'Thirteen shot dead' at US army base

Originally Posted by Gary L

I thought the complaint was that it was cruel and un PC.



They were too far up their own bums to be bothered.

That as well,

Errr are you referring to the fact that one of the twins was reportedly 'gay'.What's that got to do with hanging?

[Gary L]

Originally Posted by Maggy J

Errr are you referring to the fact that one of the twins was reportedly 'gay'.

No.

[TheDaddy]

Originally Posted by Flyboy

Okay, let's put it this way. How would you quantify 100% certain?

Err I wouldn't that's why I said reasonable doubt...

Originally Posted by Gary L

No.

Then possibly your meaning may become clearer in the future.

But then again maybe not.

[Gary L]

Originally Posted by Maggy J

Then possibly your meaning may become clearer in the future.

But then again maybe not.

I doubt it too.

[Flyboy]

Originally Posted by Maggy J

But the complaint against the cane in school was it was the same few idiots who still got caned,again and again and again and again........it wasn't a complete deterrent..anymore than hanging was.You all avoided my mention of the Krays...they weren't scared of hanging, in fact they weren't scared of anyone.Their record on National service is a real eye opener.

Weren't they one of the last to to be imprisoned in the the Tower of London, because of insubordination during their National Service?

---------- Post added at 11:04 ---------- Previous post was at 11:01 ----------

Originally Posted by Maggy J

And The Krays were still murderers who weren't scared of being hung...it doesn't matter whom their victims were.Safer?Not really it was just certain crimes were less reported.In fact there was less news and it certainly wasn't available 24/7. Tv and Radio were shut down for most of the evening.Only two TV stations.So there was less concentrated reporting of the crimes taking place.
I very much doubt that Brady and Hindley were even thinking about being caught even less that they weren't going to hang..

And then there were still those who committed murder despite the chances of being caught, tried and hung.It may have deterred some but not all.

Proscribed,precsribed..not often I use the wrong word.

In fact, on some days, the report would say, "There is no news today."

[Kymmy]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/8388396.stm

Police in the US state of Washington say they have shot dead the man suspected of killing four police officers at the weekend.

[Flyboy]

Police have said they do not know why he shot the officers in Lakewood, south of Seattle on Sunday.

Perhaps that good old policy, to shoot first and ask questions later, is not such a good idea at all, then.

[punky]

Originally Posted by Flyboy

Perhaps that good old policy, to shoot first and ask questions later, is not such a good idea at all, then.

You're pathetic.

[Flyboy]

How very adult and construcive of you.

[punky]

Originally Posted by Flyboy

How very adult and construcive of you.

I wasn't going to waste the time and effort but if you're going to cast aspersions my maturity I might as well.

1. He ambushed 4 police officers in cold blood. And you seriously think he would come quietly and explain his motives for it?

2. Police believe he was mortally wounded from the cafe. It still not clear whether he died as result of that wound or another shoot-out. Despite that, you with no experience, knowlege or vested interest in the matter decide that they were wrong to act in self-defense. Whilst sitting safely in a different country.

3. The police have arrested 3 people who have been accused of helping him - perhaps one of those will illuminate you with regards to Clemmons' motives you are so interested.

4. Your comment that the police are gung-ho, persumably because they are Americans and you despise them, can easily be considered racist.

5. 4 entirely innocent people have lost their lives whilst trying to serve and protect the public and you're more interested in persuing some kind of vendetta against them.

Realise why you are pathetic now? Or just going to ignore what I say and harp on with more of your rubbish?

[Derek]

Originally Posted by Flyboy

Perhaps that good old policy, to shoot first and ask questions later, is not such a good idea at all, then.

And maybe asking someone who has already shot 4 people down in cold blood isn't the best person to ask nicely to come along and when they don't sometimes, just sometimes force might have to be used.

Originally Posted by Flyboy

Perhaps that good old policy, to shoot first and ask questions later, is not such a good idea at all, then.

From the BBC story linked earlier

The officer ordered the man to stop and show his hands, but the suspect tried to run away, said Assistant Police Chief Pugel.
"He wouldn't stop. The officer fired several rounds," he said, adding that the police officer had not been wounded.
Mr Pugel also said that Clemmons was found to be carrying a handgun taken from one of the dead officers.

Doesn't sound like "shooting first and asking questions later" to me.

[TheDaddy]

Originally Posted by foreverwar

Doesn't sound like "shooting first and asking questions later" to me.

Shooting some one in the back? I am not sticking up for him but wasn't he only a suspect at the time of death?

[Derek]

Originally Posted by TheDaddy

Shooting some one in the back? I am not sticking up for him but wasn't he only a suspect at the time of death?

A very, very strong suspect with a proven history of violence. Sometimes you can't take any chances.

What if he was running towards where he had stashed a weapon?
What if he fired a shot randomly over his shoulder towards the cop?

There is nothing in the rules saying you can only shoot someone when they are facing you. If they are a threat then you take action to remove the threat.