30 UK Police vs man armed with machete in the street.

Brookert said:
If you've got 30 officers to hand, why not use them?

They got the job done with no injuries to themselves or the offender = job well done
Click to expand...

Aside from the guy who decided to test out the pepper spray on himself to see if it was actually working.
 
lixxus said:
his behavior is shocking. I wonder what made him angry
Click to expand...

I heard he set his alarm on his iphone,it never went off and got up late.

fun.jpg
 
I guess numbers have a quality of there own.

The police no doubt have stab proofs on what have they got to worry about :D.
 
vonhelmet said:
30 people disarmed a man with a machete with no serious consequences?

That's called a result in my book.
Click to expand...

30 may be to many people to disarm one person but due to the severity of the situation I'm not suprised they didn't take any chances. Better to do things that way than wait for an armed unit to arrive and have the lunatic run a mock with a wkacking great knife on the streets.
 
simulatorman said:
What like beating up people or shooting them? I’d rather have our police than any other in the world. A job well done.
Click to expand...

Don't necessary would have to do neither. 1 or 2 officers to distract his attention, 3 to take him down. Other 25 officers off to deal with other crimes.
 
malachi said:
Don't necessary would have to do neither. 1 or 2 officers to distract his attention, 3 to take him down. Other 25 officers off to deal with other crimes.
Click to expand...

It's very easy to say that sitting at your PC. We don't know what was tried before they just contained him, the man's strength/hardiness, we don't really know much. We certainly don't know if the extra officers were neglecting other crimes to attend this one. It's all conjecture from you.
 
sniffy said:
It's very easy to say that sitting at your PC. We don't know what was tried before they just contained him, the man's strength/hardiness, we don't really know much. We certainly don't know if the extra officers were neglecting other crimes to attend this one. It's all conjecture from you.
Click to expand...

I'm not a police officer myself but I do work for a police force with my job role and this incident happened to be a conversation between a few people.
Some do agree that 30 officers in this incident was too much and could have been dealt with by much less officers. Also, yes better safe than sorry so 30 officers for this can be justified but (and less hope it doesnt) if this happened on a regular basis, would sending out 30 officers be suitable to sort this out each time? Someone higher would have to rethink the strategy on how to deal with this situation, possibly without sending out so many officers to the same seen.
 
malachi said:
I'm not a police officer myself but I do work for a police force with my job role and this incident happened to be a conversation between a few people.
Some do agree that 30 officers in this incident was too much and could have been dealt with by much less officers. Also, yes better safe than sorry so 30 officers for this can be justified but (and less hope it doesnt) if this happened on a regular basis, would sending out 30 officers be suitable to sort this out each time? Someone higher would have to rethink the strategy on how to deal with this situation, possibly without sending out so many officers to the same seen.
Click to expand...

It can often take 6-7 or even 10 officers to get control of a determined unarmed offender, especially if they're on drink or drugs. What you suggested in your earlier post is just putting officers at unnecessary risk.
 
Werewolf said:
I think I read on a police blog/site that they did use one, twice but as you say it's not filly effective (besides anything else, I think some clothing can interfere with it).

I think they did a great job in containing him, keeping the public safe, and then arresting him without anyone getting seriously hurt.
The police get a hell of a lot of usually pointless flack, but this shows the lengths they can/will go to in order to safely detain a serious threat when they are able to.

I hope the officers involved get a pat on the back for a job very well done.
Click to expand...

Sounds about right.

Interesting point about the clothes. Just how piercing are these tazers? I mean, could one peirce your skin deep enough to hit an organ? If not then surely any clothing bar a tshirt is going to stop one?

Pretty much means you are stabbing someone and then electrocuting them.
 
Disgusting behaviour by the Police.
I hope the Council sue them for damage to the wheelie bin.

Anyway, anybody who has ever watched a cop show will see that it normally takes 6 burly coppers to take one 8 stone bloke down so 30 coppers for a 20 stone machete wielding thug is about right.
 
dmpoole said:
Disgusting behaviour by the Police.
I hope the Council sue them for damage to the wheelie bin.

Anyway, anybody who has ever watched a cop show will see that it normally takes 6 burly coppers to take one 8 stone bloke down so 30 coppers for a 20 stone machete wielding thug is about right.
Click to expand...

Are we to presume you know this from your own experiences as well? *points at sig*
 
a bit un-ethical but i'd have to say, where our US buddies differ, is he'd have been shot, tasered, or just driven at. Are we doing something wrong ?
 
robz21 said:
a bit un-ethical but i'd have to say, where our US buddies differ, is he'd have been shot, tasered, or just driven at. Are we doing something wrong ?
Click to expand...

Almost definitely in the US they'd have either used their cars to try and pin him against a wall or similiar first if the opportunity arose and failing that shot him if he didn't pretty much immediatly surrender - and given the potential danger to the public I don't have a problem with that approach.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom