+- Fazer Owners Club - Unofficial (https://foc-u.co.uk/mybb)
+-- Forum: General (https://foc-u.co.uk/mybb/forumdisplay.php?fid=65)
+--- Forum: General (https://foc-u.co.uk/mybb/forumdisplay.php?fid=69)
+--- Thread: No sympathy for Gunmen (/showthread.php?tid=77172)
Re: No sympathy for Gunmen - slappy - 06-01-17
(06-01-17, 08:52 AM)Bretty link Wrote: 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?
Re: No sympathy for Gunmen - locksmith - 06-01-17
My niece has recently passed her firearms course with the Met.
She'd fekkinn shoot me so any scumbags dont stand a chance
Re: No sympathy for Gunmen - maddog04 - 06-01-17
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 :rolleyes
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
Re: No sympathy for Gunmen - BBROWN1664 - 06-01-17
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 :rollin
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.
Re: No sympathy for Gunmen - mtread - 06-01-17
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!
Re: No sympathy for Gunmen - BBROWN1664 - 06-01-17
Always "double tap" incase the first one doesn't do the intended job.
Re: No sympathy for Gunmen - darrsi - 06-01-17
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.
Re: No sympathy for Gunmen - maddog04 - 06-01-17
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
Re: No sympathy for Gunmen - Bretty - 06-01-17
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.
Re: No sympathy for Gunmen - Bretty - 06-01-17
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?!
Re: No sympathy for Gunmen - slappy - 06-01-17
(06-01-17, 12:08 PM)mtread link Wrote: Mark Duggan wasn't carrying the gun in order to harm others..
How do you know that for certain? He was carrying a gun, there was always the possibility that he was going to use it. If not why was it a replica that had been converted to fire live ammo?
Re: No sympathy for Gunmen - Bretty - 06-01-17
If you're interested in police marksmen, I've just read Tony Long's book which is quite an interesting read and covers many of the details around most of the high profile shootings.
Re: No sympathy for Gunmen - maddog04 - 06-01-17
Tony Long was on tv not long ago discussing his work, very interesting. He went public and got all sorts of crap off people
Re: No sympathy for Gunmen - mtread - 06-01-17
If he was going to use the gun, why did he throw it over the fence as he got out of the car?
Re: No sympathy for Gunmen - Oldgit - 06-01-17
the Minimum, the Maximum, and the Fuck I'm---C**T got what he deserved.
Re: No sympathy for Gunmen - pilninggas - 06-01-17
(06-01-17, 04:40 PM)mtread link Wrote: If he was going to use the gun, why did he throw it over the fence as he got out of the car?
Is this a serious post?
Also describing Duggan as a 'minor criminal' in a in earlier post is outrageous. Minor criminals commit minor crimes, carry a gun (with or without intent, and no legitimate reason) is serious.
Don't people have to be responsible for their actions anymore? Straight out of the Shami Chabrabati school of liberal apologism.
Re: No sympathy for Gunmen - tommyardin - 06-01-17
(06-01-17, 06:08 PM)pilninggas link Wrote: [quote author=mtread link=topic=21619.msg249149#msg249149 date=1483717252]
If he was going to use the gun, why did he throw it over the fence as he got out of the car?
Is this a serious post?
Also describing Duggan as a 'minor criminal' in a in earlier post is outrageous. Minor criminals commit minor crimes, carry a gun (with or without intent, and no legitimate reason) is serious.
Don't people have to be responsible for their actions anymore? Straight out of the Shami Chabrabati school of liberal apologism.
[/quote]
I agree with the last statement by pilninggas.
I don’t know the details of the crime or the specific offence/case.
If you carry a gun how is any police officer meant to know what your intentions are.
Even if it’s a replica gun how is the officer meant to know.
We are not talking school playground stuff here, the police put their life on the line, he or she possibly has a spouse and children at home who love and rely on him. They may also only have a second to make the decision.
Point a gun or verbally threaten to shoot a policeman with a gun and expect to get shot, if you not prepared to accept that you will probably die, don’t carry a gun.
It’s not unlike the sh-t you hear on the TV News most weeks of the year:
This is hypothetical by the way, I have not done it yet.
He strangled his wife when the state of his mind was emotionally unstable, upset and confused or he was in a state shock, well he may have been emotionally unhinged, confused, or his mind in a state of shock, or any other term you might like to use, but, he still strangled her, he took her life, he is guilty of the crime.
It might seemed hard because we don’t know how he had been (Hypothetically) provoked or what she had done but he still took her life.
Pilingggas said “Don't people have to be responsible for their actions anymore?”and he is spot on.
Re: No sympathy for Gunmen - Graham53 - 06-01-17
I agree with tommy, if you carry a gun or get in a car with people with guns then you have made a choice and that choice is you risk getting shot by firearms officers.
Flip it around and if that person went on to shoot an innocent child , the outcry would be that police are not tackling gun crime.
I worked in south London as a bus driver and had a gun pointed at me and knives more than once and I can tell you it's fucking scary and the area I worked (Stockwell ) had a child get shot and crippled in crossfire from a gangs shooting at each other.
Gun crime is not something to be treated with mamby pamby attitudes
Re: No sympathy for Gunmen - mtread - 06-01-17
Yes it was a serious post. Obviously I was the only one who watched the documentary. He was being used as a gun courier. Serious criminals use them all the time because they know they are under observation. Often they use kids. They're not major criminals, and more than likely don't even know how to use it. Watch the documentary and then you'll know the facts.
Re: No sympathy for Gunmen - tommyardin - 06-01-17
(06-01-17, 08:38 PM)Graham53 link Wrote: I agree with tommy, if you carry a gun or get in a car with people with guns then you have made a choice and that choice is you risk getting shot by firearms officers.
Flip it around and if that person went on to shoot an innocent child , the outcry would be that police are not tackling gun crime.
I worked in south London as a bus driver and had a gun pointed at me and knives more than once and I can tell you it's fucking scary and the area I worked (Stockwell ) had a child get shot and crippled in crossfire from a gangs shooting at each other.
Gun crime is not something to be treated with mamby pamby attitudes
Hear! hear! two other voices of reason.