democracys is that the parliament is the decisionmaker, the court is the judging power, and the police is authorized to uphold the law. The police is not the judging authority, and in this killing of an innocent, they have become all. Decitionmaker, judge, and executer. That does not belong in a democracy, no matter how it is threatened.
isa, isae: The truth is if you assume an armed police in a democracy you must assume the use of guns by police, that use must be done according to training, specific instructions and good judgement. All this happened and in this situation a policeman must act like a soldier, chasing a terrorist suspect has the same procedures as urban war, it's basically a kill or be killed situation. This was not the case, right, I agree. But the policemen couldn't assume that. The policy behind this is wrong? Who believes so should blame the politicians instead of saying the police is a bunch of murderers. This is my only issue here.
Apparantley, the man's student visa had expired. And the policemen were dressed in plainclothes (to be undercover)
Does that make the story seem any different?
I agree with you, its the politicians who has the overall responsibilty in a democracy, and in every other beurocratic system. But as danny said it, I want to question; is this equal rights in a democracy based on personal freedom and responsibillity? When is the authorities supposed to take responsibility? And next question; who is the authorities, and who is to blame?
danno: No. If he ran because his visa was expired it proves he recognized the policemen as such, thus it changes nothing in my point of view.
Post a Comment
<< Home