WHO Poll
Q:



sbeddy 3:04 Tue Nov 17
Shoot to Kill
Given the debate on the Corbyn thread that has been running all day - do you believe that an armed UK Police Officer should ever operate a shoot to kill policy if he believes an armed assailant poses an immediate threat to another human life ? Yes or No answers please only - you can debate it on the other thread.

Replies - Newest Posts First (Show In Chronological Order)

stomper 8:24 Wed Nov 18
Re: Shoot to Kill
The cops aint that good at shooting to make a choice. As a friend (and ex US cop told me) 'When you shoot you shoot to hit and stop whatever is happening, that means aiming at the torso. If that causes death, it causes death.

After8 12:31 Wed Nov 18
Re: Shoot to Kill
Croe i bloody love you!

Far Cough 12:04 Wed Nov 18
Re: Shoot to Kill
Good for you

whufcroe 12:03 Wed Nov 18
Re: Shoot to Kill
Erm..................

No

Far Cough 12:00 Wed Nov 18
Re: Shoot to Kill
whuffy, did you meet Eggy out in Iceland?

whufcroe 11:58 Wed Nov 18
Re: Shoot to Kill
Yes of course

Anyone that thinks different is clearly as fucking insane as the nut job, terrorist loving Labour leader.

SnarestoneIron 11:21 Wed Nov 18
Re: Shoot to Kill
Yes

The Kronic 10:46 Wed Nov 18
Re: Shoot to Kill
If there is a choice then no, don't give them exactly they want. Shoot off their limbs and cocks instead.
Rather than die as martyrs, they'll be weebles. Weebles without weiners.

costahammer 8:59 Wed Nov 18
Re: Shoot to Kill
Yes

claret50 1:14 Wed Nov 18
Re: Shoot to Kill
Yes.

Son of Anarchy 1:10 Wed Nov 18
Re: Shoot to Kill
All it would take is some arsehole black gangster wannabee in some armpit London shithole to get shot and you've got race riots on your hands again.

peroni 1:08 Wed Nov 18
Re: Shoot to Kill
One word answer, you cunts!

Er, I mean - YES

i-Ron 1:05 Wed Nov 18
Re: Shoot to Kill
We come in peace, shoot to kill,
Shoot to kill,
Shoot to kill.
We come in peace, shoot to kill,
Shoot to kill, men

DukeofDevo 12:28 Wed Nov 18
Re: Shoot to Kill
If someone's got an AK47 and they are endangering life shouldn't they be killed?

The police or whoever can't be expected to put their lives or the lives of innocent bystanders at risk because some right on politician doesn't think a 'shoot to kill' is right.

When you shoot you ONLY shoot to kill any thing else is bullshit!

Saul Bollox 11:36 Tue Nov 17
Re: Shoot to Kill
The trouble is that you get all these cunts shouting "Justice for Mark Duggan".

What about justice for the general public or justice for the officers who put their lives at risk and. have to do this work.

As far as I'm concerned Duggan got his justice.

united we stand 11:33 Tue Nov 17
Re: Shoot to Kill
Yes

Shoot first ask questions later.

Animal 11:32 Tue Nov 17
Re: Shoot to Kill
Shooting not at the main body mass puts the police and the public at risk, which is why they don't do it. The aim of the shot is to save lives, not to fuck about trying to capture people.

Thought this would be pretty simple to understand

mentor 11:06 Tue Nov 17
Re: Shoot to Kill
Absolutely yes. The death of the Brazilian showed the way. No fucking about.

After8 11:02 Tue Nov 17
Re: Shoot to Kill
Yes.

stewey 10:29 Tue Nov 17
Re: Shoot to Kill
Why the fuck is it called shoot to kill and not just open fire,don't get me wrong for a second im all for stopping the muslimists,but shoot the cunts maim the fuckers put them in an orange boiler suit and send them to the yanks to torture,then lock the rest their cunting family up,stop benefits and housing.

Animal 9:12 Tue Nov 17
Re: Shoot to Kill
Stewey of the police fire, it means they believe that life is imminently at risk. They shoot at the largest mass in order to get the highest chance of stopping that that to life.

Asking them to shoot in the arms or legs is just silly, as it is less likely to prevent the loss of life.

Page 1 - Next




Copyright 2006 WHO.NET | Powered by: