London Police told "Shoot to Kill"

Police in London have been told that hey are to "Shoot to Kill" if they believe they are dealing with a terrorist or suicide bomber. The news stated that they have taken up this stance after taking advice from the FBI.......who says we aren't Bush's Lapdog??

How long before Martial Law, eh?

I was reading that this morning as well chebob, didnt think it would be too long before it happened though.

We should be use to gun's on our street's though by now, although usually they're with the criminal world arent they!

But Northern Ireland locals have had to live with it most of their live's, so it was only a matter of time really.

But then again, does our HONEST government know something we dont as usual? And just not telling us?


blackwidow

This is a joke Chebob right?
I'm British. As far as I know, I'm the regular guy in the street.
I'm pretty sure the majority would agree with the shooting of a suicide bomber on a mission.

Maybe you wouldn't. But then I'd be the guy laughing at what's left of you as they pick up your entrails with a dustpan and brush, if your objections were listened to.

If you need to use such a lame excuse as the defence of our country from people intent on blowing us up with explosives strapped to their bodies, just to get in a cheap shot at the US, I suggest you go and live in one of the fundamentalist areas in the Middle East. I'm sure they'd be pleased to make you their biatch. Looks to me like you're almost there anyway.

Originally posted by blackwidow666

But Northern Ireland locals have had to live with it most of their live's, so it was only a matter of time really.

But then again, does our HONEST government know something we dont as usual? And just not telling us?


blackwidow

Your right.....and Northen Ireland is in a state of disrepair. In theory, Police using guns to stop dangerous criminals is great, but in reality, our policemen and women aren't up to it. We all know how racist, sexist and basically bad the majority of the police force are. Now that this has happened, how long before a kid is shot for holding a BB Gun? Or a man going for a early morning jog is mistaken for a criminal and shot......sounds ridiculous, but with our police force, It will happen. A lot.

I wouldn't rule out Tony Blair knowing something we don't either.........but thats what I thought when he wasa desperate to go to war in Iraq. Turns out he was just going along for the "friendship" of Bush, so it's quite likely that Tony Blair is just "keeping up appearances" and showing Dubya that he likes to fight terrorism too........who knows

"But Northern Ireland locals have had to live with it most of their live's, so it was only a matter of time really."

Thats exactly what i was going to say, the part about Bush's lapdog though true, does not apply to this.

I don't think we could have expected any less, of course they will shoot a terrorist and kill him/her, good.

They would have done it anyway, the SAS has killed republican terrorists on many occasions. When you are dealing with a suicide attack, you cannot take any risks.

Obviously i would prefer if we didn't fight Israel's wars and attract attention of terrorist groups, but Blair seems to either be fooling us, or being fooled himself into following the gang and i don't see the trend reversing any time soon.

Martial law would only ever be possible if there was a huge terrorist attack and it would be confined to a relatively small area (eg. central London), i think you can sleep easy

Originally posted by Leveller
This is a joke Chebob right?
I'm British. As far as I know, I'm the regular guy in the street.
I'm pretty sure the majority would agree with the shooting of a suicide bomber on a mission.

Maybe you wouldn't. But then I'd be the guy laughing at what's left of you as they pick up your entrails with a dustpan and brush, if your objections were listened to.

If you need to use such a lame excuse as the defence of our country from people intent on blowing us up with explosives strapped to their bodies, just to get in a cheap shot at the US, I suggest you go and live in one of the fundamentalist areas in the Middle East. I'm sure they'd be pleased to make you their biatch. Looks to me like you're almost there anyway.

Ahh, levellers upset agin. Why don't you get out of your pram and pick your toys back out. Don't throw them out again, it's getting boring.

Yes leveller, we have the BEST police force ever, they CERTAINLY know how to determine a terrorist from a civilian.........

As I said, IT IS A GOOD IDEA, it's just that our police are assholes, so we'll just have to see how it plays out. Perhaps they will actually stop terrorists and bring peace to the UK. Perhaps they won't.

But of course, your mind has no room for more than 1 option. Tings go YOUR way, or not at all, isn't that right?

martial law will only come into effect in the UK if a terrorist group (or the gov) target somethin "high profile".

Originally posted by chebob
Ahh, levellers upset agin. Why don't you get out of your pram and pick your toys back out. Don't throw them out again, it's getting boring.

But of course, your mind has no room for more than 1 option. Tings go YOUR way, or not at all, isn't that right?

I'm upset?
No more upset than that I have to share my country with a cretin like you.

Fortunately old chap, things normally go my way. So I don't have to get upset too often. Of course, if one of our "asshole" police officers failed to shoot a suicide bomber who was running towards me, I guess I could be a little miffed.
Luckily though, we're gonna shoot the buggers before that can happen, aren't we?

Upset? Me? Never.
Everything's going my way!!!!

Excuse me if I could interject, I was just curious..im American and not very knowledgeable about to much of anything but I was wondering...your police officers ride donkeys? In the states well in NYC they ride horses. Thats pretty cool. Anyways I just had to clarify.

Originally posted by infinite
martial law will only come into effect in the UK if a terrorist group (or the gov) target somethin "high profile".

Ok, I was being far fetched with the "Martial Law" comment, just a "side-thought".

As for you Leveller.......

You just turn everything I say into a personal attack on you. Reminds me of FreeMasons golden days.......

You seem to think I want Terrorists blowing us up. You are mistaken. I would gladly see them shot.

btw has anyone here from the UK notice that there has been a large rise of police on are streets? i live in Canterbury and you never used to see a police officer now they are everywhere

OK.

*takes deep breath*

Right. What was the point of this thread then?

You want to see the terrorists shot. You recognise the martial law comment was an exaggeration.
What does that leave you with from the content of your first post then?

Ah yes. The lapdog comment.

Well why beat about the Bush dude? If you can't stand the Yanks then fair one. To tell the truth they get up my nose occassionally too. But surely there has to be a better way of dissing our colonial cousins than to start a thread which falls apart after one or two tugs.

You're gonna have to try harder to get me to hate them. My national security isn't a "I Hate Yanks" issue. I can blame 'em for a lot of things if I'm forced to. But not in this instance.

Originally posted by infinite
btw has anyone here from the UK notice that there has been a large rise of police on are streets? i live in Canterbury and you never used to see a police officer

now they are everywhere

Infinite. This is what the government has been aiming at for years with the full backing of the population of this country. Less red tape bull# paperwork and more bobbies on the beat. It's meant to be a return to the community policing days that we lost during the 70s.

There's nothing to read into it other than this is why our Council Taxes have risen.

oh right thanx, and theres me thinkin we were headin into a police state nice to see the government thinkin about the population for once

But Northern Ireland locals have had to live with it most of their live's, so it was only a matter of time really.

The British Army has had a shoot to kill policy for over 20 years. Like my old Seargeant used to say "your an Infantry man! You dont F***ing well shoot to wound do you!?" My point is that Soldiers and Police marksmen are trained to shoot to kill, because if you wound someone there is a chance he can still press the button pull the trigger or whatever. As for the Police being arsholes my Old Dad was a copper for over 20 years and i never thought he was an arsehole .... just over worked and underfunded.

Infinite

I've noticed that there's been alot more copper's around where I live (Devon), whether its to do with all terrorist alert's or drug's down here is anyone's guess!


Rogue Trooper

It might be the case in the army "shoot to kill", but I didnt think that it's always been the case with the police (I could be wrong though) but then our police force hasnt always been gun-armed though! Mark's men maybe but not ordinary police officer's, out on the streets daily. I'm saw it was disarm/disable the criminal if possible, if not then shoot to kill.

blackwidow

Wow.the bobbies trading in the baton and the tit for a full auto? What is the world cummin too?

Nothing wrong with cops having guns and walking around. Its when the citizenry lacks arms to balance out the authority and power of the givornment. An unarmed populace with a heavily armored police force is bad news, and a sure road to total dictatorship. an armed civilian population and an armed state leaves a nice, wary balance, the govornment can provide some sort of order, but the population always has that stick just in case the gov gets out of hand.

Our police force has always been armed. But like a lot of things in this forum, people here are only just finding it out and making a big deal of it.
As for a shoot to kill policy? Do you reckon there was ever a shoot to injure policy?

It's nigh on impossible to shoot to injure. You aim for the shape and press the trigger. Whichever part you hit is down to how skillful or lucky you are with the firearm.
When police shoot at people they very rarely have time to pick their spot on their target. They've always shot to disable their target - it has never mattered either way what happens to that target other than that it isn't a threat once the trigger has been pulled.

It might be the case in the army "shoot to kill", but I didnt think that it's always been the case with the police (I could be wrong though) but then our police force hasnt always been gun-armed though! Mark's men maybe but not ordinary police officer's, out on the streets daily. I'm saw it was disarm/disable the criminal if possible, if not then shoot to kill.

You are, of course, right our police force is trained to dissarm an armed person first. And my Dad says that the police prefer things as they are, unarmed police backed up by Specialists like SO19, armed response units etc. But when the options run out then the police marksman in question will shoot to kill.

They've always shot to disable their target - it has never mattered either way what happens to that target other than that it isn't a threat once the trigger has been pulled.

But the only way to make sure a target is no longer a threat would be to kill said target, would you agree? A marksman is trained to aim for the centre of a visable target. So if that target was behind cover you would aim for the centre of the visable target what ever part of that target would be. So if the target was not in cover the marksman would aim for the chest and, depending on if the target was wearing kevlar or not, that would 9 times out of ten be a kill shot.
As for not having the time to pick the shot, well that does indeed depend on the skill and experience of the marksman. But then the training they under go is extensive and after a while becomes automatic. The point is to combine skill with instinct.

www.google.com... this site is Cadadian put the training is more or less the same worldwide
sorry i linked straight to google but if you click on the 4th link you will see what i mean.

[Edited on 10-8-2003 by RogueTrooper]

[Edited on 10-8-2003 by RogueTrooper]