OllyK

No it's not happenign every week, but the mechanism for it to happen again is still in place, unchanged and uninvestigated. If your car starts making clunkign noises you don't keep driving around in the hope that it will just go away, you investigate it and fix the problem.

I'm not saying that there is no place for a S2K policy, I just don't see much benefit in the case of suicide bombers, it won't deter them, it may stop them, but equally it may well result in a detonation. On it's first outing the policy has been shown to have flaws, I think the benefits of suspending the policy and fixing them far outweigh any benefit we have from keeping them active as they are.

davegtt

But it is being investigated so I fail to see your point?

Olly, theyre gonna detonate a bomb what ever happens. least theres a chance of stopping the bomb going off by shooting them int he head dont you think? the chances of a bullet setting the bomb off are quite small....

New_scooby_04

iTrader: (4)

Yes I am fed up with hearing about it. I don't know what happened and nor does anyone else at the moment. An independent body is investigating it and the truth will out eventually.

NS04

OllyK

If something appears to be broken, you stop using it till you find out what the problem is and fix it.

Think about this. Now they know there is a shoot to kill policy, what modification do you think they will make to the detonation mechanism?

You now set it so that you have to keep a sprung switch depressed to stop the detonator going off. As soon as you get shot (head or otherwise) you'd release the pressure on the switch detonating the bomb (hence the term dead man trigger). The shoot to kill policy now guarentees the bomb is detonated, probably killing the officer doing the shooting at the same time. The policy has lost almost all its value as it is now known and can be countered accordingly. You still want the police shooting suspected bombers?

Aztec Performance Ltd

iTrader: (234)

I think you've cornered him on that one Olly

New_scooby_04

iTrader: (4)

Then its a case of Dammed if you do, dammed if you don't surely? It then just becomes a question of who decides where the thing goes off, the police man or the suspect. Unless we're to believe that the suspect might have changed his mind and not gone through with it given no interference.

Also I don't think its the effectiveness of the S2K policy in stopping a SB that's in doubt, its the circumstances under which it was enacted which would appear to have lead to an innocent being killed. i.e. it's not the watch that's broken, it was the decision to put it on!

NS04

brihoppy

they know all about the shoot to kill policy anyway...its standard in theatres such as iraq and afghanistan to shoot suspected suicide bombers in the head if possible...you really are in a no-win scenario when dealing with them...!

The Zohan

Option 1)
In which case we might as well give up if we cannot prevent them from building the bomb or finding weak-minded-cowards to detonate them.

or
Option 2)
There will always be weak minded cowards who will do this so - Throw out all Muslims from the UK - you never know!

or
Option 3)
Shoot them in the head, they are gonna detonate it anyway best it is in a place/space of 'our' chosing as much as possible.

I vote for option 3

I still have faith in our Police (if not the judges and legal system).

I am sorry that young man died but sometimes sh*t hapens to people.

Dave!

If he had returned to Brazil when his visa expired then it seems pretty obvious to me that he would not have been shot - at least not by our coppers (i've read they're even more trigger happy over there).

So he was shot as a direct consequence of overstaying his visa limit in this country.

D.

OllyK

Sure, it just makes the point that intelligence is so important, something that was somewhat lacking in this case it would seem.

It also makes the point that the S2K policy is of little value any more, so if there is no benefit from having it, is it worth the risk to innocent people to maintain it in it's current form?

You also have to consider that there is no negotiating with a dead man. Assuming they change the trigger mechanism, a swift head shot is no longer a solution to the police. However, stalling a potential bomber and trying to engage him in dialog "may" allow you to establish what he has and disarm him or talk him out of it, not much chance, but more than shooting him.

brihoppy

just a damn horrid situation to be in...im off to iraq for the third time in november...cant wait...better not see anyone in a padded jacket or hes getting proper brassed up...!!!

OllyK

Why do your options have to be mutually exclusive? Perhaps more importantly what about all the other options you choose not list?

Stupid

Hello

New_scooby_04

iTrader: (4)

If I understand it correctly, Std practice for armed officers is not S2K, it's "stop the threat"! Marksmen usually aim for the torso to minimise chances of missing and balance with stopping power! Unfortunately with SBs stopping them is not enough, as even a severely wounded SB may be able to flick a switch, thus the S2K- dead people can't operate butons! Actually, IIRC owning to advice from middle eastern police, instructions are even more gory, they operate a destroy the brain (DTB) policy to try and minimise the chances of an involuntary movement setting off a device. One shot to the medulla would be effective, but thats a difficult shot for a stationary target, let alone a moving one.

NS04

OllyK

No otherwise all the other people who are here with expired visas would also have been shot. An expired visa does not result in you being shot by the police. He was shot as a result of mis / poor identification. His visa status is irrelevant, the fact that it has turned out that his visa had expired, just happens to suit your bias.

brihoppy

yeah, thats what is SOP on suicide bomber briefs on pre deployment training these days...it is specific for suspected suicide bombers, and suicide bombers only...i know it doesnt take into account a dead mans trigger, but these are extremely unreliable and not in widespread use AFAIK...

OllyK

And as I stated, it isn't effective against a dead man trigger.

OllyK

Every hand grenade has one!

SJ_Skyline

Asylum applications down by 11%....

Reality

Well in that case he was shot as a direct result of being born in the first place.

or as a direct result of coming to Britain in the first place.

Where does you logic end ?

Angry

Knew it!

Suresh

WTF. His visa status is totally relevent.
If he had left the country when legally obliged to do so the British Police would not have shot him and this thread would not exist.

He did not deserve to be shot; of course he didn't, but the wrong place, wrong time circumstances were entirely of his own making! It's not that difficult to understand, surely??

Suresh

New_scooby_04

iTrader: (4)

Agreed, prevention is better than cure. But we don't know if there was an intelligence breakdown yet, or a communication breakdown, or an operational error, or all three!

I don't see that's a tennable argument. There are two issue here 1) the cirumstances under which s2k is enacted (critical of course) and 2 the effectiveness of s2k assuming correct threat identification.

Yes, but here police are merely acting on a worse case scenrio

a) They try and talk and SB does it anyway, lots die
b) They shoot and make a mistake, one innocent dies.
c) They shoot and get it right, eveyones happy, one SB dies
d) They shoot correctly SB has DMT and device goes off anyway (in my mind this is a very unlikely scenario, esp given the crudity of the devices used previously)...at least the police decided when best to do it, SB dies, so do innocents, but not as many as might have if SB had been allowed to do it at intended time, which, presumably, would have been planned to cause maximum carnage.
e)They shoot the SB when they could have been talked out of it talk, one SB dies.

What a horrid position to be in.


Ok, then see scenarios a, c d and e. Whats the worse case?


NS04

Reality

No Suresh - this thread would exist as the British police would have shot the next dark skinned male to come out of the flats

OllyK

Logical fallacy Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc

If he had left, who is to say he wouldn't have re-applied, been accepted and been in exactly the same place at the same time? While the events are sequential, the former did not cause the latter.

Stupid

why?

OllyK

So let's find out and fix it before we use it again.

a) Why does there have to be a lot of deaths - if the police stop him to suit them in a quiet place before he gets to a tube or such?
b) That's bad news.
c) That's better news - but better yet to take them alive for questioning IMO.
d) Again - this should if possible be done in a controlled location or one where the impact will be at a minimum. A DMT is no harder to produce than an ordinary switch really, it's just sprung loaded.
e) Again - better to take them alive if we can

Potentially a, b or d depends on a host of other things, some of which I have covered above.

OllyK

Certainly possible, even plausible, but it is by no means certain that things would have played out in the same manner. The copper taking the pee would have hopefully finished for a start, he may not of headed to the tube and gone to the pub instead. I'm sure I don't have to go on?!

Reality

Well they didn't shoot the Brazillian guy cos he was an illegal immigrant or a terrorist - we have to assume they shot him cos he looked like a terrorist and he came out of the flats.

Unless of course they just thought "let's shoot the next commuter getting on a train" - but even our "intelligence" services would stop at that !

rr_ww

Im sick of this story.

Mainly because the media have jumped on it and used it to slate the Police from day 2 onwards. There has been no proof either way as to the events in Stockwell Tube station. But the media believe that the Met emptied 6000 shells into this guy. And report it as FACT. Which it clearly cant be at this time.

It was a **** up, without a shadow of a doubt. But the various media groups are getting sanctimonious about the whole thing with their reconstructions and leaked (read: Made up) reports.

Only a matter of time before the ITV news anchors (silent W ) hold Glocks and show how the Mets firearms officers killed the Brazillian guy, then shot 6 innocent kittens in the face for good measure!

I hate the manipulation of our thoughts far more than anything else.