November 2, 2006 by Nosemonkey
Leave a reply →
Duh! Of COURSE it’s an issue when a policeman does his job: it’s OUR fault when underprivileged and discriminated-against people commit crimes.
“The family of Jean Charles de Menezes expressed “shock and disbelief” that officers involved in the Stockwell shooting “had been handed back their guns as if nothing has happened”. ”
Couldn’t happen in Brazil. Were they coached?
This is a bit of a silly thread. These police men/women volunteer to be shooters. The police hierarchy are against any form of disciplinary or investigation when there is a whiff or suspicion of wrong-doing because it will discourage others from volunteering and they need them.
This particular man has now shot two innocent men, and yet he was “only doing his job”. How convenient that neither he nor his superiors are to be investigated. Meanwhile some of us are hoping that this particular individual might chose to unvolunteer himself from firearm duties.
It’s a sad day when neither the elected representatives of the people nor the law enforcement agencies are prepared to investigate whether an officer of the law who is carrying out firearms duties (and/or his superior officers) is fit for the job or not….
I’m not sure about the tactical circumstances in the Kent case(although I understand the victim was carrying a shotgun) but the guys who pulled the trigger on Menezes should not suffer for it. Under the circumstances, they had to do what they were told. The people in charge of planning the operation and giving the shoot order, on the other hand, ought to be in the dock.
Incidentally, the cops who killed Harry Stanley ought to be in the dock: they were the ones making the shoot / don’t shoot decision, and they got it wrong (understandable if regrettable) then lied about it to a jury (not acceptable).