Soldato
- Joined
- 12 Aug 2005
- Posts
- 3,331
- Location
- Orpington.
Lawful killing of Mark Duggan
- Thread starter thedoc46
- Start date
Ok probably be flamed for this, but sick to death of all the namby pamby skirting around the issues that seem to happen all the time.
Remember the court of law jury had all the evidence, all you hear is sound bites on the TV or radio.
1. He was a known problem with history
2. Intelligence was obtained he had a gun
3. He had a gun when stopped, one can only assume it was for criminal intend why else would he have one
4. He was given plenty of warnings and failed to comply
5. He was shot when he made threatening moves having known to have a gun.
6. The officer acted within the law.
This is what the Jury decided in our over careful criminal system.
No matter what the outcome was, the locals shouting about the outcome of the enquiry (mainly black) will never accept this and will claim racism etc.
Let's get this right, it is fine for the youngster / gangsters to go around shooting each other and innocents, but if the police dare to stop an armed man and shot him when he fails to act to instructions and acts threateningly it is not ok ?
At the end of the day, he was involved in the wrong side of the law / community and had a gun on our streets for criminal intent.
Well done to the police and the community should look at themselves rather than the police.
As for his mother and what to tell his kids when they ask why their daddy is dead (on radio 5 live). Simple. Tell them he was a bad man and was punished for it.
Another typical example of run down inner city communities wanting to blame everyone but themselves.
Remember the court of law jury had all the evidence, all you hear is sound bites on the TV or radio.
1. He was a known problem with history
2. Intelligence was obtained he had a gun
3. He had a gun when stopped, one can only assume it was for criminal intend why else would he have one
4. He was given plenty of warnings and failed to comply
5. He was shot when he made threatening moves having known to have a gun.
6. The officer acted within the law.
This is what the Jury decided in our over careful criminal system.
No matter what the outcome was, the locals shouting about the outcome of the enquiry (mainly black) will never accept this and will claim racism etc.
Let's get this right, it is fine for the youngster / gangsters to go around shooting each other and innocents, but if the police dare to stop an armed man and shot him when he fails to act to instructions and acts threateningly it is not ok ?
At the end of the day, he was involved in the wrong side of the law / community and had a gun on our streets for criminal intent.
Well done to the police and the community should look at themselves rather than the police.
As for his mother and what to tell his kids when they ask why their daddy is dead (on radio 5 live). Simple. Tell them he was a bad man and was punished for it.
Another typical example of run down inner city communities wanting to blame everyone but themselves.
Last edited:
I concur.
If only the thread could be closed now, the inevitable mindless bickering and naïve, ignorant police bashing is a waste of bandwidth tbh.
Lets get that right, its fine for a black male to do this
(not racist just anti people screaming racism at every chance).I completely agree with everything else you said.
- Joined
- 25 Apr 2009
- Posts
- 2,780
- Location
- Sidcup
Just when PS4 consoles were coming back in stock...
Keep an eye on Gumtree and I'm sure you'll find a few lol.
Soldato
- Joined
- 29 Jul 2004
- Posts
- 7,166
If anyone has a handgun then i'm 100% behind any level of police force to remove it and them from the street.
Don't be silly, its cold wet and windy and we all know they are only fair weather rioters.
Soldato
- Joined
- 12 Aug 2005
- Posts
- 3,331
- Location
- Orpington.
Lets get that right, its fine for a black male to do this
I completely agree with everything else you said.
I wanted to put that as it is mainly true (operation trident is it ?) but I knew it would probably cause outcry by some. It is a fact that the black on black gun crime in London is bad, but because of the police it is much better.
How can these people moan when one of these gang members is shot dead whilst in procession of a gun that has and would probably be used in yet another black on black murder or even worse innocent's
So he didn't have it in his hand when he was shot, what a shame but the Jury and most sane people believe the firearms officer certainly thought he had and would not have shot him if he did not think he or others were in danger.
In my eyes result. One scum bag and one firearm off the street for good. Just plenty more to go. Unfortunately the police's job is now so much harder and guess who will be the 1st to complain when another little girl is shot dead in the cross fire ? Yes of course the locals complaining right now. Idiots.
Last edited:
This. ^^^^^^^
Listening to radio 5., yes I'm that old, I couldn't believe what I was hearing, if he had a gun he was off to do no good with said gun. Just one less scumbag on the streets..
Because hindsight is not the standard employed in these things. How were the police supposed to know for definite that the previously armed criminal is now suddenly unarmed and definitely pointing something harmless at them? The jury accepted unanimously that Duggan had a gun on the day, and that the police did not see him dispose of it.
What we know now is not what the officers in the situation knew at the time, which is why hindsight cannot enter into the decision.
Precisely the police can only go on the information they have been given. Given his priors and aggressive nature the suspicion of the firearm being on his person is already at his highest. If the police had given him the benefit of doubt then we could be looking at a whole other case of police shooting gunman on the run. (In my opinion a hell of a lot worse to lose someone who put their lives/body on the line for a crap wage than some drug dealing thug). (if thats too un-pc for forums please just delete the comment rather than ban me mods I'm sorry
)The riots really put the icing on the cake! (thats another story though
).
Soldato
- Joined
- 27 Apr 2011
- Posts
- 5,607
- Location
- UK
not only one scumbag less, but the taxpayer doesnt have to pay for his accommodation!
If you want to mess about with guns, be prepared for the consequences.
Police were right IMO
If you want to mess about with guns, be prepared for the consequences.
Police were right IMO
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 27 Sep 2004
- Posts
- 25,821
- Location
- Glasgow
I'm aware you're asking a rhetorical question but the reason this proceeded is because an inquest is mandatory in such circumstances e.g. a sudden or violent death. It's normal to have an inquest into police shootings.
Because the police don't often shoot people dead.. If they had just winged him it would wouldn't have caused so much uproar.
End of the day if your wandering around armed, you can't really be surprised if you get shot.
Knowing he was armed, and knowing the police probably had a good idea, he had a choice of how to behave when stopped and by the looks the police acted appropriately given the situation.
Moral of the story, if you have that kind of history, don't go around armed and acting like that, because you'll get shot.
Yup, it has to be done as these idiots protesting the result of this outcome would scream and shout even louder if we didn't.
The problem is that each time the police are called to explain their actions the harder their job becomes with more and more restrictions.
But I do agree that the police should be accountable. No way would I want a China style police in the UK. But common sense must prevail which certain members of the Tottenham community obviously don't have.