No one on here seems to be talking about his 'injury' anymore. Quite strange. please log in to view this image
That's an example of a person who can and will change his mind about something if he sees it isn't right. Leftie ****ers will never do that regardless of how bad Starmer ****s the country up.
Does anyone know who has actually been running America in recent months? Is it the same people that have been running it for the past years?
Billy No Mates When he's not too busy buying up millions of acres of US farmland as he is the world's foremost agricultural expert bar none.
There's a reason the police are releasing all this imformation now and that is to quell any questioning of their shoot to kill. I don't support the lad that was shot and I don't condemn the cop that shot him, but it is right we question the process that led to it, and was there other routes we could have taken to retrieve the vehicle and capture the individual driving it. If you corner a criminal they will generally try to make a run for it, let alone cornering a serious criminal on a dark evening using his car as a weapon. You cornered this individual in a public street, if you felt the situation was dangerous enough to fear for other officers, thus shooting the guy dead, then the decision to block was incorrect. If you have to go for the headshot then you have failed in the duty of care to everyone. Next time a serious criminal goes on the run, don't be surprised if he's armed because we now know the police will be armed and will kill you if you do a runner. The long term consequences of their actions could put future coppers at risk beyond what they've seen, we've always been an unarmed state but we seem to be making go to weapons more favourable, even things such as tasers are now more common place and even drawn when no threat exists, it's never been how our cops do things in the UK. Cops today are saying as such we need accept this course of action and while I'm happy to accept the individual posed risk, we can't just go round doing headshots on criminals who are merely taking flight, if we go your suicide by cop route, then we really have decided to start going down a very bloody path if these criminals instead decide to fight back.
You keep going on about this "head shot",. tell me, when someone is slumped behind the wheel of a car and doing his best to smash out of a block you have him in how much of a target do you think you have?
But all criminals take flight, they are more likely to do that then anything else. Go on Youtube, you will see countless police chases in the UK, on people who have decided to take off rather than pull over and be the honourable citizen. If you've had to take a headshot then it's a fail of the block. London is covered with ANPR it wouldn't take much to track the route of the vehicle, they didn't even know who the driver was that they were pointing their guns at. This aint America mate, shoot the fooking lot of them for all I care, but this aint going to end well if we start going down this route. The process failed even if you justify the shooting of the individual.
They also had intel on the crimes associated with the vehicle and the likely driver. They don't just role out the gun squad for a traffic incident, and there are a lot of checks and balances that are gone through before it reached the stage it did. This is backed up by the relatively small number of these type of incidents.
Of course most criminals take flight but this particular one was actually caught and boxed in. He was driving a car known to be involved in shootings and the police didn't know who was inside, as a copper what do you do at that point, make a gap and just let him go, sit and wait until you or one of your coleagues is shot or take the **** out. I know i wouldn't like to be the one who had to tell the dead cops wife and children that he wasn't coming home anymore because a criminal didn.t want to be caught.
How often in this country do cops have guns pulled on them in a stop....I can't think of one in any situation, so while the intel says the vehicle was involved in associated crimes, the fact remains the individual was unarmed, aside from using his vehicle as a weapon of course, which we see done countless times, especially when some people decide to reverse their vehicles into police cars, sometimes even with trucks. Like I say, it don't bother me, just questioning this shoot to kill, seems a failure and then attempts to justify it against an unarmed man. I pretty sure there are better ways of bringing these individuals in.
I keep hearing these hypothetical circumstances of cops being killed, but a cop wasn't killed, he was ramming himself out, which just says to me this block wasn't thought through, but it's ok guys we've got guns so we'll just pop him if he tries....oh well one less individual to worry about.
The fact the Officer now has a £10,000 bounty on his head shows the level of criminals they were dealing with, and the Police would have been well aware of what they were dealing with. To try and compare it to other situations is clearly a non-starter.
In that situation how do you know the man is unarmed when you stop him? He is driving a car associated with fire arms and as it happens the driver was also know for using fire arms even if they didn't know who the driver was. No point in taking risks at that point, take the **** out. I have said before on these boards that if a cop was ever chasing me in America and he shout freeze and lie down i would ****ing do it knowing what the consequencies could be. Perhaps it's time people felt that way here too.
