DS Forums

 
 

M62 Police Shooting


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 05-01-2017, 10:48
EvieJ
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 3,630
If they found a gun in the car, it would seem the intelligence was good. Convictions are not a measure of whether someone is a threat or not. Plenty of dangerous people are out there without convictions. The more dangerous some are, the less chance of anyone giving evidence against them.

The only issue here is whether there was a threat at the time, and we wont know that until the evidence is presented at court.
The problem is without convictions then he is still innocent despite the hearsay.

From the articles I've seen its not very clear but do we know if there was an actual car chase or was the boxing in of the vehicle a surprise move by unmarked police cars?
EvieJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 05-01-2017, 10:52
Dotheboyshall
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 9,313
Surrounded by armed police officers pointing guns at him and his response is going for a gun. Not exactly clever is it.
Dotheboyshall is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2017, 11:01
Jellied Eel
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: In a jar, on a shelf
Posts: 31,678
Surrounded by armed police officers pointing guns at him and his response is going for a gun. Not exactly clever is it.
We don't know that he did. If so, then it's one way to exit the gene pool. It may be that he tried to use his car as a weapon though, ie drive over officers who were trying to stop him. If so, that may also have justified stopping him.
Jellied Eel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2017, 11:02
el_bardos
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 2,970
The problem is without convictions then he is still innocent despite the hearsay.

From the articles I've seen its not very clear but do we know if there was an actual car chase or was the boxing in of the vehicle a surprise move by unmarked police cars?
His background and previous criminality (or lack thereof), even the lead up to the event is all complete irrelevance.

What matters is if he was a threat (or reasonably perceived to be a threat) to life at the time he was shot, and nothing else. If he was, its a justifiable shooting. If he wasn't it isn't.
el_bardos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2017, 11:09
Jellied Eel
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: In a jar, on a shelf
Posts: 31,678
You can wrap it up in any way you want but it is a shoot to kill outcome.
And it is going to backfire again.
It's a subtle but important distinction. There are sometimes situations where 'shoot to kill' is authorised, ie against suicide bombers where you want to make sure there's a 'hard' stop and the bomber can't act. The law still requires reasonable force though, hence the very small number of rounds fired by our police.

The difference is mostly reality vs fiction, so Hollywood versions of shooting that are pretty much always unrealistic. Reality is people frequently survive being shot multiple times, and can remain a threat. So shoot to kill means keep shooting until you're sure the person is dead. Shoot to stop means until they're no longer a threat. Then in a planned operation, there were probably paramedics on hand to try to stabilise the suspect, or AFO's are usually trained paramedics as well to render first aid.
Jellied Eel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2017, 11:24
Somner
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 8,617
I challenge where I feel appropriate. Despite some posters admiration they're not saints or above the law and in a number of cases in recent years they have earned the scrutiny.
Using the term "they" to refer to many other groups in society will at the very least be frowned upon. Oddly enough it's acceptable to refer to police officers this way, when discussing how individual officers may have acted. Police Officers come in all different shapes, sizes, colours and genders, with even more having varying ideologies, political influences, opinions, levels of intelligence, attitudes, tolerances etc. Yet because a small minority have earned scrutiny (and indeed they have), "they" have all done so.

Bizarre.
Somner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2017, 11:36
EvieJ
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 3,630
Using the term "they" to refer to many other groups in society will at the very least be frowned upon. Oddly enough it's acceptable to refer to police officers this way, when discussing how individual officers may have acted. Police Officers come in all different shapes, sizes, colours and genders, with even more having varying ideologies, political influences, opinions, levels of intelligence, attitudes, tolerances etc. Yet because a small minority have earned scrutiny (and indeed they have), "they" have all done so.

Bizarre.
Because individuality should not come into it. They are representing a body which has its own ideology, political influences attitude and tolerances. Where a representative (or in some cases entire forces) act outside those unfortunately yes, it leads to the scrutiny of the body as a whole.
EvieJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2017, 11:51
big brother 9
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 15,025
His background and previous criminality (or lack thereof), even the lead up to the event is all complete irrelevance.

What matters is if he was a threat (or reasonably perceived to be a threat) to life at the time he was shot, and nothing else. If he was, its a justifiable shooting. If he wasn't it isn't.
He had a gun.....that justified the shooting.
big brother 9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2017, 11:52
Dotheboyshall
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 9,313
He had a gun.....that justified the shooting.
Under the rules of engagement it doesn't.
Dotheboyshall is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2017, 11:59
LakieLady
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 9,177
He had a gun.....that justified the shooting.
Did the police know that for sure though? Had they seen it? I don't think that is known yet.

I'm uncomfortable with police shooting people on the basis of suspicion or tip-offs that they might have a firearm.
LakieLady is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2017, 12:21
Babsefc
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 821
Every officer from day one of training is told what they will have to go through if they fire their weapon, and I've never met any who wanted to shoot someone. It is a ridiculous notion.
As the wife of an ex firearms officer I was told this and asked if I was happy with it before my husband was accepted to train as a firearms officer. Whether it's true today I don't know as this was back in the 90's
Babsefc is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2017, 12:30
skp20040
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Central London
Posts: 43,693
As the wife of an ex firearms officer I was told this and asked if I was happy with it before my husband was accepted to train as a firearms officer. Whether it's true today I don't know as this was back in the 90's
The sad thing is some people think people become firearms officers because they want to go out and shoot people, whereas in reality that is the last thing they want to do when they go in to work.
skp20040 is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2017, 13:22
Caxton
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Posts: 24,059
Criminals who carry guns deserve to be shot. What excuse can there be for carrying one? Criminalsare bad enough without guns, with them they are just expendable.
Caxton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2017, 13:37
SaturnV
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 5,623
Did the police know that for sure though? Had they seen it? I don't think that is known yet.

I'm uncomfortable with police shooting people on the basis of suspicion or tip-offs that they might have a firearm.
Stopping when told and cooperating sensibly and peacefully will not get you shot. Arse about and you're likely to raise the stakes.
Don't know what applied in this case though but we'll find out in due course.
SaturnV is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2017, 13:40
Brandy211
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 790
Parents were on Sky News today. Father said, he knew the police didn't like his son. "It was a planned assassination".

According to a Chris Bean who was known to Yasser Yaqub, he used drones carrying drugs into HMP Armley prison, selling them to prisoners at 10 times their street value.

(The Telegraph) Stud badboy shot on M62 b police used fast cars to launder profits from his drugs empire.
Brandy211 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2017, 14:12
spkx
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 14,186
Did the police know that for sure though? Had they seen it? I don't think that is known yet.

I'm uncomfortable with police shooting people on the basis of suspicion or tip-offs that they might have a firearm.
Police almost always shoot on suspicion.

There's no way on earth any human can be sure if someone poses a threat in the split second they have to decide whether or not to shoot.

In many cases, even after decades of inquests, combing over witnesses statements, analysing CCTV frame by frame, etc, it's STILL not clear.

Police act on genuine, reasonable belief of a threat.

Unfortunately that does mean there will be mistakes, but the other options are either no armed police at all (as they can never be sure there is a threat) or only allowing the police to shoot after a suspect has so they can verify they are actually a threat.

However that second option also has issues: Robert Dixon was killed after shooting at officers but it turned out he was firing blanks, so wasn't actually a real threat.
spkx is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2017, 14:21
skp20040
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Central London
Posts: 43,693
I love the local paper that is reporting a "spate of police shootings" then state 4 in the area since 1992, so 4 in 24 years ? I think they need to look up the definition of spate.

http://www.examiner.co.uk/news/west-...-shot-12399474

The police shooting on the M62 is the latest in a spate of police shootings in Huddersfield that have coincidentally all happened around this time of year



Police almost always shoot on suspicion.

There's no way on earth any human can be sure if someone poses a threat in the split second they have to decide whether or not to shoot.

In many cases, even after decades of inquests, combing over witnesses statements, analysing CCTV frame by frame, etc, it's STILL not clear.

Police act on genuine, reasonable belief of a threat.

Unfortunately that does mean there will be mistakes, but the other options are either no armed police at all (as they can never be sure there is a threat) or only allowing the police to shoot after a suspect has so they can verify they are actually a threat.

However that second option also has issues: Robert Dixon was killed after shooting at officers but it turned out he was firing blanks, so wasn't actually a real threat
.
However carrying a weapon is bad enough, the people that do so have to realise they make themselves a target, to then discharge a weapon even if it is blanks is then fully justified for Police to shoot, I mean they cannot know they are blanks all they know is a person is shooting at them as you say they cannot know at that point if the person is a real threat.
skp20040 is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2017, 14:24
anne_666
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 30,190
Parents were on Sky News today. Father said, he knew the police didn't like his son. "It was a planned assassination".

According to a Chris Bean who was known to Yasser Yaqub, he used drones carrying drugs into HMP Armley prison, selling them to prisoners at 10 times their street value.

(The Telegraph) Stud badboy shot on M62 b police used fast cars to launder profits from his drugs empire.
I'm pretty sure he knows why.
anne_666 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2017, 14:56
VicnBob
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 954
Parents were on Sky News today. Father said, he knew the police didn't like his son. "It was a planned assassination".

According to a Chris Bean who was known to Yasser Yaqub, he used drones carrying drugs into HMP Armley prison, selling them to prisoners at 10 times their street value.

(The Telegraph) Stud badboy shot on M62 b police used fast cars to launder profits from his drugs empire.
Oh please! You have brought up a wrong un, end of.
VicnBob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2017, 15:15
ayrshireman1
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 2,034
Oh please! You have brought up a wrong un, end of.
Just like the whinging Palestinian father, re the convicted IDF soldier case this week. No mention of why his son was out stabbing Israeli soldiers.
ayrshireman1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2017, 15:15
GusGus
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Posts: 626
Oh please! You have brought up a wrong un, end of.

Could you refresh our memory as to what the dead man has ever been convicted of
GusGus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2017, 15:23
TeeGee
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Dark Satanic Mills
Posts: 4,815
Could you refresh our memory as to what the dead man has ever been convicted of
Clutching at straws with that comment. IIRC one of the Brinksmat robbers allegedly stabbed a policeman to death but got away with it. He was only convicted after later stabbing to death a motorist in a road rage incident. Leopard, spots.......
TeeGee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2017, 15:25
Ginger Daddy
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 6,798
Could you refresh our memory as to what the dead man has ever been convicted of
Jimmy Savile was never convicted. Just saying.
Ginger Daddy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2017, 15:36
skp20040
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Central London
Posts: 43,693
So now Black Lives Matter are apparently trying to use this to raise money on the back of hinting this was a racially motivated

http://www.manchestereveningnews.co....olice-12408697

http://www.nigeriadailynews.news/new...d-justice.html

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...ide-vigil.html

Plea: The Black Lives Matter movement in Britain have used Yaqub's death to fundraise its activities in a Facebook post suggesting his death was racially motivated

and Dad is going to bring a private prosecution of the officer who pulled the trigger

Last night Mr Yaqub said he would pay to privately prosecute the officer that shot him dead

Love the banners sating "this is a peace protest" people in balaclavas and attacks on police cars, yes very peaceful.
skp20040 is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 05-01-2017, 15:43
EvieJ
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 3,630
Jimmy Savile was never convicted. Just saying.
That was the result of corruption and those who should have been protecting people looking the other way. That said even he wasn't sentenced to death.
EvieJ is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply



Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 03:31.