Man Shot Down Was Innocent.

[Benji]

Cos they wanted to fuck him up

[The Milner]

but 5 times?

I thought the sas or mi5 or whoever did this was specialy trained in taking people down with the minimum of shots?

[2 minutes of hate]

i think it was just the fact there was 5 guns shooting at him i doubt one guy would of shot him 5 times in the head.

the sas usually use fully automatic weapons to take there people down so you would know if it was them "man shot 150 times"

[The Milner]

but still 5 times to take one man down seems a bit over the top.

[Jim Stax]

Maybe

Suicide bomber: bomb strapped to chest: trigger in hand: 5 bullets in the head: no chance of detonation?

I imagine they knew what they were doing until it came to getting the right guy? Unless... they did get the right guy and its all a cover up for national security reasons as the suspect was in actual fact on his way to have a coffee with a cloned and in disguise Osama Binladen who had in fact just been to see his old pal Mr Bush Snr, who had been duscussing the disruption of the western world and the middle east for reasons best kept secret by all of those in charge of oil prices!

Now where's my 14th copy of Catcher In The Rye?

J

[Camie]

but still 5 times to take one man down seems a bit over the top.

Like Jim said so no detonation.

It was 5 times according to some "expert" on BBC because the type of guns they used shot bullets at low velocity therefore not powerful enough to go through skull or whatever.

[Jim Stax]

Three guys chasing him he fell running onto the tube, one guy stood/knelt on him whilst another guy fired five shots into his head with a low impact hand gun. This is used to prevent by standers being hit by high velocity bullets ricocheting or the like... Any one read or listen to the news? I like the fact that a chinese whisper started over the space of about three posts! o_O

[Guest Zeenat Aman]

http://news.yahoo.com/photo/050724/481/xvc10507241335&g=events/ts/070705londonblast;_ylt=Arf4NNhlc_O2Pc9FyFmQoEBbbBAF;_ylu=X3oDMTA3bGk2OHYzBHNlYwN0bXA-

Heart breaking.

[Guest pop-notmyface]

maybe they threw the bullets at him

that amused me a little bit...handbags at dawn...

[Guest Zeenat Aman]

that amused me a little bit...handbags at dawn...

Yeah' date=' there is just so much [i']humour relating to this situation.

[Guest pop-notmyface]

Yeah' date=' there is just so much [i']humour relating to this situation.

i was really tempted to say "cheer up goth", but i'm sure you're not a goth.

[Guest Zeenat Aman]

i was really tempted to say "cheer up goth"' date=' but i'm sure you're not a goth.[/quote']

Correct. I am tempted to say "grow up", but you're probably taller than me.

[Guest pop-notmyface]

Correct. I am tempted to say "grow up"' date=' but you're probably taller than me.[/quote']

i apologise for my disgusting manner in relation to the issue.

[Guest Zeenat Aman]

i apologise for my disgusting manner in this relation to the issue.

I'm tempted to ask "are you being sarcastic?", but apology accepted, not that you needed to apologise really.

[Guest pop-notmyface]

I'm tempted to ask "are you being sarcastic?"' date=' but apology accepted, not that you needed to apologise really.

[/quote']

nope, wasnt sarcastic, it appears to be a sensitive issue anyway.

[lepeep]

nope' date=' wasnt sarcastic, it appears to be a sensitive issue anyway.[/quote']

classic.

"it appears to be a sensitive issue".

lets hope one of your rellies gets shot accidentally, and we can band around jokes at your expense.

makes you think, eh.

[pete_inthehills]

Yeah' date=' there is just so much [i']humour relating to this situation.

there's humour in ever situation, if you look hard enough.

I'm sure they'll be some new jokes circulating soon about the new punishment for traveling without a ticket on the underground...

Pete

[Guest pop-notmyface]

classic.

"it appears to be a sensitive issue".

lets hope one of your rellies gets shot accidentally' date=' and we can band around jokes at your expense.

makes you think, eh.[/quote']

i hope so too.

[pete_inthehills]

classic.

"it appears to be a sensitive issue".

lets hope one of your rellies gets shot accidentally' date=' and we can band around jokes at your expense.

makes you think, eh.[/quote']

when I die, I want folk to gather around have a few beers/smokes and tell stories of the stupid things I've done while I was pissed. Y'know, have one last laugh. Re-tell the puking on a bus story.

It won't bother me. I'll be dead, but I don't want the rest of the living to be on a downer 'cos of it.

Pete

[Jim Stax]

when I die' date=' I want folk to gather around have a few beers/smokes and tell stories of the stupid things I've done while I was pissed. Y'know, have one last laugh. Re-tell the puking on a bus story.

It won't bother me. I'll be dead, but I don't want the rest of the living to be on a downer 'cos of it.

Pete[/quote']

All well and... erm...good, and with typical british, particularly 'north eastern' gallow's humour. But this situation is about more than 'the singular' innocent death over the weekend! Lest we forget the new nature of 'war' etc. Sorry to be so gloomy but what will come of this and what has transpired so far I find hard to laugh at! The bigger picture is somewhat worrying and one that I doubt will go away in a hurry.

I too hope that folks at my passing party do indeed party. Unless I am gunned down on a train for no apparent true reason. I would hope then that they ask some serious fucking questions and keep asking!!!!

(breaths a big sigh but decides to leave post up)

Chin up though we have always got a pile of shit bands in Aberdeen to go watch.... hehehehehe

[Guest tv tanned]

Boy I hate being right about these things.

There we were, SHaron screaming that the guy had on a suicide vest. Probably didn't even have a string one.

Look, I'm no medical expert, but I'm reliably informed by the antomist and soon to be qualified forensic scientist who lives with me, that five shots from point blank range to the head is not 'making sure' but 'overly excessive force' most likely from someone who got a little trigger happy.

I note people asking why the guy ran.

Here's a different spin on it.

Why did the police follow him for so long before tackling him?

They tailed him for a long way, even allowing him to board a bus. So why not stop him getting on the bus? Was there not an equal chance that he could have blown that up, were he a terrorist?

And yet the police now say their shoot to kill policy is not going to be deterred.

One wonders how many more innocent people will have to die before they change their tune.

One closing thought. Imagine if, instead of planted evidence, we'd had the same shoot to kill policy throughout the entirity of the Troubles? Guildford Four? Birmingham Six?

[Flash@TMB]

Quote from yesterday's New of the World (we have it in the bar because some people like looking at the pictures). The quote is by the former Chief Constable of the Met who is now Lord something or other:

"My heart goes out to the officer who pulled the trigger"

No mention of the victim.

Another quote from the same paper, this time from a police source:

"The public will have to be prepared for more innocent deaths"

They are questioning why he was wearing a big padded jacket... err because he was just off the boat from Brazil and the climate in the UK is a bit cooler.

The original claim was that he was seen leaving the same flat as one of the bombers, now it transpires it was the same building (as in block of flats). So police staking out the same building see a brown guy wearing a heavy jacket in summer leave. The jacket could be concealing explosives. So they follow him... and let him board a bus... then on the way off the bus he heads for a tube station.

So the moral of this story is, if you live in the same block as a terrorist, best leave the house in a Brazilian football strip.

Don't even get me started on the Daily Mail. They see this shooting as a solution to the immigration problem.

What's sick here is that if someone breaks into your house carrying a tyre iron, and you shoot and kill them with your shotgun then you WILL go to jail for murder. You will also be sued by their relatives and end up bankcrupt.

However this policeman will only be suspended until the enquiry is over. Nobody will bother to ask why they didn't stop the guy earlier.

The crime in this country that carries the stiffest sentence is murder of a police officer. There is a famous case where a petty theif was being chased accross a field at night by 3 officers. On of them slipped, hit his head on a stone, and fell face down. The other two kept chasing the guy until they caught him. Then they went back with the guy in handcuffs and discovered that their colleague had drowned in a puddle. So they charged the guy with murder. The guy is still in prison over 20 years later, serving a life sentence, he has continually been denied parole.

[Guest tv tanned]

If the weather in London has been similar to the weather here recently then it's little fucking wonder he was wearing a big coat.

[framheim]

they've just announced his visa had expired which might explain why he ran when challenged.

[Spoonie]

this is a pretty touchy subject and my thoughts are with the brazilian gentlemans family. at the same time, however, (and i know this isn't gonna be a popular opinion) i don't honestly believe that there was anything malicious in this killing. The police are stretched and under massive pressure to prevent any further atrocities and in this kind of situation, accidents are bound to happen. now there's a difference between taking the wrong person in for questioning and killing an innocent man, but i think that under whatever circumstances this killing happened, there would have been little doubt in the policemans mind that this was the right course of action to take.

as for all the chat about the number of shots fired and the range at which this happened, the police were not trying to immobilise this guy, they were trying to kill him because they, for whatever reason, believed that he was a serious threat to other peoples lives. if the bullets did have a lower velocity than is normal (which seems sensible given the place in which the shooting occurred so that they don't exit the victim and enter someone else) then it makes sense to use more rounds. all of this detail is an aside anyway, because whether they sniped him down or put him in a man-size blender, he is dead.

people have complained that the police let him travel for a while on buses etc. and apprehended him later on, but perhaps (and this is going to sounds really stupid considering what happened) they were waiting for the confirmation that they had the right guy before they took any action or startled him in any way.

as for the news of the world and the daily mail, they only print the quotes that they want the readers to see so that they come to the same conclusions that you have flash. these papers, like many others, manipulate people, they never give the whole story.

sorry to anyone who reads this and thinks i lack compassion. i think that what happened was a real tragedy but i think it's very easy to talk about this objectively when you're a long way away from the incident, sitting in the relative safety of your own bedroom but imagine you are the policeman who gets the call to take action and this guy who you suspect of being a terrorist (based on information which people you are paid to trust are passing on to you) is about to board and potentially destroy the same underground line which your wife and kids travel on every day. i know it seems unimaginable but these people are paid to protect us and take the decisions based on what they think is best for our security. i certainly don't envy them.

spoons

/x