PC WS5, a former member of the armed forces, was just behind PC YX99 and said after the first two shots he moved away when he saw what he thought was a real suicide belt.
He said he realised he was in "no man's land", too close to the device, so he moved back to Fishmongers' Hall 50m away where there was a wall to use as cover.
"At the time I was on the radio just trying to get control to send more units, to shut off the foot passage under the bridge," he said.
"I remember distinctly there was lady pushing a pram without a care in the world and there were also City river cruises going on.
"In my experience I have seen IEDs and what devastation they can cause: if it did not blow the whole bridge up, it could collapse the walls and cause death or serious injury."
The officer described his "disbelief" as he saw Khan sit up. "He sat up which threw us all how he was still moving around. I remember telling him to stay still, stop moving - he still had what I believed was a viable device strapped to him and he could have set it off."
Khan did not respond and the officer told the inquest: "I believed he was a threat and needed to be neutralised as soon as possible. I couldn't get a clear shot or a clear view of him so I moved a bit closer to the footpath, maybe 15m from him. I remember taking various shots, trying to neutralise him by shooting him in the head."
He was aiming for the mandibular nerve which he described as the "on-off switch" for the brain, adding: "Without that you can't have any mobility to move or detonate or do anything at all, so I was aiming for that."
Looking through his rifle sight he could see one shot go across Khan's forehead. "He put his hand up and wiped it across his forehead in disbelief, so I then went for the body mass."
Initially there were members of the public in the background and he was worried about a ricochet. "The amount of movement he was doing meant he was still a threat," the officer said. "I had to make sure he did not initiate that IED. I had to fire to make sure the subject was neutralised and it was safe to shoot.
"I went for the head shot to try neutralise, but that didn't work. I didn't have time to reinitiate a stable platform to shoot again to the face so I went for the body mass. I believe some of them hit."
PC WS5 fired 10 shots. In all, six officers fired 20 shots between them. Eventually it was established that the 'suicide belt' was a fake, but jurors were told all officers were trained to treat all devices as potential explosives.
Chief Inspector Phil Taylor, Scotland Yard's most senior firearms instructor, said individual firearms officers did not need specific permission from above to take a critical head shot. But even if such a shot worked, it might not remove the threat.
He said: "History has taught us that there might be other people orchestrating or might be commanding that situation or directing those people, who might have access to the device which might initiate the explosive, depending on what's going on - it could be anywhere in the world with telephone technology."
My old office was 100 yards from that building and we were locked inside when it happened. Leaving afterwards was pretty damn scary tbh.
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
Right read the whole article and comment. Fascinating to read and I think they did exactly the right thing.
Tens could have died that die if the vest was real, it's not worth the risk.
comment by ttliv87 (U11882)
posted 1 hour, 11 minutes ago
Yep this is why it facks me off that morons like Corbyn and AOC say aim for the legs and arms, as if police officers are like the terminator or the facking predator with lazer like precision in life and death situations.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Irrelevant to this situation.
There are many publicised instances where people are shot several times in the back/chest running away, unarmed and everything in between.
A bloke with a suicide vest, who has just indiscriminately stabbed people and is threatening to blow up several more is obviously a different case altogether...
comment by ttliv87 (U11882)
posted 1 hour, 9 minutes ago
Yep this is why it facks me off that morons like Corbyn and AOC say aim for the legs and arms, as if police officers are like the terminator or the facking predator with lazer like precision in life and death situations.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So they say aim for arms and legs when dealing with terrorists or just when dealing with local crime?
They didn't need to shoot this guys until they saw the IED. The recommended response in that situation is a head shot, for obvious reasons. You can't apply the same response to other kinds of criminals, obviously.
comment by Sharteta (U19684)
posted 18 seconds ago
comment by ttliv87 (U11882)
posted 1 hour, 11 minutes ago
Yep this is why it facks me off that morons like Corbyn and AOC say aim for the legs and arms, as if police officers are like the terminator or the facking predator with lazer like precision in life and death situations.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Irrelevant to this situation.
There are many publicised instances where people are shot several times in the back/chest running away, unarmed and everything in between.
A bloke with a suicide vest, who has just indiscriminately stabbed people and is threatening to blow up several more is obviously a different case altogether...
----------------------------------------------------------------------
How many publicised incidents? Since 1990 there have been only 75 fatal police shootings, maximum of 3 a year for the past 10 or so.
You speak as is this happens every day.
comment by Thorgen Kloppinson - The Artist Formerly Known as Prince (U1282)
posted 13 seconds ago
comment by ttliv87 (U11882)
posted 1 hour, 9 minutes ago
Yep this is why it facks me off that morons like Corbyn and AOC say aim for the legs and arms, as if police officers are like the terminator or the facking predator with lazer like precision in life and death situations.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So they say aim for arms and legs when dealing with terrorists or just when dealing with local crime?
They didn't need to shoot this guys until they saw the IED. The recommended response in that situation is a head shot, for obvious reasons. You can't apply the same response to other kinds of criminals, obviously.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sorry, I don't think you realise how unbelievably difficult it would be to shoot an arm or a leg.
Aim for the biggest target.
Also, again police shootings are insanely rare in this country!
comment by Alisson Becker, Liverpool's Number 9 (U3979)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by Thorgen Kloppinson - The Artist Formerly Known as Prince (U1282)
posted 13 seconds ago
comment by ttliv87 (U11882)
posted 1 hour, 9 minutes ago
Yep this is why it facks me off that morons like Corbyn and AOC say aim for the legs and arms, as if police officers are like the terminator or the facking predator with lazer like precision in life and death situations.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So they say aim for arms and legs when dealing with terrorists or just when dealing with local crime?
They didn't need to shoot this guys until they saw the IED. The recommended response in that situation is a head shot, for obvious reasons. You can't apply the same response to other kinds of criminals, obviously.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sorry, I don't think you realise how unbelievably difficult it would be to shoot an arm or a leg.
Aim for the biggest target.
Also, again police shootings are insanely rare in this country!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah, OK.
We are replying to TTliv's comment which mentioned Corbyn and AOC so the natural assumption is that he is not just talking about this country alone.
Unless AOC is English somehow.
comment by Alisson Becker, Liverpool's Number 9 (U3979)
posted 12 minutes ago
comment by Thorgen Kloppinson - The Artist Formerly Known as Prince (U1282)
posted 13 seconds ago
comment by ttliv87 (U11882)
posted 1 hour, 9 minutes ago
Yep this is why it facks me off that morons like Corbyn and AOC say aim for the legs and arms, as if police officers are like the terminator or the facking predator with lazer like precision in life and death situations.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So they say aim for arms and legs when dealing with terrorists or just when dealing with local crime?
They didn't need to shoot this guys until they saw the IED. The recommended response in that situation is a head shot, for obvious reasons. You can't apply the same response to other kinds of criminals, obviously.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sorry, I don't think you realise how unbelievably difficult it would be to shoot an arm or a leg.
Aim for the biggest target.
Also, again police shootings are insanely rare in this country!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I was more talking about America
As I believe the original comment was largely based on apart from shoehorning Corbyn into it
Aim for the biggest target.
----
Depending on the level of criminal you're dealing with. An unarmed person running away from you should never be shot. A terrorist or mass shooter should get it in the head.
Comment deleted by Article Creator
I’m wondering how many on here have actual experience with firearms? And I don’t mean your grandads .22 air rifle or paintball guns, but the 5.56 calibre that the police and armed forces use?
If you did then you’d realise that a heat of the moment head shot is incredibly difficult to do. Even in this case it’s stated that none of the attempted head shots hit the target and 8 out of 20 of all shots missed. The overriding factor for this is pressure, more than most of us will ever come close to experiencing in our lives. You can be sure in training the success rate will be far higher than that, but until you’re in a real life situation no one knows how any individual will perform. It was the centre mass shots that disabled him, and in the forces that is what you’re taught. I can’t say for definite because I don’t have experience of police policy, but I’d guess that the first aim would be to disable with the centre mass shots and then the follow up if there is still a threat to life will be a head shot.
the guy had police rifles, i assume theyre trained to use them and theyre highly effective at range no? otherwise whats the facking point.
Go away klunker, this isn’t here for you to get one over on those who don’t like you.
For you to dismiss the effects of pressure is pretty clueless…..
i admire them but dont envy them in situations like this for sure. Can't judge that kind of stuff i imagine its surreal even with all the exp and training in the world are you really fully prepared for such things. Fair play to them and i hope theyre not too facked up after it either and got top notch care and support.
comment by Inbefore (U20589)
posted 3 minutes ago
the guy had police rifles, i assume theyre trained to use them and theyre highly effective at range no? otherwise whats the facking point.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Our police use MP5 carbines and their official effective range is 200m. Obviously in a built up urban area the police aren’t going to be firing at these ranges, it’s more likely to be 50 or less.
Also, its not always about pressure under the situation. There must be a balance. There's a whole other side to the OP's story.
On July 22, a 27-year-old electrician, Jean Charles de Menezes, was unceremoniously shot to death by police as he boarded a subway train in south London. His death came one day after Muslim extremists attempted unsuccessfully to repeat the bloody July 7 attacks--on three subway trains and a bus--that killed 52 people (and the four suicide bombers themselves). Tensions were running high and police knew that one more round of attacks could paralyze the United Kingdom and do irreparable harm to the nation's economy and psyche. There was no debate about the fact that Mr. de Menezes had been shot eight times by a police officer (who actually fired eleven rounds at him). Initially, authorities justified the shooting by saying that de Menezes was wearing an "unseasonable" heavy coat--which could have concealed explosives--that he was running toward a subway train and disregarded police challenges to halt, that he tripped and was shot while he lay on the ground, and that he had an "Asian appearance," which is often the way individuals from the Middle East are described in the U.K. Unfortunately, none of this was true. An official investigation, relying on cameras in the station and on eyewitness accounts, quickly shredded the police version of the incident. Mr. de Menezes, it turned out, was dressed in a lightweight blue denim jacket. He did not vault over a barrier, was not challenged by police, and was walking until he began hurrying to catch an arriving train. Finally, he was not from the Middle East but from Brazil, and was living in the U.K. on a valid work permit. Police officers apparently panicked and, fearing for whatever reason that de Menezes was a suicide bomber, pushed him into a seat, pinned his arms to his sides, and executed him. The unfortunate death of Mr. de Menezes has raised questions about the wisdom of shoot-to-kill policies when dealing with suspected suicide bombers. Clearly, the British police, among the best in the world, completely bungled the operation and their attempts to explain away the tragedy and lay the blame on de Menezes himself were reprehensible.
Mamba. Not quite sure what your point is, genuinely.
The two cases are completely different. Khan had already killed two people and the police had confirmed he was wearing a suicide vest before opening fire.
The Menezes case was a complete bungle by the police which they tried to cover up.
comment by Terminator1 (U1863)
posted 1 hour, 5 minutes ago
I’m wondering how many on here have actual experience with firearms? And I don’t mean your grandads .22 air rifle or paintball guns, but the 5.56 calibre that the police and armed forces use?
If you did then you’d realise that a heat of the moment head shot is incredibly difficult to do. Even in this case it’s stated that none of the attempted head shots hit the target and 8 out of 20 of all shots missed. The overriding factor for this is pressure, more than most of us will ever come close to experiencing in our lives. You can be sure in training the success rate will be far higher than that, but until you’re in a real life situation no one knows how any individual will perform. It was the centre mass shots that disabled him, and in the forces that is what you’re taught. I can’t say for definite because I don’t have experience of police policy, but I’d guess that the first aim would be to disable with the centre mass shots and then the follow up if there is still a threat to life will be a head shot.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I have experience with firearms, but delete my comment all you want. Doesn't make what i said less true. You've no clue as to why they missed their target.
I was on a Central London firearms unit from 1992-1993 but I guess things have changed “big style” since then.
comment by Sut mine klunker - Admin 5 (U1250)
posted 14 minutes ago
comment by Terminator1 (U1863)
posted 1 hour, 5 minutes ago
I’m wondering how many on here have actual experience with firearms? And I don’t mean your grandads .22 air rifle or paintball guns, but the 5.56 calibre that the police and armed forces use?
If you did then you’d realise that a heat of the moment head shot is incredibly difficult to do. Even in this case it’s stated that none of the attempted head shots hit the target and 8 out of 20 of all shots missed. The overriding factor for this is pressure, more than most of us will ever come close to experiencing in our lives. You can be sure in training the success rate will be far higher than that, but until you’re in a real life situation no one knows how any individual will perform. It was the centre mass shots that disabled him, and in the forces that is what you’re taught. I can’t say for definite because I don’t have experience of police policy, but I’d guess that the first aim would be to disable with the centre mass shots and then the follow up if there is still a threat to life will be a head shot.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I have experience with firearms, but delete my comment all you want. Doesn't make what i said less true. You've no clue as to why they missed their target.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yet you suggest that pressure wasn’t a factor. That tells my you’re just being argumentative because it’s me, because you only have to read the police officer’s statements, you know the ones that were actually there, to realise the amount of pressure they were under. And you’re also wrong with your effective range. Correct me if I’m wrong, but didn’t you say 50m or less? With a 5.56? You’re way out.
I reckon most of your experience has come from reading Andy McNab fiction.
comment by downsouf (U4095)
posted 20 minutes ago
I was on a Central London firearms unit from 1992-1993 but I guess things have changed “big style” since then.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I’d guess legislation and procedures have changed a lot, as obviously the threat has too. But I’m assuming around then some of your training revolved around the NI threat? If your Rules of Engagement were anything likes ours in the army, they’d have been extremely rigid….
There was the Northern Ireland threat around that time, of course, but mine was more concentrated on international ones. I won’t be able to go into details, certainly not on this platform.
Sign in if you want to comment
London Bridge - Nothing like the movies
Page 1 of 2
posted on 10/6/21
PC WS5, a former member of the armed forces, was just behind PC YX99 and said after the first two shots he moved away when he saw what he thought was a real suicide belt.
He said he realised he was in "no man's land", too close to the device, so he moved back to Fishmongers' Hall 50m away where there was a wall to use as cover.
"At the time I was on the radio just trying to get control to send more units, to shut off the foot passage under the bridge," he said.
"I remember distinctly there was lady pushing a pram without a care in the world and there were also City river cruises going on.
"In my experience I have seen IEDs and what devastation they can cause: if it did not blow the whole bridge up, it could collapse the walls and cause death or serious injury."
The officer described his "disbelief" as he saw Khan sit up. "He sat up which threw us all how he was still moving around. I remember telling him to stay still, stop moving - he still had what I believed was a viable device strapped to him and he could have set it off."
Khan did not respond and the officer told the inquest: "I believed he was a threat and needed to be neutralised as soon as possible. I couldn't get a clear shot or a clear view of him so I moved a bit closer to the footpath, maybe 15m from him. I remember taking various shots, trying to neutralise him by shooting him in the head."
He was aiming for the mandibular nerve which he described as the "on-off switch" for the brain, adding: "Without that you can't have any mobility to move or detonate or do anything at all, so I was aiming for that."
Looking through his rifle sight he could see one shot go across Khan's forehead. "He put his hand up and wiped it across his forehead in disbelief, so I then went for the body mass."
Initially there were members of the public in the background and he was worried about a ricochet. "The amount of movement he was doing meant he was still a threat," the officer said. "I had to make sure he did not initiate that IED. I had to fire to make sure the subject was neutralised and it was safe to shoot.
"I went for the head shot to try neutralise, but that didn't work. I didn't have time to reinitiate a stable platform to shoot again to the face so I went for the body mass. I believe some of them hit."
PC WS5 fired 10 shots. In all, six officers fired 20 shots between them. Eventually it was established that the 'suicide belt' was a fake, but jurors were told all officers were trained to treat all devices as potential explosives.
Chief Inspector Phil Taylor, Scotland Yard's most senior firearms instructor, said individual firearms officers did not need specific permission from above to take a critical head shot. But even if such a shot worked, it might not remove the threat.
He said: "History has taught us that there might be other people orchestrating or might be commanding that situation or directing those people, who might have access to the device which might initiate the explosive, depending on what's going on - it could be anywhere in the world with telephone technology."
posted on 10/6/21
My old office was 100 yards from that building and we were locked inside when it happened. Leaving afterwards was pretty damn scary tbh.
posted on 10/6/21
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 10/6/21
Right read the whole article and comment. Fascinating to read and I think they did exactly the right thing.
Tens could have died that die if the vest was real, it's not worth the risk.
posted on 10/6/21
comment by ttliv87 (U11882)
posted 1 hour, 11 minutes ago
Yep this is why it facks me off that morons like Corbyn and AOC say aim for the legs and arms, as if police officers are like the terminator or the facking predator with lazer like precision in life and death situations.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Irrelevant to this situation.
There are many publicised instances where people are shot several times in the back/chest running away, unarmed and everything in between.
A bloke with a suicide vest, who has just indiscriminately stabbed people and is threatening to blow up several more is obviously a different case altogether...
posted on 10/6/21
comment by ttliv87 (U11882)
posted 1 hour, 9 minutes ago
Yep this is why it facks me off that morons like Corbyn and AOC say aim for the legs and arms, as if police officers are like the terminator or the facking predator with lazer like precision in life and death situations.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So they say aim for arms and legs when dealing with terrorists or just when dealing with local crime?
They didn't need to shoot this guys until they saw the IED. The recommended response in that situation is a head shot, for obvious reasons. You can't apply the same response to other kinds of criminals, obviously.
posted on 10/6/21
comment by Sharteta (U19684)
posted 18 seconds ago
comment by ttliv87 (U11882)
posted 1 hour, 11 minutes ago
Yep this is why it facks me off that morons like Corbyn and AOC say aim for the legs and arms, as if police officers are like the terminator or the facking predator with lazer like precision in life and death situations.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Irrelevant to this situation.
There are many publicised instances where people are shot several times in the back/chest running away, unarmed and everything in between.
A bloke with a suicide vest, who has just indiscriminately stabbed people and is threatening to blow up several more is obviously a different case altogether...
----------------------------------------------------------------------
How many publicised incidents? Since 1990 there have been only 75 fatal police shootings, maximum of 3 a year for the past 10 or so.
You speak as is this happens every day.
posted on 10/6/21
comment by Thorgen Kloppinson - The Artist Formerly Known as Prince (U1282)
posted 13 seconds ago
comment by ttliv87 (U11882)
posted 1 hour, 9 minutes ago
Yep this is why it facks me off that morons like Corbyn and AOC say aim for the legs and arms, as if police officers are like the terminator or the facking predator with lazer like precision in life and death situations.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So they say aim for arms and legs when dealing with terrorists or just when dealing with local crime?
They didn't need to shoot this guys until they saw the IED. The recommended response in that situation is a head shot, for obvious reasons. You can't apply the same response to other kinds of criminals, obviously.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sorry, I don't think you realise how unbelievably difficult it would be to shoot an arm or a leg.
Aim for the biggest target.
Also, again police shootings are insanely rare in this country!
posted on 10/6/21
comment by Alisson Becker, Liverpool's Number 9 (U3979)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by Thorgen Kloppinson - The Artist Formerly Known as Prince (U1282)
posted 13 seconds ago
comment by ttliv87 (U11882)
posted 1 hour, 9 minutes ago
Yep this is why it facks me off that morons like Corbyn and AOC say aim for the legs and arms, as if police officers are like the terminator or the facking predator with lazer like precision in life and death situations.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So they say aim for arms and legs when dealing with terrorists or just when dealing with local crime?
They didn't need to shoot this guys until they saw the IED. The recommended response in that situation is a head shot, for obvious reasons. You can't apply the same response to other kinds of criminals, obviously.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sorry, I don't think you realise how unbelievably difficult it would be to shoot an arm or a leg.
Aim for the biggest target.
Also, again police shootings are insanely rare in this country!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah, OK.
We are replying to TTliv's comment which mentioned Corbyn and AOC so the natural assumption is that he is not just talking about this country alone.
posted on 10/6/21
Unless AOC is English somehow.
posted on 10/6/21
comment by Alisson Becker, Liverpool's Number 9 (U3979)
posted 12 minutes ago
comment by Thorgen Kloppinson - The Artist Formerly Known as Prince (U1282)
posted 13 seconds ago
comment by ttliv87 (U11882)
posted 1 hour, 9 minutes ago
Yep this is why it facks me off that morons like Corbyn and AOC say aim for the legs and arms, as if police officers are like the terminator or the facking predator with lazer like precision in life and death situations.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So they say aim for arms and legs when dealing with terrorists or just when dealing with local crime?
They didn't need to shoot this guys until they saw the IED. The recommended response in that situation is a head shot, for obvious reasons. You can't apply the same response to other kinds of criminals, obviously.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sorry, I don't think you realise how unbelievably difficult it would be to shoot an arm or a leg.
Aim for the biggest target.
Also, again police shootings are insanely rare in this country!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I was more talking about America
As I believe the original comment was largely based on apart from shoehorning Corbyn into it
posted on 10/6/21
Aim for the biggest target.
----
Depending on the level of criminal you're dealing with. An unarmed person running away from you should never be shot. A terrorist or mass shooter should get it in the head.
posted on 10/6/21
Comment deleted by Article Creator
posted on 10/6/21
I’m wondering how many on here have actual experience with firearms? And I don’t mean your grandads .22 air rifle or paintball guns, but the 5.56 calibre that the police and armed forces use?
If you did then you’d realise that a heat of the moment head shot is incredibly difficult to do. Even in this case it’s stated that none of the attempted head shots hit the target and 8 out of 20 of all shots missed. The overriding factor for this is pressure, more than most of us will ever come close to experiencing in our lives. You can be sure in training the success rate will be far higher than that, but until you’re in a real life situation no one knows how any individual will perform. It was the centre mass shots that disabled him, and in the forces that is what you’re taught. I can’t say for definite because I don’t have experience of police policy, but I’d guess that the first aim would be to disable with the centre mass shots and then the follow up if there is still a threat to life will be a head shot.
posted on 10/6/21
the guy had police rifles, i assume theyre trained to use them and theyre highly effective at range no? otherwise whats the facking point.
posted on 10/6/21
Go away klunker, this isn’t here for you to get one over on those who don’t like you.
For you to dismiss the effects of pressure is pretty clueless…..
posted on 10/6/21
i admire them but dont envy them in situations like this for sure. Can't judge that kind of stuff i imagine its surreal even with all the exp and training in the world are you really fully prepared for such things. Fair play to them and i hope theyre not too facked up after it either and got top notch care and support.
posted on 10/6/21
comment by Inbefore (U20589)
posted 3 minutes ago
the guy had police rifles, i assume theyre trained to use them and theyre highly effective at range no? otherwise whats the facking point.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Our police use MP5 carbines and their official effective range is 200m. Obviously in a built up urban area the police aren’t going to be firing at these ranges, it’s more likely to be 50 or less.
posted on 10/6/21
Also, its not always about pressure under the situation. There must be a balance. There's a whole other side to the OP's story.
On July 22, a 27-year-old electrician, Jean Charles de Menezes, was unceremoniously shot to death by police as he boarded a subway train in south London. His death came one day after Muslim extremists attempted unsuccessfully to repeat the bloody July 7 attacks--on three subway trains and a bus--that killed 52 people (and the four suicide bombers themselves). Tensions were running high and police knew that one more round of attacks could paralyze the United Kingdom and do irreparable harm to the nation's economy and psyche. There was no debate about the fact that Mr. de Menezes had been shot eight times by a police officer (who actually fired eleven rounds at him). Initially, authorities justified the shooting by saying that de Menezes was wearing an "unseasonable" heavy coat--which could have concealed explosives--that he was running toward a subway train and disregarded police challenges to halt, that he tripped and was shot while he lay on the ground, and that he had an "Asian appearance," which is often the way individuals from the Middle East are described in the U.K. Unfortunately, none of this was true. An official investigation, relying on cameras in the station and on eyewitness accounts, quickly shredded the police version of the incident. Mr. de Menezes, it turned out, was dressed in a lightweight blue denim jacket. He did not vault over a barrier, was not challenged by police, and was walking until he began hurrying to catch an arriving train. Finally, he was not from the Middle East but from Brazil, and was living in the U.K. on a valid work permit. Police officers apparently panicked and, fearing for whatever reason that de Menezes was a suicide bomber, pushed him into a seat, pinned his arms to his sides, and executed him. The unfortunate death of Mr. de Menezes has raised questions about the wisdom of shoot-to-kill policies when dealing with suspected suicide bombers. Clearly, the British police, among the best in the world, completely bungled the operation and their attempts to explain away the tragedy and lay the blame on de Menezes himself were reprehensible.
posted on 10/6/21
Mamba. Not quite sure what your point is, genuinely.
The two cases are completely different. Khan had already killed two people and the police had confirmed he was wearing a suicide vest before opening fire.
The Menezes case was a complete bungle by the police which they tried to cover up.
posted on 10/6/21
comment by Terminator1 (U1863)
posted 1 hour, 5 minutes ago
I’m wondering how many on here have actual experience with firearms? And I don’t mean your grandads .22 air rifle or paintball guns, but the 5.56 calibre that the police and armed forces use?
If you did then you’d realise that a heat of the moment head shot is incredibly difficult to do. Even in this case it’s stated that none of the attempted head shots hit the target and 8 out of 20 of all shots missed. The overriding factor for this is pressure, more than most of us will ever come close to experiencing in our lives. You can be sure in training the success rate will be far higher than that, but until you’re in a real life situation no one knows how any individual will perform. It was the centre mass shots that disabled him, and in the forces that is what you’re taught. I can’t say for definite because I don’t have experience of police policy, but I’d guess that the first aim would be to disable with the centre mass shots and then the follow up if there is still a threat to life will be a head shot.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I have experience with firearms, but delete my comment all you want. Doesn't make what i said less true. You've no clue as to why they missed their target.
posted on 10/6/21
I was on a Central London firearms unit from 1992-1993 but I guess things have changed “big style” since then.
posted on 10/6/21
comment by Sut mine klunker - Admin 5 (U1250)
posted 14 minutes ago
comment by Terminator1 (U1863)
posted 1 hour, 5 minutes ago
I’m wondering how many on here have actual experience with firearms? And I don’t mean your grandads .22 air rifle or paintball guns, but the 5.56 calibre that the police and armed forces use?
If you did then you’d realise that a heat of the moment head shot is incredibly difficult to do. Even in this case it’s stated that none of the attempted head shots hit the target and 8 out of 20 of all shots missed. The overriding factor for this is pressure, more than most of us will ever come close to experiencing in our lives. You can be sure in training the success rate will be far higher than that, but until you’re in a real life situation no one knows how any individual will perform. It was the centre mass shots that disabled him, and in the forces that is what you’re taught. I can’t say for definite because I don’t have experience of police policy, but I’d guess that the first aim would be to disable with the centre mass shots and then the follow up if there is still a threat to life will be a head shot.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I have experience with firearms, but delete my comment all you want. Doesn't make what i said less true. You've no clue as to why they missed their target.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yet you suggest that pressure wasn’t a factor. That tells my you’re just being argumentative because it’s me, because you only have to read the police officer’s statements, you know the ones that were actually there, to realise the amount of pressure they were under. And you’re also wrong with your effective range. Correct me if I’m wrong, but didn’t you say 50m or less? With a 5.56? You’re way out.
I reckon most of your experience has come from reading Andy McNab fiction.
posted on 10/6/21
comment by downsouf (U4095)
posted 20 minutes ago
I was on a Central London firearms unit from 1992-1993 but I guess things have changed “big style” since then.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I’d guess legislation and procedures have changed a lot, as obviously the threat has too. But I’m assuming around then some of your training revolved around the NI threat? If your Rules of Engagement were anything likes ours in the army, they’d have been extremely rigid….
posted on 10/6/21
There was the Northern Ireland threat around that time, of course, but mine was more concentrated on international ones. I won’t be able to go into details, certainly not on this platform.
Page 1 of 2