Fatal shootings in Cumbria

[Harleyman]

This link seems to counter your assertion in the above post about swat teams and helicopters.http://fh1100-pilot.blogspot.com/2009/03/i-hate-fox-news.html

Similar sounding crime too.

 

I dont know anything about Alabama other than it's economically a poor state. so I cant comment My post referred to the area of the US I live in which is a hell of a long way from Alabama.

A police helicopter can travel at a speed of anywhere between 90 and 150 MPH so I dont know why the SWAT did not respond in that situation in Alabama. Maybe they were all sleeping off a few bottles of Southern Comfort

 

If anyone believes that there are very few cops around in remote areas try going over the 75 MPH speed limit for very long in Arizona or New Mexico which are plenty remote. The Highway Patrol appear out of nowhere and they seem to be everywhere as well. Same applies to Oregon

[Xt500]

But no one knew about the first shooting until after the second one had been reported. The first one they think happened early in the morning, but was only found at 11am whereas the first known shooting was 10.30am. By 1.30pm they'd tracked down his car and found him dead so not 7 hours to track him.

 

As mentioned, something like Hungerford would have been slightly easier as it all took place in one location whereas here until there were I suspect 2 - 3 shootings the police wouldn't have enough information to know they were dealing with most likely a single person....or of course who they're dealing with.

 

The TV progs probably make it look pretty easy to spot a car, but thats when you're looking on city roads and it's driving insanely. The route he took was a very long one through lots of villages with lots of other cars....not a simple case of spot a blue car, drop the helicopter and shoot him. For one thing I not even sure they can shoot from the air.

 

Trev

 

Seems at least THREE officers stood and watched him murder more victims and did nothing.

[Tony]

You missed a word.

 

"unarmed"

 

 

 

And where does it say that they did nothing?

[hels1977]

Seems at least THREE officers stood and watched him murder more victims and did nothing.

 

Incorrect. Three offices saw him shoot two people and they stopped to help. They were unable to persue him because they were UNARMED. He pointed a gun at them to ensure they backed off.

 

What exactly do you propose they should have done? Left the victim to continue the persuit and get shot? Well - what a hero that would have made them - they'd be dead too and all the rest of the victims would still have died.

[buck]

SWAT teams do more than just pick up bodies and wipe up spilled blood. If that's all they normally did we really wouldn't need SWAT Just a gang of morgue attendants driving coroners wagons and armed with buckets and mops.

 

There are often situations where bank robbers are holed up in a bank or some demented person holding hostages in a house or apartment building, then there are the crack houses with people barricaded inside packing some major firepower or a street gang house where it's become necessary to enter and search the place

 

That's when your average street copper needs back up. He wouldn't be much use armed armed with his standard issue of a .45 pistol, a shotgun and no Kevlar helmet for head protection nor bullet proof vest

 

All this of course in the wild and wooly US of A and not normally peaceful England

I agree about the other aspects of crime control, but swat teams have not prevented mass shootings.That's not to say they shouldn't try to, and in fact at Columbine, they did a superb job of getting students away from the danger. Its a shame they couldn't save those poor kids who died. There was a classic case of two boys who could get away with all that weaponry. Somebody had to know what they had and what they were capable of. They had been ignored, and made sure they would never be ignored again.

[Harleyman]

I agree about the other aspects of crime control, but swat teams have not prevented mass shootings.That's not to say they shouldn't try to, and in fact at Columbine, they did a superb job of getting students away from the danger. Its a shame they couldn't save those poor kids who died. There was a classic case of two boys who could get away with all that weaponry. Somebody had to know what they had and what they were capable of. They had been ignored, and made sure they would never be ignored again.

 

As you and I know a shooting spree can happen anywhere at any time. For instance I could be sitting in a McDonalds in a sleepy town somewhere in New Mexico, just stopped off during a road trip to grab a bite and in walks some person, gone off his rocker who just got fired from the place and lets loose with a gun. In that case the SWAT can do little except clean up the mess and deal with the killer if he hasnt already done it to himself.

 

As always for the victims its a case of being in the wrong place at the wrong time

 

 

 

In the case of Columbine it was a laxness on the part of the the school admin who were aware that the boys involved were loners and were having problems with other students and ignored or were not told by students that one of them had threatened to come back with a gun.

The parents of the boys were also to blame for leaving firearms around the house instead of locking them up in a gun safe and hiding the key.

 

The taxi driver in Cumbria probably gave no indication beforehand that he would go postal even after he had an argument with the other taxi driver

[Harleyman]

I agree about the other aspects of crime control, but swat teams have not prevented mass shootings.That's not to say they shouldn't try to, and in fact at Columbine, they did a superb job of getting students away from the danger. Its a shame they couldn't save those poor kids who died. There was a classic case of two boys who could get away with all that weaponry. Somebody had to know what they had and what they were capable of. They had been ignored, and made sure they would never be ignored again.

 

As you and I know a shooting spree can happen anywhere at any time. For instance I could be sitting in a McDonalds in a sleepy town somewhere in New Mexico, just stopped off during a road trip to grab a bite and in walks some person, gone off his rocker who just got fired from the place and lets loose with a gun. In that case the SWAT can do little except clean up the mess and deal with the killer if he hasnt already done it to himself.

 

A case of the victims just happening to be in the wrong place at the wrong time

 

 

 

In the case of Columbine it was a laxness on the part of the the school admin who were aware that the boys involved were loners and were having problems with other students and ignored or were not told by students that one of them had threatened to come back with a gun or made threats implying something like that.

The parents of the boys were also to blame for leaving firearms around the house instead of locking them up in a gun safe and hiding the key.

 

I was surpised while visiting Colorado some years ago that a drugstore of all places had rifles for sale. I often wondered if the waiting period for the FBI finger print check to be done was carried out.

[Fantasia X]

Seems at least THREE officers stood and watched him murder more victims and did nothing.

 

I thought the Police were there to serve and protect.

 

Maybe one Officer having a go at detaining the gunman would have saved many more lives? Self preservation?

[Harleyman]

I thought the Police were there to serve and protect.

 

Maybe one Officer having a go at detaining the gunman would have saved many more lives? Self preservation?

 

There was always a strong sentiment in Britain against arming police officers. Rightly or wrongly I dont thinks it's reasonable or fair to expect a cop who is unarmed to get blown away by a maniac who has already demonstrated that he has no qualms about killing and wounding numerous other people.

 

Police officers are there to serve and protect but they're not sacrificial lambs either

[Tess]

There was always a strong sentiment in Britain against arming police officers. Rightly or wrongly I dont thinks it's reasonable or fair to expect a cop who is unarmed to get blown away by a maniac who has already demonstrated that he has no qualms about killing and wounding numerous other people.

 

Police officers are there to serve and protect but they're not sacrificial lambs either

 

I completely agree. Police Officers have family too and aren't the superhero's people think they are.