Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

News

Man shot dead in Stockwell unconnected to terror inquiry

1078 replies

QueenOfQuotes · 23/07/2005 17:06

Just seen a ticker on the BBC website saying that

OP posts:
Gobbledigook · 24/07/2005 16:40

Don't be so condescending - of course I've noticed there is no death penalty. However, if once of the suicide bombers was shot by police I wouldn't feel in the least bit sad having seen what the innocent citizens of London have gone through.

If someone murdered my mother, father, brother, husband, child I would feel no remorse at their death. Not many sane people would surely?

HappyMumof2 · 24/07/2005 16:41

Message withdrawn

Gobbledigook · 24/07/2005 16:42

Exactly HM2 - I said that earlier - drugs gangs don't usually go after their targets in the middle of the street, in broad daylight shouting 'STOP, ARMED POLICE' do they?

hunkermunker · 24/07/2005 16:43

I would find it hard to feel remorse if they had got the right man and I am vehemently anti death penalty. But largely because there's such a chance of not getting the right person and because people don't have equal chances of getting the death penalty for the same crime (colour and wealth come into it too much).

Plus it's not a deterrent - America shows that nicely, I think. And it's expensive.

Gobbledigook · 24/07/2005 16:43

Exactly Hunker.

hunkermunker · 24/07/2005 16:43

I don't like the inference that because I'd find it hard to feel sorry a terrorist was dead, I am ethically and morally bankrupt either, frankly.

HappyMumof2 · 24/07/2005 16:45

Message withdrawn

TigerLilly2005 · 24/07/2005 16:45

I agree jessicaandbumpsmummy, I also would like to ask, if say the man was a terrorist and did have a bomb and the POLICE did not use there shoot to kill/protect policy and this man did activate his bomb on the tube he jumped on and loads more innocent people were killed, would we all be sitting here saying WHY did the police not use there shoot to kill policy on this man??

Gobbledigook · 24/07/2005 16:46

Hunker, should you be subtitling??

I should be working - best get on with it (but will flick back and forth!)

hunkermunker · 24/07/2005 16:46

GDG - only a bit

Gobbledigook · 24/07/2005 16:47

I knew it!!

jessicaandbumpsmummy · 24/07/2005 16:47

exactly tigerlilly..... thank you.

HappyMumof2 · 24/07/2005 16:49

Message withdrawn

hunkermunker · 24/07/2005 16:49

People who are saying he shouldn't have been shot - what should have happened?

HappyMumof2 · 24/07/2005 16:51

Message withdrawn

TigerLilly2005 · 24/07/2005 16:54

I am sorry to say this but ok the man was innocent but if he had, had a bomb which was a possibility in the polices eyes when this whole incident happened there would have been many many more than just 1 innocent life lost, i stand by the police and think they do a fantastic job, all in all they are trying to do there best to PROTECT us the PUBLIC.

Gobbledigook · 24/07/2005 16:57

We're on our own here now girls!

I agree, that in the circumstances the officer seemed to have no option. However, the man did not have a bomb and has been needlessly killed - how certain should they have been before taking that action? I don't know. It's very, very difficult.

It's just a quick judgement call and it must be a horrific position to be in to make that call. I just hope they don't hesitate if a similar scenario comes about and that someone does have a bomb.

I must admit, I'm a bit confused about the 'suicide bomber' issue though - the bombers on 7/7 didn't have the bombs strapped to them did they? SO just wondering why they might have expected that that man did?

Though, as I've said before, we are not going to be privy to all available intelligence are we?

MrsGordonRamsay · 24/07/2005 16:58

At the risk of repeating myself, there is more to this than meets the eye.

MrsGordonRamsay · 24/07/2005 16:58

At the risk of repeating myself, there is more to this than meets the eye.

HappyMumof2 · 24/07/2005 16:59

Message withdrawn

MrsGordonRamsay · 24/07/2005 16:59

PMSL

I only clicked once

hunkermunker · 24/07/2005 16:59

LOL MGR! Did you mean to repeat yourself there?

Agree, btw (LGJ)

Gobbledigook · 24/07/2005 17:01

Me too - more to it than we'll get to know no doubt.

Jimjams · 24/07/2005 17:16

gobbledigook you wrote

"Don't be so condescending - of course I've noticed there is no death penalty. However, if once of the suicide bombers was shot by police I wouldn't feel in the least bit sad having seen what the innocent citizens of London have gone through.

If someone murdered my mother, father, brother, husband, child I would feel no remorse at their death. Not many sane people would surely?"

So how would you feel if you were the mother of this Brazilian man? The police who shot him (think it was one man) are responsible for their ownactions and it is possible (although highly unlikely) that he could face a murder charge. That's another possibility at the moment (or whoever gave the say so from higher up).

Onto intelligence and armed police:

When I was 9 our house was raided by armed police at 2am on New Years Day (my mother opened the door to them in bullet proof vests and carrying guns and famously-within the family- said "ooo you look just like the professionals"). We were a "nice" Daily Mail reading (ha ha is that a contradiction) middle class family by the way The "intelligence" that led to the armed raid was a drunken man (my uncle by marriage) taking a taxi ride and talking a load of nonsense about nothing. He used some fairly common names (was talking about another uncle) and the taxi driver suggested to the police he could be a murder suspect (because the common names he used- one was Stuart to give you an idea how common- matched the name of a murder suspect). Fine - in this case he was arrested, roughed up a bit, police dogs trampled the garden and released about 12 hours later a bit more sober - We all recovered form having men with guns in our house- but it was hardly high class intelligence that led to this raid. Shortly afterwards a similar raid was carried out by a different police force and young boy was shot in bed (he moved- they shot)

FWIW if the police knew that man X was going to plant bomb Y at such and such a time then no problem - shoot him if you have to- the chances of mistaken identity are very low- but if they are going to rely on much dodgier evidence (as in man leaves block of flats wearing big coat) then they need to be cautious. As already pointed out shooting innocents tends to breed terrorists. Make a few more of these mistakes and we'll be having young men queing up to blow themselves up. It is a dangerous policy so the police need to be sure they are getting it right. Otherwise they're not protecting us- they're killing the wrong people and breeding terrorists. Obviously it is a difficult balance to strike but Clearly at the moment they are getting it wrong - and that is dangerous. And if it was your son I'm sure you wouldn't find it acceptable for them to say "oh whoops sorry our mistake but understandable mistake eh?"

Heathcliffscathy · 24/07/2005 17:34

what i find stunning is the attitude that you either say:

bravo, well done chaps, bit of a mess (more to it than meets the eye though) but i'm feeling thoroughly protected and support you wonderful people wholeheartedly.

or you are flagburning pinko weirdo for daring to question that an innocent man was shot dead.

no room for any middle ground there evidently.

no possibility that i might be horrified by what has happened to that brasilian man, and angry with people that accept it as a side effect of the fight against terrorism and feel sorry for the guy who did it and feel the police have a tough job at the moment and worry a bit about whether the atmosphere in policing circles as in the world of the tabloids is 'let's get 'em' rather than, let's find them, question them, put them on trial, find out more about their organisations. lets also look at why young men might be willing to give up their lives. what, collectively, are we doing that is inflaming some sections of the arab world against us to such an extent (i have a few ideas on this as you know) how can we cut off the grass roots of terrorist organisations as this is the only way to fight them, not id cards, not fingerprinting on leaving and entering the country and not shoot to kill without cast iron reason policies.

it's george bush all over isn't it: you're either with us or you're with the terrorists....

what a pile of shite.

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

This thread is not accepting new messages.