UK MPs criticise Jeremy Corbyn over shoot-to-kill

[webfact]

Jeremy Corbyn criticised by Labour MPs over shoot-to-kill

LONDON: -- Labour MPs have criticised party leader Jeremy Corbyn over comments he made about counter-terrorism measures.

Mr Corbyn said he was "not happy" with police potentially operating a "shoot-to-kill" policy during a terror attack.

He later faced criticism from his own MPs at a party meeting, with one accusing him of "fundamentally misunderstanding" the threat to the UK.

A spokesman for Mr Corbyn denied he had been "shouted down" at the meeting, saying MPs backed his stance on Syria.

Full story: http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-34840708


-- BBC 2015-11-17

[Always18]

Keep it up Jeremy - we're all anxiously awaiting the final demise of the "socialist" movement in the UK and you're the right man to do the job.........................

[GinBoy2]

Now the disclaimer is, Yes I am an American. That being said I'm not of the 'arm everyone, shoot on sight' brigade.

However, I have owned guns, been in the military so I do know my way around firearms.

Does this man actually understand what he is saying? Shooting to wound, is actually a darn bit harder than shooting to kill, in fact the odds are if you pull the trigger you are more likely to kill than wound regardless of where you aim, especially if it's a sidearm.

Now I don't know this guy, but in any kind of terror attack I would want the cops to contain the situation as fast as possible by whatever means. Desperately trying to shoot some guy with a kalashnikov or suicide belt in the legs to 'disable' him wouldn't be in my playbook.

[ezzra]

There's another burke and a tosser of a person, why even people like him allowed to breath the air I don't

understand? what message is he putting out beside hatred and foul mouthing the system?

no wonder it comes from a staunch Hezbollah and radical Muslim advocate... people like thrives

in times where unity needed and he goes around preaching diatribe and garbage....

[MrTee]

Not his words. you've got to be pretty dumb to accept right wing tory media headlines.

Lets not forget the last time the UK had shoot to kill a young man, Jean Charles da Silva e de Menezes, was shot to death for no other reason than being in London.

[billd766]

Not his words. you've got to be pretty dumb to accept right wing tory media headlines.

Lets not forget the last time the UK had shoot to kill a young man, Jean Charles da Silva e de Menezes, was shot to death for no other reason than being in London.

So whose words were they?

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-34840708

[NeverSure]

I don't know how they define their terms as in "shoot to kill". In the heat of the moment you can't "shoot to wound" if that's what this is about.

There is something known as "center of mass" which is roughly the torso. It is the largest and easiest target to hit. It also contains the most places where a bullet will immediately disable and probably kill. It is hard enough to hit center of mass without trying to just hit a leg or arm. Even so, hitting a leg or arm doesn't guarantee an immediate stop of the threat.

When you are being shot at or threatened with it you shoot at center of mass for all of those reasons and many or most hits to center of mass are fatal.

If you really wanted to shoot to kill you'd shoot at the brain but that's a tiny target for suckers. I might do that if I had a rifle at fairly close range but never with a hand gun.

Also, police are trained to "triple tap" which means shoot three times at center of mass. That almost guarantees an immediate halt to the threat which was the goal in the first place. If the perp dies, tough shit. He shouldn't have been doing what he was doing.

Cheers.

[MrTee]

Not his words. you've got to be pretty dumb to accept right wing tory media headlines.

Lets not forget the last time the UK had shoot to kill a young man, Jean Charles da Silva e de Menezes, was shot to death for no other reason than being in London.

So whose words were they?

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-34840708

If you listen to the interview you see they were Laura Kuenssberg's words.

She asked a hypothetical generalised question

"if you were prime minster would you be happy to order Shoot to Kill on Britain's streets"

"I'm not happy with a shoot to kill policy in general".

And I'd not be happy, either.. what happened last time we had a shoot to kill : Menezes was murdered in cold blood.. before that Operation Flavius?

- who wants a shoot to kill policy on the streets of the UK? would you? and when your brothers\sisters\daughters\ get shot dead by a policeman doing his job, you'd be happy?

Come on, clearly Corbyn is being played by the media.

[MrTee]

He never said that if there was a terrorist with gun\bomb\whathaveyou they shouldn't be shot.

To suggest that is disingenuous at best..

Get over your selves. why do you want to allow the Daesh to bring war to the streets of Britain?

There was a top British counter terrorist officer on the Radio this morning backing Corbyn's stance.

I'd rather trust him than the Tory supporting BBC journalist trying to make a name for her self.

Edited November 17, 2015 by MrTee

[Steely Dan]

I wonder whether Mr Corbyn is in favour of his 'friends' Hamas and Hizbollah operating a shoot to kill policy?

[MrTee]

I wonder whether Mr Corbyn is in favour of his 'friends' Hamas and Hizbollah operating a shoot to kill policy?

Childish and facetious ..

http://i100.independent.co.uk/article/dont-ever-interrupt-jeremy-corbyn-when-hes-answering-a-question-about-the-middle-east--bJTt6y0Afe

When trying to paint someone as a terrorist sympathiser when they are trying to bring about a peaceful solution ask yourself, do you want peace or are you happy to contribute to failing world based on death and destruction.

[Chicog]

Not his words. you've got to be pretty dumb to accept right wing tory media headlines.

Lets not forget the last time the UK had shoot to kill a young man, Jean Charles da Silva e de Menezes, was shot to death for no other reason than being in London.

The young man could have easily stayed alive if he hadn't run into a tube station when challenged, and continued to run to a train while repeatedly being told to stop by armed anti-terrorist operatives at a time when terrorists were attempting to bomb public transport (and had already done so).

THAT'S why he was shot to death.

Not for being in London.

So please don't spout such disingenuous garbage.

[MrTee]

Not his words. you've got to be pretty dumb to accept right wing tory media headlines.

Lets not forget the last time the UK had shoot to kill a young man, Jean Charles da Silva e de Menezes, was shot to death for no other reason than being in London.

The young man could have easily stayed alive if he hadn't run into a tube station when challenged, and continued to run to a train while repeatedly being told to stop by armed anti-terrorist operatives at a time when terrorists were attempting to bomb public transport (and had already done so).

THAT'S why he was shot to death.

Not for being in London.

So please don't spout such disingenuous garbage.

Gotcha - it own was his fault..

[Enoon]

"I'm not happy with a shoot to kill policy in general".

As a politician he would be happy to modify whatever policy was in force according to specific circumstances. It would not be a good idea to create a "one size fits all" policy as that..........etc,etc.

News, a very special sort of fiction.

Edited November 17, 2015 by Enoon

[MrTee]

Not his words. you've got to be pretty dumb to accept right wing tory media headlines.

Lets not forget the last time the UK had shoot to kill a young man, Jean Charles da Silva e de Menezes, was shot to death for no other reason than being in London.

The young man could have easily stayed alive if he hadn't run into a tube station when challenged, and continued to run to a train while repeatedly being told to stop by armed anti-terrorist operatives at a time when terrorists were attempting to bomb public transport (and had already done so).

THAT'S why he was shot to death.

Not for being in London.

So please don't spout such disingenuous garbage.

Gotcha - it own was his fault..

"The officers followed Menezes to a bus-stop for the number 2 bus on Tulse Hill where several plainclothes police officers boarded. Menezes briefly got off the bus at Brixton Station. Seeing a notice that the station was closed due to a security alert because of the previous day's attempted bombings, he made a telephone call and reboarded the bus towards Stockwell.

Unaware the station was closed, the surveillance officers said they believed that Menezes's behaviour suggested that he might have been one of the previous day's failed bomb suspects. Officers claimed that Mr de Menezes' entirely innocent behaviour appeared 'suspicious'.[8] They later stated that they were satisfied that they had the correct man, noting that he "had Mongolian eyes".[9] At some point during this journey towards Stockwell Tube station, 3.3 kilometres (2.1 mi) away, the pursuing officers contacted Gold Command, and reported that Menezes potentially matched the description of two of the previous day's suspects, including Osman Hussain.[10] Based on this information, Gold Command authorised "code red" tactics, and ordered the surveillance officers to prevent Menezes from boarding a train. According to a "senior police source at Scotland Yard", Police Commander Cressida Dick told the surveillance team that the man was to be "detained as soon as possible", before entering the station.[11] Gold Command then transferred control of the operation to Specialist Firearms Command (known as 'CO19' or 'SO19'), which dispatched firearms officers to Stockwell Tube Station.

Stockwell tube station entrance

Menezes entered the Tube station at about 10:00am, stopping to pick up a free newspaper. He used his Oyster card to pay the fare, walked through the barriers, and descended the escalator slowly. He then ran across the platform to board the newly arrived train. Menezes boarded the train and found one of the first available seats.

Three surveillance officers, codenamed Hotel 1, Hotel 3 and Hotel 9, followed Menezes onto the train. According to Hotel 3, Menezes sat down with a glass panel to his right about two seats in. Hotel 3 then took a seat on the left with about two or three passengers between Menezes and himself. When the firearms officers arrived on the platform, Hotel 3 moved to the door, blocked it from closing with his left foot, and shouted 'He's here!' to identify the suspect's location."

[Briggsy]

Not his words. you've got to be pretty dumb to accept right wing tory media headlines.

Lets not forget the last time the UK had shoot to kill a young man, Jean Charles da Silva e de Menezes, was shot to death for no other reason than being in London.

The young man could have easily stayed alive if he hadn't run into a tube station when challenged, and continued to run to a train while repeatedly being told to stop by armed anti-terrorist operatives at a time when terrorists were attempting to bomb public transport (and had already done so).

THAT'S why he was shot to death.

Not for being in London.

So please don't spout such disingenuous garbage.

This fictitious account made up by the police to hide their guilt and incompetence was completely disproved by the independent investigation.

What you have said is repeating a complete pack of lies. Go back, do your research and you will find the truth was very, very different from the utter garbage, Chicog, that you have posted. Absolute <deleted>.

[norfolkandchance]

JC would make a great PM. Heaven forbid

[MrTee]

Not his words. you've got to be pretty dumb to accept right wing tory media headlines.

Lets not forget the last time the UK had shoot to kill a young man, Jean Charles da Silva e de Menezes, was shot to death for no other reason than being in London.

The young man could have easily stayed alive if he hadn't run into a tube station when challenged, and continued to run to a train while repeatedly being told to stop by armed anti-terrorist operatives at a time when terrorists were attempting to bomb public transport (and had already done so).

THAT'S why he was shot to death.

Not for being in London.

So please don't spout such disingenuous garbage.

This fictitious account made up by the police to hide their guilt and incompetence was completely disproved by the independent investigation.

What you have said is repeating a complete pack of lies. Go back, do your research and you will find the truth was very, very different from the utter garbage, Chicog, that you have posted. Absolute <deleted>.

Briggsy, you are entirely correct, but which ever way you look at it an innocent man was shot dead..

His poor mother's tears!

[Enoon]

Not his words. you've got to be pretty dumb to accept right wing tory media headlines.

Lets not forget the last time the UK had shoot to kill a young man, Jean Charles da Silva e de Menezes, was shot to death for no other reason than being in London.

The young man could have easily stayed alive if he hadn't run into a tube station when challenged, and continued to run to a train while repeatedly being told to stop by armed anti-terrorist operatives at a time when terrorists were attempting to bomb public transport (and had already done so).

THAT'S why he was shot to death.

Not for being in London.

So please don't spout such disingenuous garbage.

At no time was he challenged or "repeatedly" told to stop. You're quoting "News".

From the inquest:

Questions of fact

Did firearms officer C12 shout "armed police"? No Did Mr Menezes stand up from his seat before he was grabbed in a bear hug by officer Ivor? Yes Did Mr Menezes move towards C12 before he was grabbed in a bear hug by Ivor? No Police challenge

Police initially stated that they challenged Menezes and ordered him to stop outside Stockwell station. Metropolitan Police Commissioner Sir Ian Blair said in a later press conference that a warning was issued prior to the shooting. Lee Ruston, an eyewitness who was waiting on the platform, said the police did not identify themselves. The Times reported "senior police sources" as saying that police policy would not require a warning to be given to a suspected suicide bomber before lethal action was taken.^[101]

The leaked IPCC documents indicated that Menezes was seated on the train carriage when the SO19 armed unit arrived. A shout of 'police' may have been made, but the suspect never really had an opportunity to respond before he was shot. The leaked documents indicated that he was restrained by an undercover officer before being shot.

During the 2008 inquest into Menezes's death, passengers who were travelling in the same carriage also contradicted police accounts, saying that they heard no warnings and that Menezes gave no significant reaction to arrival of the policemen. One passenger said that Menezes appeared calm even as a gun was held to his head and was clear that the police officers did not shout any warnings before shooting him.^[102]

In its open verdict on 12 December 2008, the jury decided 8 to 2 that no shouted warning had been given.^[103]

[Chicog]

Thank you for the education gentlemen.

Points all noted.

But I still don't blame the officers that actually killed him, if they genuinely believed he was packing a suicide bomb, they did the right thing.

Wrong place and definitely the wrong time.

[Basil B]

I am sure our police and armed forces are not told "take no prisoners", ideally for intelligence purposes it is better to take them alive.

I hope our police have the instructions to do what's best in their judgement of the situation, I am proud of our our armed police, as we do not routinely arm every police officer, instead only selected police officers are accepted for the fire arms unit.

In such a situation the officer has a few seconds or even less to make a decision whether to shoot or not... they are trained to shoot at the part of the body that presents the largest profile, normally the chest, though nowadays if they suspect the target is wearing a suicide vest the may well go for a head shoot.

[MrTee]

Thank you for the education gentlemen.

Points all noted.

But I still don't blame the officers that actually killed him, if they genuinely believed he was packing a suicide bomb, they did the right thing.

Wrong place and definitely the wrong time.

I wouldn't blame those policemen, they were doing a very difficult job in a time of heightened tensions - there was a a lot of pressure on them..

But it proves that a generalised shoot to kill policy is not the right thing for the UK and in saying so Corbyn is right.

We don't want to be a nation were extra-judicial exterminations happen.

Its only the PTB that want to discredit the man and make him look dangerous.

Ask yourself what are they afraid of..

[norfolkandchance]

Policeman - Please Mr Terrorist don't keep firing at me. Put the gun down nicely

[Baerboxer]

Not his words. you've got to be pretty dumb to accept right wing tory media headlines.

Lets not forget the last time the UK had shoot to kill a young man, Jean Charles da Silva e de Menezes, was shot to death for no other reason than being in London.

So whose words were they?

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-34840708

If you listen to the interview you see they were Laura Kuenssberg's words.

She asked a hypothetical generalised question

"if you were prime minster would you be happy to order Shoot to Kill on Britain's streets"

"I'm not happy with a shoot to kill policy in general".

And I'd not be happy, either.. what happened last time we had a shoot to kill : Menezes was murdered in cold blood.. before that Operation Flavius?

- who wants a shoot to kill policy on the streets of the UK? would you? and when your brothers\sisters\daughters\ get shot dead by a policeman doing his job, you'd be happy?

Come on, clearly Corbyn is being played by the media.

He's being played by the media because previously he has made statement about never deploying British forces; not supporting a nuclear deterrent; and supporting extreme Muslin terror groups (as well as some nearer to home).

He would quiet happily neuter Britain's defense capabilities and hog tie the police. The public has a right to know his views given he could be PM one day.

He was avoiding answering direct questions as he knows large numbers of his own party, MPs and the public at large disagree with his views.

The police forces in the UK make very few shooting mistakes. Any would be regrettable but maybe we should think about protecting the victims of terrorism too.

Would you be happy if some terrorist beheaded or blew up your brother/sister/son/daughter because the police weren't allowed to shoot him when he was attacking them for fear they might not just wound him?

[English 1]

Dixon of Dock Green and PC Plod helping old ladies across the road are long gone…..Sadly.

The English Bobby has been proud not to bear arms like in most other countries.

However, the way things have and are escalating into a war on our streets it's time for change.

All Police should now be trained to use a gun and have one visible on their person.

You cannot stop a brainwashed terrorist with a 'Steel Baton' as at present!

[anfh]

Whatever happened to Mr Mendes is very sad, whatever the circumstances. But i wonder what the comments would have been about the Police had Mr Mendes indeed been a terrorist and be allowed to blow up a tube train.

As for dealing with terrorists on the street, armed with guns etc, i personnally would be very happy with a "shoot to kill " policy.

Mr Corbyn seems to think that talking to terrorists is the way forward and comming to a happy agreement etc, these people are not rational, but are fanatics, you cannot reason with fanatics !

[MrTee]

Not his words. you've got to be pretty dumb to accept right wing tory media headlines.

Lets not forget the last time the UK had shoot to kill a young man, Jean Charles da Silva e de Menezes, was shot to death for no other reason than being in London.

So whose words were they?

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-34840708

If you listen to the interview you see they were Laura Kuenssberg's words.

She asked a hypothetical generalised question

"if you were prime minster would you be happy to order Shoot to Kill on Britain's streets"

"I'm not happy with a shoot to kill policy in general".

And I'd not be happy, either.. what happened last time we had a shoot to kill : Menezes was murdered in cold blood.. before that Operation Flavius?

- who wants a shoot to kill policy on the streets of the UK? would you? and when your brothers\sisters\daughters\ get shot dead by a policeman doing his job, you'd be happy?

Come on, clearly Corbyn is being played by the media.

He's being played by the media because previously he has made statement about never deploying British forces; not supporting a nuclear deterrent; and supporting extreme Muslin terror groups (as well as some nearer to home).

He would quiet happily neuter Britain's defense capabilities and hog tie the police. The public has a right to know his views given he could be PM one day.

He was avoiding answering direct questions as he knows large numbers of his own party, MPs and the public at large disagree with his views.

The police forces in the UK make very few shooting mistakes. Any would be regrettable but maybe we should think about protecting the victims of terrorism too.

Would you be happy if some terrorist beheaded or blew up your brother/sister/son/daughter because the police weren't allowed to shoot him when he was attacking them for fear they might not just wound him?

he has made statement about never deploying British forces;

Not true, he said he would under international law.

Perhaps if other Prime minsters, such as Tony Blair, had obeyed international law then the Middle East wouldn't be the mess it is now. and millions of people wouldn't have had to die for nothing - including hundreds of British soldiers .

"not supporting a nuclear deterrent;"

There is no such thing, not "ours" and it deters no one.

We pay the good ol' US for their weapons. Daesh don't give a monkey's about any nuclear deterrent.. Not did Argentina when they thought we were vulnerable after spending all our defence budget on weapons we can never use. Having Trident make the UK more vulnerable - better to spend £167 BILLION on a proper army, ask the military..

and supporting extreme Muslin terror groups (as well as some nearer to home).

Again more nonsense. See my post above.. trying to bring about a discussion for peace is not "supporting extreme Muslins [sIC]

I suppose you'd rather not find a peaceful solution?

Oh, thats a new take on it..

Can you point out where Corbyn or anyone else for that matter said " the police weren't allowed to shoot him when he was attacking them for fear they might not just wound him?"

I missed that part, but I am willing to concede I am wrong if you can provide evidence of Corbyn saying that ..

Edited November 17, 2015 by MrTee

[MrTee]

Dixon of Dock Green and PC Plod helping old ladies across the road are long gone…..Sadly.

The English Bobby has been proud not to bear arms like in most other countries.

However, the way things have and are escalating into a war on our streets it's time for change.

All Police should now be trained to use a gun and have one visible on their person.

You cannot stop a brainwashed terrorist with a 'Steel Baton' as at present!

Seems the public can be brainwashed though..

How many people in the UK have died from terrorism since 2010?

you are more likely to die from a bee sting.

Quick lets arm every police men with high powered DEET,.

[MrTee]

Whatever happened to Mr Mendes is very sad, whatever the circumstances. But i wonder what the comments would have been about the Police had Mr Mendes indeed been a terrorist and be allowed to blow up a tube train.

As for dealing with terrorists on the street, armed with guns etc, i personnally would be very happy with a "shoot to kill " policy.

Mr Corbyn seems to think that talking to terrorists is the way forward and comming to a happy agreement etc, these people are not rational, but are fanatics, you cannot reason with fanatics !

Anfh, no one is saying you can reason with fanatics..

What Corbyn said was he would not be happy with a general shoot to kill policy on the British streets.

you're working as hard as you can to make it into something its not.

[Chicog]

Corbyn as quoted by the (left wing) Guardian:

“I’m not happy with the shoot-to-kill policy in general – I think that is quite dangerous and I think can often be counterproductive. I think you have to have security that prevents people firing off weapons, where they can. There are various degrees of doing things as we know … but the idea you end up with a war on the streets is not a good thing. Surely you have to work to try and prevent these things happening, that’s got to be the priority.”

He obviously does not equate what happened in Paris with "war on the streets".

I, on the other hand, do.

I think it's a given that you want to try and preclude these type of attacks, but once they are in play, the gloves must come off.

Edited November 17, 2015 by Chicog