Yeah, that's a good point... if he did have a bomb strapped to himself, blowing him up was probably the best thing to do.
On Sat, Jul 9, 2016 at 10:22 AM, Jeremy <[email protected]> wrote: > My initial thoughts were that the police should probably not be blowing > people up with bombs. Then, I thought about it some more and I think it > may have been a genius move. Their negotiator had been talking with him. > It sounded to me like he was heavily armed, there was no way that they were > going to take him alive, and he was claiming to be strapped with bombs. He > made it clear that he intended to continue killing white cops. If he > really did have a bomb strapped to him there is no way to take him alive. > They had to make a decision between losing more lives attempting to do so, > or blowing the guy up with a robot bomb. Clearly, he was going to kill > more cops. Robot bomb is highly unconventional, but it definitely put a > stop to the killings. We are living in a time where people regularly strap > bombs to themselves and blow themselves up. I'm not sure how you deal with > that. > > On Sat, Jul 9, 2016 at 9:16 AM, [email protected] < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> Chuck, I agree with you. How they handled that situation didn't seem like >> the right way to handle it but at >> this point we don't know all the facts. Like you said, he could have said >> he had RF detonation abilities. >> But, during the press conference, the police commissioner said it was >> done to avoid injury to the officers >> in trying to get him out of there. But isn't that what SWAT teams do? >> Isn't that why we have them? Otherwise, >> the police could just go around blowing up buildings with the suspect. >> >> The other problem is, you lose the ability to interrogate him later. Just >> because he says he is a lone wolf, doesn't >> make it so. Could others have been involved? Was someone guiding him? >> We'll never know because of how >> it played out. >> >> On Sat, Jul 9, 2016 at 11:10 AM, <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> I understand the logic of that, but it appears they had him cornered. >>> And I realize he was supposedly saying things like he had deployed IEDs >>> and perhaps they thought he had RF detonation abilities etc. >>> >>> Where do you draw the line between the cops neutralizing a threat and >>> the cops giving all the full benefit of the law? >>> I guess confusion and disagreement as to where that line is - is what >>> got us here in the first place. >>> >>> *From:* Bill Prince <[email protected]> >>> *Sent:* Saturday, July 9, 2016 9:06 AM >>> *To:* [email protected] >>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] OT Philosophical question - WRT Dallas >>> >>> >>> I don't know the whole story, nor does anyone else on this list. >>> >>> My impression was that the guy wasn't really talking, and he'd already >>> shot a dozen officers (at least 3 or 4 fatally). At that point, I feel that >>> any means necessary to prevent more damage. >>> >>> Call it the nuclear option if you will. >>> >>> >>> >>> bp >>> <part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com> >>> >>> >>> On 7/9/2016 7:40 AM, Chuck McCown wrote: >>> >>> Why blow up a perp? >>> Why not keep talking? >>> Better to have him caged for the rest of his life IMHO. >>> >>> >>> >> >
