Mark Duggan Still Deid
- Thread starter DevAdvocate
- Start date
-
Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
-
The problem is Dan, as far as the police intelligence reports were concerned he did have a gun. In fact he did have a gun as has been proved, looks like he chucked it away when he got stopped. One less crim on the streets as far as i'm concerned.
*sigh*
You answer my question with a question, yet get all fussy when I don't spell it out for you.
No, of course the police shouldn't let people shoot at them first, that would be a stupid move.
Shooting someone that you suspect is in possession of a gun (no proof at that time, they were relying on intel) is ****ed, unless they threaten to/start attempting to shoot you.
Get it?
I know the guy was a dick, and I despise people carrying weapons, it's a pathetic thing to do.
I just don't agree with people being shot before they are proven guilty though.
I agree - and the police are not entitled to just go and shoot anyone who they think might be a scumbag. That said, I do sympathise with what Dev said about the intelligence reports saying he had a gun (which he did at some point in the journey). You can't wait for him to fire. I suppose it depends on what was said and how it was said when they stopped the car - which we're never going to know.
No
Bit unfair of me really - I just get a bit annoyed on the Lawrence one because I am convinced that lad was as clean as a whistle. If he hadn't been there is no way the Mail would have started a campaign on his behalf.
I'm convinced of it too. I got speaking with one of the cops from the area about it (not involved in the investigation). They were desperate for some **** to stick because of their own incompetence.
Which the police chose to lie about quite a lot?
I don't see it as a reason to shoot someone, he didn't fire at them.
He was a known villain you ****, if the coppers hadn't got to him first, his "bro's would have
one less druggie gangmember
I asked you a question, it's as simple as that Toby, i'm not attempting to trick you. I'm neither attempting to justify the killing nor condoning it, because I, like the vast majority of people, was not there and don't know the full story, probably no one does but I was a firearms officer for 10 years and I have some comprehension of the strain carrying and being responsible for a firearm causes.
Everything you learn in exercises and training can only get you so far, some people default to instinct when confonted with a life-threatening situation, the Police are no different so i'm not going to second guess the actions of the individual concerned, it's futile.
All i'm saying, or attempting to, is that there is one less lowlife crim on the streets who will be missed by no one apart from his friends and family, it's the misguided outrage being vented by liberals about such an outrageous loss of life. The deceased, Mark Bridger, was responsible for his own death, he chose a life of crime, he chose to carry a firearm, he gambled and he paid for it.
No tears from this quarter and I don't care if he was Black, Yellow, Green or Ginger, I have as much sympathy for him as I would any gangster killed due to his lifestyle choice, whether he lived in Glasgow, London or the Outer Hebridies, which is to say none.
In fairness Alf, I wish it had been someone else who shot him as we wouldn't then have had 4 nights of rioting.
I have a view on that case unsurprisingly
That poor bastard didn't even need to be black or Irish to get shot.
Someone was gonna get shot, he ****ed up, the coppers saved someones life, for now anyway