Discussion
luke37 said:
In England do police carry firearms on general duty?
Over here (Aust) they carry magnums!
They carry magnums? Is that just for show.
It seems a bad choice for a weapon which would be used on the streets. The ideal weapon would be one that would stop an offender without passing on through his body to also kill anyone standing behind him.
A soft nosed .38 would penetrate the offender and usually stay in the body of the target, thus reducing the chance of innocent folks getting whacked.
So if it gets to be showtime, keep your head down, check six and aim for body-mass.
BTW, the county mounties over here are also using Tasers to still a perp. Non-lethal option.
T.
[quote=luke37]I'm serious poorcardealer when he got out i went to his place to bog up the holes in his car,(HQ Monaro)
3 in doors 2 in boot 1 missed,our cops are really trigger happy,wev'e had a lot of controversy.[/quote
Sounds like the Police in Oz are phycho's, it's getting like that over here though. A guy was shot dead by plod for carrying a chair leg!! Trigger happy bastards!!
3 in doors 2 in boot 1 missed,our cops are really trigger happy,wev'e had a lot of controversy.[/quote
Sounds like the Police in Oz are phycho's, it's getting like that over here though. A guy was shot dead by plod for carrying a chair leg!! Trigger happy bastards!!
volvod5_dude said:
Sounds like the Police in Oz are phycho's, it's getting like that over here though. A guy was shot dead by plod for carrying a chair leg!! Trigger happy bastards!!
But WHY was he carrying a chair leg in such a mannor that ARMED cops were required on the scene, and were confident enough too shoot him?
no sympathy given the above set of events (granted, could be well out)
I would much rather a trigger happy BiB force, than a
lentalist force armed with Abrasive Language, resulting in Scum running the Streers? Wouldnt you?
JamieBeeston said:
Sounds like the Police in Oz are phycho's, it's getting like that over here though. A guy was shot dead by plod for carrying a chair leg!! Trigger happy bastards!!
But WHY was he carrying a chair leg in such a mannor that ARMED cops were required on the scene, and were confident enough too shoot him?
no sympathy given the above set of events (granted, could be well out)
I would much rather a trigger happy BiB force, than a
Wouldnt you?
Sigh, he was carrying a table leg wrapped up(??) he went to his local for a quick pint, as he left "someone" phoned police saying he had a sawn-off shotgun (prank??) the ASU shot him dead in very, VERY strange and quite unbelievable circumstances. What happend after he was shot (in the back?) of the head also leaves grave concerns for anyone who has ever carried out armed duties around MOP.
MoJo.
mojocvh said:
Sigh, he was carrying a table leg wrapped up(??) he went to his local for a quick pint, as he left "someone" phoned police saying he had a sawn-off shotgun (prank??) the ASU shot him dead in very, VERY strange and quite unbelievable circumstances. What happend after he was shot (in the back?) of the head also leaves grave concerns for anyone who has ever carried out armed duties around MOP.
MoJo.
Is this some form of Game, that I dont understand.
WHY would you walk around with a Table Leg, wrapped up?
If he was pretending to carry a Gun around, and someone mistook it for serious, and Called dibble.. then he is a muppet.
I am not discounting the cops over-reacted in Shooting him, but by the same token, i doubt they A-Teamd up, jumped out and Capped off a few rounds.
Regardless, if its a case of some fool getting shot for pretending to have a concealed sawn-off, after being down the boozer!, or No Armed cops...
I know which Way I will go.
Pranks are fine, pranks with guns (or imitating guns) is Darwin.
mojocvh said:
I belive he had (serious) previous but was straight at the time, he was working as carpenter (??) and was returning the repaired table leg.
The story is on here somewhere....
MoJo.
ok,
makes a little more sense on both sides now (as to why they were so quick to act, and also why he might have a table leg under arm)
still, its one of those things that unfortunately happens, the only way to stop it happening again is better training, which means more frequent use of armed police.
I cant see a downside to armed police really, the counter argument is always 'armed cops == armed crims' but those crims who are gonna tool up anyway, are ALREADY tooled up.
I would certainly feel safer knowing Dibble was packing, as opposed to just carrying a tickle stick and some hair spray.
I am sure dibble would feel safer too.
jeffreyarcher said:
<...>as to why they were so quick to act,
The local(s) who reported him mistook his Scottish accent for an Irish one.
Yokels
I am happy to admit I know nothing of the case, and as such can only comment on the spare info that the previous poster has provided.
Thats not to say I may have the situation TOTALLY wrong, but regardless, my personal feeling Is I would prefer a French Style Police System,
multi tiered, with the top branch being Military in origin, for Problematic Football matches, May Day Riots etc.
JamieBeeston said:
Sounds like the Police in Oz are phycho's, it's getting like that over here though. A guy was shot dead by plod for carrying a chair leg!! Trigger happy bastards!!
But WHY was he carrying a chair leg in such a mannor that ARMED cops were required on the scene, and were confident enough too shoot him?
The story:
The Daily Telegraph said:
Witness tells how police shot man
(Filed: 19/06/2002)
Police who shot dead a painter and decorator in the mistaken belief that the coffee table leg he was carrying was a sawn-off shotgun fired almost immediately after shouting at him to stand still, an inquest heard today.
A drinker in a pub had phoned the police, claiming to have seen an Irishman carrying a sawn-off shotgun in a plastic bag.
The call led to Scottish-born Harry Stanley, a 46-year-old father of three, being shot in the head and hand as he returned home to Hackney, east London, on Sept 22, 1999, with the piece of furniture wrapped in a blue plastic bag.
John Carpenter told the jury at St Pancras Coroners' Court, London, that he had been walking along with his wife, Peggy, in Hackney, east London, when he saw two policemen running past them and heard a shout of: "Police. Stand still." He said: "The next thing I heard were two cracks, one after the other, pretty much straightaway."
Mrs Carpenter said that the man turned to face the officers as they shouted at him, raising an umbrella-shaped object. The hearing has been told that Mr Stanley had been recovering from cancer of the colon and had difficulty raising his hands.
Sgt Michael Meaney, second in command of the Metropolitan Police's SO19 firearms unit on the day, said he looked inside the bag and saw a piece of wood.
He ran to inform Insp Neil Sharman and Pc Kevin Fagan, who had shot Mr Stanley. "They both appeared to be stunned and in shock by that," he told the jury. "They said they wouldn't have done anything differently in the circumstances."
The Daily Telegraph said:
Open verdict on death of man shot by police
By John Steele
(Filed: 22/06/2002)
An inquest jury yesterday returned an open verdict on the death of a 46-year-old man shot by police who had been told he was carrying a shotgun which in fact was only a table leg.
Relatives of the dead man said they would challenge the inquest in the High Court, arguing that the coroner erred in not letting the jury consider a verdict of unlawful killing.
Irene Stanley plans to sue the police
Jurors had been asked to chose between lawful killing, based on self-defence, and an open verdict after a week-long hearing which heard that Harry Stanley, a father of three and a grandfather, was shot twice by officers from Scotland Yard's firearms squad as he walked home from a pub.
They had received a report that an "Irishman" had left a pub in Hackney, east London, with a sawn-off shotgun in a blue plastic bag. It turned out to be a table leg which Mr Stanley, of Warneford Street, Hackney, had had repaired.
Mr Stanley, a painter and decorator who had been drinking before his death and had convictions for offences of violence, was shot in the head by Insp Neil Sharman and in the hand by Pc Kevin Fagan. The two officers said Mr Stanley appeared to have "levelled" what they believed was a shotgun towards them and they feared they would be shot. One civilian witness recalled a similar movement.
The hearing heard that Mr Stanley had been recovering from an operation for cancer of the colon and had difficulty walking, bending down or raising his hands.
Mr Stanley's widow, Irene, said afterwards she would sue the Metropolitan Police, make a formal complaint about the coroner and seek a judicial review of the inquest.
Earlier she and her supporters had left the St Pancras coroner's court after the coroner for Inner North London, Dr Stephen Chan, decided to withdraw the option of an unlawful killing verdict from the jury.
She said: "The jury were not allowed to bring a verdict of unlawful killing even if they wanted to. It's not right. There has been no police officer charged with the mistakes they made."
The family were also unhappy about a decision by Mr Chan to allow Mr Stanley's previous convictions into evidence. It emerged that he had served four years in prison for causing grievous bodily harm with intent and had older convictions for robbery.
The Daily telegraph said:
New inquest over table leg shooting
By John Steele Crime Correspondent
(Filed: 08/04/2003)
The family of an unarmed man shot dead by police yesterday won the right to a fresh inquest into his death.
A jury at an inquest last June returned an open verdict.
But the family bitterly criticised a decision by the coroner for Inner North London, Dr Stephen Chan, not to allow the jury to consider a verdict of unlawful killing.
The Stanley family lawyers succeeded yesterday in an application to the High Court to have the open verdict from the first inquest quashed because it followed an "insufficient inquiry".
Mr Justice Silber said he would lay down guidelines for the new inquest.
Tim Owen, QC, appearing for Mr Stanley's widow, Irene, had told the judge it was now accepted by police that the original inquest was flawed and a fresh investigation should take place.
He argued that Dr Chan had wrongly prevented the jury from hearing from expert witnesses and should have left open a verdict of unlawful killing.
A central argument by the family was that the independence of the first inquest was fatally undermined by the refusal of the coroner to call an expert firearms witness requested by the family.
Streaky
>> Edited by streaky on Monday 7th June 08:23
>> Edited by streaky on Monday 7th June 08:24
Thanks Streaky.
The few things that jump out are.
He was a Known Violent Con.
Someone called in a Tipoff of a 'Potential Terrorist Style' incident.
This was back in 99, when Irish Relations were nowhere near as friendly as they are now.
When Confronted by police, he turns, and raises the aforementioned 'suspected shotgun' and 'levelled" what they believed was a shotgun towards them and they feared they would be shot.
This DOES, to me, give some strength to their actions.
Now, this wasnt a smooth shooting, but it wasnt a Kid with an IceCream gun either. It was a 'credable threat', I dont think its anywhere near as 'obviously wrong' as has been previously suggested, again on the limited evidence provided.
Certainly its NO justification for NOT having the majority of BiB armed. Like anything, the more you use it, the more you get used to it.
Does anyone know of any other 'similar' Line of Duty incidents since 1999 ?
thnx
The few things that jump out are.
He was a Known Violent Con.
Someone called in a Tipoff of a 'Potential Terrorist Style' incident.
This was back in 99, when Irish Relations were nowhere near as friendly as they are now.
When Confronted by police, he turns, and raises the aforementioned 'suspected shotgun' and 'levelled" what they believed was a shotgun towards them and they feared they would be shot.
This DOES, to me, give some strength to their actions.
Now, this wasnt a smooth shooting, but it wasnt a Kid with an IceCream gun either. It was a 'credable threat', I dont think its anywhere near as 'obviously wrong' as has been previously suggested, again on the limited evidence provided.
Certainly its NO justification for NOT having the majority of BiB armed. Like anything, the more you use it, the more you get used to it.
Does anyone know of any other 'similar' Line of Duty incidents since 1999 ?
thnx
If there was a major civil unrest you would be surprised how many police would suddenly be wandering the streets with firearms, a fair number of BiB are "authorised" firearms officers. Not on active firearms duty but they have been on a course and know how to use (you would hope) a hand gun.
Most ARVs carry side arms permanently now (9mm Glock is in fashion), the big boys such as the HK MP5 or some forces even have Steyr AUG PARA - which is a beast! need authorisation by ACC or duty officer before they can play out.
These days in the uk its getting silly, I am aware of an incident recently where an armed individual pointed a shotgun directly at the ARV officers, they did not open fire. They are so scared of the aftermath they would rather just take cover behind their vehicle than take him down. Thats just wrong.
If someone points a gun at me or anyone else they are doing so because they intend to pull the trigger - so there should be no hesitation, if that was me he would have had 3 rounds in him before he hit the deck, game over.
Most ARVs carry side arms permanently now (9mm Glock is in fashion), the big boys such as the HK MP5 or some forces even have Steyr AUG PARA - which is a beast! need authorisation by ACC or duty officer before they can play out.
These days in the uk its getting silly, I am aware of an incident recently where an armed individual pointed a shotgun directly at the ARV officers, they did not open fire. They are so scared of the aftermath they would rather just take cover behind their vehicle than take him down. Thats just wrong.
If someone points a gun at me or anyone else they are doing so because they intend to pull the trigger - so there should be no hesitation, if that was me he would have had 3 rounds in him before he hit the deck, game over.
bluesandtwos said:
These days in the uk its getting silly, I am aware of an incident recently where an armed individual pointed a shotgun directly at the ARV officers, they did not open fire. They are so scared of the aftermath they would rather just take cover behind their vehicle than take him down. Thats just wrong.
bluesandtwos said:
If someone points a gun at me or anyone else they are doing so because they intend to pull the trigger - so there should be no hesitation, if that was me he would have had 3 rounds in him before he hit the deck, game over.
Agree.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff