[aldo_14]

Y'know, few weeks back.  hundreds of police storming a bungalow, the tabloids wailing about the search for a doomsday chemical (oh hell, let's make it nuclear - better headlines) device that could Destroy The World, one of 2 brothers shot, live ITV hand-flailing?

Weeellllllll.......

How many tabloids reported that they were released without charge?

Of course, that's 2 shootings, no terrorists shot.  Lovely country, eh?

[vyper]

This is what happens when you give the police free reign to shoot whoever they want, and then justify it by going "He was teh terrorist... or so we thought!".

[Colonol Dekker]

I'd happily live at risk from the police in a police state if it meant a guarantee less risk to the general population from outside threats or criminal elements.

[vyper]

... then you're a ****ing moron.

[aldo_14]

I'd happily live at risk from the police in a police state if it meant a guarantee less risk to the general population from outside threats or criminal elements.

Ok.

*hauls Colonel Dekker into jail without charge for 2 years *

(technically, the police state that guarentees reduced external threats also promises increased internal threats)

[Fineus]

Well thats the trouble isn't it. Our system doesn't garuntee less risk to the general population from outside threats / criminals. I believe crime rates are rising in the UK and only yesterday I recall (though didn't closely read) a headline stating the current Labour government telling the population to "stop moaning about it".

I wonder if they'd moan if one of their close relatives was shot because someone thought they were a terrorist. Heck, if anyone deserves it it's Tony Blair.

[Colonol Dekker]

... then you're a ****ing moron.

Suck my nuts!

You like chavs, kids commiting suicide through bullying and random muggings not to mention terrorist bombings, If it was all cut down as i said then i'd be happy, if a few mistakes happen, so be it.

[aldo_14]

... then you're a ****ing moron.

Suck my nuts!

You like chavs, kids commiting suicide through bullying and random muggings not to mention terrorist bombings, If it was all cut down as i said then i'd be happy, if a few mistakes happen, so be it.

So long as you're not the 'mistake', eh?

Well thats the trouble isn't it. Our system doesn't garuntee less risk to the general population from outside threats / criminals. I believe crime rates are rising in the UK and only yesterday I recall (though didn't closely read) a headline stating the current Labour government telling the population to "stop moaning about it".

I wonder if they'd moan if one of their close relatives was shot because someone thought they were a terrorist. Heck, if anyone deserves it it's Tony Blair.

Hmm.... well, you know i'm not a Labour apologist or anything but there are BCS (British Crime Survey) records indicating - loosely - that 'minor' (theft, assault, burglary) crimes have actually decreased, but it's the reportage that's increased (the BCS aims to record non-reported crime, i.e. the stuff that people don't report to the police for various reasons).  Plus, I did get the impression the whole 'vigilante' thing was just tabloid pish in response to a single quote that was actually relating to a campaign to get people to report crime more often.

[Fineus]

Ever seen Swordfish?

GABRIEL
                 Stanley, here's a scenario. You
                 have the power to cure all of the
                 world's diseases. But the price
                 for this is that you must kill a
                 single, innocent child. Could you
                 kill that child to save the world?

STANLEY
                 No.

GABRIEL
                 You disappoint me, Stanley.   It's
                 the greatest good.

STANLEY
                 How about ten innocents?

GABRIEL
                    Now you're getting it.   How about
                    a hundred? How about a thousand?
                    Not to save the world, but just to
                    preserve our way of life.

So what about you? I think the parallels are quite similar.

[aldo_14]

Ever seen Swordfish?

GABRIEL
                 Stanley, here's a scenario. You
                 have the power to cure all of the
                 world's diseases. But the price
                 for this is that you must kill a
                 single, innocent child. Could you
                 kill that child to save the world?

STANLEY
                 No.

GABRIEL
                 You disappoint me, Stanley.   It's
                 the greatest good.

STANLEY
                 How about ten innocents?

GABRIEL
                    Now you're getting it.   How about
                    a hundred?

GABRIEL
                    How about a thousand? Not to save
                    the world, but just to preserve
                    our way of life.

So what about you? I think the parallels are quite similar.

All you have to ask is the question 'what if it was your kid?'

and I think then you have the answer.

[Colonol Dekker]

If i was the mistake, Id be happy to allow it for the greater good Aldo.
Sincerely and honestly so....

Anyway as someone said earlier "Lovely country, eh?" Its not that great at the moment anyway...

[Flipside]

The Balance is hard to strike. It served a lot of peoples purposes to whip the population up into a fear-powered frenzy, especially after the bombings in London.

But for every bit of privacy we surrender, there is a far larger price to pay than simple first appearances. Personally, I don't think this is about surrendering privacy though, it's about making sure your intelligence is correct and that the habit of shooting people because you think they are terrorists and about to do something dangerous is both neccesary when viewed from the Police point of view, but extremely dangerous when the correct intelligence is obviously lacking.

If I were a cop with a Gun, and I really believed that the guy in front of me had access to chemical weapons or the like, I'd be forced to make a difficult decision as well.

BUT.. If we are going to send armed men with orders of 'If in doubt, shoot', then you better make damn sure your intelligence is based on more than stereotype and assumption. The Police obviously believed they were right. Circumstances have obviously proved them wrong.

I, for one, never want to have to go through another day like last years bombings, but if that meant giving the Police carte blanche to make mistakes such as this without any recourse, then I think it would be more than I am prepared to pay.

I'll wait and see what comes of this before I come to a decision.

[aldo_14]

If i was the mistake, Id be happy to allow it for the greater good Aldo.
Sincerely and honestly so....

Anyway as someone said earlier "Lovely country, eh?" Its not that great at the moment anyway...

The greater good, eh?  What is 'the greater good', anyways, in a situation like this?  Authoritarianism?

I mean, me, I'm not too willing to get shot to assist the governments paranoia-mongering, when our response to a supposed threat to our democracy and freedoms is to impose ever-tightening restraints on our democracy and freedoms.

[Colonol Dekker]

The greater good in my opinion, Is the general wellfare and safety of the law abiding populace.

[Flipside]

True, but it could be argued that the 'law abiding populace' depends on the law. Also, it seems to have included two guys who have just been shot, they were just as law-abiding as anyone else, but it didn't protect them.

That's why it's so important to be sure.

[Bobboau]

jeeze, you brits are thin skined. 'Oh noes, the police made a mistake! police it's all your fault, your not alowed to arrest anyone else, and ... no cars now, you have to do what ever it is your still allowed to do on scooters'
seriously, the cops ****ed up, it isn't a sign of creeping totalitarianism. just because your tabloids sensationalised the **** out of it doesn't make it anything more than that.

[Colonol Dekker]

e may be thin skinned but at least we could hack it over here, we didnt have to run of to form Bustopia 

[Fineus]

So... it's OK to shoot innocent people now and us thinking differently makes us thin skinned?

Sorry, but I don't buy that. The innocent do not deserve to die and those that kill them should be held accountable 100% of the time. Were this a case of "friendly fire" in a war zone, I'd accept it as an unfortunate accident. But this was a planned police raid. How many should we allow to die before we finally stand up and say "stop killing innocent people"?

[Colonol Dekker]

I'm not saying that it'll turn into Bit Cit from 2000AD comics, with Judges running round all over the place killing a dozen people for jaywalking, But at least we havent got the states gun crime rate over here, and if i understand corectly your rozzers are a bit trigger happy themselves.

[Flipside]

Because if we don't stand up and say something, then we are condoning the mistake Bobb. It's very easy to say 'these things happen' until it's you that's staring down a gun barrel.

As one of your own great quoters once said, 'The Price of Freedom is eternal vigilance.', and he didn't just mean from the inside looking out. I actually consider it our responsibility to be concerned. If we stop, then we allow it to pass because it's for the 'Greater Good', I would consider that a far less 'brave' thing to do.

If we let the government make our opinions for us, rather than wanting answers, we would put ourselves in terrible danger.