matty01

What does this interview tell us about Mark Duggan ?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=biKJDVSRO8M&hd=1

alphaj12

Not a lot other than his mrs seems to be a reasonable person who is concerned that other people have lost homes and children have been hurt despite losing her partner.

If he had a gun then the police were right to shoot to protect themselves and the public regardless of whether he fired or not, if he had no gun then ???????? who knows, doubt we ever will know the truth now

Jamo

iTrader: (23)

scumbag. he was carrying a loaded gun, thats enough for me.

JonMc

iTrader: (51)

At the end of the day, the decision to use lethal force is not one that is taken likely - there either had to be a perceived direct threat to the life of those in the vicinity or someone screwed up. The IPCC will get to the bottom of it. The fact that there appears to have been a hand-gun at the scene tells me that there was a likely threat and the police responded.

The fact that his partner is concerned about what is going on tells us nothing about him, stranger relationships will exist I'm sure.

David Lock

I've heard all the arguments but I am still not sure why the cops always have go for the killer shot rather than one which will incapacitate someone.

His g/f seems to be pretty reasonable given the circumstances.

dl

alphaj12

They are trained to take the "killer shot", funny how all the people being interviewed on the news say that the police haven't been there to protect them....are they not protecting the public when they are shooting armed/dangerous criminals.

Not a massive fan of the police on a day to day basis, I think a few arrogant, bad apples(usually traffic police) ruin it for the rest but who the hell would want their job lets face it.....the media don't help with what they portray. At the end of the day they have Boris Johnson as a spokesman, he was good on Have I got news for you but really.....Mayor Of London WTF that is just unbelievable....who voted for him btw

Daryl

It has been confirmed by the IPCC that he was carrying a loaded gun.

Live by the sword etc...

Poetic justice, shame on those who use his death as an excuse to indulge in more criminality.

Chip

stilover

I like when asked "Who do you blame"? she replies "The Police".

So............ She blames the Police for shooting an armed man, a known Gangsta, who probably wouldn't think twice about shooting them dead first?

That B!tch needs a good slap. What are the Police supposed to do? Wait to be shot at? No fecking way. The law is there (Percieved threat) to protect those who put themselves in front of armed Gangsta's. I'd have shot the **** too.

The Rig

iTrader: (13)

why should they ?

If there is a reason to fire upon someone, then kill them,i`m sure if the other person were to fire at police,they are not going to aim at their leg/foot are they

stilover

Where do you shoot to incapacitate someone? The Leg? The arm?

What if you miss? What if the shot you think would incapacitate them doesn't? What then?

Once someone is shot, doesn't mean they can't shoot back. Shoot to kill, that way they can't shoot you back. Simples.

The Dogs B******s

+1

Leslie

I still cannot get my head around the fact that having killed that suspected bomber(which was incorrect anyway) on the underground, they then leapt upon him in turn and shot him a further 7 times in the head!

Les

millsy3

iTrader: (1)

its police law, you carry a gun on the streets, even if its a replica, and you point it at police, you will get shot and not in the hand mark duggan put his own life at risk by carrying a gun and he paid the price. well done to the police for quick reactions.

BrownPantsRacing

iTrader: (6)

Couldn't agree more!

The Zohan

Killer shot, what the hell is that? You been watching too many Hollywood sniper movies.

You aim for 'centre mass' by that aim at the centre of the body-chest as it is the largest and easiest/slowest moving area to consistently hit with small arms - pistols and smgs such as the armed cops carry. Think about it and arm is some 6 inches across, the chest likely 20+ which do you think will be easier to hit and incapacitate someone?

It is a complete myth to think you can go for the leg or arm as they are near impossible to hit at anything more than a few feet, especially if the person is moving them and you are operating under perfect conditions - again Hollywood would have you think otherwise but not real life!

The Zohan

Being ex forces i would have thought you would have had a better grasp of these things. The chap was suspected of having a bomb and possible means to self detonate it. 1 shot to the head does not necessarily mean he is dead or 100% incapacitated. He could have still pressed a switch to set off a bomb. What they did was to destroy the brain-stem stopping all motor function including twitching (in case he had a detonator, etc in his hand). No very pleasant but not the actions of a sadist, nor someone out for sh*ts and giggles but a highly trained officer in the most difficult of positions!

David Lock

Look I'm not trying to defend this guy. I don't like firearms and know sod all about them. But I sort of assumed that a trained marksman could hit something fairly accurately as long as target wasn't too far away, the light was reasonable and he wasn't moving about a lot. By killer shot I mean a shot aimed at the head or chest area that will be likely to kill someone. Is that clear enough?

And I don't know the details of this particular incident so impossible to comment except in a general sense. If he was stupid enough to be waving a gun about in front of the police or others then so be it. If he wasn't it's a slightly different matter. Must be a horrible job for the police.

dl

MOTORS S GT

iTrader: (2)

Given the choice, always shoot to kill, they can't stand up in court to testify against you.

JonMc

iTrader: (51)

When you conduct firearms training you always learn to aim for the centre of mass - it is a bigger target and regardless of how good a marksman you are you still have a responsibility to avoid collateral damage so you minimize the risk of missing where you can.

Chip

matty01

Very well said.

matty01

An arm shot or leg shot is just unrealistic ....

in fact i remember one off y/t, guy in a chair with gun motionless [standoff] for ages before a sniper eventually shot gun out of his hand , to think a regular armed copper is going to do that and have bullets flying all over while he tries to hit a hand/leg/arm is just silly , get yourself down to a gun club and shoot some stuff and you'll see why...

RobsyUK

iTrader: (2)

Everyone who dies was always loved by the community, nicest person in the world

ALi-B

iTrader: (1)

Anyone who has been paintballing can attest to this.

Although if the target is a women with a big ****...sometimes that proves to be a better/easier target than the body

f1_fan

iTrader: (9)

Forgetting the video for a minute I hope those of you who right royally ridiculed Mus the other day when he told you Mark Duggan hadn't shot at the police are going to offer him an apology. Seems he was right after all.

CrisPDuk

Read this Les;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1986_FBI_Miami_shootout

The case is now used as a training example by both US and UK law enforcement weapons schools

Lisawrx

iTrader: (1)

I didn't ridicule anyone, so I'm safe.

However, if it is correct that he didn't actually fire first, but despite that, he did have a gun and posed a potential threat, what would you suggest the police should have done?

Or do you think that is was ok that they shot him, you're just mad for Mus that people made assumptions without knowing the facts?

f1_fan

iTrader: (9)

This. Although 'mad for' might be going a bit far LOL. Just think people shouldn't be so quick to shout someone down when the facts aren't fully known.

As for the police they have a job to do and decisions to pul the trigger are decisions made under extreme duress. In this instance while it is sad that someone had to die I think the very fact he had a loaded weapon to hand meant the police probably couldn't have taken many chances.

So while I don't like it I do understand it. It's not a job I would like to have.

Lisawrx

iTrader: (1)

Me neither. I think the police have one of the toughest jobs to be honest, as no matter what they do, they will be open to (extreme) criticism. In cases like this, they either act fast and eliminate a threat, or don't act, and god knows what may happen. People could have equally been taking to the streets should a loved one been shot and killed by the person concerned due to inaction by the police. (not that I'm assuming that would have happened, just the possibility it could have) There are power hungry police out there, but I'd imagine very few would want a death on their hands unless there was little choice in a given situation.

Oh, and re. Mus, fair play, I just wondered.