Page 6 of 8

Re: Mark Duggan was not armed when shot by police

Posted: Thu Jan 09, 2014 7:01 pm
by bennyfroobs
m8son wrote:lol i have tried google all that comes up is newspaper articles, do you not remember where you saw it?
haha sorry man, if i remembered i honestly would have posted it for you, it was a while ago now and my memory is hazy as it is (not hazy about this, i can actually remember the stuff i read pretty well, just about everything else. dates, peoples faces, what i had for breakfast)

Re: Mark Duggan was not armed when shot by police

Posted: Thu Jan 09, 2014 7:06 pm
by Terpit
hmmm, that's tricky, I don't think everyone carrying a weapon should be shot, I'm not actually sure where I stand, but he would have probably killed someone with that gun, keep that in mind. It's a weird one, that's for sure, I think we all agree that this guy was a nasty twat though, this operation wouldn't have been planned otherwise.

The police did handle this badly tho

Re: Mark Duggan was not armed when shot by police

Posted: Thu Jan 09, 2014 7:20 pm
by Doozle
djredi2step wrote:this is a good article
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfre ... ons-police
He's on channel 4 news in the next few minutes

Re: Mark Duggan was not armed when shot by police

Posted: Fri Jan 10, 2014 3:16 am
by test_recordings
Doozle wrote:
djredi2step wrote:this is a good article
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfre ... ons-police
He's on channel 4 news in the next few minutes
It's kind of obvious the police fucked it tbh

Re: Mark Duggan was not armed when shot by police

Posted: Fri Jan 10, 2014 11:09 am
by magma
Terpit wrote:hmmm, that's tricky, I don't think everyone carrying a weapon should be shot, I'm not actually sure where I stand, but he would have probably killed someone with that gun, keep that in mind. It's a weird one, that's for sure, I think we all agree that this guy was a nasty twat though, this operation wouldn't have been planned otherwise.
It seems pretty simple tbh - we don't have the death penalty in this country, let alone summary execution without trial. The *only* time a policeman should fire a weapon is when he's under a direct threat from an armed suspect (i.e. a gun being pointed directly at them)... given that Duggan apparently tossed a gun wrapped in a sock from the moving car before he was engaged, it seems fairly clear that he wasn't posing a clear threat. The police should've either moved in to arrest him or kept their powder dry and picked him up another time; whatever plans he had, he obviously wasn't going to be able to carry them out once he'd chucked the weapon.

Even if he was on his way to do something nasty, this isn't minority report and we most certainly can't justify using lethal force based on gut assumptions and still claim to be an 'enlightened' society. Society has to be better than its criminals (that's why they're criminals)

Re: Mark Duggan was not armed when shot by police

Posted: Fri Jan 10, 2014 11:09 am
by scspkr99
Terpit wrote:hmmm, that's tricky, I don't think everyone carrying a weapon should be shot, I'm not actually sure where I stand, but he would have probably killed someone with that gun, keep that in mind. It's a weird one, that's for sure, I think we all agree that this guy was a nasty twat though, this operation wouldn't have been planned otherwise.

The police did handle this badly tho
That's a massive leap

Re: Mark Duggan was not armed when shot by police

Posted: Fri Jan 10, 2014 11:26 am
by m8son666
magma wrote:The *only* time a policeman should fire a weapon is when he's under a direct threat from an armed suspect (i.e. a gun being pointed directly at them)... given that Duggan apparently tossed a gun wrapped in a sock from the moving car before he was engaged, it seems fairly clear that he wasn't posing a clear threat. The police should've either moved in to arrest him or kept their powder dry and picked him up another time; whatever plans he had, he obviously wasn't going to be able to carry them out once he'd chucked the weapon.
Do you not think the policemen must of thought he was under a direct threat? or do you think he knew there was no threat and killed him anyway? It's very easy to say what he should of done in hindsight and with unlimited amount of time to ponder alternatives. In the heat of the moment if you believe your or a friend's life is in danger, rightly or wrongly, i'm sure you would of done the same thing.

The thing i can understand people being pissed off about is the lack of accountability of the police, whatever the reason the policemen shot the guy he should of had some form of punishment. I think the cameras that have been proposed will go along way to solving this problem.

Re: Mark Duggan was not armed when shot by police

Posted: Fri Jan 10, 2014 11:30 am
by scspkr99
I'd expect armed police to be a bit better prepared for the situation than I would be

Re: Mark Duggan was not armed when shot by police

Posted: Fri Jan 10, 2014 12:38 pm
by bennyfroobs
^ye they shot EACH OTHER as well lol. fuckin useless

m808son, do u not think the fact that duggan got shot in the back while he was running away would infer that wasnt really that much of a threat tho? shit, this guys doing some dangerous fleeing, better cap the fucker

terpit, re. "he had a gun, he was gonna shoot someone".... just look at the amount of people in america who have guns? are they all gonna shoot someone? dnt get me wrong i dont think anyon should have them, clearly recipies for disaster

Re: Mark Duggan was not armed when shot by police

Posted: Fri Jan 10, 2014 1:00 pm
by Laszlo
bennyfroobs wrote:^ye they shot EACH OTHER as well lol. fuckin useless

m808son, do u not think the fact that duggan got shot in the back while he was running away would infer that wasnt really that much of a threat tho? shit, this guys doing some dangerous fleeing, better cap the fucker
I am under the impression the first shot went through Duggan's arm and then struck a police officer. The second, fatal shot was fired as Duggan was going down from the first. I don't think there was any running involved.
The shot that killed him sounds plausible. The first shot could have been a legitimate mistake.

Re: Mark Duggan was not armed when shot by police

Posted: Fri Jan 10, 2014 1:11 pm
by Pedro Sánchez
Look, once you train someone to be an armed marksman, you have psychologically give them the urge to carry out that training, the same way a muscle head can't wait to take his shirt off after all them gym sessions. The way one feels when in charge of all that power with no release must be like holding back on creaming yourself when Megan Fox is saddling you. They have been trained to mame and kill and are always waiting for the chance of some action.

Re: Mark Duggan was not armed when shot by police

Posted: Fri Jan 10, 2014 1:16 pm
by Laszlo
That is wildly speculative.

Re: Mark Duggan was not armed when shot by police

Posted: Fri Jan 10, 2014 1:18 pm
by Pedro Sánchez
It's the nature of man, some can hold back the urge but the type that wants to become a copper more often than not, is slightly deluded and seeks an authoritarian position or they just want a career with some action.

Re: Mark Duggan was not armed when shot by police

Posted: Fri Jan 10, 2014 1:21 pm
by Riddles
Pedro Sánchez wrote:It's the nature of man, some can hold back the urge but the type that wants to become a copper more often than not, is slightly deluded and seeks an authoritarian position or they just want a career with some action.
Laszlo wrote:That is wildly speculative.

Re: Mark Duggan was not armed when shot by police

Posted: Fri Jan 10, 2014 1:28 pm
by garethom
Terpit wrote:if the police shot a gang member who had a gun in his car over here, i would be glad, one less scum bag on the streets. how many people do you reckon he's assaulted/mugged/raped? because come on, only serious people carry guns in their vehicles
I like you Terpit, but that might be the most stupid non-trolling thing I've read on DSF in ages.

I can only sincerely hope one day that nobody ever looks at you as a scum bag, and that nobody "reckons" you've ever assaulted or raped anyone.

Re: Mark Duggan was not armed when shot by police

Posted: Fri Jan 10, 2014 1:51 pm
by nousd
however unjust this case is

I have a gun should be a corollary of I'm now more likely to be shot dead

Re: Mark Duggan was not armed when shot by police

Posted: Fri Jan 10, 2014 2:23 pm
by Forum
Pedro Sánchez wrote: The way one feels when in charge of all that power with no release must be like holding back on creaming yourself when Megan Fox is saddling you. .
Not really relevant but I find Megan Fox extremely unatractive.

In a country like this with such a small gun presence it probably takes a certain kind of person to want to be on an armed response unit

Re: Mark Duggan was not armed when shot by police

Posted: Fri Jan 10, 2014 2:25 pm
by m8son666
my m8s dad is an armed policeman and has a severe case of small man syndrome, in fact i bet there aren't any armed police taller than 6 foot

Re: Mark Duggan was not armed when shot by police

Posted: Fri Jan 10, 2014 2:51 pm
by bennyfroobs
Laszlo wrote:
bennyfroobs wrote:^ye they shot EACH OTHER as well lol. fuckin useless

m808son, do u not think the fact that duggan got shot in the back while he was running away would infer that wasnt really that much of a threat tho? shit, this guys doing some dangerous fleeing, better cap the fucker
I am under the impression the first shot went through Duggan's arm and then struck a police officer. The second, fatal shot was fired as Duggan was going down from the first. I don't think there was any running involved.
The shot that killed him sounds plausible. The first shot could have been a legitimate mistake.
yea my bad he wasnt running away when he got shot

its doesnt sound like it was unintentional in the slightest tbh

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-25657206

Re: Mark Duggan was not armed when shot by police

Posted: Fri Jan 10, 2014 3:12 pm
by m8son666
lol how could he have seen if he had a gun or not at ~150m 20/20 vision or not :lol: