Quote:
Originally Posted by jamiefrost
Iranian Embassy 2 SAS commando's execute 2 surrendered terrorists.
What we're their rules of engagement?
Random Brazillian is shot dead by Armed Police in the aftermath of 7/7
Who was thought to be a suicide bomber and failed to stop after being told to by police who acting acting under instruction killed him.
Male is shot dead in a London Cab for possession of a firearm. He didn't fire upon officers.
Police following their standard rules of engagement thought they were under imminent threat and shot him
Marine shoots dead an insurgent in Afghanistan (is punished for it
Who acted outside their rules of engagement and were not under threat (according to the evidence) shot and killed someone.
As far as I can tell very different circumstances
J
|
The brazillian had a headset on... showed no signs of possessing a bomb and was repeatedly shot. This has since been made very clear.
The lad in the cab had no firearm in his hand and made no move for it. He again was executed on a coppers hunch. An Armed response officer is to attempt to defuse a situation and attempt to attain a peaceful outcome but it's very clear in this case they ran over to a cab window and scattered it with bullets. They've gotten away with it due to a gun being on the person but it was never pointed or used to threaten. Even American police wait until there's a legitimate threat to open fire.
The 2 surrendered terrorists from the iranian embassy were dragged back into the embassy from the custody of police then executed. Last time I checked execution is illegal in this country regardless of your engagement rules.
Saying they're justified is a very dangerous place to go. It's basically giving the impression you're free to shoot anyone as long as you think they are a threat. The SAS execution broke every law in the book.