Well, I've no idea how he plans to stop someone armed with an AK47 or a suicide bomb!!!! http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-34840708
I get that JC is a committed pacifist and against killing in all forms and he has also clearly shown himself to be a man of principle on this and other issues however his statement to the press is effectively saying that his principles are worth more than the lives of the people he is supposed to be representing. I don't see how he can talk suicide bombers round as they have a tendency to be a tad close-minded and somewhat committed to their own point of view and I know that if terrorists started walking down Magdelene Street sporting AK47's and suicide vests I would be more than a little keen for the police/army to take them out with a nice clean head shot at the earliest opportunity. Even for a principled man I don't see how killing someone who is wanting to kill themselves whilst at the same time kill and maim others is morally questionable. I don't see how killing a person before he is about to shoot defenceless bystanders can be the wrong choice. Labour are becoming more of a joke than a genuine opposition party. Sadly this means that the Government are going to be able to do pretty much as they please as JC and his non-media friendly statements are making him unelectable. I will be interested to see if the Paris shootings have any bearing on the EC vote - my feeling is that with this happening somewhat regularly in France - third attack this year - then people here may want to do whatever is necessary to keep our borders as secure as possible.
Good post and I believe you to be right in your last paragraph, every country will now want to secure their borders and it will undoubtedly sway the vote in favour of leaving the EU come the referendum IMO. Therefore expect Cameron to delay the vote for as long as he can
I have quite a range of friends and some are followers/occasional posters, of britain first and other right leaning groups, and the ammount of posts and traffic with anti-muslim and immigration retoric are on the increase. Britain First and others do put some very reasonable posts appealing to national pride with little if any controvercial content, some weighted nationalistic questions i.e. Should an imigrant get a house and benefits ahead of a traumatised or injured veteran? Clearly not! and then of course they will also post some absolute bilge! But more and more of these posts are doing the rounds and being liked on FB. Open boarders and the obvious risks that that is now bringing, should however be a point of concern for all of us. The evil minority are certaintly giving us all food for thought. What controls can we bring in and equally importantly Europe? Soft policy, whether it be; immigration, benefits or building regs, will be taken advantage of by those who seek to further their own cause by fair means or foul. Unfortunitely whilst deranged, there are clever people in IS (or at least clever enough to take advantage of our soft open boarders) and whilst that is the case, we as a continent and us as a country need a rethink on security. As the rossers have said, it can be next to impossible to prevent attacks of the nature perpetrated in Paris so should we be letting more refugees in? IS have said and perhaps succeded to get people in amoung the refugees and for me even if it is 1 in 5000 refugees to me is an unacceptable risk. By all means send aid to the camps and help someone win the war, but if 30 people get blown up or shot in a UK city by that 1, I would say that allowing them in was a mistake. Or worse that 1, could radicalise 5, 10, Bradford! And then we really are shafting ourselves. What ever his principles, Corbyn is a grade A lunatic if thinks that those monsters in Paris and any others in the pipeline should not be shot when posing an immediate risk. Yes capture to question is better but not if they are carrying a bomb or gun, just kill the feckers! Bah!
I just hope that other European nations can see the folly of open boarder policy and free movement and we can keep some union that ensures collective prosperity. Leaving Europe is probably a mistake on a business level (Though that is far from certain) and a world influence level, but on security it would be a must without reforms and I'll not lie, the thought of our taxes not subsidising the corrupt eurocrats b#*tards warms the cockles a bit too! Bah!
What is there to be "happy about" with a shoot to kill policy? Not much. A beating human heart is stopped prematurely and that's a tragedy whatever way you look at it. However, if that one human heart is looking to take away another 120 of people who are enjoying their lunch/concert/sporting event then that's when tough decisions have to be made. This is why I would never trust him to run the country, he simply does not have what it takes to make the tough decisions when it matters most. No one is "happy" about doing it but in life sometimes you just have to take hard decisions to protect the people that have put their trust in you to protect them. Whatever your personal feelings about it. I don't want to start another "why you must vote Tory" thread but can people seriously think that he should be in charge of our country?
Excellent point KEMP - sometimes a leader will have to take tough choices where neither outcome is good but one is less bad than the other. I don't think anyone on here thinks of taking a human life lightly, even if it is some mad bastard like Jihadi John or the Paris gunmen but to terminate an individual intent on his own demise whilst trying to save others seems to me to be a far better option than waiting for the attackers to run out of ammo and hope they elect to be captured rather than blow themselves up.. I know we have non-lethal methods of disabling attackers but its a brave police office who approaches a man holding an AK47 armed only with a Taser. I honestly don't see what else the French police could have done in the circumstances and I doubt I am in the minority in this instance.
Damn straight. If there's some bloke with an AK47 wearing a suicide vest shooting hundreds of unarmed people what are you going to do? Just stroll up to and say "excuse me Mr, would you mind lowering your gun? Your making a frightful mess" No your not, if you have a shot you take it wherever you can hit them.
Some excellent responses and I'm sure we haven't heard the last of this - even some members of his own party disagree with his stance. As several have said in their posts, these gunmen/bombers are intent on only one thing and I trust our police/security forces to take whatever action is necessary to prevent further loss of life and whilst I don't condone a 'shoot to kill'policy, trying to maim/capture them is not an option.
Bit agressive that and a waste of good lentils! Bah! Disclaimer: I in no way like lentils not even in curry! I am not a rabbit!
But then again, he said that he supported 'any strictly necessary force', quite a measured response I would have thought, as I'm sure that the innocent Brazilian guy Jean Charles de Menezes would agree, if he was still alive to do so, but after taking seven bullets in the head in a police ''shoot to kill' policy he's not around to agree anymore...
