Shots fired outside Westminster

Tom, read Muddydwarf’s answer about chainmail. While the mail itself is the most obvious part there’s a lot going on behind it. All this kind of body armour from chainmail to kevlar vests is heavier and bulkier than you first realise. It’s fine for a while but it’s warm stuff to wear and by the end of a shift very tiring. If you are wearing a shark suit then you’ll also have a buoyancy vest to assist you and you’ll be kept cool by the sea water around you.

Not been to the HofC but I’d imagine that in principle it’s little different to the defences of a medieval castle, basically concentric rings of defence so while you might only see unarmed policemen, behind them are armed units, (possibly interlocked) secure doors, etc.

Cheers guys.

I think it would be a bit crap if nothing can be learnt from the incident – in that the men and women we ask to do our dirty work will carry on facing the same level of risk of which nothing can be done… but as max pointed out I guess we’ll have to wait for the official answers.

Interesting post about sharks – eg probing bites – learn something new each day – but I’m sure that is for another thread.

Always amused me that the cops in Sicily swan around in short sleeve shirts and sunglasses while a surrey pcso is dressed up for ww3.

Loving the response from this officer…

Officer criticises "nonsense from armchair critics" when asked about actions of Met Police boss after London attackhttps://t.co/Ryvri8Arn4 pic.twitter.com/ydQAQqFA0y

— BBC News (UK) (@BBCNews) March 24, 2017

I suspect they are running low on sleep in what is a complex investigation!

Not confirmed yet but it seems that they removed the armed cover from most of the external entry points in favour of roving patrols as it was seen as more cost effective.
They also don’t have the gates shut due to the volume of traffic using the entrance, which reads as the MPs don’t want to be inconvenienced by having to wait for the gates to open .

…..

Is the gate thing related to the swearing incident and scandal a while back?

“They also don’t have the gates shut due to the volume of traffic using the entrance,”

I’m not sure this is quite true. You can’t just drive a lorry load of semtex in because there are dual ‘airlock’ gates. However a pedestrian can get in, which is tolerable because it’s not an especially secure area, it’s a carpark.

If you could just drive a car bomb in that *would* be a security issue IMHO.

Can someone edit the thread title and remove the word ‘Breaking’ now please

outofbreath – Member
“They also don’t have the gates shut due to the volume of traffic using the entrance,”

I’m not sure this is quite true. You can’t just drive a lorry load of semtex in because there are dual ‘airlock’ gates. However a pedestrian can get in, which is tolerable because it’s not an especially secure area, it’s a carpark.

If you could just drive a car bomb in that *would* be a security issue IMHO.

One thing people don’t often realise is that there a lot of lessons learnt between the IRA and the 90’s “ram-raiding”, it is actually very difficult to drive a vehicle towards any large building or public place, if you look carefully the entrances to a lot of these places still have concrete bollards and many other measures to stop you doing so. There is also a reason why most train stations only reintroduced bins in the last 8-9 years and even then they are now clear bags so you can see what has been placed in them.

Tom_W1987 – Member

I think it would be a bit crap if nothing can be learnt from the incident

I think it’d be great if everything that can be done is already being done, personally.

Can someone edit the thread title and remove the word ‘Breaking’ now please

Good point.

I heard earlier that the reason why most policemen/women don’t want to carry pistols, is all the stuff they have to go through after any use of the weapon.

Inquiries and the like which they feel the burden of proof is on them to avoid prosecution for doing what they perceive to be their duty in situations where instant decisions have to be made which could so easily be incorrect. They feel they would not get the benefit of the doubt which they feel they deserve.

Charles Menezes, for example…

Not for any distaste about using armament.

It sounds harsh, but at some point you have to file things under “s**t happens” and hope it never happens to you…..

Exactly my thoughts. You could put walls along a pavements, you could spend billions monitoring anyone who had a remote chance of doing anything bad (remember many people are murdered in the UK each week so would need to be monitoring for those too) or you could just accept that there is not much you can realistically do.

Also, don’t give it 3 days of constant news coverage.

Cougar – Moderator
Can someone edit the thread title and remove the word ‘Breaking’ now please
Good point.

Has there been a bomb in Regent Street? 😉

They feel they would not get the benefit of the doubt which they feel they deserve.
Charles Menezes, for example…

Hmmm. Not perhaps the perfect example of when benefit of doubt should be applied.

Or a taser, or pepper spray.

Or a **** off big shouty dog armed with a laser!

A LASER!!

This is possibly a stupid question, but it just occurred to me, so excuse me if it’s stupid. What is the evidence that this is a terrorist attack as opposed to a nutter with a grudge against society/government? I know he was a Muslim, but I’m not aware of any note and I haven’t heard anything about him shouting anything that would mark this out as terrorist attack. Sure, IS have claimed responsibility, but they would.

This was sparked by just hearing on the news that although he had converted to Islam, there was no awareness he had been radicalised.

Not trolling or trying to be smart, genuinely wondering if I have missed something in the reporting that is indicative of a specific terrorist claim on his part

Charles Menezes, for example…

that was a combination of piss poor intelligence and surveillance and over-zealous policing in the heat of action

the police have said that the attacker was known to them so it strikes me as odd that it took so long to formally identify him.
but again they initially got that wrong so that explains the delay…was this guy a lone wolf operating under the inspired influence or was he part of something bigger?
we dont even know what his motives for the attacks were…for that reason it might have been better if he could have been taken alive.

This is possibly a stupid question, but it just occurred to me, so excuse me if it’s stupid. What is the evidence that this is a terrorist attack as opposed to a nutter with a grudge against society/government?

He was a scrote, a petty criminal and had a history of violence.

Even if this does turn out to be a ‘legitimate’ terrorist attack (however you want to define that) I take the view that dying in an orgy of violence because he got a kick out of violence is the real motivation. Perhaps he didn’t admit that to himself. Probably steroid abuse contributed as well. …and yeah having little to lose and a grudge against society will be there in the mix too.

If he’d been a decent person he’d have done something decent in the name of Islam. Because he was a scrote he did something scrote-like for the sake of Islam. I’m not sure Islam gets the credit in the first case, or the blame in the second case.

He’s probably mentally ill.

What is the evidence that this is a terrorist attack as opposed to a nutter with a grudge against society/government?

He was known to the security forces as had been involved with a number of radicals.

He’s probably mentally ill.

No shit Sherlock.

I take the view that dying in an orgy of violence because he got a kick out of violence is the real motivation.

You keep telling yourself that if it makes you feel better.

No shit Sherlock.

Well if that was an initial thought to people, this thread would barely exist.

“He’s probably mentally ill.”

Or at least mildly eccentric. 🙂

The BBC (at least) isn’t going quite as far as that

However, Mrs May added that “some years ago” he was “once investigated in relation to concerns about violent extremism”.

scotroutes

gobuchul » He was known to the security forces as had been involved with a number of radicals.

The BBC (at least) isn’t going quite as far as that[/quote]

Multiple raids in different cities by armed police kind of hints at him being connected to other malcontents though.

gobuchul » He was known to the security forces as had been involved with a number of radicals.

Had he?

Multiple raids in different cities by armed police kind of hints at him being connected to other malcontents though.

Or.

Multiple raids in different cities by armed police kind of hints at living at multiple addresses.

“You keep telling yourself that if it makes you feel better.”

What’s the alternative? God didn’t make him violent, he was violent long before he found God.

“Multiple raids in different cities by armed police kind of hints at living at multiple addresses.”

This.

What’s the alternative? God didn’t make him violent, he was violent long before he found God.

He had a violent past but nothing like this. He hadn’t been arrested for any violence for a number of years.

There is a big difference between slashing someone with a Stanley knife and chopping their head off with a machete.

not trying to avoid a probable elephant in the room but playing devil’s advocate.

In a seven degrees of Kevin Bacon style way, i played cricket with a lot of British asians a few years back. They would have had a circle of friends, who had a circle of friends, we’d have had our numbers on people’s phone lists…… I bet a number of us have possibly shown up on ‘investigation’ lists even if just for a junior spy at MI5 to immediately discard us again as not of interest.

We tread a fine line between trust nobody and civil liberty above all. Just because he was once looked at means nothing without knowing why and how hard.

**

Devil’s advocate off – the police and sec services will be looking at it. Guessing at motive despite an obvious apparent elephant is of no great use. If they have info that operationally they don’t want to reveal just yet then I’m fine with that. I’d also note that the police thanked the media for not revealing the attackers name(s) despite having them quite quickly to allow the police time to act upon the info first.

Well said.

“There is a big difference between slashing someone with a Stanley knife and chopping their head off with a machete.”

Well that’s where we disagree. I think someone who carried a knife in a pub and used it on someone’s face is *exactly* the kind of person who could end up killing people.

Drac

Multiple raids in different cities by armed police kind of hints at him being connected to other malcontents though.

Or.

Multiple raids in different cities by armed police kind of hints at living at multiple addresses. [/quote]

Silly me jumping to conclusions. I forgot to consider EVERY possible reason other than “Islamist group” when someone runs over tourists then hacks a police officer to death.

The eight arrests at six addresses are probably just a happy accident because he has a considerable property portfolio.

The right wing press were pretty quick to use a picture of a woman of Muslim appearance walking past a body looking completely indifferent though, and when more pictures were released it was apparent that it was a ‘lucky snap’ and that she was quite clearly upset.

Anyone who’s ever used a camera knows if you take a rapid fire shot at a moving scene, you’ll only get one or two good pictures, and one or two really bad looking ones as well.

The press chose to publish one that suited an agenda.

“Silly me jumping to conclusions. I forgot to consider EVERY possible reason other than “Islamist group” when someone runs over tourists then hacks a police officer to death.”

I think there’s no doubt this **** was an Islamist.

I just think ‘Islamist’ is never the whole story. Unless you can offer am example of a totally peaceful person who hates violence and then feels forced to kill by God. Because IME these ****s always have a history of crime/violence/drugs and I don’t think that’s coincidence.

“when more pictures were released it was apparent that it was a ‘lucky snap’ and that she was quite clearly upset.”

Yup. Camera never lies. Bollocks, it always lies, it’s a split second and the way the press use that is obscene.

He’s probably mentally ill.

Some might be but most jihadist/terrorist’s won’t be ill in the medical sense. In all probability he’d have know exactly what he was doing, and had an absolute certainty that what he was doing was right.

“Some might be but most jihadist/terrorist’s won’t be ill in the medical sense. In all probability he’d have know exactly what he was doing, and had an absolute certainty that what he was doing was right.”

I assume you’re guessing, rather than referencing some study?

If so my guess is that every single suicidal terrorist in a Liberal Democracy has a personality disorder of some kind.

Obviously not Psychosis, but something most of us would regard as ‘being a nutter’.

I think crazy people are susceptible to religion rather than the other way around, religion is a symptom of mental illness.

Of course most religious people don’t go that far, but they are all wrong in the head in varying degrees.

Then then thier religious beliefs are used as an excuse.

……..religion is a symptom of mental illness.

Of course most religious people don’t go that far, but they are all wrong in the head in varying degrees.

The overwhelming majority of people in the world have religious beliefs. I would question the sanity of someone who thinks most people are mentally ill.