Tazers.....None them worked well on Ralph Moat, who was armed all the time, but none of the Plod shot him........until he had blown his own effing head off.......
id like to say come and do it yourself if you are clever enough you clearly have a good understanding about developing information or a threat assessment …………..they have even removed the lower height limit….
I think You mean Raoul moat Tazers don't work well on dead people sadly - I guess that's the polices fault too
"No, just put people in charge of weapons that aren't so thick as some......…." it was a twisted quote of the spelling polices post earlier…… but nice to see you are on the ball….and yer mates!
Just because you are a P O, I guess you think you are automatically right and I am wrong . Notwithstanding, as you are a P O, IMO your manner and attitude is what gets the service a bad name.
Ah, the high ground……..your post just wants na na na na na at the end of it….. As a SFO of 17 years id say i have a pretty good idea about the Police use of firearms…what do you base your opinions on?
Imho unless you have had a gun stuck in your face, and knife at your throat or someone trying to chuck you off a building, its churlish to think you have even an iota of knowledge of what it must be like Opinions are fine, but telling someone who has, and does, do it how they should do it when you don't, cant and haven't, isn't worth listening to
I can qualify then although no one has tried to chuck me off a building yet. I have come into contact with firearms and other lethal weapons on many occasions.I have been threatened with them and come under attack from them.Luckily for me I have come to no serious harm and nothing more than the effects of cs gas or a few bumps and bruises.Few friends I worked with were not so lucky. I can tell the difference between a gun and a mobile phone.I can also tell the difference between someone with there hands in the air surrendering and someone pointing a weapon at me. If I used lethal force and it was found I was mistaken and guy was holding a mobile phone I would be well and truly in the shit so to speak.Or should that be up shit creek without a paddle. Seriously though I worry if people can be shot because the police THINK they are armed but not 100% sure ie see the weapon and it is being raised to fire.Its also worrying you can be shot for not doing as you are told rather than tazered ie non lethal usualy.Maybe the person has hearing impairment or mental health issues so does not react as normal to police commands.Maybe they shit themselves and freeze or panic and do something stupid like try to run away. I agree the armed police have a difficult job but shooting unarmed people is not exactly boosting public confidence in police.
Some of you will know this but many won't,if you go up one letter in alphabet on each of the letters of the name Hal you might be surprised.
whats unarmed got to do with this thread? Its so easy to say unarmed, which is totally out of context with the scenario, and certainly timeframe. has with him (as a legal definition), immediate access to , honest held belief…are much more relative...
