If the guy was guilty, I had no problem with his death.
But London Metropolitian Police have admitted they tracked a man from his home, to an Underground train and shot him to death, five times at point blank range.
Oh and they also admitted it was the wrong man. Shit.
That is wrong on so many levels.
Wrong because an innocent man died. Wrong because police will be more hesitant to act in the same way again. Wrong because terorrists know this.
Wrong because actual investigative work, presumably, led to this man and it was false. Wrong because it's a step backward. Wrong because neither Britain nor any other country should have to react his way. Wrong because many commuting Londers had to watch a man shot and killed in front of them.
If all this doesn't give you pause, you are suffering from bloodlust.
Wrong because who the hell knows, the man could be a terrorist sympathizer and planned it to cause just such strife. Wrong because those suffering from bloodlust will grab onto that last possibility as the most likely.
Witnesses told of plain-clothes police pursuing a suspect on to a subway train carriage. He slipped as he ran and then was repeatedly shot at point-blank range as he lay on the floor.- [Yahoo: Reuters Link]
Article comments
— go to most recent comments1 - Jones Violet
Horrible.
2 - Aaman
Love the Amazon link, and doesn't this belong in Politics?
3 - DaveH
Yes, wrong on every level. But, the guy still should have stopped when ordered to. He bears as much blame as the police.
4 - Mark Sahm
This incident shows the terrorists succeeded in causing a fear that has even affected the police there.
Most people forget that cops are normal people like anyone else, and they're just as afraid of being blown up, or worse--- responsible for a bomb going off when they had the chance to stop them.
5 - Dana Blankenhorn
If you don't stop right away it's OK if cops shoot you? Don't you wish Bull Connor had that kind of attitude behind him.
6 - Mark Sahm
I'm not advocating that the cops were in the right by shooting the guy, but they are just footsoldiers who were misled by their higher-up informants (who's really to blame in this).
7 - Nancy
"If you don't stop right away it's OK for the cops to shoot you?" Well, if you're in post-trauma London, at one of the bombing sites, & the last set of bombers are still on the loose, & the cops tell you to stop, & you keep running, & you may be a human bomb about to endanger more lives ... yeah. They have to protect the greater good. If it can be done w/out such extreme measures, well & good, but the guy did bring it on himself, IMO.
8 - andy marsh
Mark Sahm asks, who's really to blame in this...I say the bonehead that ran when he was told to stop...and if you don't like that answer...how about...the assholes that planeted the bombs and put the entire city of London on the alert...
9 - Dave Nalle
Wrong yes, but also inevitable. If not this time, then eventually.
Dave
10 - Jones Violet
He was a Brazilian electrician on his way to work. You can read the article here, if you so please.
"Wrong yes, but also inevitable. If not this time, then eventually."
so, according to you, keep shooting them until they all die, even if innocent people get shot to death! What a world this is turning out to be.
I'm finding the replies to this much more frightening than anything else.
11 - gonzo marx
this is a really tough one here..
one, running from the police when they tell you to stop gives them all the justification they need to use a higher level of Force in apprehension...
on the flip side, once the individual fell to the ground, which is my inderstanding based on media reports of the incident, then deadly force is no longer justified unless it appeared the perpetrator was reaching for a weapon, which was not the case according to reports..
now, if they had shot him while running, that's one thing and fully justified police procedure, in the US or in England..
but shooting someone while they are down is a completely different matter
let's hope the higher ups at Scotland Yard can sort this all out properly...good chance of that, their reputation for Ethical treatment is sterling and untarnished
Excelsior!
12 - Dave Nalle
>>"Wrong yes, but also inevitable. If not this time, then eventually."
so, according to you, keep shooting them until they all die, even if innocent people get shot to death! What a world this is turning out to be.<<
Nice job reading things into my statement which aren't there. All I was saying is that if you get into a situation where suspects are being chased by armed policemen, eventually someone is going to get shot, and if it goes on long enough someone innocent is going to get shot. That's what happens when people run from policemen carrying guns. And the chance of it happening in England where people don't expect the police to have guns is probably greater because people are more likely to run if they're at all nervous about the police for whatever reason.
Dave
13 - Dave Nalle
Good to see you back, Gonzo.
If the British police were overzealous in shooting this guy it's not surprising considering their relative inexperience with armed pursuit of suspects.
Dave
14 - Capt. Mike Snow
I find it very sad that people say "why didnt he stop" and such rubbish. Since when did running away from heavily armed plain clothes Police officers deserve arbitary execution? This was in London right? not Albania or Iraq! The individuals that committed this evil deed must be punished to the full extent of the law.
15 - Dave Nalle
Capt. people who run from cops get shot. It would be nice if it didn't happen, and it certainly doesn't happen any time. But when the cops say 'stop, don't run', wtf are you doing running away?
Dave
16 - Capt Mike
Hi Dave, you are certainly right in this case. But this didnt happen in downtown LA or South Africa (where I hail from) where guns are commonplace and Cops tend to shoot first and ask after. Even here in JNB a police officer acting in this manner would be for a very high jump indeed. I fear the land of my birth is being turned into a combat zone by Machiavellia politicians who didnt invent "Si guarda al fine," but are donig thier best to perfect it.
Lateral thinking is what they need to do not shoot to kill.
17 - Nancy
In this day & age, under these circumstances with which we now all labor, anyone who doesn't stop on demand, or who keeps or starts running, is either braindead (& soon will be for real), too stupid to live (& they'll take care of that point for him, too), or is behaving in such a way as to justify police taking severest action to ensure the greater good of the safety of others. To continue to run, or to ignore commands to stop, is inexcusable given today's situations, unless the potential drop is suicidal & figures this is a good quick way to get it done. He brought it on himself. To continue the way he did was reckless, stupid, & irresponsible in the extreme to everyone concerned, from his family, to himself, the cops, & the bystanders.
18 - bhw
It's very easy to forget that the police were plainclothed, not uniformed. And this guy was not a native of England. Confusion and/or uncertainty made him run, perhaps.
For that, he was executed. I fear the police plan to shoot first [for just walking out of the wrong building, wearing the wrong clothes, having dark skin, not stopping when people in street clothes and with guns chase you] and ask questions second as much as I fear the terrorists.
19 - JR
I guess they're not interested in interrogating suspects anymore.
20 - Dave Nalle
The police can't tell why a guy is running if he runs, so how can you blame the police? Would you prefer a policy where he was just allowed to get away?
BTW, I think this post is mistitled. For there to be a downside of this that implies there's an upside. I don't see one.
Dave
21 - bhw
Would you prefer a policy where he was just allowed to get away?
He didn't get a way. They chased him, and he fell. Then the piled on and shot him in the head several times.
22 - Aaman
Dave, the oddity is that the police did not apply basic police techniques - of verification and detail. Some interesting info from the NYT, via huffingtonpost,
23 - JR
Dave Nalle: Would you prefer a policy where he was just allowed to get away?
In this case, yes.
24 - Dave Nalle
>>He didn't get a way. They chased him, and he fell. Then the piled on and shot him in the head several times.<<
Then we go back to the issue that the London police have traditionally not used guns when apprehending suspects, and therefore are inexperienced and jumpy and probably not nearly as well trained in proper procedure with a gun in their hands as cops from the US. Another reason why Britain needs to lift their ridiculous gun laws so more people have a familiarity with firearms from an earlier age.
Dave
25 - Temple Stark
Well, with Aaman's details I guess this one from the orignal post takes front and center:
>>Wrong because actual investigative work, presumably, led to this man and it was false.
I was wrong because it appears there was no actual investigative work.
If Aaman's fact is a fact then that is where the true fault lies. That is where the serious embarrassment lies and someone should lose their job over that F*** up.
The man was an electrician on his way to work.
It's nothing to do with whether the police are jumpy. And guess what if they are trained they really shouldn't be and that's no excuse (But they aren't making that they're excuse.). And if the training was terrible, than someone should be held accountable. I had read that it was only one person who fired the five shots.
Big picture did the police act admirably? No. Did they act practically? Yes. I do finds it refreshing that the London Metro police aren't trying to obfuscate and dodge all responsiblity.
Police are not saints. And on the job they are rarely sinners. Most are kicking themselves for this action.
On-topic parallel - six Casa Grande policemen are on "routine" paid suspended leave pending investigation into a man being shot here multiple times by police.
Situation's markedly different, however. It seems the guy was already firing as police arrived.