Would the UK ever "revolt"

[gaudinho's stolen car]

The term unarmed is subjective in some cases

In this case the term means that he was unarmed.

The IPCC stated that a loaded Bruni BBM blank-firing pistol converted to fire live rounds was recovered from the scene. The IPCC had commissioned tests on the pistol by the Forensic Science Service and had received advice that it was an illegal firearm.

This gun was found 14 feet from the scene in a sock, inside a shoe box.

The investigation into the death of Mark Duggan has found no forensic evidence that he was carrying a gun when he was shot dead by police on 4 August, the Guardian has learned.

A gun collected by Duggan earlier in the day was recovered 10 to 14 feet away, on the other side of a low fence from his body. He was killed outside the vehicle he was travelling in, after a police marksman fired twice.

The new details raise questions about the official version of events. The shooting triggered some of the worst riots in modern British history, which began in Tottenham, north London, in response to the treatment of the Duggan family. The investigation into Duggan's death is being carried out by the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC), but the Guardian has learned new details of the shooting, and a much more complex picture than first revealed is emerging.

On the day Duggan was shot, there is overwhelming evidence he had obtained a firearm, and there is video supporting that. But the investigation is considering whether Duggan had a weapon in his possession when he was shot dead by the police.

 

[nijinsky's fetlocks]

The term unarmed is subjective in some cases

Jean Charles De Menezes was not carrying a weapon of any kind.
I think most legal professionals would view this as unarmed.
Subjectivity doesn't come into it.
An innocent man was killed.
The enquiry may well establish the motivation as to why he was killed,but the fact that he was innocent and unarmed automatically means that it was an error of judgement.

I was talking about Mark Duggan not De Menezes
Its where this whole off shoot started from (excuse the pun)

Sorry,my bad.
Duggan was a criminal and a drug dealer,so I don't really lose much sleep over him.
De Menezes shooting was a disgrace where even the Met chief falsified a statement and lied under oath to protect the guilty.
Why that would come as any great shock to anyone I don't know.<br /><br />-- Tue Mar 20, 2012 12:20 pm --<br /><br />

That does not answer the question.

Yes it does, they made a mistake and shot a man dead which supports my original point that police shouldn't be using live ammunition.

What should the police around Toulouse be carrying at the moment?

A string of onions?
A baguette?
Some escargots for lunch?
Ok - I give up - what is the answer?

 

[gaudinho's stolen car]

Jean Charles De Menezes was not carrying a weapon of any kind.
I think most legal professionals would view this as unarmed.
Subjectivity doesn't come into it.
An innocent man was killed.
The enquiry may well establish the motivation as to why he was killed,but the fact that he was innocent and unarmed automatically means that it was an error of judgement.

I was talking about Mark Duggan not De Menezes
Its where this whole off shoot started from (excuse the pun)

Sorry,my bad.
Duggan was a criminal and a drug dealer,so I don't really lose much sleep over him.
De Menezes shooting was a disgrace where even the Met chief falsified a statement and lied under oath to protect the guilty.
Why that would come as any great shock to anyone I don't know.

Perhaps we should have a scale identifying who can be shot by the police whilst unarmed. Paedophiles at the top, with criminals and drug dealers; wife beaters and football hooligans somewhere in the middle and people who have never committed a crime at the bottom?

 

[tommcfc]

the less powers the police have the better. bunch of braindead morons who are "just doing their job". there will never be a revolt in the UK while the police can arrest people people for 'an imminent breach of the peace', in other words, arrest before a 'crime' is even committed. governments have taken plenty of action to ensure their police force protect them and not the people who they are under oath to protect.

 

[pominoz]

Give or take the odd Brazilian electrician who looked fuck all like an al qaeda terrorist but got shot in the back at point blank range anyway.

What does an Al Qaeda terrorist look like ?

Shifty looking beardy Islamic types.
Usually reciting passages from the Qur'an.
Wearing a semtex belt.
Not South American.
They have a multicoloured poncho and play pan pipes,whilst wearing a sombrero.
See?
Totally different.

Oh, i see.

Here is an Islamic terrorist organization trained Aussie, he did'nt try to blend in with his terrorist mates, did he.

 

[BlueHammer85]

 

[nijinsky's fetlocks]

I was talking about Mark Duggan not De Menezes
Its where this whole off shoot started from (excuse the pun)

Sorry,my bad.
Duggan was a criminal and a drug dealer,so I don't really lose much sleep over him.
De Menezes shooting was a disgrace where even the Met chief falsified a statement and lied under oath to protect the guilty.
Why that would come as any great shock to anyone I don't know.

Perhaps we should have a scale identifying who can be shot by the police whilst unarmed. Paedophiles at the top, with criminals and drug dealers; wife beaters and football hooligans somewhere in the middle and people who have never committed a crime at the bottom?

There is a huge difference between those who have never committed a crime and those who simply have evaded justice.
As a poster with a fully stocked sex dungeon,you of all people should know this.
Seriously,in a perfect world the police would be 100% competent and not clueless or corrupt,and they would be acting on flawless information,and nobody would ever get shot.
Sadly,we don't live in such a world,and never will.
So please forgive me if I reserve the bulk of what little compassion is left in my cynical and world weary soul for those who don't have a criminal record as long as my arm who are known crack dealers,who kinda attract negative attention from the plods given their illegal choice of vocation.

 

[BoyBlue_1985]

 

[Josh Blue]

Surely the people would rise up and say No to war against Iran, whether USA and Israel be involved or not.

 

[BoyBlue_1985]

Surely the people would rise up and say No to war against Iran, whether USA and Israel be involved or not.

If you really believe that my friend then i hold out little hope for you coming back to the real world