Welcome to Open Carnage

A resource for gamers and technology enthusiasts, with unique means of rewarding content creation and support. Have a wander to see why we're worth the time!

Krazychic

Police Who Pre-Emptively Kill Suspected Terrorists Will Be Protected

149736038216650.jpg

 

The NSW government is set to introduce new laws by the end of this month which give police immunity for pre-emptively shooting a person they suspect of terrorism, even if that person does not pose an imminent threat to others.

 

Spoiler

NSW Premier Gladys Berejiklian announced that she will support all 45 of the recommendations from the coronial inquest report into the Lindt Café siege, and will prioritise those which give police more powers and protect them from civil and criminal prosecution.

 

New South Wales Police Commissioner Mick Fuller acknowledged that police already have the power to “shoot-to-kill” people they suspect of terrorism in situations analogous to the recent London attacks – where they pose an imminent threat to public safety.

 

However, he feels that situations like the Lindt Cafe siege are a grey area, as it was unclear whether Man Haron Monis was going to act upon his threats.

 

As it turned out, Monis was later categorised as a “deranged gunman” suffering from “mental health problems” who was not affiliated with any particular group, whether terrorist or otherwise.

 

Under the proposed legislation, police would be authorised to “shoot-to-kill” suspected participants once the commissioner declared an event to be a “terrorist incident”, regardless of whether those suspected of involvement pose an imminent threat to others.

 

Critics point out that the proposed legislation confers virtually unfettered power on the police commissioner to determine whether an event constitutes a “terrorist incident”, and therefore when his colleagues will be protected from prosecution for wounding or killing people.

 

They are concerned he will declare such events “all too readily” in the interests of protecting police, thereby increasing the likelihood of police unnecessarily shooting and killing people. Critics are concerned that “rogue” police officers who carelessly shoot people will be protected, even if it turns out that their targets were completely innocent of any crime, and/or the shooting was not justified.

 

There are also fears that the legislation will cause the escalation of situations which could be kept under control and ultimately defused, again potentially leading to the loss of innocent lives.

 

There are additional concerns about the commissioner’s ability to identify whether a situation constitutes a “terrorist event”, with critics arguing that current laws which require an imminent risk to persons or the public representing a more appropriate mechanism for determining whether a particular individual should be shot or killed.

 

New South Wales police are already being trained in specialised tactics based on a ‘confront and neutralise’ policy, and have access to semi-automatic weapons to act in order to protect themselves and members of the public.

 

The question, then, is whether the proposed legislation – which gives the minister significant powers, allows for the “pre-emptive” killing of suspects and protects rogue and careless police officers from prosecution – is really a good idea.

 

Source

Vaporeon and Iggy like this

Rumors are carried by haters
Spread by fools
and
Accepted by idiots

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Members of Open Carnage enjoy an ad-free experience!

No way in a million years would any police force in this country be allowed to do that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Iggy said:

No way in a million years would any police force in this country be allowed to do that.

More common than you would think.

 

West Virginia Cop Fired After Not Shooting a Suicidal Man Files Lawsuit
Stephen Mader didn’t shoot a suicidal, gun-wielding man. For that, he says he was fired and called a coward.

Quote

 

"When I arrived at the scene, Mr. Williams was pleading for me to shoot him. He didn't appear angry or aggressive," Mader said in a statement. "He seemed depressed. As a Marine vet that served in Afghanistan and as an active member of the National Guard, all my training told me he was not a threat to others or me. Because of that I attempted to deescalate the situation. I was just doing my job."
 

Shortly after, another officer arrived on the scene and fatally shot Williams after Williams raised his gun. The gun was unloaded. State investigators later determined the shooting was justified.

[...]
Roughly a month later, Mader was fired by the Weirton Police Department for "failure to meet probationary standards of an officer" and "apparent difficulties in critical incident reasoning," according to his lawsuit.
[...]
In a meeting with the chief and City Manager Travis Blosser, Mr. Mader said Chief Alexander told him: "We're putting you on administrative leave and we're going to do an investigation to see if you are going to be an officer here. You put two other officers in danger."

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.