Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Police shoot man in 'intelligence-led operation' in London

yeh and the only way to stop them was shoot yer man :facepalm:

Dunno, I wasn't there. But it's not a vast stretch of the imagination to think the victim was challenged by the police and pulled a gun at some point and was then shot.

I think the knee jerk lefty reaction to scream 'execution' to every police shooting is stupid and unhelpful tbh.
 
Dunno, I wasn't there. But it's not a vast stretch of the imagination to think he was challenged and pulled a gun and was shot at that point.

I think the knee jerk lefty reaction to scream 'execution' to every police shooting is stupid and unhelpful tbh.
being as the general story is someone trying to surrender or not actually having a gun or both you can maybe understand why people suspect the police of shooting first and covering up afyer
 
Police aren't going to be taking any chances with armed criminals on the streets. Not so soon after Paris. Too early to know what really happened here, but if they were trying to spring their mates, then tough shit.
 
Dunno, I wasn't there. But it's not a vast stretch of the imagination to think the victim was challenged by the police and pulled a gun at some point and was then shot.

I think the knee jerk lefty reaction to scream 'execution' to every police shooting is stupid and unhelpful tbh.

If you re-read my post, I did actually say, execution or, man pointed a gun at police. Its not a 'knee jerk lefty' reaction at all, its a reasoned assumption based on hundreds of cover-ups of deaths in police custody and some seemingly outright executions.

Its really important to remember that the role of the police is to stop/apprehend suspects so that they can be tried within the criminal justice system. It is not, nor should ever be, their role to kill, unless its as a very last resort.
 
If you re-read my post, I did actually say, execution or, man pointed a gun at police. Its not a 'knee jerk lefty' reaction at all, its a reasoned assumption based on hundreds of cover-ups of deaths in police custody and some seemingly outright executions.

Its really important to remember that the role of the police is to stop/apprehend suspects so that they can be tried within the criminal justice system. It is not, nor should ever be, their role to kill, unless its as a very last resort.
That's what I found laughable in a noir fashion about this in relation to the Leytonstone stabbing
One former commander said it was alarming that armed officers were not at the scene of the attack.
What so that he'd be dead instead answering questions?
 
Last edited:
I spoke to a copper in Victoria recently about last Saturday night's incident in Leytonstone, telling him that I felt proud at how police had acted. I added that had this happened in the US, the man would be dead (at which point he nodded enthusiastically!), and how glad I am most police here are unarmed. He said this won't be for long, that arming police is inevitable. I wonder do some police envy their American counterparts, and their ability to mete out justice there and then.
 
I know it's probably horrendously off message on here, but IMO the most plausible explanation looks like the fact he was armed and going to try and spring his mates from the court and the cops stopped him and shot him.

Of course they were hoping he had the gun on him rather than in the boot of the car...
 
But the only two possible options aren't execution or man points gun at police are they?

There's a huge range of possible options in between those. A person doesn't have to either directly point or even draw a weapon to possibly be a imminent and potentially life threatening concern to either/or the police or members of the public nearby.
 
Considering it's only just happened and we've not seen proper reports or statements saying they're lying their way out of it seems to be somewhat hasty and inaccurate.
 
Considering it's only just happened and we've not seen proper reports or statements saying they're lying their way out of it seems to be somewhat hasty and inaccurate.
Well you're vanishingly unlikely to get anything such as 'reports or statements' in any case. If a cover-up is going to happen you have to piece together why certain organisations have acted the way they did after the fact such as the IPCC trying to whitewash the events surrounding Duggan's death and then changing their story and looking like complete cunts into the bargain.
 
Two armed robbers were shot dead by police marksmen as they tried to raid security van making delivery to HSBC

The above article relates to armed robbers shot dead by Met police in Hampshire in 2007. There's no doubt these guys were ruthless, but the decision by the Met to allow them to proceed to their destination and begin to carry out the robbery was criticised by the IPCC, as it placed many people at serious risk. One bullet went through one of the guys, hitting a parked car with members of the public sat in it. They COULD have stopped them before, so why didn't they? There was a feeling within the community that this was a pre-planned execution, albeit, with the men's own actions during the incident arguably leading to their deaths. Hope that makes sense!
 
?
was a feeling within the community that this was a pre-planned execution, albeit, with the men's own actions during the incident arguably leading to their deaths. Hope that makes sense!
What's the opposite of "suicide by cop"?
 
Yeah that phrase sprung to my mind too.

Surely murder by cop? Or murder by Quaker maybe. :rolleyes:
 
Back
Top Bottom