Quote:
Originally Posted by sperbonzo
So the report on Sky news, that I've been monitoring all day, says that "Man Shot By Police 'Did Not Open Fire". So what I'm asking here is, is it required that the British Police wait to be shot at first, and possibly killed, PRIOR to opening fire on someone with a gun?
|
Let's examine two facts you know about this:
1. The guy did not fire.
2. The guy was shot dead by police.
Given those two facts you know, why are you asking if the police need to be shot at first before firing?
Quote:
Originally Posted by naughtylaura
As stupid as it is, British police cannot shoot unless they are shot at, or see somebody about to shoot somebody else/ cause injury with a weapon.
|
In what way is that "stupid"? I would hope that's how every professional police force in the world operates. You'd rather the police were able to go around offing people for any non-threatening reason?
Quote:
|
Oh and they can't shoot and "kill"... they can only shoot at a leg/ arm etc.
|
If they can't shoot and kill how is this guy dead? Coincidental heart attack? If you mean they can't
shoot to kill, why should they? They're police, not death squads.
Quote:
|
A law came out a few years ago where all UK citizens with guns had to serender their weapons... leaving only the criminals with firearms (and farmers).
|
And police.
Quote:
Originally Posted by naughtylaura
Oh and if you think that is bad... if somebody breaks into your house and cuts himself, he can sue you...
|
Can you provide an example of this happening? Otherwise some people might start to think you are talking utter shit.
Quote:
|
and there's no such thing as tresspassing
|
Nonsense.
Quote:
|
in a private residence so somebody can climb in through an open window, walk around your home and then leave... they haven't broken ANY laws!!
|
Except the laws on trespassing.