Re: The De Menenez Cover-Up gets under Way


"Michael O'Neill" <onq@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:430DC76E.33DF4D39@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> westprog wrote:
> >
> > "Michael O'Neill" <onq@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> > news:430C9027.FFCA017A@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > ...
> > > The fault lay IN PRINCIPLE with operating a shoot to kill policy in
the
> > > first place.
> >
> > Nonsense. There isn't a government in the world which won't shoot its
> > citizens in the right circumstances. There isn't a government in the
world
> > which wouldn't shoot a bomber before he killed a large number of people.
> > What do they have those guns for if it isn't to shoot people?
> >
> > If the government weren't allowed to use force, ultimately lethal,
against
> > its citizens, then it would soon cease to exist.
> >
> > The problem, obviously, with this case, is that they shot an entirely
> > innocent man. There is clearly something wrong with the policy in
practice.
> >
> > Is there a state on the face of the Earth where the government, armed
forces
> > or police will say "No matter what, we will never kill anyone"?
> >
> > J/
> >
> > SOTW: "Love Power" - Lorenzo St. DuBois
>
> Democracies, and citizens of democracies, the world over [and I exclude
> America because of the following] do not kill their citizens as a matter
> of principle.
>
> This principle is enshrined in law as the Right to Life. You may have
> heard of it.

Any democracies that claim such a thing are lying. They all kill their
citizens when they need to. Usually when it is feared that they are about to
commit a violent act.

> Democracies have repealed the death penalty, even as a deterrent
> following judicial process.

> How then can any shoot-to-kill policy be justified.

> I draw a distinction between shoot-to-kill policies and shooting dead
> someone in self-defense. There are huge grey areas here, where someone
> believed the other person was about to kill them, or where they would not
> obey a reasonable request to stop [the Abbeylara reasoning].

That isn't a grey area. That's what happens when you defy the state.

> But holding a guy down who had had ample time to set off a remote control
> bomb and, after restraining him, putting five slugs into his head?

> There's no excuse for that kind of behaviour whatsoever.

> That is murder, plain and simple.

Now you are getting to the specifics of the case, which is a different
matter. It was the on principle bit I objected to.

J/

SOTW: "Love Power" - Lorenzo St. DuBois



.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: The De Menenez Cover-Up gets under Way
    ... >> The fault lay IN PRINCIPLE with operating a shoot to kill policy in the ... There isn't a government in the world which won't shoot its ... There is clearly something wrong with the policy in practice. ...
    (soc.culture.irish)
  • Re: The De Menenez Cover-Up gets under Way
    ... >>> citizens in the right circumstances. ... >>> There isn't a government in the world ... >>> which wouldn't shoot a bomber before ... >> of principle. ...
    (soc.culture.irish)
  • Re: Harold Fish Murder Trial Begins This Week
    ... and willing to use it to shoot a human being. ... If the attacker dies, oh, ... much as the legal system allows the state to commit murder ... No one has the right to kill another ...
    (talk.politics.guns)
  • Re: Tau - Playable?
    ... leadership test any time he wants to shoot anything. ... and move in for the kill on turn two). ... One of the most common ways is to take a squad of crisis suits with any ... The Jump Shoot Jump ability of the Crisis suits is useful for ensuring ...
    (rec.games.miniatures.warhammer)
  • Re: Police can be ordered to kill
    ... to shoot to kill on their own, Savill said his aim was to put the ... deployment of surveillance officers, who now worked in one command, he ... kill, it would be OK. ... Like the one in the police helicopter who threatened to shoot the ...
    (uk.legal)
Loading