Forum menu
So they say we are turning in to America shooting first & asking questions later, they also ask why the victim was given no chance to get out of the car?
I was thinking why did he have a gun?
What has changed in the last decade or two?
❓
I don't think we know the full facts yet, so it is a bit premature to be making a judgement either way.
V premature to be making ANY conclusions.
This thread may not end well, but fwiw I believe we are a long way from being America.
Obviously anyone who wasn't at the scene at the time has no actual knowledge of what happened.
I've known several firearms officers, they were all very aware that they were expected to make an instantaneous life or death decision every day they were deployed. It's amazing that fewer people aren't shot by our Police if you look at it objectively.
Nobody's saying much, tiny protest, all quiet really but media would obviously like a story about chaos in the streets. Classy as usual.
Even by STW standards you'll be going some to argue [b]anything [/b]from this story right now.
EDIT: Too late, touchpaper lit.. 🙂
I'm not making conclusions, mealy asking why the police need to defend themselves against unlawful killing proceedings when anyone with a gun is breaking the law & should expect to be challenged.
I agree with bear, no need to jump the gun on this. Anything could have gone down.
I'm not making conclusions, mealy asking why the police need to defend themselves against unlawful killing proceedings when anyone with a gun is breaking the law & should expect to be challenged.
There is always an inquiry after a police shooting, no? So what's different here?
Even by STW standards you'll be going some to argue anything from this story right now.
Still, ten pages at least. Maybe more if the Argualympians are still awake.
As someone whose had firearms training - I know things can go from normal to batshit in the blink of an eye.
Not a job I ever wanted.
Unfortunately having a gun in this country while illegal isn't enough for the Police to be able to shoot you. The officer must justify they felt a risk to theirs or another life.
It's right that we have due process around these events and they are investigated properly but the officers should not face being treated like criminals unless they are proven to have killed someone illegally.
Will be interesting to see what comes out of this investigation.
Jamie - Member
There is always an inquiry after a police shooting, no? So what's different here?
Protests & mobs attacking the police, just like in the good old USA.
One thing of note, bloody good grouping.
On the news yesterday someone was saying that over the last year there were some 14,000 incidents involving officers with firearms, but only 7 where the weapon was discharged.
I may have got that second figure a bit wrong, but anyone suggesting that we're getting as bad as 'Murica really ought to go away and have a serious talk with themselves.
i will not be adding my obviously racist views to this thread.
challenged yes shot dead for no reason* nomealy asking why the police need to defend themselves against unlawful killing proceedings when anyone with a gun is breaking the law & should expect to be challenged.
* who knows what happened in this incident we need more details.
The fact this is even on the national news confirms we are nothing like America.
Hardly any details have been released yet so its way too early to speculate on the legitimacy of the police actions.
However, even the Guardian, buried among the usual racebaiting and identity politics, identified the deceased as a "drugs kingpin".
The phrase "live by the sword, die by the sword" (or gun in this case) holds true for such people.
Ripples in a stream, but I lost all respect for armed police in 1983
[url= https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Stephen_Waldorf ]Seems legit[/url]
Nobody's saying much, tiny protest, all quiet really but media would obviously like a story about chaos in the streets. Classy as usual.
This.
The Daily Wail is far from complementary towards him.
Sounds a pretty nasty piece of Shite if they're to be believed.*
*Yes, I do realise the irony in that...
And as Flashy said, yup, someone's sites where well zeroed.
One thing of note, bloody good grouping.
I dunno, he's dropped a shot low, could be the cold barrel or could be his initial round as the weapon came up.
Grouping at 25m standards should be about 50mm so he would have failed his test.
4 people fatally shot by UK police in 2016, 23 in the last 10 years. 957 killed by US police in 2016, that is an educated estimate as the various forces are not obliged to submit any data. Every fatal shooting in the UK is automatically referred to the IPCC. We are NOTHING like the US, thankfully.
This case was inflamed simply because the police used the words "pre-planned operation" and then someone got shot. Ergo, they planned to shoot him (of course they didn't), but that's what people are thinking.
There's been a shift of sorts in the last 10 years, time was if the Police saw a gun and felt threatened they could fire - now if they had intelligence to suggest the suspect had a gun and they move in a threatening way - for example moving forward violently in their seat as if reaching for something or perhaps because they've just been boxed in and come to a sudden stop they can fire. There will be an enquiry because that's what they do, but the law / rules are fairly clear - intelligence however good or bad says armed, offer feels threatened (impossible or close to, to disprove) leathal force - 3 shots, 6 including 4 to the chest and 2 to the head to make sure or a dozen or more to the back of the head whilst they're laying on their face on a train floor - no problem.
It's not the frequency in which they shoot that bothers me, it's the tick box justification especially in the Met and I have to think it's because they allowed their firearms officers to be trained by Special Forces post 7/7 some of them, especially the one who made that 'confessions' show a few months back are psychopaths, not nutters but have zero empathy for people - its target, can I shoot? Yes? Then I'll shoot. "Should" gets lost in the mix - gun crime is still very rare in the UK, gun crime against the Police incredibly rare - they are being too risk adverse imho.
4 people fatally shot by UK police in 2016, 23 in the last 10 years. 957 killed by US police in 2016, that is an educated estimate as the various forces are not obliged to submit any data. Every fatal shooting in the UK is automatically referred to the IPCC. We are NOTHING like the US, thankfully.This case was inflamed simply because the police used the words "pre-planned operation" and then someone got shot. Ergo, they planned to shoot him (of course they didn't), but that's what people are thinking.
Don't be coming in here with rational facts like that. Silly.
I know, I know 😀
not nutters but have zero empathy for people - its target, can I shoot? Yes? Then I'll shoot.
I'm afraid a lot of people do that simply because it's the training they receive and not because it's their mental want to shoot someone. When training with simulations all the time you become desensitised to the fact it is a human and its just a target you have to hit. With adrenaline running that will only get worse.
Coppers eh? First proper day back to work from the Christmas holiday and they'll do anything to get another few months off on paid leave while the IPCC investigate.
Should have done as he was told:
I'm afraid a lot of people do that simply because it's the training they receive and not because it's their mental want to shoot someone. When training with simulations all the time you become desensitised to the fact it is a human and its just a target you have to hit. With adrenaline running that will only get worse
So, how come they shoot so few times despite, literally, thousands and thousands of stops/operations. You can't blame training for desensitising people when most armed police go through their entire careers without ever pulling the trigger.
Not directly related to this thread but my wife has recently been in the US working with families of officers killed in the line of duty.
This site makes very sobering reading. As many have said - fortunately we are nothing like the US.
https://www.odmp.org/search/year/2016
especially the one who made that 'confessions' show a few months back are psychopaths, not nutters but have zero empathy for people - its target, can I shoot? Yes? Then I'll shoot.
Hmm.
I can think of a couple I've crossed paths who'd fit that category.
V glad I was the one who was armed & they weren't - sadly some of them were instructors!!
Yep the Police must have just stopped a random car and decided to kill a random person, and then a bunch of random people in Bradford might have used it as an excuse to potentially start a riot (doesn't take much in Bradford)
Or the person was a known drug dealer, known to be carrying firearms, who didn't do as the Police asked and unfortunately was killed. Then part of the Bradford population used this as an excuse to play the race card, get a bit upset and nearly use it as an excuse to start rioting.
Of course the truth is probably somewhere in between. However carry a firearm, and logic tells me that your chances of ending up dead go up big time.
I'm reasonably sure that the bloke who was shot was a waste of space and a burden on society, but having known a few armed police officers, including one who was an army colleague who became my brother in law, they seem to have a large number of bell ends amongst their ranks that openly talk about really wanting to shoot someone.
Couldn't give a toss about this bloke if the drug baron rumours are true, but the police attitudes that I've been witness to will inevitably lead to innocent people being shot, and it does seem that the rules of engagement as such have been lowered since the days of the Northern Ireland troubles for example.
but the police attitudes that I've been witness to will inevitably lead to innocent people being shot, and it does seem that the rules of engagement as such have been lowered since the days of the Northern Ireland troubles for example.
Does the evidence back that up?
4 people fatally shot by UK police in 2016, 23 in the last 10 years. 957 killed by US police in 2016, that is an educated estimate as the various forces are not obliged to submit any data. Every fatal shooting in the UK is automatically referred to the IPCC. We are NOTHING like the US, thankfully.
With criminal gangs, terrorism threats and more 4 fatal shootings in one year by the police is incredibly low and shows the training and rules of engagement probably do work.
There will always be ones that were not done right, and there will be grey areas where it comes down to judgement calls and those split seconds of threat assesment. But thankfully as these get reviewd people can learn from each and every one.
So, how come they shoot so few times despite, literally, thousands and thousands of stops/operations. You can't blame training for desensitising people when most armed police go through their entire careers without ever pulling the trigger.
Just because they think it's a target it doesn't stop them assessing the threat correctly and choosing not to shoot. That's what the training is there for, to stop them thinking about the human being and make them think about the threat levels. They have to take a lot in to account, especially now they are using 5.56mm ammunition in crowded areas and what's behind the bad guy matters a lot more.
I dunno, he's dropped a shot low, could be the cold barrel or could be his initial round as the weapon came up.Grouping at 25m standards should be about 50mm so he would have failed his test.
FFS, why are we discussing grouping on here? Do you know how hard it is for many soldiers to kill for the first time? Or that grouping goes to shit outside of a shooting range when you've got adrenalin running through you. Are the police battle hardened, cold, dead eyed special forces operatives now?
Someones dead, discussing grouping is a bit shallow.
FFS, why are we discussing grouping on here?
It's an outrage and I'm as angry as you are.
Surprised that none of the posts refer to yuqub having been in court for attempted murder using a firearm.
Doesn't prove anything but......
Im not angry, its just odd.
Its like people were discussing darts...
Doesn't prove anything but......
It suggests why in an operation to aprehend him firearms officers were present. They were there to apprehend him not execute him so probably best wait for...... the inquirey.
Do the firearms guys have body cams these day?
In 2 balanced sides, UK and many other countries accept that imprisonment is the legal punishment for crimes. Where somebody puts lives in danger they can act to stop that danger.
@Tom, it's the wannabe's getting their practice targets out. Somebody got killed, on balance I'm glad it wasn't a police officer. For the guy they were after given the choice would you rather be awaiting trial or dead.
Do the firearms guys have body cams these day?
I don't think they were wearing any which is one of the points a lot of people are questioning. Especially as this was a planned operation and not a rush job.
Coppers do a crap, hard job - yes on balance I'd rather a young policeman wasn't dead. It would be nice if the social divisions and drug problems that lead to these things happening were tackled though.
somouk - Member
They have to take a lot in to account, especially now they are using 5.56mm ammunition ...
Ohhh ... 5.56 from Sig Sauer MCX?
Ohhh ... 5.56 from Sig Sauer MCX?
Not sure, a lot of forces seem to choose different rifles depending on their own testing.
The "facts" as I know them
Been in court for attempted murder with a firearm
Has been shot before
His house is covered in cctv cameras
He has had a series of expensive cars inc a yellow Lambourghini (see press photo)
Dating profile of "stud badboy"
Seems highly likley to me he was, as the press have said a drug dealer and was armed.
Still, ten pages at least. Maybe more if the Argualympians are still awake.
[img] 
[/img]