17 caught in Australia

[Arok]

I woke up to the news that 17 terrorists had been caught in Australia. They showed them covering their faces and being taken away. They then showed reporters gathered outside the courthouse being attacked by arab men, about 10 of them just randomly attacking reporters.

I'm not a morning person anyway, but waking up to that has made me fucking furious. Personally I think there should be public executions of these people, Maybe we could drown them in pigs blood or something creative. I know alot of people don't like the idea of death penalties, but we should have exceptions for terrorists. If they're not executed couldn't we at least put therm in a jail with all female gaurds and nothing but pork on the menu.

[Arok]

The next story on the news after that was about some US soldiers in Iraq abusing detainees.......I just wasn't the least bit bothered by that news, wonder why.

[*Delly*]

The problem I have with the death penalty is that if you find out later you killed them by mistake you can`t then un-kill them! ;)

I`m glad we no longer have it here and long may it stay that way!

[Jenks69]

The problem I have with the death penalty is that if you find out later you killed them by mistake you can`t then un-kill them! ;)

I`m glad we no longer have it here and long may it stay that way!

Well said! I don't agree with the death penalty.

[BroadbandPlacey]

ditto delly and mike

not an option for us brits thank god as most of us realise its not the correct option in nearly every case.

17 suspected terrorist btw! most weeks at somepoint in the news someones been hauled out of there house at 5 in the morning and held on terrorism charges - we hear very little about them being charged and court cases being brought

im cynical - and am of the opinion its most likely a PR stunt by the aussie govt to appease the australian population due to the Bali bombings...

[craig]

The thing with the 'suspected' terrorists that is that I heard that one of them shot at and was shot by police.

Kinda makes them seem a bit dodgy, but they could just be drug dealers or sommit.

[Arok]

The problem I have with the death penalty is that if you find out later you killed them by mistake you can`t then un-kill them! ;)


That's why I think there shold be exceptions for terrorists. They're not like most killers who just kill maybe 10 people before being caught. They try to kill as many as possible. Playing the numbers, more innocent lives would be saved even if some of the ones executed were innocent.

[Huskey]

That's why I think there shold be exceptions for terrorists. They're not like most killers who just kill maybe 10 people before being caught. They try to kill as many as possible. Playing the numbers, more innocent lives would be saved even if some of the ones executed were innocent.

If you were mistaken for a terrorist, would you really want every relative and friend to remember you as a scumbag after your public execution?

Everyone deserves innocence until proven guilty, however blatent their crime may be.

[BroadbandPlacey]

surely the bigger the crime the smaller the level of doubt should be accepted before a guilty verdict is brought

death penalty just isnt an option that people in the uk care about any more and its widely accepted over here its the wrong choice of punishment. Why the USA a supposedly more developed country than ourselves with a good democratic constitution still use a barbaric and outdated method of punishment

what is that quote?

A society should be judged not by how it treats its normal citizens but by how it treats its criminals.

in the american case i think this says it all...

[*Delly*]

Our police shot a "terrorist" on the tube a few months back. The poor lads parents would argue that he wasn`t a terrorist at all, as would I. It`s a pity we don`t have jesus walking among us anymore, as that would be the only hope his parents would have of ever seeing him again. Yup...no way at all to un-dead him!

All you need for a recipe for disaster is a bent cop or a bent judge and you`re fucked if you live in a country that doles out irreversible punishment.

And I wouldn`t be prepared to make exceptions for acts of terrorism either. It`s just a slippery slope IMO.

I wonder just how many innocent people were hanged in this country before we decided to ditch that appalling form of punishment? And i wonder how many more innocent people in America and other country`s will be killed in the name of justice? Pah! Keep it thanks, I don`t want anything to do with that level of barbarity.

Nothing personal Tracey me little petal. it just turns me stomach is all. :(

[BroadbandPlacey]

to be fair delly i know that kid who got shot maybe wasnt a terrorist, but he wasnt the brightest button in the pack either...

police officers with guns runs after you 3 days (or whatever it was) after 7th july, you choose to run down an underground station!!!

i would have made that mistake and its obvious why the police officers made the mistake - it so could easily have been the other way around

i think i said at the time i would rather one innocent person gets shot (even if that person was me) than the potential for another 53 people dead -

the odds of that guy being a terrorist because of his actions were surely 99/100

[Huskey]

the odds of that guy being a terrorist because of his actions were surely 99/100

True, but what does the percentage have to drop to for it to become unacceptable? Terrorism shouldn't be an excuse for a license to kill.

[BroadbandPlacey]

its never happened before and surely its up to the individual officer?

these guys are highly trained and i trust their judgement - ultimately its up to the copper with his finger on the trigger - he/her will have to decide the percentages

its never happened before! this is the only time in recent history this has happened and it hasnt happened since - i think the shoot to avoid detonating suicide jackets policy should stay - its a very rare occasion (only once) it has been used and is ultimately their to protect the greater good in society

[sara]

True, but what does the percentage have to drop to for it to become unacceptable? Terrorism shouldn't be an excuse for a license to kill.
No?
The police chasing him thought he had explosives on him. *If* he had been a real terrorist, he would have set them off just before they grappled him to the floor. So they shot to kill, as that would stop him setting the bomb.

They didn't shoot him just because he's a bad guy and should be dead. They only shot him because they thought he might have blown himself (and everyone nearby) up.

[Annemarie]

I still don't think it justifys shooting him 7 times in the head!

[sara]

I still don't think it justifys shooting him 7 times in the head!
Depends on the gun, does it fire off loads of rounds really fast with just one squeeze of the trigger? If so, maybe 7 shots is just one squeeze.

I dunno.

I hate the death penalty, but I can see why the coppers did what they did. They were trying for the common good. The guy who fired the shot is probably dealing with a lot of issues in his own mind, it can't be easy.

[BroadbandPlacey]

what does it matter how many times they shot him??? that mystifies me?

he might have been dead on the first bullet - he wouldn't have felt the other 6 - if he was still alive after three bullets in his head he might still have been able to detonate the bomb?

if your gonna have a shoot to kill policy - make sure you kill the person otherwise it defeats the object of aiming for the head in the first place.

[stabber]

They shot him to protect us! Ill tel lyou what else anoys me, this cant hold terrror suspects for 90 days, wtf! We will hold them for as long as we want, its our countrty if they are a threat we should keep them in prison to keep the public safe and if not ship him back to where ever he came from, grrrr no power at all.

[Huskey]

No?
The police chasing him thought he had explosives on him. *If* he had been a real terrorist, he would have set them off just before they grappled him to the floor. So they shot to kill, as that would stop him setting the bomb.

They didn't shoot him just because he's a bad guy and should be dead. They only shot him because they thought he might have blown himself (and everyone nearby) up.

I see. By doing so however, terrorists and the police seem to have something in common. Ironic, wouldn't you say?

</ devil's advocate >

[sara]

I see. By doing so however, terrorists and the police seem to have something in common. Ironic, wouldn't you say?

</ devil's advocate >
As in the terrorists (the Islamic ones in this case) are working for the greater good of society (in their eyes) while the police are working for the greater good of the local citizens?

Interesting, not sure it's ironic. The thing is, the Police (well, the non-bent ones) don't discriminate. They protect the presumed innocent. The terrorists are judging Londoners (and UK society in general) as evil, and to make us all scared into changing our ways.

[BroadbandPlacey]

not really - a murder is defined as an unlawful killing

a police officer or other govt agent killing someone whilst doing their job under instruction from the govt is lawfully killing someone - which is completely different - they kill someone to protect and is always a last resort following guidlines and protocols

a terrorist kills freely and unlawfully using twisted logic

[David]

surely the bigger the crime the smaller the level of doubt should be accepted before a guilty verdict is brought

death penalty just isnt an option that people in the uk care about any more and its widely accepted over here its the wrong choice of punishment. Why the USA a supposedly more developed country than ourselves with a good democratic constitution still use a barbaric and outdated method of punishment

what is that quote?

A society should be judged not by how it treats its normal citizens but by how it treats its criminals.

in the american case i think this says it all...
You can't really compare the USA to the UK because each State has it's own policy on the death penalty. True, some States execute a lot of people, even children when they are tried as adults, but other States very rarely execute. When you look at the world as a whole it seems that as a country becomes better educated and weathly they do tend to stop executing people even if it's still officially an option. Why that hasn't happened in the USA is confusing to outsiders - they're educated and wealthy but the populatoin carry guns and good people are killed all the time so executions of bad people is seen as correct. Some of the US could abandon the dealth penalty immediately but many others have the "an eye for an eye" ideology so deeply embedded into their culture that to even mention changing provokes extreme anxiety and angry reactions.

[Huskey]

As in the terrorists (the Islamic ones in this case) are working for the greater good of society (in their eyes) while the police are working for the greater good of the local citizens?

Interesting, not sure it's ironic. The thing is, the Police (well, the non-bent ones) don't discriminate. They protect the presumed innocent. The terrorists are judging Londoners (and UK society in general) as evil, and to make us all scared into changing our ways.

I kinda meant if police are killing innocent people too, why does that make them any better than the terrorists?

In other news, has anyone heard about the bombings in Jordan? One terrorist walked into a wedding reception and killed 50 people, including the bride and groom's parents. How sick is that? :(

[sara]

I kinda meant if police are killing innocent people too, why does that make them any better than the terrorists?

In other news, has anyone heard about the bombings in Jordan? One terrorist walked into a wedding reception and killed 50 people, including the bride and groom's parents. How sick is that? :(
Yes it does make them better, because by killing the one person, they are trying to protect everyone else. Plus, if they knew that person was innocent, they wouldn't shoot. Of course they wouldn't. Isn't that obvious?

Police aren't killing innocent people on purpose. In fact they don't even want to kill guilty people, but they will kill someone if that person is likely to trip a devastating bomb in the next few seconds if he or she remains alive.

Terrorists kill anyone in the vicinity. They don't care about innocence, they are going for shock factor in an attempt to make the government back down about whatever they disagree with. In that sense, you could compare the terrorists to our armies at war. There's a reason that war makes me very uncomfortable.

[Paddy]

I don't usually comment on stuff like this as find it hard to discuss on forums and often don't know much about the subject!!!

But, I have to agree with Sara, with armed poilce it comes down to a split second decision about what to do in the situation. If someone is a suspected terrorist and they make a sudden move and all evidence suggests this could be detrimental to the people around them, then the police have to act immediately. The aim is to incapacitate the person, but by shooting someone in the leg/arm or even stomach may slow them but in the case of a suicide bomber they will still have a lot of their motor functions avaiable. What I beleive they have to do is shoot them in the left eye (or is it right!!), as this leads to an automatic release/relaxation of their bodies muscles. Anywhere else and it causes the muscles to tense and contract and pull the trigger on any weapon they may be carrying. I believe this or part of it is correct, though the slight drawback is that the person may not survive this procedure!

I don't believe in the death penalty due to alot of problems cuasesd, though there are other methods available, is it in Nigeria they cut off a thiefs hand, I'm sure that'll make people think twice about shoplifting!! What about torture, probably more succesful at dettering people from crime than a few years in prison :D

[Slamdog]

the trouble with handguns is that they are really not that accurate....

once you get past about 20 feet then you really have to aim for the largest body mass.. the torso. only in films can they pull off a 100 yard shot to the leg with a 9mm. reality is very different. even the old bills mp5's are not that accurate because the barrel is far to short. now, the m16 that our american mates have is a fair bit better...

[Arok]

On the gun issue I think canada has quite a few per capita. I'm not sure about how many of them are handguns though. The canadian crime and gun crime rates are drasticly lower than those of the US. It's not just guns, it's a cultural difference.