Further London Explosions
 

BBC News

BBC News reports 3 'Minor Blasts' on the tube and one on the No. 26 bus in London between 1238 and 1250 today.

No casualties reported, may it remain that way.

NFS

This is indeed good news. Taking the fight back to the scum. Well done the Met.

Here.

Agree strongly Navaleye , well done SO19 or whoever it was.

Just heard an eyewitness account on the lunchtime news; sounds as if suitably "Gibraltarian" ROE were in force too:rolleyes:

Yeah, and now lets wait for the lefties to start complaining about the amount of force used!!

Markerboy

I do not see why they can complain, he has the right to remain silent:ok:

Retard

My thoughts are with the Officers concerned. It should never be an easy thing to take a life - no matter how correct the act is.

Indeed, well done the Met.

Let's hope that the Home Office backs up those police officers who have to make tough calls in split seconds. MoD seems to have difficulty doing the same for servicemen in similar situations.

V disappointing that the BBC are already 'questioning' the ROE - intimating that the 5 rounds fired may have been OTT. Why can't they resist the journo urge and wait until any salient facts are released? Well done to whoever it was that did what was required. :ok:

Well, my favorite line was this one:
NHS must have really gone down-hill since I moved away :E

The best press commentary so far ran something like this:

Presenter: So you saw what happened?

Witness: Yes [explains what he saw] ... shot him five times.

Presenter: Were those warning shots?

Witness: Er....


:rolleyes:

Yes it was a warning....a warning that he had picked the exact wrong bunch of cops to tangle with! He must have thought they were the standard "unarmed" variety and thus unable to adequately defend themselves.

It is always a bad move to get into a gun fight without having a gun.:E

Before you Huffy Muffs say something....a bomb can be construed as being a deadly weapon.

Interesting that the suspect dived down the Tube and onto a train. He may well have been carrying an armed IED, as it's most unlikely he ran down there to avoid capture.

Five rounds fired may have been due to a stoppage.

Hmmm.

Several unanswered questions spring to mind.

If he presented an immediate danger (eg if he was thought to have a 'device' under his unseasonal coat) then why shoot him five times in the torso, rather than in the head? And according to eyewitnesses he was pushed to the ground and shot, so they were near enough to avoid risking putting rounds into the detonators, etc. And one or two in the cranium would seem so much less..... 'American' .... than a fusillade of five in the torso, and would seem so much less like over-reaction to the public at large.

And if he didn't present an immediate danger, then wouldn't the int value of taking him alive have been worth something? Wouldn't it even be adequate compensation for missing the glee that I'm sure we all feel for having 'got one of the bastards?'

And if he wasn't an immediate threat but wasn't worth taking alive, wouldn't it have been sensible to capture him and then shoot him 'trying to escape', or at least out of public view? (And though I'm a liberal-ish journo, that's not an otion I could bring myself to condemn).

Is there anything we could do to 'gag' witnesses? Why do I know that he was pushed to the floor in a way that suggests he could have been restrained (or shot more sensibly)? Why do I know that they put five rounds into him? The simple fact that the police shot a suspect who they feared was about to detonate a bomb would be so much better from a PR point of view.

And had he been taken alive, how could we have interrogated him rigorously and effectively enough while complying with existing human rights legislation?

I'm not a fan of Gitmo/Abu Ghraib/exporting folk to Jordan, and wouldn't condone using those methods, but against a terrorist suspect are our laws and practises sufficient?

Being realistic, this could easily be presented as 'police overreaction', and could sow further discord in the Moslem community. Nothing (repeat NOTHING) justifies what these scum (terrorists of all flavours) do, but we do need to be mindful that they draw some support from decent human beings who have real (or real seeming) grievances. Presenting them with more causes for concern seems silly.

Jacko - it's hard enough to hit a running target at the main point of impact (or whatever the Rocks keep telling me) let alone go for a head-shot, at lest this way if he was hit he was staying down

Aren't police MP5s single shot? (Assuming it was an MP5)

If you are pursuing a suspect you believe to be carrying an explosive device would it be fair to assume that the device is primed?
In which case, I wouldn't want to risk the remotest possibility that the suspect could denonate if kept alive, taking you, your colleagues and a lot of innocents with him.
A very dramatic demonstration to the perpetrators that our security services mean business.
All over every front page in the world, I imagine, they will see thier failure.
I assume that if this guy is a failed suicide bomber then he won't now be in Paradise with 80 maidens at his beck and call?
Shame, he's really missed out.

I haven't heard anything to confirm that it was torso shots (rather than head shots) that killed this chap. Witness reports on News 24 indicate that officers piled on top on him and then shot him. In ordinary circumstances, to kill someone under restraint is clearly disprortionate. But if they could feel him struggling to get a hand free, then given his unseasonable big coat, I don't see their response as disproportionate at all.

MP5s? Yes, but some SO19 officers engaged in non-uniformed duty carry more concealable weapons. The guys who were fast up to keep up with this guy were reportedly not in uniform.

adr

Armed police are more common by the week. Officers with Glock automatics are a common sight at LHR.

First reports are often wrong. Eye witnesses are often wrong. The press is hardly ever right.

With that out of the way...
The witness that I saw being interviewed said the police were undercover and were armed with semi-automatic pistols.

So first reports suggest that the suspect was shot with a pistol, not an MP5. I've no idea whether the UK police MP5s are select-fire or semi-auto only. Even if they are semi-auto only, it does not take long to fire 5 shots.

I concur well done SO19. Mind you I hope it all was for right reasons as I m sure it was, cause if not London underground are getting really OTT about ticket dodgers!!:ooh:

Oh yeah well done!! Not connected at all with yesterdays bombings it now seems!! Now it's ok to shoot people who are wearing a big coat in july and who run away from the police!!

Human rights people are going to have a very lucrative field day over this!!

:mad:

He was being trailed as likely suspect. He jumped the ticket barrier, ran towards a train. Despite being challenged to stop he did not. The actions of the police were entirely appropriate and reasonable. Protection of the public comes first. I would have done the same thing. The officers concerned are to be congratulated. I welcome a similar course of action under similar circumstances in the future. We are at war.

Naval

Well I do suspect that, unlike the poor Iraq squaddies who are up for courts martial, these policemen will be protected by their chain of command. For a while anyways!

:(

Alas my Simian friend that will not be the case. I have a mate in the Lothian and borders police and he said the procedure after any shooting is to all-but arrest the police marksman and debrief him (read interrogate) According to my mate it's not something you want to be on the recieving end of. As for the shooting. Do not all civilian issued Hand guns have a maximum of two automatic discharged rounds? and would this not apply to police hand guns? if that is indeed the case then the marksman would had to have squeezed the trigger at least 3 times. Does anyone have any info on police sidearms?

For pete's sake! Stop cringeing. This is a state of extreme concern and if someone is suspected and he won't stop when challenged then the ultimate occurs. That is NOW the ROE according to the police - shoot to kill. What the hell is wrong with that?

Would you prefer that they didn't get to him/them and he/they detonate on the bloody train! Get real. This a REAL situation. If these people want to live by the sword then they die by it. I am happy with that!

I had always been led to believe that plod are trained to shoot at the body under all circumstances. Anyone out there suitably qualified to confirm or deny?
I had pondered.. OK random searches on the tube. What does a copper do on discovering and individual wearing an IED, presuambly with a hand held trigger. Lose, lose situation. Now I see the only realistic tactic that may be employed.

Just hope that pick pockets, dodgy street traders and the like have the comon sense to stand still and do as they're told when challenged.

RTR - absolutely. To hell with the huggy-fluffy wet-pants attitudes of some; if the bug.ger didn't stop when lawfully ordered and the officers thought that they had genuine reason to suspect that their lives and those of many others were at risk, then just waste the ba$tard......

One down.....

Maple,

I'd understood that he was shoved to the ground and was on the floor (terrified, "like a scared rabbit") when shot, and not running away and thereby making himself a target. Don't get me wrong. If they thought he had a bomb I entirely commend the decision to shoot him, but if so, I'm scared crapless that they thought it a good plan to fire five rounds into his bulky coat/bomb belt rather than his head, if the latter option was available, as it seemed to be.

Random thought
Do the police have good enough training for this? The police firearms people seem to have a bit of a habit of shooting harmless nutters with replica guns or table legs in Tesco bags, and of being less than 'surgical' when killing in a way that the SAS do not. With this in mind, would it not be better to be aiming to use the professionals for these kind of ops rather than the SO19 wannabes? They do a difficult job fairly well, but this is serious, and no matter how short they crop their hair, and no matter how far they get away from the pointy hat traditional constable's uniform, and no matter that they wear black overalls with military style boots they are policemen and not the SAS, and given the choice I'd have more confidence in the armed forces than I do in the police.

Hmmm.

Marker and Canary Boys,
So it's OK to jump in and validate the police's actions, and to judge the force appropriate before all the facts are known, and to issue willy nilly congratulations for taking out another bad guy (he must have been bad, he had a brown face) but it's not OK to question those actions, or whether there has been excessive force? Surely we should all wait for the facts before judging the actions of the police, even if, like me, you can't help but smile to yourself while being pretty sure that this was a 'result', however messily it might have been achieved?

To paraphrase:

"V disappointing that the 'Enoch had it right'/'Tony Martin's a hero'/'send 'em home' loonies are already speculating about the ROE - intimating that the 5 rounds fired were an entirely proportionate response. Why can't they resist the right wing nutter urge and wait until any salient facts are released?"

Well done to whoever it was that did what was required. Even if it was shooting a shoplifter, fare-dodger or illegal immigrant........

..... read not identified from CCTV footage.

Does not mean not connected. The nice officers would not have had this person under surveillance all morning if he hadn't been suspected of something.....

... well said BEags.
Fight terrorism with retribution of a public nature.

Now install sniffing devices in every entrance to every form of public transport.... just like airports already have.... who cares if it takes 20 more seconds to get on your train, but how the h*ll do you do it at bus stops?
We will come to accept it eventually.

Jacko

Much as I hate the b@st@#ds when they are pointing a laser gun at me on the A1 and much as I respect many of your aviation related opinions, I think your random thought is out of order.
The police firearms units are trained to do their job. They are the experts in this case and you are not.
They're not wannabes, they are the professionals. (though I imagine not Bodey and Doyle)

apparently.... and I know nothing about it before I get to receive incoming (I quote an "expert" from TV).... the gun used was low velocity and one round may not have incapacitated sufficiently..

The Indy was briefed on this last week:

Anti-terror police will useshoot-to-kill policy

By Nigel Morris, Home Affairs Correspondent
Published: 14 July 2005

The face of British policing has been changed forever by the revelation that suicide bombers have struck for the first time in this country.

For several years police chiefs had been preparing for the day that fanatics prepared to take their own lives commit an outrage on British streets. Police had visited Israel and Sri Lanka, which have suffered many suicide attacks, and had sent out guidance to officers on how to tackle a suspected bomber. But last week's atrocities in central London have turned a theoretical exercise into one with a chilling relevance to everyday policing.

Armed officers responding to alerts will follow a "shoot-to-kill" policy, while further security precautions will be taken in buildings regarded as prime targets. It is also understood that fresh advice has been circulated to chief constables in the wake of last Thursday's atrocities, who in turn have passed the information to front-line officers.

British planning for a suicide bombing predates 11 September, but was given fresh impetus by those attacks on New York and Washington in 2001. After leading a police delegation to Israel and Sri Lanka, Barbara Wilding, then a deputy assistant commissioner of the Metropolitan Police, produced a confidential report in 2003 on how to tackle the threat in Britain.

Its general advice for officers was not to challenge suspected bombers, but to alert anti-terrorist officers immediately. If the terrorist appears to be about to blow himself up, officers are told to move passers-by discreetly away from him.

<b>Armed police officers arriving on the scene will be operating a shoot-to-kill policy, aiming for the terrorist's head. They will not shoot at the chest, as is the practice in Britain, for fear that would detonate explosives strapped around the bomber.<b/>

Police are testing mobile or hand-held scanners that can detect hidden weapons or bombs packed with nails and bolts. Work is also under way on how bomb-sniffer dogs can be deployed in the fight against suicide bombers.

The National Suicide Terrorist working group, comprising senior officers, regularly updates its advice to chief constables. A police source said: "It is ongoing work. Many of its projects are under constant review."

One effect of the attacks is that public buildings will have to adapt their security checks. Metal detector machines are likely to be moved outside buildings to minimise the carnage if a bomb is detonated and the number of entrances minimised.

But Ms Wilding has confessed that the potential targets are numerous and diverse, including large sports stadiums and shopping centres. That leaves police with having to rely on intelligence work as they try to track down home-grown suicide bombers.

Many are likely to be only very loosely affiliated to terrorists and to be living outwardly respectable, conventional lives.
------------------------------------


It was classified, but I 've just seen ITN refer to it on the 1830 news by its police Op codeword, so guess it will come out more into the open now. Hell of a call for the police officer - I hope his superiors have the bottle to defend the implementation of their policy.

Armed police officers arriving on the scene will be operating a shoot-to-kill policy, aiming for the terrorist's head. They will not shoot at the chest, as is the practice in Britain, for fear that would detonate explosives strapped around the bomber.

Do they know something we do not?

Speed

From what I have seen so far the victim is not connected in any way with yesterdays incidents and was unarmed. That has come from Police sources.

Funny how we never had such responses during the IRA years!! Shoot to kill policies were never allowed! Now we have armed Police able to shoot any one under the new rules of engagement, marvellous comrades!!
:}

Don't remember the IRA having suicide bombers though.
I feel we are dealing with an entirely different threat here, requiring entirely different counter measures.

Well, what would you do - guy you think is a potential suidice bomber, fails to stop when challenged, runs away into a crowded tube carriage (where 6 people have in the last 2 weeks attempted/managed to detonate devices) and you have at best a few seconds to make a decision? And the guidance/policy is to shoot him in the head if you believe he is a bomber?

Like I said a heck of a call for anyone to make; even if the guy turns out to not be carrying anything, I would not like to second guess the three cops in the situation. Though I agree, police officers tackling and shooting a suspect whilst he is on the ground is grisly and disturbing.

Could a QRA pilot find himself in a similar (though even worse) position someday?

:(

Thanks for that bit of perspective, trailfinder. Possibly even quite topical, too, given what's just happened in Berlin.

adr

I've no idea whether the UK police MP5s are select-fire or semi-auto only.

Met. Police issue MP5's are semi-auto only.

Met. Police issue Glock 17's are standard mil/commercial issue.

Does the 'shoot in the head' policy only apply to our chums of somewhat arab extraction or can they now shoot Mr or Mrs 'white middle class' as well?:}

Thank God we have Police Officers who are willing to do what is necessary on our behalf.... Thank You guys.

I'd suggest that the MET get as many explosives dogs trained as quickly as possible and position them randomly at the entrances to Tube stations, moving them around on an irregular basis to different stations. That might make the bombers think twice if they think they might get caught before they get on the trains.

It should also be made known that any successful bomber will never have a final resting place, once his/her remains have been identified and isolated, whatever is left will be fed to pigs. Then we'll see how keen they are to die for the cause.

I am worried that now London is becoming a harder target, the murderers will move to other cities in the UK with fewer police resources!

Jim 208