You always try that lame attempt at spin. If people lived normal lives and just went to the fish shop, instead of changing their minds and try to burn down a hotel, or shoot a policeman rather than asking him the way to Boots, they'd be a lot happier.
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/story/...-new-york-apartment-to-defamed-election-staff How delightful. Cough it up Rudi, you trumptard slag. Think Trump gives a ****?
I think it’s hilarious that these people have done Trumps bidding and he has now let them all suffer. Wake up America. If this is how he treats his mates, do you think he gives a rats arse about anybody other than himself.
It’s a good question. I’m not going to pretend I’m a fan of police at all. Like I said, I sympathised with BLM at one point, have been left-leaning most of my adult life (even far-left) but I’ll try to explain why I think the two situations are different. The riots were disgraceful. The people who caused the damage and incited/participated in the violence deserved the book thrown at them. The difference between the riots in the summer and the incident with Kaba is riot police in this country aren’t equipped with firearms and the UK police has specialised firearms units. Riot police have helmets, shields, batons, pepper spray etc. to deal with crowd control and dispersal. Firearms units are trained to deal with situations that require precision to deal with specific threats. Having firearms units deal with riots would be chaotic as they would be indiscriminately shooting into a crowd. The incident with Kaba was due to the Met having intel that the car was involved with firearms offences, hence the firearms unit, they boxed him in, an officer had a clear line of sight through the windshield and Kaba decided in that moment to reverse his car into a police car instead of surrendering.
My take on the Kaba shooting: 1) the reason the armed ploce were on the scene was because the Intel was that there was the likelihood that the occupant was armed and dangerous - given the nightclub shooting. 2) the police couldn't know, for sure, whether the driver was armed - but there were obvious reasons to suspect he might be I.e. 1) 3) the ramming of the cars was not in itself, an absolute threat to the lives of the other police officers 4) the most measured response at that point would have been to shoot all tyres out - would have made the car un-driveable and made it completely and absolutely clear to the driver that he was surrounded by 'armed police' and with no prospect of getting away ... 5) Police could then have demanded he exit the vehicle ... if he didn't comply at that stage he could then be informed that they suspected he might have a gun and would shoot if he did not comply ... 6) and finally - if you live by the sword...
Yeah cars don't work if you shoot the tyres . The A team wasn't a documentary ffs you silly old sod .
Also Kaba was not in the act of committing a crime when stopped, unlike the gammonista. The list of police killings makes them look like gimps
No BLM demos for the latest 16 year old member of the black community murdered https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cwyvy9nqg5jo.amp
Never knew you were an arms expert Simon - your specialty in all the time you've been on here being obviously more wrist based ... Twat ...
Just like the Bolsheviks, punish those that criticise the regime & release violent criminals to cause more fear from law abiding citizens so the regime can pass more laws . Rapists given suspended sentence if they are protected minority status lock up people for Facebook posts critical of mass immigration. Pretty sure celebrating the death of people that commit suicide is illegal in the UK but Toby loves it so long as they are disgusting English people that don't vote Labour
Have you ever seen a car drive over a stinger that police use in high speed pursuit ? The car still drives on the rims & can obviously still be able to run people over , there's just lots of sparks . Perhaps the armed police could have shot the steering wheel off ?
Thanks for the response, I don't disagree with you btw, I'm more playing devils advocate, as I understand it Kaba was shot because the copper with the firearm felt his colleagues lives were at risk from the ramming. But ramming is not an unusual event, it's probably a lot more common than we realise. I've certainly seen flatbeds and transits ram police cars. Naturally I do get it that the assumption that the driver may have a firearm - but I'm sure the migrants felt their lives were at risk, and at one point due to the mob and the coppers becoming overwhelmed, they lost all control of the situation, were we going to leave them to die (IF they were even in the hotel). Yeah it's all a bit pedantic because as you said it's two completely different events. However, if we go for these straight headshots as Mindy said on here how long before these criminals start firing back, where do we want to go with this. If I as a criminal know the coppers are not going to be armed, chances are I go unarmed, if coppers start reacting in the way they have with this one off incident, then maybe criminals instead of hiding their arms will start carrying them at all times, it's a bit of a dodgy road. As I said at the beginning, Kaba means nowt to me, the copper did what he did and I don't blame him, it's more asking questions of the process, imagine for one moment Kaba did have a gun on him, and things had played out slightly differently, as happens in America, shots start going astray and hitting innocent citizens including kids. I think we should always question such an event and we have done, I still think there was better ways of doing this, but accept the coppers have a job to do, and could do without dogooders like me challenging the events, especially when they are trying to keep us all safe.
Says 'The Mechanic' ... 'Jason Statham' only a lot shorter ... and only ever been insured to drive his mum's automatic ...
