Young woman shot by Police in terrror op.

[Rude-boy]

MarshPhantom said:

I'd have been more reassured if we had heard why she was shot. We haven't.

Well we have not heard that yet so perhaps the best thing is to wait until we have before trying to debate about why she was and if 'she had it coming' or if she was just a neighbour borrowing a cup of sugar.

I must say though that one way I personally have been able to avoid being shot by police is by not being in the sort of places where they are likely to come in with guns drawn or associating with people who might well be of significant interest to those working on anti terrorism matters.

To be honest the only hard and unquestionable points that are available to debate on this thread currently why did the OP chose to lead the title with the words "Young woman" as opposed to potential suspect or similar. It almost seems to suggest that the age and gender of the person shot should have a bearing on anything.

[battered]

London424 said:

battered said:

TTmonkey said:

5 shots fired and no ones died.... (yet)

Some training needed perhaps?

On the contrary. Shooting to immobilize is preferable to shooting dead, where possible, and this seems to have happened here. That's what the training should be for.

It really isn't. This is action movies where the hero shoots the gun out of their hand or shoots them deliberately in the leg or some nonsense.

They'll be trained to shoot the big part of the body and whatever happens injury wise is down to luck.

So all the documented UK and USA cases where real police shoot a suspect in the leg are just because they can't point it straight? Do me a favour.

I'm not talking Hollywood here, police are trained to stop. Of course, and in most cases that means kill given the distances involved and the need to hit the centre of the target. But if they can avoid killing, they will.

[Tom Logan]

I'm not familiar with that London, is Willesden one of the more 'salubrious' areas?

[battered]

Used to be a bit grubby but I'm going back 30 years. These days it's quite gentrified. There may still be a few pockets of grimness but it's being pushed out to the outer bits that used to be industrial land.

[Tom Logan]

Cheers battered, I've never been there.

[Uncle John]

Do we know how much the house is worth yet?

[battered]

The DM will tell us. If the woman is hot, the Sun will tell us how old she is.

[hornetrider]

Rude-boy said:

I must say though that one way I personally have been able to avoid being shot by police is by not being in the sort of places where they are likely to come in with guns drawn or associating with people who might well be of significant interest to those working on anti terrorism matters.

Here's a great instructional video.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uj0mtxXEGE8

[Loyly]

battered said:

On the contrary. Shooting to immobilize is preferable to shooting dead, where possible, and this seems to have happened here. That's what the training should be for.

You need to educate yourself on firearma. 'Shooting to immobilise' is a fantasy concept from action movies where guns are shot out of the bad guy's hand. If you're shooting someone with a gun, you shoot to stop. That is, to stop the threat that made it necessary to use potentially lethal force against them. There are a good number of less-lethal options which are always considered and ruled out first. Trick shots, winging legs and such are not part of that. They're nonsense.

[Oakey]

battered said:

So all the documented UK and USA cases where real police shoot a suspect in the leg are just because they can't point it straight? Do me a favour.

I'm not talking Hollywood here, police are trained to stop. Of course, and in most cases that means kill given the distances involved and the need to hit the centre of the target. But if they can avoid killing, they will.

Do you have some examples of these cases where suspects have deliberately been shot in the leg?

[battered]

Here you go:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/u...

[Bigends]

battered said:

Here you go:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/u...

Looks more like a crap shot rather than a deliberate shot to the legs - the first two shots missed and the third hit him in the thigh

[Oakey]

battered said:

Here you go:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/u...

Not the best example, is it? An unarmed man who wasn't doing anything wrong, laying on the ground with his hands in the air and they fire three rounds at him from a rifle with only one hitting him. It's more luck than anything that he was only hit in the leg and not killed.

Also

Wiki said:

On July 22, the head of the local police union, John Rivera, said that the officer who fired the bullets was aiming for Kinsey's patient, and was "trying to save Kinsey's life

and

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/apr/13/jo...

Edited by Oakey on Friday 28th April 12:31

[Boring_Chris]

Eric Mc said:

The spectre of John Charles Menezes always lurks in the background of these types of police operations.

First thing I thought of when reading the OP comments.

Maybe MarsPhantom derives his sense of morality from 80's action films?

[iphonedyou]

MarshPhantom said:

A womanyoung, female charity worker in her twentieslate teens was shot several times in the back by the Police in London's glamourous Willesden, during an anti-terror operationher trip home from the soup kitchen in which she volunteered selflessly.

The actual events, as imagined by MarshPhantom.

[Dr Doofenshmirtz]

Uncle John said:

Do we know how much the house is worth yet?

battered said:

The DM will tell us. If the woman is hot, the Sun will tell us how old she is.

And the Express will tell us more about Diana, Princess of Wales...and the ethnic origin of the injured party as a side story.

[Derek Smith]

Dr Murdoch said:

MarshPhantom said:

I'd have been more reassured if we had heard why she was shot. We haven't.

Its been reported to the IPCC, so the Police will not be able to comment / speculate at this time.

He knows. It has been pointed out to him many, many times.

[Don]

bhstewie said:

I wonder sometimes why people don't just post a thread called "I want an argument"

Is that the five minute dispute or the full half hour disagreement, sir?

[DS240]

TTmonkey said:

5 shots fired and no ones died.... (yet)

Some training needed perhaps?

It is only the news reporting 5 shots based on the brief video.

I would say the noises initially heard was either a distraction device being put through the door or they were shotgun breaching the front door. Or combo of both.

The door breaching would likely also involve the CS element.

It's quite possible the person was shot with the after effects of the door breaching rounds rather than shot how everyone would think.

[mac96]

There are of course a few other things that are fairly certain:

(1) The officer involved did not go out that day with the expectation of or desire to shoot anyone- this cannot always be said of the bad guys.

(2) He/she would much rather it hadn’t happened and will now be about to go through a long drawn out investigation which will be no fun for them whatsoever.

(3) Probably (not certainly- we will find out in due course)he/she had to make a judgement in a split second in a situation that the rest of us are very pleased not to have deal with, but which will now be analysed at great length with 20/20 hindsight.

Let’s wait for the facts to emerge.