Divided by a Common Language

[Wage Slave]

Couldn't help but notice the difference between the UK and the US in this police shooting:

The operation appears to have been planned around one car - believed to be an Audi.
It appears to have been heading off the M62 at around 17:30 GMT on Monday, heading towards Huddersfield, when it was stopped by at least one unmarked police car that was following it. The car that was stopped, which is still there this morning, was boxed in. Shortly after this a shot was fired and a man died.
A close-up photo shows the marks from what appears to be three bullets in the Audi's windscreen and a side window that has been smashed.

3BCDF6C700000578-4082864-image-a-25_1483440448962.jpg

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-leeds-38492953

It appears the police had information that he was carrying a firearm in the car and according to the police one was found after he was shot. This fact alone was sufficient to prompt three shots from someone who clearly knew what they were doing and didn't miss. To me that seems regrettable but unless you are going to let firearms get out of control, necessary. I'm sure Americans will be horrified that the mere fact a man was carrying a gun in his car could prompt such a police response.

[Coligny]

You mean the GB police have more accuracy when they murder black people ?

Sure the US police seem to follow a "spray and pray" tactic.

[Wage Slave]

He was of Pakistani descent and quite light skinned as it happened. Was he murdered? I'm not sure. If you are carrying a firearm in your car then you might be shot by people with more guns and training than you. That's the attitude and I can't say it fills me with horror.

[wagyl]

But is a wookiee a bear?

Excuse the frypan in the face foley effect at the end: apparently it was felt that it was necessary to indicate to the audience that this is funny. One of the perils of trying to promote a jihadist comedy I suppose.

[Grumpy Gramps]

murder

A strong word. I mean, we are the good ones in this war, we mean well and it's the thought that counts. Freedom and democracy, of course.

[Wage Slave]

murder

A strong word. I mean, we are the good ones in this war, we mean well and it's the thought that counts. Freedom and democracy, of course.

Not sure about good in any meaningful way but perhaps less bad? I am conflicted over this one. The idea that the police can act as jury, judge and executioner is deeply concerning. On the other hand there is an (in theory) independent police complaints commission that will conduct an investigation as well as the autopsy report and the young man's father is a man of means so is promising private prosecutions of the police officers involved. We will learn a lot more about what happened and why.

However, the police had no body cameras and it appears that the police cars weren't video equipped either. Why was that?

But, back to the crux of it. If you carry a loaded gun in your car then should you be able to assume that the police won't fire on you unless you actually pick it up and make as though you are going to point it at them or someone else? In the US, the answer to that question is a resounding yes. Guns don't kill people, people kill people and people have a right to carry a gun for self defense or to take out bad guys. In the UK the answer to that question is a resounding no. Just carrying a gun is enough to put you at serious risk of being shot. And perhaps it's better for us all that everyone understands that very clearly.

[legion]

Hate to say slippery slope but slippery slope

This looks like extra judicial killing

It's under investigation, but I very much doubt we will ever know why this happened

[Wage Slave]

Hate to say slippery slope but slippery slope

This looks like extra judicial killing

Yeah. Predictably some say that. Though I notice the Guardian are being careful here. The Daily Mail of course is besides itself with unbridled glee and gloating.

There is an important point of principle at stake in this one. Assume for a moment that he was carrying a gun in his car. If so, do you think that that in itself is sufficient cause for the police have lawful reason to shoot him. I hate to say it, but I think it does - unless you want to accept a situation like America or Thailand.

[legion]

British police have always been armed but generally restrained



Perhaps dystopia has arrived

[Wage Slave]

Yes. And your answer to the question?

[Grumpy Gramps]

AFAIK in Britain, the trigger is intent. You carry a big knife through the woods for practising your bushcraft hobby is fine, for potential self defense is prohibited. IIRC that is.

I think, ask before shoot should remain the gold standard.

[matsuki]

There is an important point of principle at stake in this one. Assume for a moment that he was carrying a gun in his car. If so, do you think that that in itself is sufficient cause for the police have lawful reason to shoot him. I hate to say it, but I think it does - unless you want to accept a situation like America or Thailand.

In the US the law varies from state to state but in California, basically you can't drive around with access to a loaded gun. Needs to be in a locked container or locked trunk. The exception being if you have a license to carry a concealed weapon. If you're being pulled over and flash a gun, license be damned, I'm pretty sure you'll get shot.

That being said, the operation was aimed at a dude who had been previously charged with attempted murder (acquitted) and was now suspected to be packing illegal weapons. More info is needed to really understand what went down and how but not hard to see why the police wre engaging the guy with their fingers on the the triggers.

[Russell]

Some questions about the British case.

Did he have a gun license? (probably not)

Was the gun in a locked container?

Was the gun loaded?

Was there pertinent information that the guy was going to use his gun in an unlawful way?

----

To me, the actions of the British police still seem a bit of an overkill. Consider the case that they think that YOU have a gun in your car, but you actually don't. Do they then justify themselves by saying that you raised the suspicion of having a gun in your car? Very slippery slope.

[Coligny]

Some questions about the British case.

Did he have a gun license? (probably not)

Was the gun in a locked container?

Was the gun loaded?

Was there pertinent information that the guy was going to use his gun in an unlawful way?

----

To me, the actions of the British police still seem a bit of an overkill. Consider the case that they think that YOU have a gun in your car, but you actually don't. Do they then justify themselves by saying that you raised the suspicion of having a gun in your car? Very slippery slope.

Airsoft be damned...

[yanpa]

murder

A strong word. I mean, we are the good ones in this war, we mean well and it's the thought that counts. Freedom and democracy, of course.

Not sure about good in any meaningful way but perhaps less bad? I am conflicted over this one. The idea that the police can act as jury, judge and executioner is deeply concerning. On the other hand there is an (in theory) independent police complaints commission that will conduct an investigation as well as the autopsy report and the young man's father is a man of means so is promising private prosecutions of the police officers involved. We will learn a lot more about what happened and why.

However, the police had no body cameras and it appears that the police cars weren't video equipped either. Why was that?

But, back to the crux of it. If you carry a loaded gun in your car then should you be able to assume that the police won't fire on you unless you actually pick it up and make as though you are going to point it at them or someone else? In the US, the answer to that question is a resounding yes. Guns don't kill people, people kill people and people have a right to carry a gun for self defense or to take out bad guys. In the UK the answer to that question is a resounding no. Just carrying a gun is enough to put you at serious risk of being shot.

Or a table leg.

[Coligny]

What aboot the old cold war rules...

"Don't fire until being fired upon" ?

Because anyone with a penis should be locked up in jail since they are definately ready to rape someone...
excell spreadshit for back up in 3... 2...

(And don't forget the brownie shot in the subway because he was running fast...

[Wage Slave]

murder

A strong word. I mean, we are the good ones in this war, we mean well and it's the thought that counts. Freedom and democracy, of course.

Not sure about good in any meaningful way but perhaps less bad? I am conflicted over this one. The idea that the police can act as jury, judge and executioner is deeply concerning. On the other hand there is an (in theory) independent police complaints commission that will conduct an investigation as well as the autopsy report and the young man's father is a man of means so is promising private prosecutions of the police officers involved. We will learn a lot more about what happened and why.

However, the police had no body cameras and it appears that the police cars weren't video equipped either. Why was that?

But, back to the crux of it. If you carry a loaded gun in your car then should you be able to assume that the police won't fire on you unless you actually pick it up and make as though you are going to point it at them or someone else? In the US, the answer to that question is a resounding yes. Guns don't kill people, people kill people and people have a right to carry a gun for self defense or to take out bad guys. In the UK the answer to that question is a resounding no. Just carrying a gun is enough to put you at serious risk of being shot.

Or a table leg.

There are plenty of historical cases of the Metropolitan Police shooting innocent, unarmed people. Two more cases that stick in my mind:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Stephen_Waldorf

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Jean_Charles_de_Menezes

So yes, the police need to be very careful and know they will face investigation and possibly criminal charges if they overstep. In the case of Charles de Menezes the officers were tried for murder but they managed to persuade a jury to acquit them.

However, each case needs to judged on its merits and this case doesn't appear to be similiar. As a matter of policy, and in principle, I think people who carry guns should be in fear of being shot themselves. Choose to live by the gun - and you risk dying by the gun. Otherwise the incentive to carry a gun is intolerably great.

[Wage Slave]

What aboot the old cold war rules...

"Don't fire until being fired upon" ?

What makes you think criminals are such terrible shots that they always miss?

[Takechanpoo]

apparently his middle eastern looking prompted the natural born racist white cops to shoot him to a large extent.

"he might focking shoot me. coz his focking appearance is focking paki! oi focking walk on! fock!"

[Wage Slave]

It's truly heartwarming to see Tacky and Coligny getting on for a change.

[wagyl]

Is that your way of saying that one devalued Paki life was not in vain?

[Wage Slave]

No. I don't agree there is any particular reason to think his ethnicity triggered the actions of the police. It could be argued that the opposite is true - they are likely to think twice before acting because they know they will face a deluge of accusations. Either way there is no particular evidence to rely on. In the meantime we do know that he was carrying a gun in his car and the police knew he was.

So come on. Should someone who chooses to carry a gun be in no fear of guns in the hands of the police unless they are actually shooting at the time? I don't agree and I rather like the idea that people who choose to carry a gun are aware that they are taking a significant risk every time they do it. Deterrence is important.

[wagyl]

I agree that I don't think ethnicity is a factor here, especially from what I understand about the area the incident took place, and the list of other incidents occurring in the last year. I was just trying to make a tasteless comment about a stranger's death bringing people together on this forum.

Exposure to the members of a certain (largely) Anglophone nation which has made this issue a cornerstone of their fundamental political document, in an amendment, on other internet sites, which are not in the slightest related to firearm control/freedom, where even there the issue gets raised and -- now, what would be the word? Debated it is not. I think "unilaterally asserted and all further discussion is shouted down" is most accurate -- leads me to conclude that these kind of discussions, polite or not, do not create amity, but instead encourage polarisation and politicisation. For that reason, I keep my own thoughts to myself.

[Wage Slave]

I'll take that as a no then.

[wagyl]

I bet you assume gender too!

[Grumpy Gramps]

There could be lots of harmless reasons for having a gun in the car, though. Like taking it to the repair shop.

[Coligny]

No. I don't agree there is any particular reason to think his ethnicity triggered the actions of the police. It could be argued that the opposite is true - they are likely to think twice before acting because they know they will face a deluge of accusations. Either way there is no particular evidence to rely on. In the meantime we do know that he was carrying a gun in his car and the police knew he was.

So come on. Should someone who chooses to carry a gun be in no fear of guns in the hands of the police unless they are actually shooting at the time? I don't agree and I rather like the idea that people who choose to carry a gun are aware that they are taking a significant risk every time they do it. Deterrence is important.

Yea... same for gurlz in miniskirtz... they should totally assume their choices and potential consequences...

[Coligny]

What aboot the old cold war rules...

"Don't fire until being fired upon" ?

What makes you think criminals are such terrible shots that they always miss?

Well... when the weapon is still in the glove box... or still a table leg... anybody with the minimal brain cell activity will highlight that the clear and present danger is still few steps away from arising...

[Grumpy Gramps]

Unless it's in the glove box of a truck; looks like trucks gain in popularity with some folks these days.

[Coligny]

Make it flat grey and I buy it...

Does the hard nippied slut come standard ?

Or is it the opposite and the truck bundled with the slut ?

Because from an invoice standpoint with the current level of chaos at home "slut with options" will be much more easily cleared than "truck with garnishing"

(Me bitch is starting to push ourluck a bit too far with the recon path taken with Meatball. Gonna need a "if you can read this Roll me over" sticker...)