Viewing Thread:
"YH QoTD"

[URL]http://www.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,30000-13394581,00.html[/URL]

So, the bloke that was shot at Stockwell on Thrusday (Friday?) was not a bomber.

And now his family is suing the police.

So, a couple of questions here:

1. Is the shoot to kill policy correct, in your view?

2. Should his family sue?


I think that if he was innocent, why did he run off? I know if I was confronted by a number of men with guns, then I'd stop pretty damn quick - even if I couldn't understand what they were saying.

As for the shoot to kill policy, I think that it is the right thing to do. If you shoot to injure, a suicide bomber could still detonate their device, so you don't actually stop anything.

Looking at it completly objectively, 1 dead innocent is far better than 10 dead innocents.

Obviously no dead would be best, but can the police take the chance?

Give him a posthumous Oyster Card.

Yeah sorry about that.

I hadn't been about for a few days and didn't realise this had already been covered.

Just out of interest, you didn't happen to watch the Wright Stuff today did you YH?

I already had a big vent about so can't be bothered again.

ssxpro wrote:
> I think the problem with the dart thing might be that whatever they
> inject through the dart could take a second or two to circulate to
> relevant areas and cause the necessary damage.

I can't believe that nobody has invented a formula that works instantly by now. I'm sure they have it available but they don't use it because they don't want it getting into the wrong hands.

I think the problem with the dart thing might be that whatever they inject through the dart could take a second or two to circulate to relevant areas and cause the necessary damage. Even if the delay was a fraction of a second, it could be enough if a suicide bomber is ready "finger on the button".

On the sound shot/vibration thing, that sounds better, but is there not a risk that the bomb could be set off if there is a wide dispersal range? I really hope a better way can be found, because as mentioned below, no deaths would be the obvious optimum.

With things as they are though, I have to agree with the decision they made. I don't want to go over the points from earlier, but I agree with the reasoning. However, I would like to add that these men probably had a lot less time to think things through than we all do. Perhaps a little time running through the station, knowing what might happen, but really only a fraction of a second was available for thinking when the guy actually reached the train.

On the subject of compensation, if the guy really was innocent, which the police seem to think so (as mentioned earlier he may have run for immigration reasons, but a little unlikely if he was just working nearby and easily tracked), it'd be nice for the family to be compensated somehow. Nothing can make up for their loss though. Having said that, if policemen in future incidents (though I hope there are no more) are given the same choice but have the added weight on their minds that they could be taken to court, disgraced and punished for the rest of their lives, then it may cause hesitation that could cost hundreds of lives.

Its a hard life being a policeman in London right now and I imagine they are going to be quite worried about next Thursday too.

Black Glove wrote:
> SubZero would be handy.

[URL]http://img141.imageshack.us/my.php?image=bomb3ua.jpg[/URL]

Line of sight. Bang! Target stopped. Done.

The best way to make sure a terrorist doesn't set off a bomb.

I remember reading about "non lethal" weapons.

There was this one which sent out pulses of sound at some frequency which upset the nervous system and disabled the assailant for a short period of time.

I suppose that might of been a better alternative.

Bullett wrote:
> Give them some free train passes I say.


The single funniest comment I've yet read about this whole affair...