London Bridge

[Cockatrice]

baggy... they didn't hand out medals here to police officers (odd exception) that shot terrorists dead but instead soon they invented the 'shoot to kill' propaganda then every do-gooder came out of the woodwork and with the value of hindsight claimed they could have been arrested or wounded (for the record I know the problem with just wounding suicide bombers).. leading to years later and every shooting being re-investigated in minute detail to find fault..

Thankfully most here and elsewhere will never have to take that step towards the line of fire and will therefore never be faced with the consequences both of the immediate action and the consequences 30 years later...

In good old NI it wasn't long before many questioned the pro-active taking out of an active service unit on the way to blowing up a police station or killing a member of the security forces.. Gibraltar is one example of dealing with the issue before it ended up a terrorist statistic and there are others..

50 shots and three dead terrorists would to some here in the bad old days be excessive force.. and it seems that at least one civilian may have been shot by police but in time watch how this plays out and into police response once a police officer has a doubt in his head that he may face consequences or worst still Barry McG chasing them down 30 years later.. many soldiers feel that now... but then maybe those shootings are shrouded in 'issues' and not so clear cut as these today but some of those problems may well surface and face the police officers of today in London having to make life and death decisions.

For the record and I make no excuse the only good terrorist is a dead one...

[Cap'n Grumpy]

It appears there was indeed some collateral damage last night with one "innocent"shot by police.

Thankfully not fatally.

[Cap'n Grumpy]

I suspect the fake suicide bomb vests was (at least in part) their way of ensuring martyrdom, as they would hope the police would be reluctant to try to arrest them while being seen to wear a possible explosive device. Safer and surer to kill them on the spot.

Depends how they shot them. ... kill needs to be with a shot to head to reduce or eliminate risk of pushing button.. in a bar situation with dozens of bystanders panicking the risk of collateral damage can be considerably increased... if they were shot to the vest then the police may actually have risked others... it is hard to win

All very true, but still a smaller risk to "shoot to hit" (preferably several times) and risk detonating a vest than to try to arrest the criminal and risk them setting off an explosion themselves, taking the arresting officer and anyone else close by with them.

A head shot sounds like the right thing, but my understanding is that firearms officers are trained to shoot to hit rather than shoot to kill, and that means aiming for the largest part of the body but gives more room for inaccuracy. Hence the requirement for several rounds too.

All this is fine and dandy though, but my original comment was based on the (possible) mindset of the criminals and their willingness or otherwise to embrace martyrdom, and the best way of inviting that in the absence of any actual suicide vests.

[Rooster]

I suspect the fake suicide bomb vests was (at least in part) their way of ensuring martyrdom, as they would hope the police would be reluctant to try to arrest them while being seen to wear a possible explosive device. Safer and surer to kill them on the spot.

Depends how they shot them. ... kill needs to be with a shot to head to reduce or eliminate risk of pushing button.. in a bar situation with dozens of bystanders panicking the risk of collateral damage can be considerably increased... if they were shot to the vest then the police may actually have risked others... it is hard to win

All very true, but still a smaller risk to "shoot to hit" (preferably several times) and risk detonating a vest than to try to arrest the criminal and risk them setting off an explosion themselves, taking the arresting officer and anyone else close by with them.

A head shot sounds like the right thing, but my understanding is that firearms officers are trained to shoot to hit rather than shoot to kill, and that means aiming for the largest part of the body but gives more room for inaccuracy. Hence the requirement for several rounds too.

All this is fine and dandy though, but my original comment was based on the (possible) mindset of the criminals and their willingness or otherwise to embrace martyrdom, and the best way of inviting that in the absence of any actual suicide vests.

Agree with you both but with between 15 and 20 shots per terrorist it was either gross overkill or damned bad shooting, they were not taking shots at someone holed up and returning fire but 3 targets in a street with a lot of civilians in close proximity, lucky only one person not seriously wounded.

[rocky]

I wonder if in years to come the police will be hunted down and charged with criminal offences for doing their job..

I wouldn't be surprised if they were

Absolutely no chance of that happening.

[Rooster]

I wonder if in years to come the police will be hunted down and charged with criminal offences for doing their job..

I wouldn't be surprised if they were

Absolutely no chance of that happening.

Well it happened here and it has happened to soldiers in Middle East conflicts so I would not rule it out. I don't think any of the aforementioned should have happened but there is always someone in this country to stir things up about the past.

[Cockatrice]

I suspect the fake suicide bomb vests was (at least in part) their way of ensuring martyrdom, as they would hope the police would be reluctant to try to arrest them while being seen to wear a possible explosive device. Safer and surer to kill them on the spot.

Depends how they shot them. ... kill needs to be with a shot to head to reduce or eliminate risk of pushing button.. in a bar situation with dozens of bystanders panicking the risk of collateral damage can be considerably increased... if they were shot to the vest then the police may actually have risked others... it is hard to win

All very true, but still a smaller risk to "shoot to hit" (preferably several times) and risk detonating a vest than to try to arrest the criminal and risk them setting off an explosion themselves, taking the arresting officer and anyone else close by with them.

A head shot sounds like the right thing, but my understanding is that firearms officers are trained to shoot to hit rather than shoot to kill, and that means aiming for the largest part of the body but gives more room for inaccuracy. Hence the requirement for several rounds too.

All this is fine and dandy though, but my original comment was based on the (possible) mindset of the criminals and their willingness or otherwise to embrace martyrdom, and the best way of inviting that in the absence of any actual suicide vests.

Agree with you both but with between 15 and 20 shots per terrorist it was either gross overkill or damned bad shooting, they were not taking shots at someone holed up and returning fire but 3 targets in a street with a lot of civilians in close proximity, lucky only one person not seriously wounded.

Rooster..... Police are allowed to use reasonable force and that is what is sometimes open to interpretation.. What police are not taught to do is use semi automatic weapons on free flow but I don't know enough about the situation here to judge.. On the face of it I agree with your comment either possible overkill or bad shooting which is possible given this is all new to them and notwithstanding any training they have been given nothing will have prepared them for what they faced.. Sometimes weapons can be too powerful for purpose and they should have a mix.... for example in many cases a good old fashion shotgun is ideal for that type of scrap.

50 shots sounds like a battle at Loughall well maybe not that went into three figures and beyond plus I could understand it better if a chase took place but from what I hear a straight confrontation in the street face to face..

[Russ]

If it takes 15-20 bullets to take down a terrorist that's 15-20 bullets well used

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

[BaggyTrousers]

I wonder if in years to come the police will be hunted down and charged with criminal offences for doing their job..

I wouldn't be surprised if they were

Absolutely no chance of that happening.

Well it happened here and it has happened to soldiers in Middle East conflicts so I would not rule it out. I don't think any of the aforementioned should have happened but there is always someone in this country to stir things up about the past.

Rooster & Cockers, you both know as well as I do that things here were seldom as clear cut as guys on suicide missions in a massive city. For the record, one of my most favourite questions years ago here was,"If there isn't a shoot to kill policy, why the fuc'k not?" I, of course, meant RA on active service rather than innocent civilians such as 1st Para made legitimate targets on a Sunday in Derry.

Equally, I'll say that the guy who has played his "get out of jail free" card in what he did in the Middle-East remains a murderer in my opinion. I'm not in favour of the forces of the crown having carte blanche to shoot who they wish, I'm in favour of them being free to use whatever force is required in situations such as last night.

I think conflating what happened here in Norn Iron with a head on suicide mission aimed at individually killing people indiscriminately in London is worthless.

Besides, as you will both definitely know, a Norn Iron life has little value compared to a "mainland" life, your hero Thatcher made that abundantly clear with her "acceptable level of violence" bullshite, the legacy of which we still feel to this day.

[UlsterNo9]

Eight minute response time is some going by the police I can't take a brad pitt in that time.

[BaggyTrousers]

If it takes 15-20 bullets to take down a terrorist that's 15-20 bullets well used

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

It took 6 bullets to kill 2 scumrats, 44 to nail the other one. I've no issue with that, we have no idea what the circumstances, the BBC news showed armed police in an area with bushy hedged gardens, we have no idea of how many opened fire, perhaps 10 officers shot 10 or a dozen - who knows, who cares, they got him and fortunately the poor guy winged in the bonce appears top be ok.

Result all round.

[Rooster]

Eight minute response time is some going by the police I can't take a brad pitt in that time.

Certainly was pretty impressive, though at the same time think of the number that 3 guys armed with guns could have killed, yes these incidents have been tragic but at the same time casualties have been pretty low considering what they have done.
This sort of terrorism is so random and ruthless you just have to be in the wrong place at the wrong time and you could be next.

There was a report tonight that at least one of them had been reported as being a radical if so then there's a serious problem with the intelligence services capabilities to deal with them effectively

[MARB]

I think this once and for all shows the modern day requirement for ALL police to be routinely armed throughout the UK. The ability to carry a side arm on and off duty on the Mainland as is the case in NI, could prove pivotal were the atrocities of the last 12 days to ever happen again.

[Cockatrice]

Had those terrorists been armed with firearms 8 minutes is a very long time and the death toll would have been huge.. The ambulance service got there in 6.. Is this a criticism NO it is a simple observation that needs and will form part of the re-appraisal..

As rooster has alluded one of these attackers was twice by two separate persons close to him reported to police so I have no doubt we will hear of more failures in the coming days and weeks..

Time will tell if 50 shots is too many but my initial feeling it seems excessive even when faced by three knife men who might have had vests... If 48 rounds went into the three feckers then good shooting but it was interesting to hear a Met Commissioner state that it may have been about 50 shots because if nothing else that is an interesting thing to comment at a press conference... I also heard the press comment allude to 3 each for two of them leaving it open that the rest might have been directed at the third.. I am simply interest not to point the finger and I can also assure you that people within the Met and elsewhere will have the same interest for the same reasons as myself..

[Russ]

If it takes 15-20 bullets to take down a terrorist that's 15-20 bullets well used

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

It took 6 bullets to kill 2 scumrats, 44 to nail the other one. I've no issue with that, we have no idea what the circumstances, the BBC news showed armed police in an area with bushy hedged gardens, we have no idea of how many opened fire, perhaps 10 officers shot 10 or a dozen - who knows, who cares, they got him and fortunately the poor guy winged in the bonce appears top be ok.

Result all round.

The bushes are Southwark Cathedral gardens

Looks like the twunt hid in a church

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk