HeadingNorth Posted September 3, 2011 Share Posted September 3, 2011 the penny will drop soon Nope, sorry. I did wonder if you were talking about Menezes, the wrongly-identified terror suspect, but he was emphatically not shot while running for a train. He wasn't shot until after he'd boarded it and sat down, at which point there were no civilian risks. So I have no idea to whom you refer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ricgem2002 Posted September 3, 2011 Share Posted September 3, 2011 Nope, sorry. I did wonder if you were talking about Menezes, the wrongly-identified terror suspect, but he was emphatically not shot while running for a train. He wasn't shot until after he'd boarded it and sat down, at which point there were no civilian risks. So I have no idea to whom you refer. oh yea he was sat on a crowded tube with no risk :hihi: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeadingNorth Posted September 3, 2011 Share Posted September 3, 2011 oh yea he was sat on a crowded tube with no risk When the firearms officers are three feet away, that is quite correct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ricgem2002 Posted September 3, 2011 Share Posted September 3, 2011 When the firearms officers are three feet away, that is quite correct.yea right:hihi: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Conrod Posted September 3, 2011 Share Posted September 3, 2011 yea right:hihi:How many other people did they shoot/injure in crossfire? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ricgem2002 Posted September 3, 2011 Share Posted September 3, 2011 How many other people did they shoot/injure in crossfire?luckily for them none Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quinnwok Posted September 3, 2011 Author Share Posted September 3, 2011 You are comparing apples with oranges here. Both the Police and Army will have rules of engagement, which will be different as they operate in very different circumstances. The fact that the police are allowed to fire on someone in certain circumstances does not imply that we are happy to see soldiers being killed in completely different circumstances. Bullets are bullets. Way have the police got the right to shoot first, but not our army at war? I say its because this nation would rather see dead soldiers than RISK Civilian casualties. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy Posted September 3, 2011 Share Posted September 3, 2011 oh yea he was sat on a crowded tube with no risk :hihi: Why is this funny? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy Posted September 3, 2011 Share Posted September 3, 2011 Bullets are bullets. Way have the police got the right to shoot first, but not our army at war? I say its because this nation would rather see dead soldiers than RISK Civilian casualties. But one is not dependent on the other. What the Army can or cannot do is not dependent on what the Police can or cannot do. I don't think anyone in this nation wants to see dead soldiers, or risk civilian casualties. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quinnwok Posted September 3, 2011 Author Share Posted September 3, 2011 But one is not dependent on the other. What the Army can or cannot do is not dependent on what the Police can or cannot do. I don't think anyone in this nation wants to see dead soldiers, or risk civilian casualties. However they would rather see dead soldiers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.