News1 min ago
Can the Police win these days?
Answers
No best answer has yet been selected by Scotman84. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.erm I am sorry - we DO know if they are innocent....they have not been convicted of any crime, and so are innocent until proven guilty.
These are basic rights for all of us and should not be given up because we are afraid of terrorism
The lesson of theBirmingham bombers -people who did NOT bomb Bham spent twenty years in prison - should not be forgotten - for the simple reason that we will just spend time relearning it. Oh and the Guildford SIx, I think an eleven and a thirteen year old spend five or ten years in prison totally innocent and needlessly.
By the way, when you say that you want them to "keep trying to get rid of the scum", do you mean all those who are found guilty and convicted of terrorist atrocities, or simply anyone who they flag up through surveillance?
Does this include Brazilian electricians?
Should we just widen the net to everyone who isn't white, lives in Hertforshire and wears Laura Ashley?
Basically, the only people who are safe under your proposed regime are Margaret Thatcher, Judi Dench and that woman off Keeping Up Appearances.
Well, Dolly1308, let me have your name and address and I'll plant a bit of "intelligence", so that when your house gets raided in the early hours of the morning and you get shot, I can say that it's worth it just to 'get rid of the scum'.
Likewise, jedda, if you got shot in a police raid, I won't raise a voice in protest, or to support you, nomatterwhat the facts, just in case I am labelled as a do-gooder.
As someone who lives in East London, (not very far from Lansdown Road at all), talk of 'scum' and 'do-gooders' does not help.
Let's wait (and wait?) to see if they find anything first. After four days , I don't think they'll find anything myself.... apart from a deadly toxin and an explosive substance, which I'm sure 95% of us have got in our cupboards. (Kidney beans and flour), but then, most of us don't have 250 armed police storming tjrough our house at some ridiculous time in the morning.
Whilst not wishing to add fuel to this particular fire...has anyone noticed something really strange with this story?
The papers are now saying that Mohammed Abdul Kahar was shot by his brother in the confusion of the arrest.
Now...there are armed police in this house at 04:00am, and one of their suspects fires a gun...and not one officer fires back.
I can't wait to hear the explanation for that one.
I think what they were saying, sp1814, was that there was a scuffle between the brother and an armed officer, during which the gun went off. But that's better than one of the television news channels during the first few hours. The reporter didn't seem to know the difference between 'shot' and 'shot dead', which I imagine was quite important to the people involved.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.