raoul moat is caught

2blue4u said:
Is anyone else now embarrassed at the state of the British Police? It is no more than the Uniformed Wing of the Social Services, full of policy makers, jobs-worths, overly-cautious decision makers and politically correct buffoons.

At the time of previous armed stand-offs, I've been dismayed at members of the public moaning about Police marksmen shooting someone instead of 'disarming' the perp with a shot to the arm or whatever. But in this case, because they had so many officers, so close to Moat, they could have done just this. Yesterday evening, during daylight, they should have shot him in the arm holding the gun and tasered him at the same time to give them time to approach over that very short distance. That was the only way he was going to come away from this alive.

Risk Analysis is crippling a once great Police Force. If this carries on, the Police soon won't leave the security of the Police Stations.

My 2 cents.
Click to expand...

They could have shot him 6 times in the head like that Brazillian chappie.

Sarcasm aside, the pol never fired a shot, but because they were present when the scumbag shot himself the incident is being referrred to the IPCC.
Who'd be an armed pol officer and subjected to all that entails. They'll get grilled over every word they uttered.

wack61 wrote:-
That acting chief constable in the getty images has an unusual hairstyle

Noticed that and wondered how her hat fits.
 
2blue4u said:
Is anyone else now embarrassed at the state of the British Police? It is no more than the Uniformed Wing of the Social Services, full of policy makers, jobs-worths, overly-cautious decision makers and politically correct buffoons.

At the time of previous armed stand-offs, I've been dismayed at members of the public moaning about Police marksmen shooting someone instead of 'disarming' the perp with a shot to the arm or whatever. But in this case, because they had so many officers, so close to Moat, they could have done just this. Yesterday evening, during daylight, they should have shot him in the arm holding the gun and tasered him at the same time to give them time to approach over that very short distance. That was the only way he was going to come away from this alive.

Risk Analysis is crippling a once great Police Force. If this carries on, the Police soon won't leave the security of the Police Stations.

My 2 cents.
Click to expand...

Do the police shoot to injure and disarm someone ?
Im not sure I have ever heard of that in this country.

From my very limited knowledge and experience of firearms, when a bullet enters ,say a body,does it not then travel on an unpredictable path.
If that is the case,then even a shot to the arm may have killed Moat,even if that wasn't the intention.
As for tasering, if they guy had the gun to his neck and his finger on the trigger, is that not going provoke an involuntary reaction causing the gun to fire ?

Im no expert, and any of they guys on here ie Military background,may be able to confirm or refute what I say.
 
You never 'shoot to wound'... You always aim 'centre mass'. It's the biggest part of the target and shooting him in the arm wouldn't necessarily have been possible unless the circumstances were exceptional.

Having spent the last 20+ years shooting rifles, I know how difficult it can be to drop a shot precisely in the right spot. In my opinion, once the police had him cornered, they did exactly the right thing by sitting it out.
 
BBC now reporting that he was Tasered.
 
Damien Pearse, Sky News Online:-
Raoul Moat came out of hiding in a final act of defiance after police reassured residents: "You won't see him walking down the street", psychologists believe.

That has to be the biggest piece of optimism since General Custer said he was going to round up those indians.
 
Viewfinder said:
I was rather disgusted by Jon Sopel on the BBC, the arrogant ****. He rudely beckoned the distressed daughter of one of the residents that was separated due to being told to keep indoors to come over and be interviewed. He's the correspondent, you'd think he would respect her emotions, or if anything go over to the daughter and wait. Then had the cheek to take the daughter's mobile phone and talk to her mother in the house at her daughter's mobile expense!
I would have told him where to go! Luckily I don't have a BBC account to leave my comment!!
Click to expand...

Couldn't agree more. I got so fed up with his behaviour I turned over to 'we don't confirm-we just sensationalise' Sky. And as for his over-excitement..well we can see why he was probably never embedded with the troops in Iraq/Afghanistan! Absolutely unproffessional! I understand it was breaking and continuous developments, but he is a supposed proffessional. Good to see my BBC tax going to good use.
 
The copper with the taser in those Getty images looks well POed that he hasn't been given a real gun. I wonder if it was him who tasered Moat, possibly causing him to shoot himself?
 
Hmmm, my first thought was, 'would you taser him after he shot himself in the head?'
 
Ha HA Just seen the polices forensic tent blow over to reveal 2 guys on there knees, all the evidence blew away.
 
Spiritflier said:
Having spent the last 20+ years shooting rifles, I know how difficult it can be to drop a shot precisely in the right spot.
Click to expand...

It's possible though

[YOUTUBE]ff4XuPtAOUk[/YOUTUBE]
 
And risk the shot hitting the trigger, or an adverse muscle reaction, firing the weapon into the police close by?
 
Think that was possibly the problem after they fired the taser - muscle spasm causing trigger finger to tense. Can't see why they would fire the taser after the fact :(
 
i believe it's the x3 they use watch this and look at there hands proves a point

taser x3

or did they use this

i must admit in the second vid i was waiting for the film to start


Merc:naughty:
 
Last edited:
wack61 said:
It's possible though...
Click to expand...

Hi Darren,

It's certainly possible but if I were in that position, I wouldn't want to risk it... To put things into perspective, I've pulled off some great long range and precise shots but when the pressure's been on (in competition), I've been in a position where I couldn't hit a cows arse with a banjo! :D

Cheers for posting the video... It gave me a laugh if nothing else. :)
Si
 
sheddy said:
90% of the country see the situation as something that could have been remedied much quicker with a well placed lead sleeping pill and saved a lot of money and resorces. The 90% would have said nothing and accepted that the plod done the best thing

!0% of the country are bleeding heart liberals and extremely vocal.
Click to expand...

Yip.

Problem: Dangerous armed murderer on the loose.
Solution: Shoot him to death at the firsrt opportunity.

End of!
 
arclight said:
wack61 wrote:-
That acting chief constable in the getty images has an unusual hairstyle

Noticed that and wondered how her hat fits.
Click to expand...

Alice from Dilbert?

Grayman said:
Couldn't agree more. I got so fed up with his behaviour I turned over to 'we don't confirm-we just sensationalise' Sky. And as for his over-excitement..well we can see why he was probably never embedded with the troops in Iraq/Afghanistan! Absolutely unproffessional! I understand it was breaking and continuous developments, but he is a supposed proffessional. Good to see my BBC tax going to good use.
Click to expand...

Next thing you know, now that its all over, the BBC are quick to move on to other news like oil leaks and asteroids. Don't remember seeing oil leak footage this week... Quick BBC, lets quickly move on to continuous... erm... Oil Leak... World Cup... Government Spending Cuts... coverage!

In need of a new News channel.
 
Terrywoodenpic said:
I would always expect the police to follow the law.
just as I do when it comes to stopping and searching photographers.
It is not the Job of police to take the law in to their own hands in some situations, and not others, they follow the regulations.

I would say they handled the job well. This country has very strict firearms regulations for everyone In america it is different.

In the past when we have got it wrong, it is when we have made things up as we went along.
Click to expand...

Spot on Terry.
 
Firstly, he hardly went out in a blaze of glory. All these threats about war on police etc...

I am glad he was not wounded, last thing we need is coughing up cash to keep in jail. Then the liberal human rights brigade will no doubt moan about him not having a 40" tv and only having a small portable and then demand all sorts of comfort.

If you have a weapon the police should be allowed to shoot to kill, if weapon ot put down, will save a lot of time and money.
 
arclight said:
Yip.

Problem: Dangerous armed murderer on the loose.
Solution: Shoot him to death at the firsrt opportunity.

End of!
Click to expand...

Problem is, it's not "end of" it's "start of" a long investigation as to why a police officer shot a person!!!

The officer involved will undergo months of uncertainty into why he chose to shoot.

Unless you have been in the situation of whether to shoot someone or not then you do not know how hard the decision is!

The forces issue “rules of engagement” cards & get regular refresher training when employed on armed duties.

Every single situation is different & YOU do not know how YOU will react until YOU are confronted by the situation.

After the act, you are very much, metaphorically speaking, “on your own” YOU will have to prove YOU acted within your “rules of engagement”

I’m sure the Police are governed by an almost identical set of rules.

I’ve been in the situation & chose not to shoot, it turned out the target was a pi33ed unarmed serviceman!

However at 3am, dark, ignoring orders, IRA threat still very real, what would YOU do? :shrug:
 
christ almighty the amount of facebook threads by people calling this man a "legend" are unbelievable... some sick minded people out there.

my 50p for this thread really is as follows - and i do speak freely here so sorry if you take this the wrong way, i sometimes come accross as a big strong.

1) The press have FAR TOO MUCH freedom in this country, running about like the bloody paparazzi thinking they can barge in anywhere they want, do what they want etc... this must be changed, yes..covering it on the news is acceptable, but how they dealt with this without finding out the facts first, and assuming things in their report... idiotic at best.

How the BBC reporter basically jumped in to the womans conversation was unacceptable given the worry that she had regarding her mother i thought, he could have shown a bit of common decency and waited until she was in a better frame of mind rather than barging in every 5 or 10 minutes asking "have you heard from your mother, can we speak to her"

2) the police are being "SLATED" now......for tasering him first before he shot himself (if that was the case) would they rather have let him shoot himself then and be slated for not stopping it? or better yet....shoot him before he had the chance, and be slated for inhumane killing of a criminal... i know what i would have done, and been trained for in the army, 2 to the chest, 1 to the head, job done.

Yes the police follow very strict rules, and i understand them being in a position like this in the army, its a hard choice to make to fire at someone knowing its a 1 shot to kill method and knowing you'll take their life, however to protect the public.. if he had raised the gun towards the police, i fully expect at least several of the police marksmen to have opened fire at him for this action... lets just be thankful no other officers or civilians have been hurt now due to this

3) the majority of people who were in the close vacinity public wise was unreal, yes a safety cordon was put up around the area... however there were far too many idiots walking about wanting to be famous on their mobiles to their teenage girlfriends, or their family... this should be addressed and changed accordingly i feel, along with the media representation in the area.
 
he still not give u a bit? i heard he had a curry in the back of the car as well, but he left that to a stray dog........bless him.
 
Neil_C2 said:
Yes the police follow very strict rules, and i understand them being in a position like this in the army, its a hard choice to make to fire at someone knowing its a 1 shot to kill method and knowing you'll take their life, however to protect the public.. if he had raised the gun towards the police, i fully expect at least several of the police marksmen to have opened fire at him for this action... lets just be thankful no other officers or civilians have been hurt now due to this
Click to expand...

That is exactly the point.

The “rules of engagement” state roughly

You shall not open fire unless a person is likely to, or is endangering human life & there is NO other way to prevent this happening. Not verbatim as the information is restricted.

So, as long as he was not pointing his weapon at anyone other than himself they could not fire at him, otherwise the officer involved could be himself charged with murder!!!!!!!!!
 
spot on mate, im glad someone see's my thinking, its a tough call... and you have to be 100% impartial about it regardless wether a fellow officer has been killed.


however i think gazza only wanted to have a beer with him and share his chicken though, i dont know who needed tasered more, moat or gazza!
 
Spiritflier said:
Hi Darren,

It's certainly possible but if I were in that position, I wouldn't want to risk it... To put things into perspective, I've pulled off some great long range and precise shots but when the pressure's been on (in competition), I've been in a position where I couldn't hit a cows arse with a banjo! :D

Cheers for posting the video... It gave me a laugh if nothing else. :)
Si
Click to expand...
Agreed, although any half decent rifle shot can put every round in a 2" circle at 200 yards, even a target as big as a shotgun receiver could be tricky under pressure - but I would have thought worth trying.

I wasn't there and don't have much faith in press reports, but it seems that the police were very, very close to him...
Now, all he had was a sawn off shotgun, its range will have been very short and the police would know exactly what ammo he had from his shooting victims, so it just doesn't make sense to me that they appeared to put themselves in range when they could have pulled back a bit and stayed safe.
But then nothing about the police conduct in this case makes sense to me...
 
I must say I enjoyed the bit where the two highly-trained police drivers crashed into each other in their rush to get on telly arrest Moat. It was only surpassed when Gazza turned up.:lol:

Apparently there were 250 armed officers from 12 forces involved - reminds me of the end of The Blues Brothers.....


 
Neil_C2 said:
christ almighty the amount of facebook threads by people calling this man a "legend" are unbelievable... some sick minded people out there.

my 50p for this thread really is as follows - and i do speak freely here so sorry if you take this the wrong way, i sometimes come accross as a big strong.

1) The press have FAR TOO MUCH freedom in this country, running about like the bloody paparazzi thinking they can barge in anywhere they want, do what they want etc... this must be changed, yes..covering it on the news is acceptable, but how they dealt with this without finding out the facts first, and assuming things in their report... idiotic at best.

How the BBC reporter basically jumped in to the womans conversation was unacceptable given the worry that she had regarding her mother i thought, he could have shown a bit of common decency and waited until she was in a better frame of mind rather than barging in every 5 or 10 minutes asking "have you heard from your mother, can we speak to her"

2) the police are being "SLATED" now......for tasering him first before he shot himself (if that was the case) would they rather have let him shoot himself then and be slated for not stopping it? or better yet....shoot him before he had the chance, and be slated for inhumane killing of a criminal... i know what i would have done, and been trained for in the army, 2 to the chest, 1 to the head, job done.

Yes the police follow very strict rules, and i understand them being in a position like this in the army, its a hard choice to make to fire at someone knowing its a 1 shot to kill method and knowing you'll take their life, however to protect the public.. if he had raised the gun towards the police, i fully expect at least several of the police marksmen to have opened fire at him for this action... lets just be thankful no other officers or civilians have been hurt now due to this

3) the majority of people who were in the close vacinity public wise was unreal, yes a safety cordon was put up around the area... however there were far too many idiots walking about wanting to be famous on their mobiles to their teenage girlfriends, or their family... this should be addressed and changed accordingly i feel, along with the media representation in the area.
Click to expand...
I pretty much agree with this, my take on the press is that their behaviour is often appalling, irresponsible and that their reports are often biased in one direction or another and it would be nice to control them to some extent - but we need a free press to stop the police (and others) from lying about what has taken place out of sight of the general public - it's a difficult balancing act.

Also, I understand that the rules of engagement didn't actually allow the police to fire a disabling or disarming shot, or even to lay down suppressive fire. But surely it should be possible to use the rules of engagement as guidelines when the situation calls for slightly different action? After all, the police have shot unarmed people on a number of occassions and then justified their actions by saying that they thought he might have been armed, or that they thought he might have been carrying a bomb, or whatever.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top