Another madman with a knife!

[finn5555]

And would you be happy if they also shot you while they were about it?

One would hope their aim is good enough to miss me 😂

I guess your happy taking the risk of being severely injured or even killed as long as the
Psychopath isn’t shot dead 🤦🏼‍♂️

[daviemac]

Personally if he broke into my house with a sword I would happily see him shot dead.

Even if your wife/partner or child was accidently shot at the same time?

One would hope their aim is good enough to miss me 😂

I guess your happy taking the risk of being severely injured or even killed as long as the
Psychopath isn’t shot dead 🤦🏼‍♂️

Unfortunately when discharging a firearm nothing is guaranteed, lethal force should always be a last resort not a first reaction. 

[finn5555]

Even if your wife/partner or child was accidently shot at the same time?
Unfortunately when discharging a firearm nothing is guaranteed, lethal force should always be a last resort not a first reaction.

There is a very low risk of that happening and rather take that risk than the perpetrator attacking family members with a sword.

Of course nothing is guaranteed that’s a given, simply put if he/she is a risk of causing serious harm a double tap to the head is the way to go.

That’s my opinion of course, what others think is of no consequence

[petermisc]

One would hope their aim is good enough to miss me 😂
I guess your happy taking the risk of being severely injured or even killed as long as the
Psychopath isn’t shot dead 🤦🏼‍♂️

I would prefer not to be injured by either psychopath or police.

You may hope that the police were sufficiently accurate and knowledgeable about who to shoot not to hit you.  Unfortunately what the US shows is that is a somewhat forelorn hope.

[finn5555]

I would prefer not to be injured by either psychopath or police.

You may hope that the police were sufficiently accurate and knowledgeable about who to shoot not to hit you.  Unfortunately what the US shows is that is a somewhat forelorn hope.

You keep referring to the US, You do know other countries law enforcement agencies also carry guns 🤷‍♂️

You only hear about the tragic events in America I am sure plenty of lunatics are justifiably killed with no collateral damage 👍🏻

[petermisc]

You keep referring to the US, You do know other countries law enforcement agencies also carry guns 🤷‍♂️

You only hear about the tragic events in America I am sure plenty of lunatics are justifiably killed with no collateral damage 👍🏻

We have already had many incidents in this country of people being mistakenly shot.  Such as de Menezes, Duggan, Kaba, etc. The more that you arm the police, and the more they are encouraged to use those srms, it is inevitable that the more such incidents there would be.  I don't want us to end up like the US.

[finn5555]

We have already had many incidents in this country of people being mistakenly shot.  Such as de Menezes, Duggan, Kaba, etc. The more that you arm the police, and the more they are encouraged to use those srms, it is inevitable that the more such incidents there would be.  I don't want us to end up like the US.

We will never end up like the US don’t worry about that. Their archaic gun laws contribute to a lot of what happens there. But we digress, you are happy to take a risk of injury or death as long as we don’t kill the perpetrator I get your message fella 🙄

[petermisc]

We will never end up like the US don’t worry about that. Their archaic gun laws contribute to a lot of what happens there. But we digress, you are happy to take a risk of injury or death as long as we don’t kill the perpetrator I get your message fella 🙄

Obviously you don't get the message.  If an attacker can be disabled using a taser, as in the latest and indeed most cases, then using a gun instead only increases my risk of being injured or even killed.

[finn5555]

Obviously you don't get the message.  If an attacker can be disabled using a taser, as in the latest and indeed most cases, then using a gun instead only increases my risk of being injured or even killed.

What if no taser? You happy for him to be shot?

[southcoastpunter]

We have already had many incidents in this country of people being mistakenly shot.  Such as de Menezes, Duggan, Kaba, etc. The more that you arm the police, and the more they are encouraged to use those srms, it is inevitable that the more such incidents there would be.  I don't want us to end up like the US.

many incidents? yes, one is one too many but - come on. Your first example was in 2005, 19 years ago, the second was in 2011, 13 years ago.

Most people would want a balanced approach to this - tazzer if possible and safe for the police and the public to use it, but some situations require the use of lethal force!

[JontyR]

The talk about the odds of instances occurring, I think the odds of any madman breaking into my house with a sword with the intention of wanting to hurt me or my family are really very tiny.

I think the odds in such a situation of being hit by a stray bullett if police are armed are much higher.

[petermisc]

many incidents? yes, one is one too many but - come on. Your first example was in 2005, 19 years ago, the second was in 2011, 13 years ago.

Most people would want a balanced approach to this - tazzer if possible and safe for the police and the public to use it, but some situations require the use of lethal force!

That is my view too.  I would be quite happy if all police were to carry tasers, as the risk of innocent bystanders getting killed by a taser is negligible.  But use of guns should be a last resort, due to the risks to others.  For an attacker armed with a knife, a taser would seem a more proportionate response than a gun in most instances, for example.

We currently have very few incidents where someone is wrongly shot, because the police rarely use guns here in the UK, but even so they have happened.  If use of guns was made the routine response to armed attackers, as proposed by the poster I was responding to, then such incidents would inevitably increase. 

[petermisc]

What if no taser? You happy for him to be shot?

I can't think of a situation where a taser wouldn't be available when armed police are present.  But in the last resort, if someone was in imminent danger and there was no other way of disabling the attacker, then yes I would be happy.  But as I say, shooting should be the last resort, not the standard response.

[Doc Holliday]

I can't think of a situation where a taser wouldn't be available when armed police are present.  But in the last resort, if someone was in imminent danger and there was no other way of disabling the attacker, then yes I would be happy.  But as I say, shooting should be the last resort, not the standard response.

Armed Police would in situations like this and in the first instance, normally use their taser against a knife attacker.

[daviemac]

Armed Police would in situations like this and in the first instance, normally use their taser against a knife attacker.

Exactly, there would never be a situation where armed police were present but had no taser available so had to shoot him.

[Watts.E.Dunn]

External Link/Members Only

Oz again!, Police shoot boy with a knife AFTER theri Tazers didnt do the job of disabling him!...

[finn5555]

External Link/Members Only

Oz again!, Police shoot boy with a knife AFTER theri Tazers didnt do the job of disabling him!...

Taser didn't work bullet did the trick 👊

[Dipper]

Taser didn't work bullet did the trick 👊

Lethal attack met with lethal defence. Don’t see a problem, to me it’s all about a deterrent being there in the first place.

[Doc Holliday]

Lethal attack met with lethal defence. Don’t see a problem, to me it’s all about a deterrent being there in the first place.

How was it a deterrent?

[Watts.E.Dunn]

External Link/Members Only

[petermisc]

External Link/Members Only
Oz again!, Police shoot boy with a knife AFTER theri Tazers didnt do the job of disabling him!...

They only used the gun as a last resort, not as their first response, which is how it should be done.

[Dipper]

How was it a deterrent?

It obviously wasn’t in this case. But as a general rule I believe it would be.

[RedKettle]

It obviously wasn’t in this case. But as a general rule I believe it would be.

I would guess that most attacks like this are either people with mental health issues or ideologically driven "terrorists", which some people might say is the same thing.  It either case they are usually not considering the consequences for them or are prepared to die for their cause.  In fact going down in, as they see it, a blaze of glory could be an attraction.  For them armed police would not be a deterrent. 

[bigden40]

many incidents? yes, one is one too many but - come on. Your first example was in 2005, 19 years ago, the second was in 2011, 13 years ago.

Most people would want a balanced approach to this - tazzer if possible and safe for the police and the public to use it, but some situations require the use of lethal force!

And the third was likely not a mistake, as the upcoming trial should find.  Chris Kaba whilst being ordered to get out of his car by armed police officers chose instead to drive his car straight at those officers and was shot. Kaba was wanted for a murder in Tower Hamlets a few days earlier, for which 6 men have been subsequently convicted as his accomplices.

[Darren101]

It’s good the tazers worked this time but had they failed, the woman officer would be in imminent danger as they won’t have guns.  I do wonder what they’d do in that instance. Tazers give you one shot and I suspect they won’t work if suspect is wearing thick clothes or the shot just misses.

[RedKettle]

It’s good the tazers worked this time but had they failed, the woman officer would be in imminent danger as they won’t have guns.  I do wonder what they’d do in that instance. Tazers give you one shot and I suspect they won’t work if suspect is wearing thick clothes or the shot just misses.

We are going around in circles! As was mentioned earlier there were armed officers there in support who would have then dealt with him.

[daviemac]

We are going around in circles! As was mentioned earlier there were armed officers there in support who would have then dealt with him.

He had been tasered and was on the floor in handcuffs before the armed response arrived, if the tasers hadn't worked four officers would have been at risk.

[Doc Holliday]

It’s good the tazers worked this time but had they failed, the woman officer would be in imminent danger as they won’t have guns.  I do wonder what they’d do in that instance. Tazers give you one shot and I suspect they won’t work if suspect is wearing thick clothes or the shot just misses.

If equipped with the latest version I understand gives you two shots, but I gather there have been some question marks over its higher 'miss' rate.

Tasers are themselves a deterrent, I certainly wouldn't want to experience one. I seem to recall reading they have only actually been fired on about 10% of occasions they were aimed at people.

[Doc Holliday]

He had been tasered and was on the floor in handcuffs before the armed response arrived, if the tasers hadn't worked four officers would have been at risk.

Indeed, but in this case only at risk for around 30 seconds 

[berksboy]

30 Seconds  count it out its a l o n g time if someone is chopping you up with a saw !

[Doc Holliday]

30 Seconds  count it out its a l o n g time if someone is chopping you up with a saw !

If you read my previous posts in the thread you would realise it was a light hearted remark aimed at Davie.

[daviemac]

If you read my previous posts in the thread you would realise it was a light hearted remark aimed at Davie.

Which was the way I took it.   

[Doc Holliday]

Which was the way I took it.   

Thank god for that 

[Dipper]

30 Seconds  count it out its a l o n g time if someone is chopping you up with a saw !

THIS