Waving a gun at the police is stupid, and will get you shot (rightly so).
Doesn't make it any less tragic. Doesn't excuse rioting, either.
( monster munch person, man, woman... camera... TV?, Tue 9 Aug 2011, 11:18, 2 replies, latest was 13 years ago)

I disagree. I think it makes it significantly less tragic.
But you're right - it doesn't excuse the rioting at all.
( Je suis un vagabond is an unfunny, up your own arse middle class knob, Tue 9 Aug 2011, 11:41, Reply)

We agree? Hurrah, a happy ending!
Unless you count the guy who got shot in the head.
( monster munch person, man, woman... camera... TV?, Tue 9 Aug 2011, 11:50, Reply)

Fuck him
If he didn't carry a gun and didn't fire it at the police he would still be alive. Who knows, he might have shot a couple of kids in a botched drug deal a few weeks later and people would say "Oh the police knew about him but did nothing"
( Peej, Tue 9 Aug 2011, 16:38, Reply)

Just to be clear:
I have no problem with the police shooting dead an armed man. An armed man is a danger to the police and public alike; a dead man is no threat to anyone. I'm also very happy that the PCC thoroughly investigates every discharge of a police firearm (it's important to hold the police to a high standard).
None of this should detract from the fact that the death of said man is a tragedy for his family, and it is a shame that they feel that they were not kept fully informed after his shooting.

None of the above excuses wanton destruction/looting, but if you're going to assume "da yoof" are a bunch of scumbags, no one should be surprised when they act like scumbags. Not only should those involved be held to account for their actions, but we, as a societ should seek to understand why so many young people are apparently so detatched from wider society, that they have no problem with trashing the areas that they live in (and, by extension, we should take the appropriate measures to guard against this happening in the future).

"Scumbags" is a massive oversimplification that benefits no one.
( monster munch person, man, woman... camera... TV?, Tue 9 Aug 2011, 19:44, Reply)

I believe he fired the gun at the police and hit one of them in his radio
therefore the police shot back and killed him and rightly so. If someone is firing a gun at you they deserve to be shot. I'm also hearing a lot of bollocks about the police apparently being trained to shoot to injure or shoot to wound. This is bollocks if someone has a gun and is injured or wounded they can still fire that gun. The police are trained to shoot to kill but only pull the trigger when totally necessary, if someone is firing a gun at you it becomes necessary to fire back.
( Peej, Tue 9 Aug 2011, 16:37, Reply)

Yeah!
Except that he didn't. The bullet in the radio was a police bullet. The one that tore through his body.
( scarpe We Stole Bikes, Tue 9 Aug 2011, 17:08, Reply)