'Gangster' shot dead by police sparking riots did NOT fire at officers - and bullet found embedded

Originally posted by Frira

Originally posted by Magnum007
As a police officer for over 7 years I can tell you from my experience and training that someone doesn't have to fire at me for me to shoot... If they have the :

CAPABILITY
INTENT
EQUIPMENT

to either injure seriously or kill myself or someone else, I will fire my weapon until the suspect is no longer a threat; whether it takes 1 round or all 51 I carry on me....

I will not wait for someone to actually fire before I take action. I they point the gun at me, or if they run away and I believe that they will hurt other people, I will shoot until they are not a threat anymore... If they die, too bad, they made the choice, not me...

So grow up and stop defending low life gangsters... If the officer would have let him go and he would have shot and killed someone else, you would all be screaming that we can't do our job properly and that he should have shot...

You idiots are just never satisfied...

More than likely, you have never fired your weapon on a call.

I have been shot at (fired at me, not just in my presence), and I have drawn down on bad guys. I know when to pull the trigger and when not to. I am not an executioner, and neither is a police officer.

Frankly, I think you are pretending to be a cop, putting words in the mouths of cops to suit your agenda.

But if you are one those few murderous men with guns and badges--- time to try real estate, accounting or any number of careers by which your existence is not endangering the public.

I've never had to shoot, you are right. But my partner did just 2 nights ago on a guy who pointed a gun at him. It's not a question of being an executioner, it's a question of protecting yourself and the public from people who have no morals.

And yes, I am a cop. I serve proudly, honestly, and I WILL come home after EVERY shift... Have the capacity, intention, and means (equipment) to cause grievous bodily harm or death to me, my colleagues, or to someone of the public, and you won't survive.

Plain and simple

Originally posted by curious7
They also said the police marksman who shot at Duggan fired a bullet that went right through the deceased and got lodged into a police radio belonging to an officer standing behind Duggan.

It's a shame not that the man is dead because I don't know the full facts of what happened and neither do anyone else except those involved but a shame because a protest that was peaceful got hijacked and now the world sees a bunch of criminals vandalising and stealing and assume the whole country is like it, assume they're also protesting and assume that we all hate police and that we all think police are killers when we don't.

I and many others in this country have a lot of respect for the police and are siding with them on the issue of the rioting and looting. There were even locals helping clean up the mess with "Looters are scum" written on their t-shirts. That should tell you what the real British public think about the situation.

Hijacking a peaceful protest for political reasons?

Say it isnt so.

Northern Ireland.. Check
G20 meetings, check

Seen it all before.

Originally posted by JennaDarling

Originally posted by curious7
They also said the police marksman who shot at Duggan fired a bullet that went right through the deceased and got lodged into a police radio belonging to an officer standing behind Duggan.

It's a shame not that the man is dead because I don't know the full facts of what happened and neither do anyone else except those involved but a shame because a protest that was peaceful got hijacked and now the world sees a bunch of criminals vandalising and stealing and assume the whole country is like it, assume they're also protesting and assume that we all hate police and that we all think police are killers when we don't.

I and many others in this country have a lot of respect for the police and are siding with them on the issue of the rioting and looting. There were even locals helping clean up the mess with "Looters are scum" written on their t-shirts. That should tell you what the real British public think about the situation.

Hijacking a peaceful protest for political reasons?

Say it isnt so.

Northern Ireland.. Check
G20 meetings, check

Seen it all before.

Thank you - it's great to see some people on here with their blinkers off. I've been saying the same thing repeatedly but it's as though it just slides past people's awareness. I think it challenges their world too much.

Originally posted by wcitizen

Originally posted by JennaDarling

Originally posted by curious7
They also said the police marksman who shot at Duggan fired a bullet that went right through the deceased and got lodged into a police radio belonging to an officer standing behind Duggan.

It's a shame not that the man is dead because I don't know the full facts of what happened and neither do anyone else except those involved but a shame because a protest that was peaceful got hijacked and now the world sees a bunch of criminals vandalising and stealing and assume the whole country is like it, assume they're also protesting and assume that we all hate police and that we all think police are killers when we don't.

I and many others in this country have a lot of respect for the police and are siding with them on the issue of the rioting and looting. There were even locals helping clean up the mess with "Looters are scum" written on their t-shirts. That should tell you what the real British public think about the situation.

Hijacking a peaceful protest for political reasons?

Say it isnt so.

Northern Ireland.. Check
G20 meetings, check

Seen it all before.

Thank you - it's great to see some people on here with their blinkers off. I've been saying the same thing repeatedly but it's as though it just slides past people's awareness. I think it challenges their world too much.

It is nothing new... The police undercover facilitated the G20 protests to make their role more justified.
Sinn Fein / PIRA bussed in rioters from other areas for political gain every year on the 12th.

Rarely will you find a rioter from the area they are rioting in.

Look if you wave a gun around in this country, even a bloody toy gun you get what you deserve..

Originally posted by Suspiria
Look if you wave a gun around in this country, even a bloody toy gun you get what you deserve..

You do not "shoot to kill", that policy has gotten the British government knee deep in # before in their past.

reply to post by JennaDarling


No you are right, we do not shoot to kill. We shoot to stop the threat. Usually, 1-2 rounds to the chest stops the threat. Unfortunately, sometimes people die from 1-2 rounds to the chest...

Once again, our intention is not to kill, but to stop the threat. So if people don't want to die at the hands of the police, then behave and obey the law...

Here's an instructional video. Although it was meant for entertainment, I have to say he's right on most points...

Originally posted by JennaDarling


It is nothing new... The police undercover facilitated the G20 protests to make their role more justified.
Sinn Fein / PIRA bussed in rioters from other areas for political gain every year on the 12th.

Rarely will you find a rioter from the area they are rioting in.

Absolutely it's nothing new, and in this case kids have even been reporting that they were approached by strangers and offered money to start a riot.

Originally posted by Magnum007

Originally posted by Frira

Originally posted by Magnum007
As a police officer for over 7 years I can tell you from my experience and training that someone doesn't have to fire at me for me to shoot... If they have the :

CAPABILITY
INTENT
EQUIPMENT

to either injure seriously or kill myself or someone else, I will fire my weapon until the suspect is no longer a threat; whether it takes 1 round or all 51 I carry on me....

I will not wait for someone to actually fire before I take action. I they point the gun at me, or if they run away and I believe that they will hurt other people, I will shoot until they are not a threat anymore... If they die, too bad, they made the choice, not me...

So grow up and stop defending low life gangsters... If the officer would have let him go and he would have shot and killed someone else, you would all be screaming that we can't do our job properly and that he should have shot...

You idiots are just never satisfied...

More than likely, you have never fired your weapon on a call.

I have been shot at (fired at me, not just in my presence), and I have drawn down on bad guys. I know when to pull the trigger and when not to. I am not an executioner, and neither is a police officer.

Frankly, I think you are pretending to be a cop, putting words in the mouths of cops to suit your agenda.

But if you are one those few murderous men with guns and badges--- time to try real estate, accounting or any number of careers by which your existence is not endangering the public.

I've never had to shoot, you are right. But my partner did just 2 nights ago on a guy who pointed a gun at him. It's not a question of being an executioner, it's a question of protecting yourself and the public from people who have no morals.

And yes, I am a cop. I serve proudly, honestly, and I WILL come home after EVERY shift... Have the capacity, intention, and means (equipment) to cause grievous bodily harm or death to me, my colleagues, or to someone of the public, and you won't survive.

Plain and simple

"...And you won't survive."

I did not threaten you-- you do not have permission to threaten me.

Did you, perhaps, mean "and they won't survive?" I am that public you claim to serve and protect. This seems to confuse you, and your judgment of another's intent is not something I trust in easily-- nor should you.

That is the point, "plain and simple" which instigated the riot and got your profession trashed.

I lived in Austin, Texas, when these things happened in a span of a few short years:

* A fifteen year old steals a car and goes for a joy ride. He gets pulled over. The officer steps up and places his arm inside the car. The teenager panics, and to escape, starts to drive away. The police pulls his weapon and fires, killing the boy. Afterwards he claims he was going to be dragged. He pulled his weapon and fires instead of removing his arm from the window? We do not see the dashboard camera video.

* A disturbance at a bar, "man with a gun" late at night has the police out. They arrive to find a man, completely naked, yelling. He has no gun. He runs off, the police shoot and kill him claiming they thought he had a gun.

* A group of teens have been driving around shooting a gun in the air. Hours later, the police see the car parked in a parking lot. One of the teens is found asleep on the seat of the car. The policeman, draws his pistol, taps on the window, says the sleeping teen reached for his weapon and so shoots and kills the teen. The video shows the teen, trying to run away, the pistol in his waistband and the officers firing on him. The video showing the intial encounter does not exists-- the policeman turned the camera off before approaching the car. Why?

The public is outraged by these events. The police chief says that the whole force will begin re-training in the appropriate use of deadly force. Two or three months later...

* Two officers in a patrol car see a man wanted for questioning-- not a suspect. The cruiser pulls up next to him and he starts to run. One officer gets out and pursues on foot. The other chases him with the car. In an attempt to "cut him off" the officer driving rams the car into a telephone pole, missing the suspect but striking and killing her partner.

Do you see the common thread here? Do I need to mention that in each case the person upon whom deadly force was used was black?

* A man is found passed out from alcohol on a bus-stop bench late at night. Someone calls the police. They arrive. The dash-camera-- now required to be turned on at all times-- shows the policeman walk up to the unconscious man, draw his knight-stick, and begin pounding the helpless man across the abdomen. That victim was Hispanic.

This one I witnessed: A fast-food restaurant manger assaults a homeless man he does not wish to serve. The police arrive and the man runs off. The policeman and the manager seem to be personal friends, based on teh conversation I heard. A witness tells the policeman that he saw the assault. The policeman, tells the witness to put his hands behind his back. The witness says, "Why?" Unprovoked, the policeman violently throws the man to the ground, cuffs him and charges him with "public intoxication." The man is asking for a breathalyzer test, the police man responds, "We are not required to issue a test." I saw the man taken off in the squad car.

What the citizens need to hear from Law Enforcement Officers, is a shared outrage that such officers as those exist among them. We need to hear outrage, not justification.

Does this site really get this deep and intense into areas? seems dangerous to me. i mean, anyone could be reading this and finding out where you live.

Originally posted by XLR8R
So he was a gangster?!, If he was...what's the big deal. Shoot them all I say. The less scum on this earth the better. But they should keep a couple of bullets for the crooked cops and politicians as well.

ok ok man, want to add : yeah, and what else ??? some rain tomorrow ? some sun ?? and how does your mother go ??? come on, what do I care about he shot first or not g-d damned !!!
if he was considered as a gangster there must have been a reason, when he had a gun well he didn't have to have one ok ???
so what ??
next time police first ask for a coffee, or a sweety or what ???
no respect for society ?? well, you pay a price man !!
want to play a game with the police or society : well you pay a price man !!!
you play playstation ?? you play computer games ?? well there are rules to respect no ?
in society there are rules also to respect !!!
play gangster ?? ok, prepare to die like a gangster !!! otherwise you are a stupid as**h**.. !!

reply to post by Frira

"...And you won't survive."

I did not threaten you-- you do not have permission to threaten me.

I wasn't speaking at you, I was speaking about people who wish to show intent, capacity and who have the right equipment to cause bodily harm to myself, my colleagues, or the public...

This seems to confuse you, and your judgment of another's intent is not something I trust in easily-- nor should you.

This is exactly why I don't wait to be shot at to fire my weapon... I can never trust anyone, nor can you. I don't know about you, but if you want to wait for the guy to point the gun and then shoot before you do something, then good for you!

As far as your stories go here's what I have to say:

Story 1:

Don't drive away when you get pulled over, especially if the cop has his hands inside the vehicle... You might get shot. The officer had a legit fear of being dragged... It happened in Toronto not long ago and the cop died...

Story 2:

I'm sure there is more to this story than meets the eye.

Story 3:

Moral of this story: teens and guns don't mix and don't wave and shoot your gun around and don't reach for the gun when the police get to you...

The chief is sending his guys for training because he is elected... He is only doing this because he needs to do so if he wants to stay in office... The training will not change anything because there is a universal standard procedure for use of deadly force that is in use everywhere in the world. It is the following (not in the exact words):

If you are in fear for your life or that you will suffer grievous harm, or that you fear for the life of another or that they will suffer grievous harm then you can use deadly force to neutralize the threat, if there are no other means possible to end the threat.

Now, how do you stop a car from dragging you? How do you stop someone from shooting at you? How do you stop someone who is stabbing you? You use deadly force. Simple as lemon pie.