Nick

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article...261214,00.html

The police threatening to shoot a peaceful protester is disgusting!

Danbo

So how were the Police supposed to know he was peaceful???

unclebuck

Blair's Britain, mate. It's the way of the future, once they get a 3rd term. Totalitarian police run super state here we come....

UB

santa2000

What? So rather than establish the nature of the protest just assume it's not peaceful and shoot him?!?!? I take it you vote Conservative?

Ringpeas

Fathers4justice seem to have penetrated all the top security centres of this country

Aparently Bin Laden has just ordered 2 dozen super hero outfits

Sure he would not have shot him though.

AndyC_772

iTrader: (2)

Oooh, let's see now. Could it be... perhaps...

THE COMPLETE LACK OF ANY AGGRESSIVE THREAT WHATSOEVER?!

IMHO the terrorists have won already. The authorities have become so paranoid that their focus is always on what might have happened if someone had been a terrorist. As far as I gather this guy was making a peaceful protest in aid of a perfectly reasonable cause, and there are suggestions that the police should shoot him?!

Am I the only one who finds the very idea of killing peaceful protesters on their home soil frightening? I don't care how paranoid the authorities may be or how embarrassing the situation may have been for the security services involved, I still find the idea of shooting an unarmed man abhorrent.

Dracoro

Protests have to be assumed as peaceful unless you have some grounds to suspect otherwise.

you what??? How do you make that connection? Regardless, it's a labour govt. we're under which sent a marksman up to threaten to shoot him. I take it you vote new labia.

darts_aint_sport

They should have shot him.

Security didn't know whether he was a terrorist or not, had weapons or bombs or not. In times like these, shoot first, ask questions later. What if the next time, a terrorist wears a Batman outfit and then proceeds to scale Big Ben, it'd be blown up faster than you can say "give him the benefit of the doubt".

Dracoro

Are you an american?

Poor Guy

Its all Blairs bloody fault!

OllyK

Err - not quite sure how that works. I don't see too many suicide bombers kicking the crap out of a few people before they blow themselves up. They just wander to where they want to be and Booooom. They want to seem unthreatening so people don't run away so they can do the maximum damage.

You have to treat EVERY security breach as a serious threat. That does not mean shoot first and ask questions later, it means take it seriously. Now if somebody says to me "Stop or I shoot" I have to be pretty determined to carry on to risk being shot. It is a good way to rapidly assess how serious the threat is. If they keep going they are determined (or deaf) and you escalate matters (still not shoot). If they **** themselves you just drag them away, problem solved.

Silvafox

iTrader: (1)

Exactly. Put yourself in the Police/security peoples place! Does the idiot really think that standing on a balcony on Buckingham Palace is gonna make any difference to his cause?! If he was shot and injured then its a risk *he* put himself in! He must have known there were armed police there as there always are. He knew the risks, if he was shot as a result of his actions then it would have been his fault not the person who decided to take action on him as they didn't know he wasn't armed or anything.

Don't get me wrong, I'm glad he wasn't hurt and can sympathise with his cause but *he* was the one who decided to a do a bolt in front of armed Police. Hopefully it'll put other idiots off doing the same thing.

He's got what he wanted now, which is publicity...doubt it'll make one ounce of difference to anything though.

Just my opinion of course.

RichWalk

surely if these guys are worried about getting shot they would have sent Superman.

SiPie

Should of shot him.... but then his wings of steel would of deflected the bullets

Seriously though, should of shot him IMHO, would make people think twice about doing similar in the future.

Wonder how much that little show cost the taxpayer

unclebuck

No you're not. I find it amazing the people seem so obsessed with their own material gains, getting more credit, house value rises etc, that they seem oblivious to the fact that their own civil liberties are being rapidly eroded by the very government they so enthusiastically vote for. Fools.

OllyK

Ahh yes - like cat owners you mean?? Are you finally taking responsibility

santa2000

you what??? How do you make that connection? Regardless, it's a labour govt. we're under which sent a marksman up to threaten to shoot him. I take it you vote new labia. [/QUOTE]
connection - the right wing, **** style response would be "sod it, shoot him anyway" i.e extreme conservatism.

Every news channel knew everything about the protester, I am sure the Police did too. If fathers for justice were extreme radicals then I personally don't think that the flour bombs would have contained just flour.

Silvafox

iTrader: (1)

Sorry, most people will agree that he has a good cause and 1000's more like him do too, however, his actions were futile. I don't think it'll make any difference. As for being selfish......just realistic I think is more the point! Everyone can't worry about everyone else all the time. We all have our own problems and issues to deal with. Being of sane nature and I believe fairly intelligent, if I was in his position I certainly wouldn't get my Batman outfit out of the wardrobe and decide to climb Buckingham Palace in front of armed Police......sure his kids would be grateful if he'd been shot and killed, that'd really help the cause wouldn't it?!

SiPie

Yes... but possibly not at the time he was starting to climb up the wall

santa2000

the original thread stated that while he was on the ledge he was told to come down or be shot, horse bolted/stable door spring to mind if that is when they were thinking of shooting him.

Dracoro

So the conservative parts are ****'s are they? I take it you mean in the same way that labour are communists. I think you'll find that the communist/left wing response is also "sod it, shoot him anyway" etc. Read some history, check out Stalin, China, tiannamen square etc. rather than trying to 'score' lame political points that don't actually make sense anyway.


oooh, I'm game today

santa2000

Key word "Extreme". Read a dictionary, it's Tiananmen.

Dracoro

No, YOU read the dictionary, it's not in there And I haven't got an atlas to hand.

Silvafox

iTrader: (1)

LOL

santa2000

I don't need to, I have proved that I am the superior one, thank you.

As Eric Cantona once said "Loser, Go Home!"

AndyC_772

iTrader: (2)

Yes, it is going to make a difference. Had you even heard of his cause before this publicity stunt? Had you given it any thought, or done anything to support or oppose it?

In a 'shoot first, ask questions later' society, how exactly are peaceful protests supposed to be staged? How do you grab the headlines without getting yourself shot at? This is supposed to be a civilised country in which the rights to free speech and peaceful protest are actively safeguarded - yet as soon as someone exercises them (and by doing so, puts themselves in a position where they could, if they so desired, do serious harm), you advocate the use of potentially lethal force.

In which countries might you reasonably expect that sort of response?

Would you want to live in them?

Murdering another human being is supposed to be the most abhorrent crime there is - yet a disturbing number of people are advocating doing exactly that 'just in case'.

unclebuck

NACRO's back

Dracoro

RE: Eric cantona: What, the guy who physically attacks people coz they call him names I think everyone was telling Eric to go home rather than the other way round

Anyway you inferred that the chap was a conservative voter. The conservative party hold the CENTRE right ground, labour hold the centre left (although could be argued centre right these days). Neither party hold extreme positions. So if you had accused the guy of being a **** voter or a nf voter etc. then your statement would have made sense.

Anyway, we're on the same 'side' in that we both think that they should figure out whether it's a peaceful protest first rather than go in guns blazing.