Altercation at Terminal 2

[abu13]

For what its worth he should have kicked him in the bollocks as well.

 

[Mr Kobayashi]

I'd say showing enough restraint to stop himself shooting the **** is sufficient self control

He had a taser in his arm when he booted him. If he felt he needed to he could have used that instead, maybe he didn't because he checked and was told that he'd already been tasered.

Just because he didn't go full Falling Down doesn't mean he exercised sufficient self-control.

 

[Mr Kobayashi]

If you sir, we're being attacked by 3 or 4 people and felt threatened and did what the police officer did in this situation you wouldn't be in risk of a charge, you would have rightfully and willfully defended YOURSELF.

Indeed, and I may even go further than the law allows. But I'd also admit I wasn't cut out for policing if I did.

 

[Mr Kobayashi]

Don’t make them out to be victims-they are vicious thugs.

I didn't use the word victim. You've put words in my mouth. I've done the opposite of taking sides, opponent isn't a loaded term.

 

[bert38]

He had a taser in his arm when he booted him. If he felt he needed to he could have used that instead, maybe he didn't because he checked and was told that he'd already been tasered.

Just because he didn't go full Falling Down doesn't mean he exercised sufficient self-control.

I think judging him for his actions at that very point is incredibly harsh-last time I checked, training doesn’t involved getting thumped in the head numerous times and seeing all of your colleagues attacked.

You can argue he needs to justify his actions, and all use of force is recorded and assessed, and he may even need to do so in court, but I can’t see how anyone can seriously question his ability to perform his role when faced with such hostility.

If he’d gone down after the first punch or two and the police been overwhelmed you’d have applauded his restraint?

 

[Mr Kobayashi]

I think judging him for his actions at that very point is incredibly harsh-last time I checked, training doesn’t involved getting thumped in the head numerous times and seeing all of your colleagues attacked.

You can argue he needs to justify his actions, and all use of force is recorded and assessed, and he may even need to do so in court, but I can’t see how anyone can seriously question his ability to perform his role when faced with such hostility.

Isn't that the point, if he can't keep a lid on it when the shit hits the fan then he just isn't cut out for it.

 

[bert38]

I didn't use the word victim. You've put words in my mouth. I've done the opposite of taking sides, opponent isn't a loaded term.

Opponent makes it sound like you believe it’s supposed to some kind of fair fight? The police were simply trying to arrest him regarding an allegation of assault.

 

[bert38]

Isn't that the point, if he can't keep a lid on it when the shit hits the fan then he just isn't cut out for it.

But you want officers to carry firearms and to protect us but you also want them to be devoid of emotion, getting scared or reacting to shocking violence?

Those people don’t exist.

 

[Drewmanc]

Isn't that the point, if he can't keep a lid on it when the shit hits the fan then he just isn't cut out for it.

For the last time pal, he is allowed to use excessive force to keep hold of that weapon. This isn't a case of a fight 1 v1 or 2v1 or 3v1 it's an officer of the law controlling a situation that should never have happened. It most certainly 100% never happened if the perpetrators of the incident complied immediately and didn't act like disgusting inhuman animals.

 

[Mr Kobayashi]

Opponent makes it sound like you believe it’s supposed to some kind of fair fight? The police were simply trying to arrest him regarding an allegation of assault.

Change it to suspect then. Same point applies, police aren't allowed to get in last digs, that e.g, a householder might get away with against a burglar.