No sympathy for Gunmen

[mtread]

You know what, the IPCC will probably remove this known-criminal from blame, but quite frankly if there was a gun about his person or in the vehicle (I believe there was) then I am with plod. People who carry guns and get into all sorts of very illegal activity are probably on borrowed time anyway. Here in Bristol there are frequent drug-gang related killings, often the stiff is implicated in all sorts of crime. I want all these selfish, parasitic, dangerous scumbags off of the streets. They have waived their right to liberty and if shot whilst gun-toting tough luck.

The IPCC can only work on the evidence provided. Forensics plus witness statements, and thereby lies the problem. The police themselves are witnesses, and they conspire not to tell the truth. Mark Duggan had threw his gun over a fence, but was shot twice. First wounded then killed.
The police have very specific rules before they can fire. Somebody's life must be in danger. For instance they must believe the victim is about to draw their gun and shoot someone. Believing they have a gun in the car isn't enough.
Yes drug gangs are scum, and they shoot each other. But shooting to kill criminals just to get rid of them isn't right. Otherwise where do you stop? Who decides who it is right to kill, and where do you draw the line? Speeding at 100mph+ is a criminal offense and is putting lives in danger. Perhaps they should be shot?

[pilninggas]

You know what, the IPCC will probably remove this known-criminal from blame, but quite frankly if there was a gun about his person or in the vehicle (I believe there was) then I am with plod. People who carry guns and get into all sorts of very illegal activity are probably on borrowed time anyway. Here in Bristol there are frequent drug-gang related killings, often the stiff is implicated in all sorts of crime. I want all these selfish, parasitic, dangerous scumbags off of the streets. They have waived their right to liberty and if shot whilst gun-toting tough luck.

The IPCC can only work on the evidence provided. Forensics plus witness statements, and thereby lies the problem. The police themselves are witnesses, and they conspire not to tell the truth. Mark Duggan had threw his gun over a fence, but was shot twice. First wounded then killed.
The police have very specific rules before they can fire. Somebody's life must be in danger. For instance they must believe the victim is about to draw their gun and shoot someone. Believing they have a gun in the car isn't enough.
Yes drug gangs are scum, and they shoot each other. But shooting to kill criminals just to get rid of them isn't right. Otherwise where do you stop? Who decides who it is right to kill, and where do you draw the line? Speeding at 100mph+ is a criminal offense and is putting lives in danger. Perhaps they should be shot?

I don't trust the IPCC's judgement on these high profile cases (part of my wider view that I do not trust the judiciary or justice quangos to make judgements without a jury of my peers having the final decision). So I think it should be judged by an unbiased 'jury' with no affiliation to anyone. Did Mark Duggan really cover his face? Unless it's caught on CCTV we'll never know. What we do know is that Mark Duggan was a criminal who died with a gun on his person (beyond refute). Part of the problem is calling this dead guy in Yorkshire 'a victim', sadly he was not, he wasn't minding his own business in a law abiding manner, he had a prolific criminal who had a gun with him. Those of us with a lawful mindset who don't sell drugs or carry guns cannot imagine how he acted or moved in that moment. I really don't think either case was an example of summary execution, plod just followed a procedure and [not] sadly a destroyer of lives got his taken away. If I was an armed copper, and following years of high quality training, a known armed criminal (with presumably no weapons training) failed to do as commanded and then acted in an immediately threatening or unpredictable manner I'd probably pull the trigger too....

As far as I am aware traffic police do not carry guns, and armed police cannot remove their weapons from the vehicle's safe if stopping someone for a traffic offence. I can't see that being americanised any time soon.

[Slaninar]

Drugs should be legalized. For all the 18+ adults. Mafia stays out of business, plus addicts don't do loads of small crimes they otherwise do to get the money for heroin.

As far as police shooting goes, it depends what kind of society you want. Even then, there are several ways to get there, depending on the starting point. I mean, imagine working as a cop. Would you prefer:
a) being allowed to shoot anyone that tries anything suspicious (reaching for glove box, or under arm, or belt...).
b) knowing that the law gives automatic death sentence to anyone that tries to shoot (or stab) a cop, and knowing that the criminals know that you are not allowed to shoot until they shoot first at someone (so they won't panic and shoot you in fear of you shooting them).

One thing's certain - shooting someone can't be taken back. Once they're shot, they're shot. The others live with it, for better or worse.

[mtread]

No Mark Duggan didn't die with a gun on his person. He'd already thrown it away when he was shot. That was the evidence provided and the decision of the coroner and the jury. Now if you don't want to believe or trust the IPCC, coroner or jury then that's your right. Fortunately we have law.

[slappy]

All you people attacking the police about this and other shootings know nothing at all about what really happened, you were not present at any of them. I would love to see how some of you would react  when put in the same position as these police are, no matter how much training they recieve the real thing must be terrifying.
How many police have lost their lives in the line of duty, doing a thankless job for an ungrateful population?

[VNA - BMW Wank]

All you people attacking the police about this and other shootings know nothing at all about what really happened, you were not present at any of them.

Indeed it took over 25 years to get the truth on Hillsbourgh. 

Still no inquiry on Orgreve.  The police destroyed many men's lives during the miners stike.  They acted like a private army.

Perhaps if people don't trust the police, then maybe, just maybe it's down the the many many times they have operated outside of the law.

Aye as if they are the biggest gang in town.

[mtread]

Slappy did you watch the Mark Duggan documentary? If you had you would know what really happened. No I wouldn't want to do the police's job. But police marksmen are all volunteers, and they are highly trained. They have to follow rules, but then again they are human and make mistakes. What they mustn't do is lie about it.

[pilninggas]

All you people attacking the police about this and other shootings know nothing at all about what really happened, you were not present at any of them.

Indeed it took over 25 years to get the truth on Hillsbourgh. 

Still no inquiry on Orgreve.  The police destroyed many men's lives during the miners stike.  They acted like a private army.

Perhaps if people don't trust the police, then maybe, just maybe it's down the the many many times they have operated outside of the law.

Aye as if they are the biggest gang in town.

The flipside is all the coppers killed or maimed in the line of duty off of the top of my head Ronan Kerr, Keith Blakelock, Yvonne Fletcher, Fiona Bone, Ian Broadhurst, Chris Roberts and Stephen Jones (driven over by a thug near here). It's easy to call them a private army, but it's a tough job and they are at the front line of what can be quite a challenging boundary between order and lawlessness. Those poor coppers shot in Greater Manchester weren't a gang they were just 2 WPCs trying to keep their community safe. I'll always side with the old-bill, most of us know a copper or two and they are putting themselves on offer everyday they work.

[pilninggas]

No Mark Duggan didn't die with a gun on his person. He'd already thrown it away when he was shot. That was the evidence provided and the decision of the coroner and the jury. Now if you don't want to believe or trust the IPCC, coroner or jury then that's your right. Fortunately we have law.

'He'd already thrown it away' and in the heat of the moment, how did the old-bill not know if he had another one up his sleeve or in his belt? I'm glad i'm unlikely to ever be in that position, but if I was I probably take no chances. If he'd never got involved in illegal firearms he may well still be alive. Just thank goodness he was never yours or my nextdoor neighbour.

[VNA - BMW Wank]

It's easy to call them a private army, but it's a tough job and they are at the front line of what can be quite a challenging boundary between order and lawlessness.

I did not call the police a private army.  But they did appear often during the miners strike to be acting as a private army, inciting violence and acting against the ordinary people they are supposed to serve.  They destoryed a great many innocent people's lives during that dispute. 

Indeed I don't know what happened in this instance, and I do hope the police got it right.

But unfortunately for the police, and very much so for the many good and proffesional officers etc within the service, is that the history of the force and it's often poor decisions, wrongful actions and charges inevitably undermines public trust in the force as a whole. 

I'll always side with the old-bill

I believe in justice, not blind alligence.  The police like all of us, should (generally) abide by the law.

[tommyardin]

No Mark Duggan didn't die with a gun on his person. He'd already thrown it away when he was shot. That was the evidence provided and the decision of the coroner and the jury. Now if you don't want to believe or trust the IPCC, coroner or jury then that's your right. Fortunately we have law.

'He'd already thrown it away' and in the heat of the moment, how did the old-bill not know if he had another one up his sleeve or in his belt? I'm glad i'm unlikely to ever be in that position, but if I was I probably take no chances. If he'd never got involved in illegal firearms he may well still be alive. Just thank goodness he was never yours or my next door neighbour

You would not want to borrow his torque wrench and forget to return it. 

[mtread]

how did the old-bill not know if he had another one up his sleeve or in his belt?

They didn't. But their intelligence said that he was transporting one gun on behalf of another criminal, and it must have been seen to have been thrown away. The video and other evidence in the documentary showed that. Anyway, if they were allowed to shoot everybody who 'might have a gun', there would be dead bodies all over the place.


Anyway, to make my point again, I'm not suggesting that this latest one or the previous fatalities were shot on purpose without reason. What the police must do is follow their own clear rules of engagement and not lie to cover up when they don't.

[pilninggas]

I'll always side with the old-bill

I believe in justice, not blind alligence.  The police like all of us, should (generally) abide by the law.


I'd side with the old-bill, it's not allegiance. I'd side with Arsenal if they are playing Chelsea, but my allegiances lie elsewhere. Most coppers have scrupples, must smack dealers don't even have basic morality.

[pilninggas]

how did the old-bill not know if he had another one up his sleeve or in his belt?

They didn't. But their intelligence said that he was transporting one gun on behalf of another criminal, and it must have been seen to have been thrown away. The video and other evidence in the documentary showed that. Anyway, if they were allowed to shoot everybody who 'might have a gun', there would be dead bodies all over the place.


Anyway, to make my point again, I'm not suggesting that this latest one or the previous fatalities were shot on purpose without reason. What the police must do is follow their own clear rules of engagement and not lie to cover up when they don't.

I can't imagine any operational briefing where plod are given intel that they consider cast-iron. As I said put in that position with no idea if there is another gun about his person, any false moves might be very definitive.

I can't excuse the deceit, seeing as plod is now under massive scrutiny perhaps instead of changing facts they stick to the exact details. I hope that they don't get hung out to dry by the judiciary though.

[Bretty]

To be fair, I don't think 'the police' do themselves any favours. Apparently there were no cameras in any of the cars or on any of the policemen. They really don't like being filmed during these operations do they.

[slappy]

To be fair, I don't think 'the police' do themselves any favours. Apparently there were no cameras in any of the cars or on any of the policemen. They really don't like being filmed during these operations do they.

How would you like to be monitored constantly in a high stress environment where every word you say and every action you take is then picked through after the event by people with an agenda to put the blame on you?


As for Mark Duggan and every other criminal out there who has carried a gun or other weapon,they do it for a reason, to intimidate or to cause injury or death. If you carry a weapon then expect the police to do the same, or would people prefer unarmed police to have to face armed criminals?


Mistakes have been made by the police as they are not infallible, and they will make mistakes in the future but the witch hunts against them do not help in anyway, too many times they are vilified by people not with truth and justice and an open mind but by people with a political agenda.




As for them being the biggest gang in town, you had better hope it stays that way because when the drug dealing, murdering scum become the biggest gang who is going to hold an inquiry into them?

[locksmith]

My niece has recently passed her firearms course with the Met.

She'd fekkinn shoot me so any scumbags dont stand a chance

[maddog04]

lew, apologies ref your family but it was a general sweeping statement in reply to your answer ie if it was Your (as in the "Royal Your") family then I think most people would be looking for answers, especially as we're all law abiding but I could've phrased it better

The coroner in the Duggan programme dismissed his ability to throw the weapon due to injuries sustained to his arm though its possible he threw it en route before leaving the car but 3 different cops all gave conflicting evidence as to they all found the gun and the gun was in 3 different places. The coroner more or less called them liars. What is strange given their high training is that the ammo they're using is not suitable or the cop chose the wrong weapon to fire.
He was that close to Duggan that the bullet from his "rifle" passed straight through and hit his colleague behind Duggan, miraculously lodging in his radio but cop 2 thought he'd been shot and dropped into shock. For me, this is a wrong tactic and maybe a pistol should've been used or a lighter round. Imagine the outcry if the 2nd cop or a member of the public had died due to the bullet travelling on. Its a balance of stopping power v bullet trajectory (the idea being the bullet stays within the body but has the impact to take down the target without going through the target and continuing...hope that makes sense....Police marksmen have the ability on their range simulator to see the person drop then watch the trajectory/path of the round eg if a cop opens up in an airport, they can see the consequences of a rogue round in a built up area)
There was an innocent guy in London a few years back with a table/chair leg in a carrier bag and someone blew it in as a man with a gun, he was shot dead and uproar followed. Look at the cool response from the armed cops when those 2 cunts had killed Lee Rigby, they charged the Police and the Police (must've been shitting it) took their legs out. A calm operator doesn't have to shoot to kill,
I'm all for taking out the baddies but unless its done legally we'll just turn into a South American state where Police death squads operate

[BBROWN1664]

Many years ago (before Dun Blane) I held a firearms licence and had a couple of pistols. One of these was a S&W .357 Magnum.
Around the same time I worked at Gatwick airport and had to attend an anti-terror training session at the police station. This was when airports were one of the few places you would openly see armed police. During the session they talked about the weapons they used and the ammunition. Their advise at the time was if a situation occurred in the terminal buildings, get behind the plant pots as their ammunition was "soft" and low charge for the sole intention that it would not pass through the targeted terrorist and would splinter up causing massive internal injuries preventing the terrorist from doing anything other than dropping down dead.
I must admit, I did take the piss a little as my .357 was a genuine S&W model whereas the plod version was a cheap copy into which they were not allowed to use the magnum cartridges as they were deemed too powerful

the MP5 they used at the time, and derivatives are still used now, have a significant range/accuracy advantage over a pistol with a 6" barrel so are the favoured weapon and the one used at all times unless they run out of ammunition on the MP5. Unfortunately, even the low powered ammo they use can still pass straight through a body at close range and unless it hits a bone, exits out the read of the body in one piece. It's a risk worth taking unless you are in a densely populated situation.

[mtread]

Mark Duggan wasn't carrying the gun in order to harm others. He was a minor criminal transporting the gun from one major criminal to another. The police intelligence knew this. He was posing no threat and didn't deserve to be shot dead. What the inquest also discovered is that he was shot twice. Once in the arm, then again in the chest. The first shot disabled him, then why the second?
Yes being an armed policeman is very stressful and I wouldn't want to do it. But there are very good policemen and not so good ones, as in every job. It's the cover ups that's the problem.
Thank goodness for tasers, otherwise things would be a lot worse. Most of all, thank goodness we're not American!

[BBROWN1664]

Always "double tap" incase the first one doesn't do the intended job.

[darrsi]

I was gonna say can you imagine being a policeman in a country where civilians are allowed to carry guns, that's gotta be a nightmare, yet it still doesn't seem to stop the crime rate at all.

[maddog04]

BB, I never got my licence as Dunblane ended pistol ownership but was close to buying a Colt Python 6" .357 magnum. I've shot various pistols privately then rifles in the TA and was close to a few SF guys and like you I'm switched on to ballistics. The MP5 is a great gun but when you're shooting yer mate as well as a suspect then you have to wonder

[Bretty]

This is me with a magnum three-fifty-seven.
I spent a lot of time working in Chicago and regularly played with guns, with many of my colleagues carrying guns all the time around the office.

[Bretty]

I think Mark Duggan was shot with a G36 -  5.55/45.


I would have thought an mp5 would have been easier to carry and shoot. I don't know why they would use the G36?!