• Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Woolwich incident 22 May

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

ReverendFozz

Member
Joined
26 Feb 2011
Messages
484
Location
Murton, Co. Durham
What is even more sickening was the headline story on Look East tonight, an apparent revenge attack on a Muslim community centre, using gas, but fortunately they only succeeded in filling an empty room. The people who carry out this sort of thing are presumably the same sorts of idiots who used to join the UVF to 'defend' their community, and the fact that this sort of thing is happening is a clear victory for terrorism in general. The most hateful thing about terrorism is its ability to turn society in on itself while still hiding within the society it hates.

I just hope people see sense.

Revenge attacks are just stupid and idiotic, at times like this we should stand together in condemning these acts of terror, not tit-for-tat revenge attacks

Sent from my HTC Wildfire S A510e using Tapatalk 2
 

455driver

Veteran Member
Joined
10 May 2010
Messages
11,329
Revenge attacks are just stupid and idiotic, at times like this we should stand together in condemning these acts of terror, not tit-for-tat revenge attacks

But its a good excuse for the thickies in society to express their deep seated prejudice.
 

ReverendFozz

Member
Joined
26 Feb 2011
Messages
484
Location
Murton, Co. Durham
At one time I was one of those thickies, had a problem with the minorities around the time of 7/7 I think, I am still not the most tolerant person in the world, I can be quite ignorant at times, but I understand that going for revenge will get me nowhere, I was out in Town earlier on and heard one drunk guy say to his mate 'we need to learn these f*****g p**is a f*****g lesson they won't forget'...Now that is just uncalled for, and it seems that the likes ofmthe EDL are quite happy to use this as best they can to try and force there point across

Marxista Fozz
 

Trog

Established Member
Joined
30 Oct 2009
Messages
1,546
Location
In Retirement.
So far as I am concerned there should be due process, and should they be found guilty which is pretty likely in this case. They should be put down, and their organs used for transplants. So they at least partly make up for the harm they have done, with any left over waste being burnt.
 

jb

Member
Joined
18 Dec 2011
Messages
369
It depends on the risk the armed person is presenting to The Police/ and or Members of The Public.

If in fear of imminent loss of life they can shoot to kill.

I doubt you have used firearms in a situation like that the police officers faced (and I would add that I haven't either) yet there seems to be an implication that officers can, in this situation, "shoot not to kill".

I think that is very very doubtful. You will almost certainly find it's more luck (if you can call it that) that these suspects are still alive.
 

Johnuk123

Established Member
Joined
19 Mar 2012
Messages
2,800
I doubt you have used firearms in a situation like that the police officers faced (and I would add that I haven't either) yet there seems to be an implication that officers can, in this situation, "shoot not to kill".

I think that is very very doubtful. You will almost certainly find it's more luck (if you can call it that) that these suspects are still alive.

You're right, as I said in my earlier post there is no rule about shooting to wound the only rule is to stop the threat the assailant may survive or they may not.
 

DavyCrocket

Member
Joined
27 Oct 2006
Messages
670
I doubt you have used firearms in a situation like that the police officers faced (and I would add that I haven't either) yet there seems to be an implication that officers can, in this situation, "shoot not to kill".

I think that is very very doubtful. You will almost certainly find it's more luck (if you can call it that) that these suspects are still alive.

It is not a shoot to kill.

The aim is to shoot at the largest body mass, so the chest area. This reduces the risk of bullets missing and going on to others.

Once shot and restrained and when safe to do so the aim is to keep them alive.
 

ralphchadkirk

Established Member
Joined
20 Oct 2008
Messages
5,754
Location
Essex
The aim is to only use enough force to stop the threat. Not to kill someone. You will notice from the video of the incident that immediatly after the two were shot, the armed officers start medical treatment to keep them alive. Most armed officers are trained in advanced first aid in trojan units, and I am aware of some that are dual qualified AFO/Paramedic.
 

Antman

Established Member
Joined
3 May 2013
Messages
6,840
The aim is to only use enough force to stop the threat. Not to kill someone. You will notice from the video of the incident that immediatly after the two were shot, the armed officers start medical treatment to keep them alive. Most armed officers are trained in advanced first aid in trojan units, and I am aware of some that are dual qualified AFO/Paramedic.

Spot on and any officer that does shoot somebody has to be able to justify their actions afterwards, and quite rightly so,
 

DavyCrocket

Member
Joined
27 Oct 2006
Messages
670
The aim is to only use enough force to stop the threat. Not to kill someone. You will notice from the video of the incident that immediatly after the two were shot, the armed officers start medical treatment to keep them alive. Most armed officers are trained in advanced first aid in trojan units, and I am aware of some that are dual qualified AFO/Paramedic.

And are indeed sent to incidents where their life saving skills could be needed rather than their police skills if there is no ambulance available!
 

ralphchadkirk

Established Member
Joined
20 Oct 2008
Messages
5,754
Location
Essex
And are indeed sent to incidents where their life saving skills could be needed rather than their police skills if there is no ambulance available!

Certainly not routinely. The only times the ambulance service requests police attendance is if there are crew safety issues (crew request, flagged address, emergency button) or the police are required for sectioning etc.

The only joint ambulance/police scheme I am aware of is some first aid trained BTP officers and a joint CoL Police/LAS responder scheme. I'm not even sure if that scheme's still running.
 

DavyCrocket

Member
Joined
27 Oct 2006
Messages
670
Certainly not routinely. The only times the ambulance service requests police attendance is if there are crew safety issues (crew request, flagged address, emergency button) or the police are required for sectioning etc.

The only joint ambulance/police scheme I am aware of is some first aid trained BTP officers and a joint CoL Police/LAS responder scheme. I'm not even sure if that scheme's still running.

They're sent when there is no ambulance.
If the police did not respond in the interim then the person would die.
 

ralphchadkirk

Established Member
Joined
20 Oct 2008
Messages
5,754
Location
Essex
They're sent when there is no ambulance.
If the police did not respond in the interim then the person would die.

Complete rubbish. I don't deny that there may be one or two occasions when it's happened, but I hope both control's were dealt with for allowing it to happen.
 

island

Veteran Member
Joined
30 Dec 2010
Messages
17,910
Location
0036
I define racism as saying this is what all muslims want and we should drive them out of our country. As has been appearing on my various social media feeds.
Islam is not a race.
The terrorists want to be martyrs, sentencing them to death fulfills that desire. They therefore should not be allowed to die ever
Other than by natural causes, I suppose. But this is why it is very good that neither was shot dead.
I think this is truley remarkable. How she shown little or no fear, and stood up to them and quite calmly spoke to them about the situation and asked them to hand over their weapons.
Friday's Times proposed that a statue of Ms. Loyau-Kennett should be the next occupant of the fourth plinth at Trafalgar Square.
 

ReverendFozz

Member
Joined
26 Feb 2011
Messages
484
Location
Murton, Co. Durham
You do realise that one cannot frame individual laws for each individual crime don't you? Obviously not. TBH it's is obviously a waste of time trying to get you to see things logically or sensibly.

Where did I say they would go round shooting who they want? That is what other people have suggested they do.

I like the way some people jump into threads posting replies to comments in discussions when it's quite clear they haven't read the whole thing and have no idea who has said what, or what the post they are replying to was in response to.

Try me, I am prepared to accept everyones opinion, and if it looks sensible and logical, then I will happily get behind it, even if it means going against my own beliefs, I would sacrfice my own beliefs and go along with the majority for the sake of the country

Look mate, I may have worded it wrong when I said 'I have nothing to hide, I won't get shot', but I do believe in the routine armimg of Police as a deterrent, if it at least puts deters some, them it is all well and good, it is not foolproof, extremists will probably commit suicide by police anyway to fulfil there task at hand.

If we cant routinely arm police, then why not setup a small scale armed response team in every Police Station, a team of a few police who would be permitted and trained to carry a sidearm whilst on the beat in there areas.

The PSNI are routinely armed, I know the streets of Ulster are very different to the streets of English Settlements, but I just think it is time to broaden the use of Arms by the police...

I dont wish to get dragged into too much of an argument here, what has gone on lately brings out every emotion in people and it is an argument that goes back and forth till were blue in the face while never coming up with a good enough idea that the absolute majority would get behind.
 

Bungle73

On Moderation
Joined
19 Aug 2011
Messages
3,216
Location
Kent
Try me, I am prepared to accept everyones opinion, and if it looks sensible and logical, then I will happily get behind it, even if it means going against my own beliefs, I would sacrfice my own beliefs and go along with the majority for the sake of the country

Look mate, I may have worded it wrong when I said 'I have nothing to hide, I won't get shot', but I do believe in the routine armimg of Police as a deterrent, if it at least puts deters some, them it is all well and good, it is not foolproof, extremists will probably commit suicide by police anyway to fulfil there task at hand.

If we cant routinely arm police, then why not setup a small scale armed response team in every Police Station, a team of a few police who would be permitted and trained to carry a sidearm whilst on the beat in there areas.

The PSNI are routinely armed, I know the streets of Ulster are very different to the streets of English Settlements, but I just think it is time to broaden the use of Arms by the police...

I dont wish to get dragged into too much of an argument here, what has gone on lately brings out every emotion in people and it is an argument that goes back and forth till were blue in the face while never coming up with a good enough idea that the absolute majority would get behind.
How would be a derrent? It wouldn't. If you arm the police, the criminals will start arming themselves too. And bottom line is that the police don't want to be armed. And there are armed police available if needed.

Some of your comments in posts #100 and #105 read like that.
Um, no they don't. Why don't you try actually following the conversation, and not taking my comments out of context.
 

GB

Established Member
Joined
16 Nov 2008
Messages
6,558
Location
Somewhere
I've read this thread since day one, but why don't you put it into context for me:roll:
 

ReverendFozz

Member
Joined
26 Feb 2011
Messages
484
Location
Murton, Co. Durham
How would be a derrent? It wouldn't. If you arm the police, the criminals will start arming themselves too. And bottom line is that the police don't want to be armed. And there are armed police available if needed.


Um, no they don't. Why don't you try actually following the conversation, and not taking my comments out of context.

A lot of criminals arm themselves anyway, but I take your point, but I think Armed Response could do with an expansion in manpower, I remember hearing Armed Response got to Lee Rigby in 14 minutes, now that is acceptable by Police, but sure more personnel would mean problems could be dealt with quicker...

One mate of mine even suggested the Army should police the streets which is utterly stupid, as this is not Belfast c.1969
 

Xenophon PCDGS

Veteran Member
Joined
17 Apr 2011
Messages
35,425
Location
A typical commuter-belt part of north-west England
The Foreign Office today confirmed that one of the two men involved in the murder of the British soldier in Woolwich, Michael Adebolajo, was arrested by the Kenyan authorities and appeaed in court in Mombasa in 2010 after Kenyan security intelligence information revealed that he was en route to join the Islamic militant group al-Shebab in Somalia.

It was further stated the British consular assistance was given to him at that time.
 
Last edited:

jon91

Member
Joined
18 Oct 2010
Messages
307
Location
Blackburn
Islam is not a race.

You are forgetting that 'islamophobia' as it is termed is often a thin veil for those who are most probably racist and seeking some kind of acceptable criticism, in their eyes, of their target.

Does the fact that Islam isn't a race make the abuse seen online acceptable? I'd be interested to hear your opinion there.

A key example is those muppets who claim to defend us all from 'militant islam', watch a video of the speech made by their leader at their most recent Newcastle demonstration, particulary to what the regional organiser has to say at the end and the crowd's response. (Link here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nZPGbwJL75c)

Heck, he doesn't even specify a race, just dark-skinned people all to applause from the crowd.
 

Bungle73

On Moderation
Joined
19 Aug 2011
Messages
3,216
Location
Kent
I've read this thread since day one, but why don't you put it into context for me:roll:

I don't know what you're rolling your eyes at me for.....

You're the one that's taken something that I said COMPLETELY OUT OF CONTEXT and twisted it to mean something that anyone with two brain cells to rub together knows full well that I didn't say at all. Like I said earlier, go back and read the FULL conversation. Maybe then you can come back here and make a comment that actually makes sense.
 

GB

Established Member
Joined
16 Nov 2008
Messages
6,558
Location
Somewhere
I don't know what you're rolling your eyes at me for.....

You're the one that's taken something that I said COMPLETELY OUT OF CONTEXT and twisted it to mean something that anyone with two brain cells to rub together knows full well that I didn't say at all. Like I said earlier, go back and read the FULL conversation. Maybe then you can come back here and make a comment that actually makes sense.

Then correct me and put it into context for me because shock horror, the information presented to me hasn't changed.

No use getting all up yourself because someone somewhere where may or may not of miss understood what you wrote.
 

Bungle73

On Moderation
Joined
19 Aug 2011
Messages
3,216
Location
Kent
Then correct me and put it into context for me because shock horror, the information presented to me hasn't changed.

No use getting all up yourself because someone somewhere where may or may not of miss understood what you wrote.

I don't know if you're deliberately setting out to cause agro or what.....

All you you've got to do is follow the conversation (like I've told you about a million times to do) by referring to the posts that I quoted. It's not that difficult........
 

GB

Established Member
Joined
16 Nov 2008
Messages
6,558
Location
Somewhere
I don't know if you're deliberately setting out to cause agro or what.....

All you you've got to do is follow the conversation (like I've told you about a million times to do) by referring to the posts that I quoted. It's not that difficult........

Yes, because I read your post in a different way to what you would have liked I must be set on deliberately causing an argument.
 

island

Veteran Member
Joined
30 Dec 2010
Messages
17,910
Location
0036
You are forgetting that 'islamophobia' as it is termed is often a thin veil for those who are most probably racist and seeking some kind of acceptable criticism, in their eyes, of their target.

Does the fact that Islam isn't a race make the abuse seen online acceptable? I'd be interested to hear your opinion there.

Abusing all members of a category because of the actions or beliefs of a minority subcategory of that category is, in my opinion, wrong. But we can, and should, be precise with terminology, as the Newcastle demonstration you referred to wasn't.

However, we must be alive to the fact that there are not, at this point in time, large (or even medium to small) tracts of Christians, or Buddhists, or Shintoists, etc. going around this country preaching aggression against those not of their belief.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top