"Deuteros" wrote in message
enews.net...
Brummie_In_London wrote in
:

Deuteros spawned some crap which read thus:

The problem seems to be that you don't understand what the problem is.

Unless, of course, you don't have a problem with police officers
turning into the judge, jury, and executioner.

The problem is one of balance.
Did the suspect run from officers he knew to be armed?
YES
Did the suspect ignore repeated calls to stop?
YES
Was the suspect aware that there had been successful and attempted
bombings in the last fortnight?
YES (Otherwise he would be the answer all of the conspiracy theorists
have been looking for)
He knew the risk, he either assessed them incorrectly; and, as I said
before - stupidity is not an excuse; or, he was an armed combatant and
deserved to die.

On the opposite side of the scales:
Did the officers open fire discriminately?
NO
Was anybody else, except the suspect, physically hurt by this incident?
NO
Did the suspect give any indication of giving himself up?
NO
How many people actually died?
ONE
How many potential deaths would there have been?
MANY

By the way, the only way to deal with a known or suspected suicide
bomber is to shoot them in the head, chest shots may activate the
device, any attempts to wound them mean that they still have the
capacity to detonate their device. ALL security forces are trained to
use a double-tap to stop their targets... so all I can suspect is that 3
officers shot him and one of them suffered from a weapon jam. I'd like
to shake their hands and buy them a nice cold pint!

Did the suspect threaten anyone with deadly force? No.

The suspect may have been very stupid, but nothing he did justified being
shot and killed. The shooting was unjustified.

Look at it as Evolution In Action - weeding out the dumb ****s who knowingly
run from armed police when told to stop.

Personally, if it turns out that he was involved in terrorist activities,
I'd support executing his immediate family and friends too - they either
knew what the **** was up to or they had their heads in the sand and these
days that is just as dangerous. We should escalate the cost of becoming a
terrorist to such a degree that the bomber risks all his or her family and
friends, not just their own life. Certainly the people around these ****ers
would then take more notice and do something to stop them. And yes, I know
most of you liberal human rights ******s will call me a fascist or some
other crap but I don't give a ****. I've got the right to hold this opinion
as much as you have to hold the opposite and neither of us are going to
change our minds so don't bother arguing with me because I ain't listening.

On Fri, 22 Jul 2005 16:09:58 +0100, Nimrod wrote:

Personally, if it turns out that he was involved in terrorist activities,
I'd support executing his immediate family and friends too - they either
knew what the **** was up to or they had their heads in the sand and these
days that is just as dangerous. We should escalate the cost of becoming a
terrorist to such a degree that the bomber risks all his or her family and
friends, not just their own life. Certainly the people around these
****ers would then take more notice and do something to stop them. And
yes, I know most of you liberal human rights ******s will call me a
fascist or some other crap but I don't give a ****. I've got the right to
hold this opinion as much as you have to hold the opposite and neither of
us are going to change our minds so don't bother arguing with me because I
ain't listening.


No need for human rights arguments just common sense and a small
degree of knowledge. Do you honestly think you ill thought out idea
would reduce bombing. FFS they happily kill other Muslims in their
bombings, how do they get round this - well they also become martyrs if
they are good Muslims, otherwise they are infidels. Of course, only the
foot soldiers believe this and the generals do not give a ****.

In the light of this, perhaps you want to reconsider.

"steve" wrote in message
news
On Fri, 22 Jul 2005 16:09:58 +0100, Nimrod wrote:

Personally, if it turns out that he was involved in terrorist activities,
I'd support executing his immediate family and friends too - they either
knew what the **** was up to or they had their heads in the sand and
these
days that is just as dangerous. We should escalate the cost of becoming a
terrorist to such a degree that the bomber risks all his or her family
and
friends, not just their own life. Certainly the people around these
****ers would then take more notice and do something to stop them. And
yes, I know most of you liberal human rights ******s will call me a
fascist or some other crap but I don't give a ****. I've got the right to
hold this opinion as much as you have to hold the opposite and neither of
us are going to change our minds so don't bother arguing with me because
I
ain't listening.


No need for human rights arguments just common sense and a small
degree of knowledge. Do you honestly think you ill thought out idea
would reduce bombing. FFS they happily kill other Muslims in their
bombings, how do they get round this - well they also become martyrs if
they are good Muslims, otherwise they are infidels. Of course, only the
foot soldiers believe this and the generals do not give a ****.

In the light of this, perhaps you want to reconsider.


not at all. They're happy to kill the faceless people of their own religion,
but having their family and friends pay the price for their madness might
make some of them reconsider. It will also make their family and friends
much more likely to either stop him or turn him in to the authorities if
they have to pay as well.