London Explosions

[Kev]

I dont think you can use the "Foreign Guy Doesn't Understand" excuse, He had been here for a while and I believe was working, so surely he understood the words "Stop" and "Police". Come on guys, its tragic that an innocent man got killed but if an armed officer shouts at you to stop, you stop.

 

[Briggsey]

I dont think you can use the "Foreign Guy Doesn't Understand" excuse, He had been here for a while and I believe was working, so surely he understood the words "Stop" and "Police". Come on guys, its tragic that an innocent man got killed but if an armed officer shouts at you to stop, you stop.

Yeah but the fact that these officers were dressed in normal clothes would have added to the confusion of the guy killed. Anyone could say stop police and have a gun if they are dressed in normal clothes. Maybe if they were in officers uniform then yes he probably would have stopped, but them being undercover certinally did not help the guy.

 

[Kev]

So are you saying we shouldn't have undercover police? Everyone knows not all police dress in uniform, they do however always identify themselves when attempting to make an arrest.

 

[Briggsey]

So are you saying we shouldn't have undercover police? Everyone knows not all police dress in uniform, they do however always identify themselves when attempting to make an arrest.

No, im saying that these guys who were undercover did not help the guy to understand who exactly they were. Like I said even you or me could shout out to somebody STOP POLICE if we were in normal clothes and had a gun. The guy obviously was confused as to who they were and probably thought they were after what was in his pockets. If you did not understand English and a couple of big guys shouted at you and they had guns would you stop?

 

[Kev]

No, im saying that these guys who were undercover did not help the guy to understand who exactly they were. Like I said even you or me could shout out to somebody STOP POLICE if we were in normal clothes and had a gun. The guy obviously was confused as to who they were and probably thought they were after what was in his pockets. If you did not understand English and a couple of big guys shouted at you and they had guns would you stop?

Anyone points a gun at me and shouts stop can have everything in my pockets if they want, no matter who they are, I would rather be robbed than shot.

 

[Ronan_UK]

So are you saying we shouldn't have undercover police? Everyone knows not all police dress in uniform, they do however always identify themselves when attempting to make an arrest.

Exactly, if a person is to live in this country, they must prove themselves that they are worthy, and can abide by our rules. This is not racist, and where this is demonstrated is in countries where the main ethnic group is muslims. We have to follow their rules, and why not people follow our British rules? Because people cry racist. But it's never uttered in foreign countries. Britain = British ruling = British rules = Any foreign immigrants, illegal or legal, follow the British rules. That is not racist.

Anyone points a gun at me and shouts stop can have everything in my pockets if they want, no matter who they are, I would rather be robbed than shot.

Exactly, he must have had a reason to run so fast, anyone in their right mind would realise that co operating with the 'enemies' or people chasing you will be better for you in this country than running. Like the old man said, run, and die tired.

 

[Briggsey]

Anyone points a gun at me and shouts stop can have everything in my pockets if they want, no matter who they are, I would rather be robbed than shot.

Who's to say they wont rob you then shoot you.

Can you justify the need to shoot him in the head 7 times though?

 

[Kev]

As I said (Many, Many pages back) He was an illegal immigrant, I believe he knew they were police and ran fearing he would be removed from the country.

 

[Briggsey]

And like I said, the police took a risk in shooting an innocent man and it did not pay off, the only thing that should be asked of the person is why he felt the need to shoot him seven times, one would have done, and even a search first would have been even better.

 

[Kev]

And like I said, the police took a risk in shooting an innocent man and it did not pay off, the only thing that should be asked of the person is why he felt the need to shoot him seven times, one would have done, and even a search first would have been even better.

When he ran on to the tube, the police (Wrongly) believed he was about to detonate a bomb. If you were a police officer and a suspect was running away from you (After issuing orders to stop several times) and was believed to be a bomber are you seriously telling me you would tackle him to the ground and check for explosives? If he had been a bomber, not only would the police officer had died but so would have the innocent passengers on the train. As for shooting him more than once, I think it is common to use more than one shot, because one shot does not always kill someone. I think people have been shot in the head before and survived.

 

[Briggsey]

Seven times is not necessary though, especially when pinned down and straight in his head.

 

[bharat]

One thing....Killing is not the answer for killing...If terrorist kill...& the govt kills thinking they are fighting terror..then it will be a naver ending peocess.

Mahathma Gandi has proved to the world that anything can be done without violence.
Even when British siverely beat up India people,he wanted them to just protest in peace & not to resort to violence.
India has always been a peace loving nation.But do to extreme cases,when terrorists infiltrate into Indian territory they had to kill them...the civilians killed by Indian govt is not even 1/billions of the number US has killed in Iraq,Afghan & other countries.

Those u have read/understud all the posts what I've posted here can find that I never supported terrorism or aprove killings of inocent people.
What I did was I didn't condemn the bombings as I thought it would be a blow to the govt.

 

[Kev]

Thats a contradiction then, firstly you talk about no violent protests and in the next sentence you talk about wanting to kill the UK government.

 

[Ronan_UK]

Ah but apparntly the government is guilty - so it makes it alright to kill them. Guilty of what? Guilty of having intelligence forces gather knowledge that the man they killed could be a bomber, and when running onto a tube, being shouted to stop, police; he ignored, and continued to try and run onto the tube. Hmm, suspicious.

 

[Kev]

Think its ok to kill them because he doesn't agree with them: