SIGN UP

Effective Firing Squad?

Avatar Image
EdmundD | 15:00 Fri 11th Jun 2021 | News
59 Answers

Answers

1 to 20 of 59rss feed

1 2 3 Next Last

Best Answer

No best answer has yet been selected by EdmundD. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.

For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
A shame he wasn't killed before he took two innocent lives.
I was under the impression that in such a situation, involving a bomb fixed to the body, the officers would fire at the head rather than at the bomb jacket.
I fail to see why it is either of the adjectives you used.

First of all it is a factual report of an investigation which has been carried out, and the conclusion is that the officers shot to kill in order to safeguard their lives, and the lives of the public, which is policy for firearms officers.

Secondly, would it not be more 'irresponsible' to either fudge or whitewash the facts?

Muslim extremists may well react negatively when they read this report - but it not prepared with the intention of keeping them happy - it is to satisfy the public who fund the armed police, that correct action was taken, and no laws were broken.

On that basis, it succeeds, dispassionately and factually, and with no 'inflammatory and irresponsible' wording or descriptions that I can see in your link.
They may be bald and stark words but it is what they are trained to do in such circumstances.

As said, it's a crying shame they couldn't have stopped him in his tracks before Saskia and Jack lost their lives.
// Rather inflammatory and irresponsible IMO. //

what is - the manner of its reporting? or do you disagree with the verdict?

(actual inquest documents here)
https://fishmongershallinquests.independent.gov.uk/documents/
Nothing inflammatory or irresponsible in that report IMO.
I believe that the three words chosen by Edmund for his title are what bothers him.
Pity Lee Rigby's assassins didn't get the same treatment.
Edmund can you explain what you mean by "Rather inflammatory and irresponsible IMO."
I would imagine Edmund is referring to “firing “squad” - to me that conjures-up a banana republic with a blindfolded man tied to a post with half a dozen men shooting.

Don’t get me wrong, I’m glad (yes, glad) this man is dead, and I applaud the coppers for shooting him, but I also query the use of the words used.
Don’t know where the errant “ came from!

Could the use of the words stir-up anger in the nuttier element of our Muslims?
I do not understand your statement. All i know is he got what he deserved.
Dave, I think that in Lee Rigby's case there was no issue about officers fearing the detonation of a bomb, hence no justification for summary execution on the grounds of protecting the lives of themselves and the public. We do not permit the unnecessary killing of suspects without a fair trial.
They were still armed & in any other country they would have been shot. Maybe the UK police have got a bit too circumspect following the Mendez cock-up.
//The inquest heard six police officers from the Met and City of London fired 20 times at Khan, including 18 in a 90-second period after being sanctioned to carry out a so-called “critical shot” amid fears he was about to detonate his explosive device resulting in mass casualties.//

What else do you need to know?
Next thing you know there will be murals of him on walls, complete with angels' wings.
Pity the cops didn't kill him, before he killed anyone.
Well I for one wouldn't mind buying the officers a drink.

All that training put to good use.
How did so many Muslim terrorist sympathisers get onto a jury ?
Who are you worried it will inflame, Edmund? I couldn’t care less if anyone is upset or inflamed. He’s where he ought to be. Dead.

1 to 20 of 59rss feed

1 2 3 Next Last

Do you know the answer?

Effective Firing Squad?

Answer Question >>

Related Questions

Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.