Gee, I don't know, maybe incapacitate him? Maybe coordinate a way to keep him out of the train station, since they should have been able to expect such behavior out of people exiting a house that they had under surveillance for possible terrorists? Maybe check his background when he went into the house? They had to have seen him go in. Maybe do auditory surveillance on the house to see what he talked about while he was inside? The technology is available for that.
We aren't talking about protecting the rights of terrorists. We are talking about protecting the rights of non-terrorists. The guy they shot in the head was NOT a terrorist. They eventually arrested a person in that neighborhood but from a different house. How was that guy supposed to know that the police were surveilling that house, especially since it was the wrong house? You have no idea why he was wearing a coat-- maybe he had chills, maybe his wife made him put it on when he left, maybe he's accustomed to even warmer weather and was chilly at the temperature. He ran from police. Lots of people do that. Is that a reason for him to die? Since he was innocent there was no way for him to even know that he was a suspected terrorist. Neither would you. You say the police identified themselves as such, although I've read at least ten articles on this and I've seen nothing that said that they identified themselves as police. I've been specifically looking for information regarding that, so if you know of some, please point them out. I have also not seen any reports that they were examining their procedures. In fact, the articles that I have found imply that they have no intention of examining their procedures. http://www.themoscowtimes.com/stories/2005/07/25/251.html "Blair defended the officers' shooting to kill, saying such action only applied when lives were believed to be at risk. "'I am very aware that minority communities are talking about a shoot-to-kill policy; it's only a shoot to kill in order to protect policy,' he said. "'It is drawn from experience from other countries, including Sri Lanka. The only way to deal with this is to shoot to the head,' Blair said. 'There is no point in shooting at someone's chest because that is where the bomb is likely to be,' Blair said." They had him pinned on the ground and shot before they shot him in the head. There were multiple officers involved. He was incapacitated before they shot him in the head, but there are other ways to inconpacitate people and other ways to keep them from being a threat. I'm not saying that the police should have their hands tied when attempting to protect against terrorists. But they very clearly could have handled this in a way that did not involve killing him and they should be required to have some more proof before shooting someone in the head. That's not for the protection of the terrorists or in lieu of protection of the transit passengers-- that's for everyone's protection. On 7/24/05, Larry C. Lyons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > To quote news reports, > http://www.cbc.ca/stories/2005/07/24/world/londonattacks-070524 -- "You can't destroy EVERYthing. Where would you sit?" The Tick Now blogging.... http://www.blivit.org/blog/index.cfm http://www.blivit.org/mr_urc/index.cfm ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Discover CFTicket - The leading ColdFusion Help Desk and Trouble Ticket application http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=48 Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:166107 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.5 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
