When not to believe what police are telling you...

[danmand]

Look, you can argue that this idiot deserves to die, and that the police is doing everybody a favour by killing him, but you cannot argue that he necessarily must be shot. A guy alone in a house with a shotgun will eventually give up or commit suicide.

 

[fuji]

Look, you can argue that this idiot deserves to die, and that the police is doing everybody a favour by killing him, but you cannot argue that he necessarily must be shot. A guy alone in a house with a shotgun will eventually give up or commit suicide.

Or point the gun at someone and start shooting. According to the article he pointed the gun at someone. They did not wait for him to start shooting.

I sure as hell wouldn't stand there and do nothing with some maniac pointing a loaded shotgun at my face.

Have you ever had a loaded gun pointed at you? It's not fun. I experienced it once travelling in Africa, some yelling over zealous heavily armed military/security pointed a gun right in my face, fingers on the trigger, trigger lock off. Not an experience I recommend to others.

In that situation I could at least hope that security weren't going to shoot me unless I made a sudden move or did something stupid. I can only imagine what it would feel like to have a raving maniac pointing a gun at you. The cops don't get paid enough for that.

 

[danmand]

Or point the gun at someone and start shooting. According to the article he pointed the gun at someone. They did not wait for him to start shooting.

I sure as hell wouldn't stand there and do nothing with some maniac pointing a loaded shotgun at my face.

Have you ever had a loaded gun pointed at you? It's not fun. I experienced it once travelling in Africa, some over zealous heavily armed security pointed a gun right in my face, fingers on the trigger, trigger lock off. Not an experience I recommend to others.

In that situation I could at least hope that security weren't going to shoot me unless I made a sudden move or did something stupid. I can only imagine what it would feel like to have a raving maniac point a gun at you.

They could just have retreated and waited it out. This had gone on for 5 hours. Why did they go near the house?

As I posted, you are welcome to argue that the idiot deserved to die, but you cannot very well argue that it was necessary.

 

[fuji]

They could just have retreated and waited it out.

He might pull the trigger while they're trying to repeat. I imagine once he pointed the gun it was over in a fraction of a second.

 

[Aardvark154]

Adding more to the story and perhaps reopening the whole thing.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...e-barrister-Mark-Saunders-capable-firing.html

A police marksmen at the scene said he did not shoot the barrister, who was brandishing the gun out of a window, because he could not 'justify' opening fire.

He explained that he was unable to see if Mr Saunders' finger was on the trigger and couldn't be sure that he was pointing his gun at anyone.

Asked why he didn't open fire, the officer replied: ''If I didn't believe the firearm was pointing at anybody I wasn't going to pull the trigger. If I am not sure that somebody else is in the line of fire I will not shoot. Until that point I am not justified to pull the trigger.

A colleague who was with him and did fire one of the fatal shots insisted that he had not made a mistake by opening fire because he believed Mr Saunders was taking aim at armed colleagues on a rooftop opposite.

The officer, described how he stepped forward to see what Mr Saunders was doing. 'I didn't want to make a mistake. I'm making the biggest decision of my life. I wanted to step forward to make sure I was taking the right decision. I didn't make a mistake.

Westminster Coroner's Court heard from one marksmen who said 'backing off' and letting the situation calm down was not an option.

Another said that retreating and then taking up positions again would have been like 'line dancing' going 'backwards and forwards' and was not possible.

The specialist rifle officer, one of the most experienced marksmen in the country, said he opened fire because he believed there was 'imminent threat to life to other officers.'

Asked by the barrister for the coroner, Nicholas Hilliard QC, if he was aware after the incident that Mr Saunders gun was 'open or broken'*, he replied, 'Yes'.

* this means unable to be fired without being closed

 

[danmand]

Adding more to the story and perhaps reopening the whole thing.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...e-barrister-Mark-Saunders-capable-firing.html

* this means unable to be fired without being closed

That is the way one would show the police that one has no intention of shooting.

 

[The Fruity Hare]

That is the way one would show the police that one has no intention of shooting.

The way to show the police that one has no intention of shooting would be to throw the weapon out the window. Not to fire the weapon a number of times.

It was late at night, he was drunk and leaning out the window, according to the report " waving a shotgun " he had discharged several times earlier in the afternoon and he had just a short time before (22 minutes before). The officers may not have been able to tell what state the gun was in in those circumstances.

That does not sound like a man who has no intention of shooting.