DS Forums

 
 

M62 Police Shooting


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 03-01-2017, 20:40
Monkey_Moo
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 1,273
Are you always this patronising Monkey?

The judge detailed the inaccuracies in his statement which were numerous. Is calling a witness a liar in an open court common language and used all over the land or would a judge show a little more restraint in his assessment of someone who isn't the one on trial?
Not intending to be patronising, sorry if read it that way.

Unreliable/inaccurate witness does not = liar. There are frequently lots of reasons for a testimony to be considered unreliable. For example, a lack of supporting evidence (it's very rare to convict on one persons word against another), drunk at the time, mental heath issues, character. And when taking a statement people often, with all the best intentions, remember things incorrectly.

And if if they were lying, which is entirely possible, that still does mean they are being 'fitted up', which is generally means a conspiracy by the police.
Monkey_Moo is offline   Reply With Quote
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 03-01-2017, 20:46
EvieJ
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 3,610
Your attitude would change if you needed the police.
Would it?

Do you think they are perfect then? No mistakes, not errors of judgement, no 'bad apples'? Completely different to the rest of us human beings?
EvieJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2017, 20:47
EvieJ
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 3,610
Not intending to be patronising, sorry if read it that way.

Unreliable/inaccurate witness does not = liar. There are frequently lots of reasons for a testimony to be considered unreliable. For example, a lack of supporting evidence (it's very rare to convict on one persons word against another), drunk at the time, mental heath issues, character. And when taking a statement people often, with all the best intentions, remember things incorrectly.

And if if they were lying, which is entirely possible, that still does mean they are being 'fitted up', which is generally means a conspiracy by the police.
Well, instead of speaking in general Monkey, what is you actual opinion of the evidence and the judges instruction in the trial?
EvieJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2017, 20:52
EvieJ
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 3,610
Exactly!

I've seen people slagging off the f****** 'pigs' for harrasing them or their families. But complaining when they don't turn up or are slow to arrive.
I don't recall seeing anything like that in this thread, or even in the reporting of the story.
EvieJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2017, 20:54
Nilrem
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 5,632
I don't see what this has to do with movies
These are supposedly highly trained marksmen and I would have thought it possible for them to shoot accurately to disarm and disable
Do some research on shooting in real world situations.

The armed police are trained to an extremely high standard, and they're trained to aim for "centre" mass because in the real world that is where you are:
A: Most likely to hit the target (not miss completely, not hit something behind them)
B: Most likely to cause a wound that incapacitates fast.

The whole "shooting to disarm" is a bad hollywood myth*, it's practically impossible to do with real weapons against real targets that are moving.
Forget shooting a gun out of a hand as that is even harder (the Mythbusters did a great segment on it, shooting at a dummy that was holding a gun, so not even a moving target, and it was done under extremely controlled conditions.

Also if you hit an arm or a leg you're quite likely to hit one of major arteries with the result that the person will likely die.

And whilst you're mucking around trying to do a Clint Eastwood shot, the person who you consider to be a big enough danger to require you to shoot at them is getting plenty of time to shoot you.

Oh and when you do try one of the hollywood shots, you're likely to miss completely and hit someone in the distance (Hollywood never seems to show the missed shots from the "good guys" hitting some random bystander).

*Up there with being pushed over a railing to fall off the balcony by a shot hitting you.
Nilrem is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2017, 21:02
testcard
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Middle England
Posts: 991
What was the reason for the police car keys all being left on the bonnet of one of the cars?

I was too far away from the TV to hear why it was mentioned.
It's likely that the officers involved would be taken away to provide statements. Their cars would have to remain at the scene until released much later.
testcard is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2017, 21:03
blueblade
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Southern East Anglia
Posts: 75,211
Surprised there wasn't a thread here about this.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leeds-38492953

No doubt comparisons will be made with the Mark Duggan case but there isn't really enough information to draw any conclusions yet.
Who knows?

The shooting, whilst bearing the hallmarks of Duggan, may have been perfectly justified if the guy drew a gun.

What is different about this, is that 3 others have been arrested, presumably individuals who accompanied the shot man.

We'll just have to wait and see.
blueblade is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2017, 21:04
GusGus
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Posts: 623
Your attitude would change if you needed the police.
Just be careful what you wish for.
There are armed police everywhere these days, far more than there were in 2005 when the Brazilian was murdered on the London underground. He was an innocent victim going about his normal daily business. The police controller at this cock up was one Cressida Dick now apparently in the running to succeed the Commisioner
Carry anything construed as suspicious by a trigger happy copper and you may suffer the same fate
GusGus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2017, 21:06
GusGus
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Posts: 623
Do some research on shooting in real world situations.

The armed police are trained to an extremely high standard, and they're trained to aim for "centre" mass because in the real world that is where you are:
A: Most likely to hit the target (not miss completely, not hit something behind them)
B: Most likely to cause a wound that incapacitates fast.

The whole "shooting to disarm" is a bad hollywood myth*, it's practically impossible to do with real weapons against real targets that are moving.
Forget shooting a gun out of a hand as that is even harder (the Mythbusters did a great segment on it, shooting at a dummy that was holding a gun, so not even a moving target, and it was done under extremely controlled conditions.

Also if you hit an arm or a leg you're quite likely to hit one of major arteries with the result that the person will likely die.

And whilst you're mucking around trying to do a Clint Eastwood shot, the person who you consider to be a big enough danger to require you to shoot at them is getting plenty of time to shoot you.

Oh and when you do try one of the hollywood shots, you're likely to miss completely and hit someone in the distance (Hollywood never seems to show the missed shots from the "good guys" hitting some random bystander).

*Up there with being pushed over a railing to fall off the balcony by a shot hitting you.

Amazing that these highly trained police marksman are not able to shoot to disarm or disable but seem able to shoot to kill
GusGus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2017, 21:09
blueblade
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Southern East Anglia
Posts: 75,211
Are you aware of the attitude and refusal to co-operate of the "highly trained police marksmen following the shooting dead of Mark Duggan who was unarmed (that was the decision of the inquest jury, who also gave the extraordinary verdict of "lawful killing"
An incident which completely changed my attitude to police marksmen
We discussed Duggan endlessly on here in a thread which ran, off and on, for over 4 years. In the end, we weren't that much further forward in determining exactly what happened, than we were at the start.

Suffice it to say though, there were some distinct, unsolved anomalies.
blueblade is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2017, 21:12
eggchen
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 2,550
Amazing that these highly trained police marksman are not able to shoot to disarm or disable but seem able to shoot to kill
That's because shoot to disarm or disable is an utter myth propagated by the movies. The intent is to shoot to stop, and marksman do this by aiming at the largest mass, the torso. They are never, ever trained to shoot to wound or other such nonsense.
eggchen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2017, 21:12
blueblade
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Southern East Anglia
Posts: 75,211
Amazing that these highly trained police marksman are not able to shoot to disarm or disable but seem able to shoot to kill
They aim to neutralise the target by aiming at the bulk of the body, which is the part easiest to hit. If they aimed for the legs, a much narrower and more rapidly moving target, they'd likely miss more often than they hit. Plus, the then free bullet might end up somwhere unintended.

I agree it would be great if they could, but it's unfortunately just not possible.

I believe the police are using tasers instead of guns more frequently than they once did though, and wherever possible, of course..
blueblade is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2017, 21:13
EvieJ
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 3,610
We discussed Duggan endlessly on here in a thread which ran, off and on, for over 4 years. In the end, we weren't that much further forward in determining exactly what happened, than we were at the start.

Suffice it to say though, there were some distinct, unsolved anomalies.
Unfortunately.
EvieJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2017, 21:19
blueblade
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Southern East Anglia
Posts: 75,211
The case was extremely involved and it would be very easy to get lost in a sea of details, facts and assertions, many of which were highly contradictory.
blueblade is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2017, 21:29
Zeropoint1
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Derbyshire / UK
Posts: 3,727
I don't recall seeing anything like that in this thread, or even in the reporting of the story.
I'm talking about those people who think they know everything about policing from watching The Bill and many action movies. People who sit behind a screen and know how to react perfectly from the comfort of their chair.

Not the actual police who are out often with little help immediately available and have to make snap life or death decisions.

Also those who complain about them but also complain when they need them.
Zeropoint1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2017, 21:40
Jane Doh!
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 32,699
Amazing that these highly trained police marksman are not able to shoot to disarm or disable but seem able to shoot to kill
You really have no understanding.
Jane Doh! is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2017, 21:56
Zeropoint1
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Derbyshire / UK
Posts: 3,727
You really have no understanding.
Exactly, there are a few 'internet experts' who know everything about policing from TV and the movies where everything is perfect and 'shoot to disarm' works.

Real life is nothing like it's portrayed in an action movie but for some reason it's taken as fact.

We also have those who read about weapons and guns in completely controlled situations and believe it's like that when faced with an criminal known to carry weapons.
Zeropoint1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2017, 21:57
Rekekah_Carter
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Posts: 131
Would it?

Do you think they are perfect then? No mistakes, not errors of judgement, no 'bad apples'? Completely different to the rest of us human beings?
Of course not, but they would put their lives on the line to save you if necessary! The rest of the human beings probably wouldn't.
Rekekah_Carter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2017, 22:01
Brandy211
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 774
Amazing that these highly trained police marksman are not able to shoot to disarm or disable but seem able to shoot to kill
An officer was arrested under caution after the Jermaine Baker killing.
Jermaine Baker was found to be unarmed. At a meeting the IPCC said they were unable to say whether Jermaine Baker was asleep or not at the time he was shot. They also said Jermaine wasn't on any police lists as a gang member, which the police/press initially led the public to believe.
There were no recordings or cctv...
Brandy211 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2017, 22:11
Leicester_Hunk
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Leicester!!!
Posts: 13,032
The family did release a statement via their solicitor, stating they wish to be left alone & that his father is a well known local businessman
Leicester_Hunk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2017, 22:11
Deep Purple
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Deep Within The Chain Of Evil
Posts: 51,275
Amazing that these highly trained police marksman are not able to shoot to disarm or disable but seem able to shoot to kill
Have you not bothered reading all the explanations for that?

If you need to shoot someone, it is because there is a serious threat to life. Shooting at a leg would not be the answer.
Deep Purple is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2017, 22:13
GusGus
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Posts: 623
You really have no understanding.
Well you could try and give me some of yours which you clearly believe you have
Explain to me how a farmer who has no basic training other than practice can shoot a rabbit, or those who shoot game for fun can hit a pheasant, both at some sdistance, yet a highly trained police marksman can not hit to disable or disarm
GusGus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2017, 22:13
skp20040
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Central London
Posts: 43,686
What was the reason for the police car keys all being left on the bonnet of one of the cars?

I was too far away from the TV to hear why it was mentioned.
Everyone will have been told to leave things where they were to preserve the scene ready for forensics and the IPCC if the keys were there than that is where they would stay, simple as that no other reasons.
skp20040 is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2017, 22:15
GusGus
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Posts: 623
Have you not bothered reading all the explanations for that?

If you need to shoot someone, it is because there is a serious threat to life. Shooting at a leg would not be the answer.

I do not accept the explanations, I do not swallow the police spin and pr
GusGus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2017, 22:16
skp20040
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Central London
Posts: 43,686
I do not accept the explanations, I do not swallow the police spin and pr
So you will basically not accept real life but prefer to believe Hollywood film scripts is what it boils down to.
skp20040 is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
 
Reply



Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 18:46.