Police cleared in Mark Duggan shooting as jury record verdict of "lawful killing"

[ADPT]

as a little side question to all of this. for people in the UK is there any real push or any real momentum for the civilians to get some kind of gun rights back? something i have been wondering, i read a report where a british poll said most brits would welcome the ability to have guns.

You can still have guns, as part of a sports club or as a farmer or under certain under circumstances. My uncle has one and manufactures his own ammunition. There's been some call to loosen legislation, mainly to do with sports shooting I believe but having rights to the extent of the US? I don't think so. I'm not sure we ever had gun rights to that extent and I really don't think most British people want it.

thanks for the response.

as for the extent i was thinking more along the lines of maybe having a handgun for home protection, that kind of thing.

I actually think we'd prefer a more concrete basis in law as to what we are allowed do to protect our homes. It's a bit fuzzy at the moment.

[Graeme]

Never seen an armed policeman up here or in Northern England when I was living there... Gun crime seems to be a London thing.

[Ace Nova]

Never seen an armed policeman up here or in Northern England when I was living there... Gun crime seems to be a London thing.

That's precisely my point.

[Guest NGOG]

I know this doesn't represent British law; but unless you see a gun in somebody's hand, you shouldn't fire your weapon. A lot of these officers are preempting something based on somebody's history.

Secondly, if you are forced to fire, you should attempt to use your weapon non-lethally if possible. Why was this guy killed, yet the two who butchered a soldier in Woolwich were specifically shot with the intent of keeping them alive? They actually posed a threat to the officers' security.

[bran]

I know this doesn't represent British law; but unless you see a gun in somebody's hand, you shouldn't fire your weapon. A lot of these officers are preempting something based on somebody's history.

Secondly, if you are forced to fire, you should attempt to use your weapon non-lethally if possible. Why was this guy killed, yet the two who butchered a soldier in Woolwich were specifically shot with the intent of keeping them alive? They actually posed a threat to the officers' security.

i would agree but look at from the police perspective, a guy moves quickly you never know if he is going for a gun or not, by the time that you see it may be a firearm you are dead. cops need to do a better job no doubt, but i think civilians can do a better job as well. if a cop tells you to freeze or tells you to get on the ground, do it. even if you are innocent and they have their story wrong just comply, and take up the issue later.

as for using force to injure rather than kill it seems the police in this case didnt really shoot to kill. there was only 2 shots fired, one hit him in the thigh and the other in the chest. if this was in the states the police would have emptied their guns into him, i dont think the cops in england wanted to kill the guy, just subdue the situation.

also this guy seemed to be a real nutjob.

[Ace Nova]

I know this doesn't represent British law; but unless you see a gun in somebody's hand, you shouldn't fire your weapon. A lot of these officers are preempting something based on somebody's history.

Secondly, if you are forced to fire, you should attempt to use your weapon non-lethally if possible. Why was this guy killed, yet the two who butchered a soldier in Woolwich were specifically shot with the intent of keeping them alive? They actually posed a threat to the officers' security.

i would agree but look at from the police perspective, a guy moves quickly you never know if he is going for a gun or not, by the time that you see it may be a firearm you are dead. cops need to do a better job no doubt, but i think civilians can do a better job as well. if a cop tells you to freeze or tells you to get on the ground, do it. even if you are innocent and they have their story wrong just comply, and take up the issue later.

as for using force to injure rather than kill it seems the police in this case didnt really shoot to kill. there was only 2 shots fired, one hit him in the thigh and the other in the chest. if this was in the states the police would have emptied their guns into him, i dont think the cops in england wanted to kill the guy, just subdue the situation.

also this guy seemed to be a real nutjob.

I would have to agree in this particular situation. TWO shots is in no way an intent to kill.

just sayin'.....

[Dazey]

I know this doesn't represent British law; but unless you see a gun in somebody's hand, you shouldn't fire your weapon. A lot of these officers are preempting something based on somebody's history.

Secondly, if you are forced to fire, you should attempt to use your weapon non-lethally if possible. Why was this guy killed, yet the two who butchered a soldier in Woolwich were specifically shot with the intent of keeping them alive? They actually posed a threat to the officers' security.

There's a big difference and the guys in Woolwich were not shot with an intention to keep them alive or at least they weren't if the police were following protocol in any way. Marksmen are taught to aim for the centre body mass and that's it because it gives them the best chance of disabling the target. There's no such thing as "shoot to wound" or "shoot to kill" in these circumstances. It's shoot to disable and you do that by aiming at the part of the body where you have the best chance of hitting the target.

As for the difference between the Woolwich and Duggan shootings, well their were two guys waving machetes and handguns and a decappitated soldier lying on the ground nearby. I think it's safe to say that the cops were pretty sure that these guys were upto no good. In the Duggan case they had to make that call in a split second based on the guy's history (don't know why that's necessarily a bad thing) and the potential risk they perceived.

Saying you should actually have to see the gun in the guy's hand is just bullshit I'm afraid. If you identify yourself as armed police and the guy makes any threatening sudden moves, reaches into his pocket without being told etc etc then that's more than enough grounds to shoot the fucker as far as I'm concerned.

[Dazey]

i would agree but look at from the police perspective, a guy moves quickly you never know if he is going for a gun or not, by the time that you see it may be a firearm you are dead. cops need to do a better job no doubt, but i think civilians can do a better job as well. if a cop tells you to freeze or tells you to get on the ground, do it. even if you are innocent and they have their story wrong just comply, and take up the issue later.

as for using force to injure rather than kill it seems the police in this case didnt really shoot to kill. there was only 2 shots fired, one hit him in the thigh and the other in the chest. if this was in the states the police would have emptied their guns into him, i dont think the cops in england wanted to kill the guy, just subdue the situation.

Great post, agree 100%.

[GivenToFly]

There are always a few police officers with rifles around Whitehall and the general area. I also see them sometimes at crowded train and tube stations, particularly Victoria, Euston and St Pancras.

[Guest NGOG]

i would agree but look at from the police perspective, a guy moves quickly you never know if he is going for a gun or not, by the time that you see it may be a firearm you are dead.

there was only 2 shots fired, one hit him in the thigh and the other in the chest.

also this guy seemed to be a real nutjob.

Should you become a police officer, the threat of being shot is something you must accept. There is absolutely no way you can shoot somebody for moving, that's preposterous. Unless you actually see a a gun being produced, you shouldn't utilize your own weapon.

If they merely acted to disarm this guy, why is he dead? It's blatantly obvious the officer panicked and acted rashly.

That's an utterly moot point. Are we now publicly executing people because they are mentally unstable?

[Dazey]

Should you become a police officer, the threat of being shot is something you must accept. There is absolutely no way you can shoot somebody for moving, that's preposterous. Unless you actually see a a gun being produced, you shouldn't utilize your own weapon.

Sorry but that's a load of crap. If you suspect somebody is carrying a gun (with good reason in this case), identify yourself as armed police and tell them to freeze then what happens next is upto them. All it takes is a split second to pull a gun and if he chose to ignore an armed police officer under those circumstances then tough.

That's an utterly moot point. Are we now publicly executing people because they are mentally unstable?

Since when was being a fuckin' wrongun a mental illness?

[Guest Len B'stard]

Whats it matter anyway, no one gives a fuck about Mark Duggan, no ones gonna go to some fuckin' high court UN bollocks with this, it'll be forgotten about tommorow cuz people just look at him like some fuckin' thieving black rudeboy or something, I mean its not like it's Madeliene McCann we're talking about or Milly Dowler. It can be as bait as fuck but when it's a certain kind of person quite frankly no one gives a shit, nothing unlawful about Mark Duggan, nothing unlawful about Smiley, it takes fuckin' nigh on 20 years for someone to go down for fuckin' Stephen Laurences murder and they wonder why no one ain't got no respect for the law, y'wanna know what the law is, the law is a bunch of jumped up pricks that get to give you stick if they see you walking down the street at 2am, the law are the people that are gonna nick you over a fuckin' draw, the law are the people to fuckin' pull you over and give you the hump over a brake light bulb...but go to em with an actual crime, wait til your fuckin' house gets burgled or the local wrong uns brick your fuckin' windows and it's all fuckin' 'oh we know the culprits but you gotta have em red handed' or 'the truth is sir that in these cases the culprits are rarely ever found, as is the case with your belongings' and 'may I suggest that in the future you have extra locks fitted?'.

The law are a fuckin' joke and this Duggan case is bait as fuck and anybody with their eyes half open can see that but no one cares, no one gives a flying fuck because deep down, the underlying thing is he's a black lad from North London, he looks a fuckin' wrong un so deep down in everyones hearts it's like, y'know, this ain't some innocent little girl in a Manchester United shirt that wandered into the pervie caretakers, it's a live by the sword thing, fuck him.

I wouldn't ask a copper for nothing ever, it's fuckin' pointless, I actively hate them, do not want them near me, wouldn't go near em even to report a fuckin' crime that happened against me, fuckin' probably end up nicking me for something, I'm actually proper afraid of em, don't like em, everytime i see em i just wanna walk in the opposite direction, i hate them, they have no fuckin' souls.

Edited January 9, 2014 by sugaraylen

[Guest NGOG]

Sorry but that's a load of crap. If you suspect somebody is carrying a gun (with good reason in this case), identify yourself as armed police and tell them to freeze then what happens next is upto them. All it takes is a split second to pull a gun and if he chose to ignore an armed police officer under those circumstances then tough.

Spoken like a true Tory.

See, I don't believe that a police officer has any more right to live than a member of the public. After all, the police exist to protect the public. When you authorize an officer to shoot anybody they suspect might have a gun, you no longer have a functioning police force. What you've then created is a state-sponsored paramilitary.

Becoming a police officer doesn't make you some sort of higher being. If anything, you become a servant of the public. When you make a concious decision to join the police, you must accept that your life will be in danger. Fatally shooting somebody that may have a gun is public execution - not good policing.

Edited January 9, 2014 by NGOG

[Chris1989]

Not reading all the posts, but if you keep your nose clean, you won't get shot by the police.

Reap what you sow and all that.

[Guest Len B'stard]

Not reading all the posts, but if you keep your nose clean, you won't get shot by the police.

Tell it to the brazillian lad outside Stockwell Station.

[ADPT]

Sorry but that's a load of crap. If you suspect somebody is carrying a gun (with good reason in this case), identify yourself as armed police and tell them to freeze then what happens next is upto them. All it takes is a split second to pull a gun and if he chose to ignore an armed police officer under those circumstances then tough.

Spoken like a true Tory.

See, I don't believe that a police officer has any more right to live than a member of the public. After all, the police exist to protect the public. When you authorize an officer to shoot anybody they suspect might have a gun, you no longer have a functioning police force. What you've then created is a state-sponsored paramilitary.

Becoming a police officer doesn't make you some sort of higher being. If anything, you become a servant of the public. When you make a concious decision to join the police, you must accept that your life will be in danger. Fatally shooting somebody that may have a gun is public execution - not good policing.

The police are aware there's a chance their life may be in danger, things like those two policewomen murdered in Manchester and the one shot at in Leeds recently and the guy blinded by Raoul Moat probably remind them of it every now and then.

At what point would you deem it acceptable to fire? When you're sure he has a gun? When you're sure it's real? How about when he's aiming it at you? Should you wait until you're sure the weapon is made ready? Is the safety on? How good a shot is he? Chances are not very good, so he may miss and there's now a round flying through the air in the middle of a public place so that's bystanders now endangered. Do you take that chance?

[Guest NGOG]

At what point would you deem it acceptable to fire? When you're sure he has a gun?

Yes.

[ADPT]

At what point would you deem it acceptable to fire? When you're sure he has a gun?

Yes.

That's the point. The copper in question was sure he did. Which was the jury's conclusion.

[volcano62]

Guy was a punk into bad shit.

This is what happens.

[DieselDaisy]

If it is a 'lawful' killing, as the court have decided, then the policeman simply has to be grossly incompetent - not malicious but incompetent - and should be struck off. If it is unlawful, he should he stand trial and be struck off. Either way, he should be struck off. Also, why has there not been some investigation into one of the most obvious Police cover ups since, well the last one? A forensic guy said, there was no way the suspect, from where he was standing, could have thrown the gun there.

[ColdHeartBreaker]

If it is a 'lawful' killing, as the court have decided, then the policeman simply has to be grossly incompetent - not malicious but incompetent - and should be struck off. If it is unlawful, he should he stand trial and be struck off. Either way, he should be struck off. Also, why has there not been some investigation into one of the most obvious Police cover ups since, well the last one? A forensic guy said, there was no way the suspect, from where he was standing, could have thrown the gun there.

Have you got a source for the forensic guy?

[***Flawless]

Everyone saying he deserved it sound so pleasant, I'd love to be around you guys.

[Chewbacca]

Fuck da police.

[Chris1989]

Not reading all the posts, but if you keep your nose clean, you won't get shot by the police.

Tell it to the brazillian lad outside Stockwell Station.

Touché

[Tater Totts]

I wouldn't ask a copper for nothing ever, it's fuckin' pointless, I actively hate them, do not want them near me, wouldn't go near em even to report a fuckin' crime that happened against me, fuckin' probably end up nicking me for something, I'm actually proper afraid of em, don't like em, everytime i see em i just wanna walk in the opposite direction, i hate them, they have no fuckin' souls.

Well mate it would certainly help if you didn't crash into police cars while drunk and with some skunk on you:lol: