CMS Author Craig Vecchione Posted July 22, 2005 CMS Author Posted July 22, 2005 www.bbc.co.ukLondon police shot a man on the subway at the Stockwell Station today....supposedly "Asian" according to BBC, or Indian or Pakistani per other reports. One witness said they hotly pursued him onto the train, he tripped or was shoved, and they shot him point blank 5 times. He was wearing a very heavy coat. One account said nothing was visible on him, another said he had a "bomb belt" with wires.
Members Perfessor Posted July 22, 2005 Members Posted July 22, 2005 I heard this on shortwave this morning. More of this is coming I'm sure. I was really glad to hear John Howard's comments on how these attacks aren't Iraq related because they started years before Iraq. And Tony Blair saying that those responsible are responsible, not people in the West responding to terrorism.
Members NeonVomit Posted July 22, 2005 Members Posted July 22, 2005 Let's wait and see what the gov't say afterwards when things clear up. Im guessing the Metropolitan Police are in no mood to negotiate after what's happened.
Members sheepdog Posted July 22, 2005 Members Posted July 22, 2005 how did the London Police shoot him? I thought they didn't carry guns. Not trying to start something, just curious.
Members beam Posted July 22, 2005 Members Posted July 22, 2005 Originally posted by Craigv www.bbc.co.ukLondon police shot a man on the subway at the Stockwell Station today....supposedly "Asian" according to BBC, or Indian or Pakistani per other reports. One witness said they hotly pursued him onto the train, he tripped or was shoved, and they shot him point blank 5 times. He was wearing a very heavy coat. One account said nothing was visible on him, another said he had a "bomb belt" with wires. Heard this on the radio this morning, seems odd to me that no one can really verify if he had anything or not... Originally posted by Craigv www.bbc.co.uksupposedly "Asian" according to BBC, or Indian or Pakistani per other reports. ...*checks map*yup, I'm pretty sure both of those countries are still part of Asia
Members Jonny Five Posted July 22, 2005 Members Posted July 22, 2005 I think they have guns that they can hand out in times of emergency. Also, there are a number of officers in the UK who do actively carry guns (but i had heard the number was around 1,000 for the entire nation at any given time). I'd assume it's increased with the bombings.
Members sheepdog Posted July 22, 2005 Members Posted July 22, 2005 Originally posted by beam ... *checks map* yup, I'm pretty sure both of those countries are still part of Asia gotta love the geographically challenged... Originally posted by Jonny Five I think they have guns that they can hand out in times of emergency. Also, there are a number of officers in the UK who do actively carry guns (but i had heard the number was around 1,000 for the entire nation at any given time). I'd assume it's increased with the bombings. that would make sense to hand out guns right now. wasn't sure.
Members NeonVomit Posted July 22, 2005 Members Posted July 22, 2005 Yeah, in times of hightened alert they carry weapons.
CMS Author Craig Vecchione Posted July 22, 2005 Author CMS Author Posted July 22, 2005 Originally posted by beam *checks map* yup, I'm pretty sure both of those countries are still part of Asia Originally posted by sheepdog gotta love the geographically challenged... Might wanna back off a click or two on the sarcasm.The differences in description lie in the target audience. BBC wrote Asian, the other source, which was Comcast, wrote Indian or Pakistani. Regarding physical appearance, in the US, to describe someone as "Asian" typically is the equivalent of describing as "oriental", for example, China, Japan, Cambodia, Korea, etc. Asian is never used here to describe someone native to India or immediately surrounding nations.
Members beam Posted July 22, 2005 Members Posted July 22, 2005 Originally posted by Craigv in the US, to describe someone as "Asian" typically is the equivalent of describing as "oriental", for example, China, Japan, Cambodia, Korea, etc. Asian is never used here to describe someone native to India or immediately surrounding nations. Typically yes, but it's still wrong.One of my pet peeves is all.It's supposed to be "East Asian" if you want to be specific about people from China, Japan, Korea, Southeast Asia, etc."South Asian" takes care of the Indian subcontinent generally. Also, the middle east is technically Asia, so it's not liek that narrows things down any. But yes, you were right, the sarcasm was a bit much, it just bugs me is all.
Members bassment zombie Posted July 22, 2005 Members Posted July 22, 2005 Originally posted by beam Heard this on the radio this morning, seems odd to me that no one can really verify if he had anything or not... Witness' account: Mark Whitby said: "I was sitting on the train... I heard a load of noise, people saying, 'Get out, get down'."I saw an Asian guy. He ran on to the train, he was hotly pursued by three plain clothes officers, one of them was wielding a black handgun."He half tripped... they pushed him to the floor and basically unloaded five shots into him," he told BBC News 24."As [the suspect] got onto the train I looked at his face, he looked sort of left and right, but he basically looked like a cornered rabbit, a cornered fox."He looked absolutely petrified and then he sort of tripped, but they were hotly pursuing him, [they] couldn't have been any more than two or three feet behind him at this time and he half tripped and was half pushed to the floor and the policeman nearest to me had the black automatic pistol in his left hand."He held it down to the guy and unloaded five shots into him."He [the suspect] had a baseball cap on and quite a sort of thickish coat - it was a coat you'd wear in winter, sort of like a padded jacket. "He might have had something concealed under there, I don't know. But it looked sort of out of place with the sort of weather we've been having, the sort of hot humid weather.
Members Bonoman Posted July 22, 2005 Members Posted July 22, 2005 For the London cop's sake I hope this wasn't just some dude who was late for work...
Members fretless Posted July 22, 2005 Members Posted July 22, 2005 Originally posted by Bonoman For the London cop's sake I hope this wasn't just some dude who was late for work... yeah its a bad time to be running from the cops , with a backpack .
CMS Author Craig Vecchione Posted July 22, 2005 Author CMS Author Posted July 22, 2005 Originally posted by beam Typically yes, but it's still wrong.One of my pet peeves is all.It's supposed to be "East Asian" if you want to be specific about people from China, Japan, Korea, Southeast Asia, etc."South Asian" takes care of the Indian subcontinent generally.Also, the middle east is technically Asia, so it's not liek that narrows things down any.But yes, you were right, the sarcasm was a bit much, it just bugs me is all. What does? My point was that the description was made more specific in the US media (or obtained from a different source than the BBC's account) likely because the term "Asian" would have a different meaning here...a meaning insisted upon by US East Asians themselves. They don't like to be called "Oriental" and decided Asian was their thing.
Members DrSquirley Posted July 22, 2005 Members Posted July 22, 2005 Either way, he was chased by undercovered cops, only one of which theyre saying had a hand gun and killed to avoid any other possible outcomes. Sir Ian Blair gave press conference a bit ago but didnt really let us know anything that the press hasnt gotten a hold of. Theyre not yet saying whether this guy is linked to anything yesterday (thurs) or two weeks prior. He did however replease cc images of 4 people who theyre urgently trying to track. -Alex
CMS Author Craig Vecchione Posted July 22, 2005 Author CMS Author Posted July 22, 2005 Originally posted by Bonoman For the London cop's sake I hope this wasn't just some dude who was late for work... My money's on this being a good shoot. Heavy coat in the subway in July in a hot spell even for London. Sure to get attention of a cop. Running from them the way they described doesn't sound like a guy late for work unless the job's blowing things up. But it is indeed way too early to tell or to judge anyone.
Members beam Posted July 22, 2005 Members Posted July 22, 2005 Originally posted by Bonoman For the London cop's sake I hope this wasn't just some dude who was late for work... Yea...that would be bad.
Members Perfessor Posted July 22, 2005 Members Posted July 22, 2005 Or he was the "naked tickler" from Florida.
Members neilster Posted July 22, 2005 Members Posted July 22, 2005 Originally posted by Bonoman For the London cop's sake I hope this wasn't just some dude who was late for work... they're used to dealing with terrorists in London (IRA) so the cops there don't fool around
Members bholder Posted July 22, 2005 Members Posted July 22, 2005 Originally posted by fretless yeah its a bad time to be running from the cops , with a backpack . No backpack, with a padded winter coat, at the height of summer. Sounds fishy to me. Still, you'd think they'd read him his rights and cuff him or something.
Members Darkstorm Posted July 22, 2005 Members Posted July 22, 2005 The police did the right thing in killing him. News story I heard said head shot. Cause head shot unlike body shots take out the central nervous system immediately and thus the shot peep cant react. A person fatally shot but with nervous system still operating can still pull a trigger for gun or bomb. For example, if I fatally stab you, in most cases if your a determined person, you can still fight for up to a minute. In std military practice you taught to shoot to middle of mass twice doubleshot. Cause you dont have the time to see if the first shot did the job. A good marksmen goes for head shot cause ones enough and it gives the shooter positive Id of who they are shooting. The latter being the other reason special forces peeps normally do head shots whenever possible. The suspect in this case had been persued by the police. He knew he was being persued by police. All his actions appeared to be that of someone desperate to get to their target to blow up a bomb. Which was reasonably believed to be under coat. Suspect had opportunity to surender. Instead suspect acted to get away and activate a bomb. Reasonable conclusion. Fatally shooting him was wise & correct action.
Members mrcrow Posted July 23, 2005 Members Posted July 23, 2005 A Scotland Yard statement read: "We believe we now know the identity of the man shot at Stockwell Underground station by police on Friday 22nd July 2005, although he is still subject to formal identification. "We are now satisfied that he was not connected with the incidents of Thursday 21st July 2005."being dead he cant either be connected with any future incidentsits bad news...and a form of terror from our side as well...
Members thelurker Posted July 23, 2005 Members Posted July 23, 2005 Here is the problem presented for police. If he is a bomber, and they don't shoot him, and he sets off the bomb, they're incompetent. If he's not a bomber, and they shoot him, they're fascist pigs. If he's a bomber and they shoot him, they may have saved 100's of lives, but they still didn't give him his "civil rights", so they're still fascist pigs. If he's not a bomber, and they don't shoot him, he sues them for harrassment, and they're still fascist pigs. With no winning option, they must decide where the least harm is. Good luck, Bobbies! By the way, while he may not have been involved in the last attack, was he maybe involved in the next one?
Members mrcrow Posted July 23, 2005 Members Posted July 23, 2005 his death could cause more trouble as an 'innocent' suicide
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.