The slow drip feed of information about the shooting of Mark Duggan continues. An insult to the intelligence of a tapeworm, but that is how they choose to do it. We now know that the police opened fire first and that Mark was killed by a single police bullet and another round hit a police officer. Mark had a gun that was converted to be able to fire live ammunition. He was shot during an anti guns operation.
No one can take issue with the police attempting to deal with gun crime. There is no issue with the police firing first. This is not some kind of duel or Western shootout. If the police can see a danger to life they should negate it immediately. They do not need to wait until someone is shot as proof they should shoot a gunman.
However, questions remain. In this 'planned' operation with 'trained' armed police involved, why exactly did they choose to confront Mark whilst in a taxi? In the street? With the driver still in his seat? From the IPCC we gather the beloved MP5 was again the weapon of choice, for an arrest operation that I'm guessing would be designed to be carried out at a range of 6 to 10 feet? (MP5 range: at least 650 feet). And these trained police officers no doubt assumed the tactical deployment we see when shown it on the TV, of standing either side of the vehicle. Directly opposite. Thus enabling them to shoot each other. When are the IPCC going to address these issues? When are they going to insist that the men with guns need to be trained for the situations they face, with a better understanding of tactics. Then clamp down on the idiots that lead them. It is clear the information and the way they are sent out puts lives in danger. And as we have seen all too often, not just criminals lives.
No comments:
Post a Comment