Moat Manhunt

[thebish]

The more I read and see of the media coverage and reactions, the more I wnder if it's actually me that's losing touch with reality.

it is Tango. just go with the flow...

I just heard a voice. Is that you Lord?

hearing voices IS an early sign - yes! - careful - there's hoboh outside with his preventative shotgun!

Why are you calling me Tango? The clipboard at the bottom of my bed says my name is Joe Navark.

it's the orangey colour....

[Worthy4England]

Surely it's ok to ask questions of the police though?

There seems to be quite a few unanswered questions. How he managed to hide so close to the town, why they decided they'd had enough and jumped him and why the autopsy left out that he'd been tasered twice? I don't think it's unreasonable that the police should answer them.

I think you're right.

We need to ask questions like...

Why did you spend 6 hours talking to a known murderer, when you could have shot him soon as you found him?

Unfortunately, we'll end up with a lodsa of liberal-assed questions like "Was it really necessary to use a taser, that culminated in this clearly misunderstood person shooting himself", for which the appropriate answer should be, "Who cares?"

My own view, as said above, is that if the news your girlfriend has a new fella drives you to go on a shotgun rampage, I'm not entirely sure you're mentally healthy.

Now a difficult question for many, if a mentally ill person escaped from an asylum and acquired a shotgun, but despite threatening to, had not yet killed a memeber of the public, and the police had them cornered, would you authorise them to shoot on sight?

Different set of circumstances - in this instance, the person concerned has been identified as mentally ill prior to the incident and up to the point they're cornered may at worst stand accused of illegally possessing a firearm.

That said, we seem to have a society, some sections of which will defend to the nth degree the rights of an individual to be complete knobheads. Members of the public aren't generally entitled to carry firearms, so I think the police should be able to take the view that if a person has one, they're intending to use it. A couple of warnings to put the bugger down should be more than enough.

[CAPSLOCK]

It should indeed

And if you don't, don't fcuking cry about the consequences

[thebish]

That said, we seem to have a society, some sections of which will defend to the nth degree the rights of an individual to be complete knobheads. Members of the public aren't generally entitled to carry firearms, so I think the police should be able to take the view that if a person has one, they're intending to use it. A couple of warnings to put the bugger down should be more than enough.

I suspect that the police response is different when a man is no threat to the general public and has a gun on himself than if a man is a threat to the public (or the police). in the former case (as we seem to have had with Moat) - then they had no real incentive to kill him.

had Moat stood up and waved the gun in their direction - there would have been no warnings - they would have shot him.

so - I'm not really sure why you think the police should have handled the situation differently - or to what benefit.

[CAPSLOCK]

Is that what Worthy is saying?

I didn't read it like that

He (and I) are quite satisfied with the outcome

And I'm not that bothered just how we reached the conclusion

[thebish]

Is that what Worthy is saying?

I didn't read it like that

He (and I) are quite satisfied with the outcome

And I'm not that bothered just how we reached the conclusion

Worthy seemed to be saying they should have given him 2 warnings to put down his gun - and if he didn't - shoot him. Worthy seemed to be saying that negotiating with him was a waste of time.

[CAPSLOCK]

I suspect Worthy wasn't too arsed about any warnings being given

[thebish]

I suspect Worthy wasn't too arsed about any warnings being given

indeed - so - what I wrote was most definately NOT what Worthy was saying.

[CAPSLOCK]

You can play as many games with words as you like, but the fact remains we've one headcase less drawing breath

I'll wait to see if Worthy can be arsed discussing it further

But my tuppenorth, which I suspect is where Worthy is, is that they warned him, he ignored them, they killed him...fair does, had it coming

If they hadn't warned him and just killed him, same as...he was armed and dangerous, had it coming

If he'd got shut of the gun days ago, stripped off and walked out to give himself up, then while I wouldn't have been too arsed if they'd picked him off, I could accept it wasn't acceptable

[thebish]

are you claiming that the police killed Moat?

[CAPSLOCK]

Just jumping on the leftie bandwagon

[thebish]

in that case you're not even on the same page as worthy - he isn't claiming that the police killed Moat - he's suggesting they should have.

makes you sound a bit like a conspiracy theorist, old boy - most people (including me) still believe the story that he shot himself.

[ohjimmyjimmy]

As long as he suffered, i don't give a shit.

[CAPSLOCK]

But the OB made him do it, didn't they

In fact, they're to blame for every fcuked up nob head walking the streets

[Worthy4England]

You can play as many games with words as you like, but the fact remains we've one headcase less drawing breath

I'll wait to see if Worthy can be arsed discussing it further

But my tuppenorth, which I suspect is where Worthy is, is that they warned him, he ignored them, they killed him...fair does, had it coming

If they hadn't warned him and just killed him, same as...he was armed and dangerous, had it coming

If he'd got shut of the gun days ago, stripped off and walked out to give himself up, then while I wouldn't have been too arsed if they'd picked him off, I could accept it wasn't acceptable

Pretty much CAPS.

My fairly simplistic view is, we've warned you twice (in case you didn't quite hear it the first time), you've ignored the warning that we're going to shoot you, you've therefore valued your own life at zero, we're happy to do the same.

Wonder how much per hour the taxpayer has spent on tracking this tosspot down? Then we have to spend another 6 hours worth? Silly idea.

[Prufrock]

Taxpayer money? Wankest of all arguments. About £8.50 probably. Certainly way less than on repairing roads, giving money to people who sue when they haven't repaired roads and weren't looking where they were going. Less than they won't be getting in taxes now they aren't taxing rich people. Less than we'll be spending on about four seats in the Olympic Stadium etc etc etc.

There is a justice system for a reason. If somebody starts firing shots at others, the police can shoot them, if they don't, they can't. I reckon we've got it pretty right there. The main aim the police had last friday was protect the public. Moat didn't seem to be a menace to the public or the police. Their main aim then is to capture him so he can go on trial. They failed in that aim. From what we can gather so far, that wasn't their fault.

[thebish]

You can play as many games with words as you like, but the fact remains we've one headcase less drawing breath

I'll wait to see if Worthy can be arsed discussing it further

But my tuppenorth, which I suspect is where Worthy is, is that they warned him, he ignored them, they killed him...fair does, had it coming

If they hadn't warned him and just killed him, same as...he was armed and dangerous, had it coming

If he'd got shut of the gun days ago, stripped off and walked out to give himself up, then while I wouldn't have been too arsed if they'd picked him off, I could accept it wasn't acceptable

Pretty much CAPS.

My fairly simplistic view is, we've warned you twice (in case you didn't quite hear it the first time), you've ignored the warning that we're going to shoot you, you've therefore valued your own life at zero, we're happy to do the same.

Wonder how much per hour the taxpayer has spent on tracking this tosspot down? Then we have to spend another 6 hours worth? Silly idea.

do you also think, like CAPS, that the police shot Moat?

[Worthy4England]

Taxpayer money? Wankest of all arguments. About £8.50 probably. Certainly way less than on repairing roads, giving money to people who sue when they haven't repaired roads and weren't looking where they were going. Less than they won't be getting in taxes now they aren't taxing rich people. Less than we'll be spending on about four seats in the Olympic Stadium etc etc etc.

There is a justice system for a reason. If somebody starts firing shots at others, the police can shoot them, if they don't, they can't. I reckon we've got it pretty right there. The main aim the police had last friday was protect the public. Moat didn't seem to be a menace to the public or the police. Their main aim then is to capture him so he can go on trial. They failed in that aim. From what we can gather so far, that wasn't their fault.

No, not the wankest of all arguments. Your £8.50 is about the same level of toss that you've just criticised the Sun for coming up with in one of their reports. This incident has the square root of bugger all to do with repairing roads.

There is a justice system for a reason. It requires some changes. The incumbency shouldn't be on the police to make a judgement on whether an individual carrying a loaded firearm is a menace. They should be given the power through statute that says anyone carrying a loaded firearm is a menace. Their main aim should be to bring the swiftest conclusion in a non-hostage situation.

As it stands now, we have the cost of tracking him down for 6-7 days, plus we'll get the cost of the inquest and the inquiry. Ridiculous waste of taxpayers money if ever there was one.

[thebish]

The incumbency shouldn't be on the police to make a judgement on whether an individual carrying a loaded firearm is a menace. They should be given the power through statute that says anyone carrying a loaded firearm is a menace.

how would they judge whether said gun was loaded or not?

[thebish]

As it stands now, we have the cost of tracking him down for 6-7 days, plus we'll get the cost of the inquest and the inquiry. Ridiculous waste of taxpayers money if ever there was one.

are you suggesting the police should not have tracked him down in order to save taxpayers' money?