man killed at outram park mrt?
-
Originally posted by Deino:
the garbament never train the police to be steven segal mah.......to train like steven segal also need time to meditate and keep your cool while being constantly vigilant.....
Havent heard the name Steven Segal for a long time but Chuck Norris like a million times here
.If my body tua chiak like him I also can bungkus anyone without the Akido
-
Whoa, this is getting more and more interesting... with qns being asked on why lethal force was being used, and alternatives being thought out... guess we are all armchair critics, just that some are armed with more knowledge than the others.
By the way, is any of the opposers' drawn to the fact that it has been ruled as justified as it was in accordance to the law and ROE.
Pls dun tell me that the 13 means some guy is really just 13 yr old in here.
"Only a suspect", some of you claim. L**J**... wait till this "only a suspect" guy is charging at you at close range with a knife. By shooting him, I am not passing the death sentence on him becos I am judge and executioner, which police are not. It's because my life is threatened. Too much muck and being just 13 does affect judgement, I guess.
-
Quoting the Penal Code:
Nothing done in private defence is an offence.
96. Nothing is an offence which is done in the exercise of the right of private defence.When the right of private defence of the body extends to causing death.
100. The right of private defence of the body extends, under the restrictions mentioned in section 99, to the voluntary causing of death or of any other harm to the assailant, if the offence which occasions the exercise of the right is of any of the following descriptions:
(a) such an assault as may reasonably cause the apprehension that death will otherwise be the consequence of such assault;
(b) such an assault as may reasonably cause the apprehension that grievous hurt will otherwise be the consequence of such assault; -
Originally posted by weewee:
i doubt cctv are still just black and white.
Yes, most of the cctv stil lr in black and white. They are so not because they cant have it in colour, but black & white are a better meaning of storage. Colour take up 3x more storage then B&W. CCTV are recorded and store for 1 month b4 overwriting on normal low level security and up to 1/2 yr for high securtiy.
-
Originally posted by pacoboy:
Whoa, this is getting more and more interesting... with qns being asked on why lethal force was being used, and alternatives being thought out... guess we are all armchair critics, just that some are armed with more knowledge than the others.
By the way, is any of the opposers' drawn to the fact that it has been ruled as justified as it was in accordance to the law and ROE.
Pls dun tell me that the 13 means some guy is really just 13 yr old in here.
"Only a suspect", some of you claim. L**J**... wait till this "only a suspect" guy is charging at you at close range with a knife. By shooting him, I am not passing the death sentence on him becos I am judge and executioner, which police are not. It's because my life is threatened. Too much muck and being just 13 does affect judgement, I guess.
I am not opposed to the idea of using force to STOP the assailant.But warning has to be given, warning not heeded, then force should be used to stop the assailant, not kill him with a single shot to the chest.
You must be quite daft to think that 13 is the age of a person, proceeding with your line of logic, don't tell me you are just a small boy.
Such infantile logic, sheesh, number associating with a name is the age.
In the case of Boon Lay Hawker center, the policeman fired a shot into the ground to serve as a warning to the man charging with a chopper.
On your ROE (Rules of Engagement):
I don't know what you were taught in the police force or army.
In the army we were taught.
1) challenge the aggressor to stop
2) if he failed to stop, fire a shot as warning
3) if he still fails to stop, aim at his leg to injure him, not to kill
Even if the policeman lacks the time to progress from stage 1 to 3.
Should he just shoot at the legs?
Why did the policeman shoot at the chest where there are vital organs?
Obvious reason is, he panicked and point the gun at shoulder level and fired a shot.
-
If according to corebooster and little pacoboy,
there is no need to give warning shots
there is no need to shoot at legs.
Then I guess the proper procedure would be:
1) Shoot the suspect in the heart to kill
If you willing to accept this statement, then I will have no contentions.
There will be more Dirty Harrys in the future.
Go ahead make my day!
It's a sad case when Singapore ends up with folks like pacoboy and corebooster.
-
Originally posted by sand king:
What kind of rounds to the police use? FMJ?
Didnt mention what round so I assume it is 38 calibre which is devastating at close range
-
Most Singaporean kids these days lack empathy.
Social Disenchantment.
-
If you were around to appreciate the scene, then you would realize how close the assailant was to the 2 coppers. and when someone is charging at you, knife in hand, as opposed to strolling or crawling like the demon in Ju-On, then you would realize that the most crucial factor, time, is lacking.
There is imminent threat of death or injury here. Do you honestly think a charging man will stop with a verbal warning at, literally, such short notice?
We can all argue till the cows come home, and even their milk turns to cheese. Basically from what I have seen, there are two skools of thought, and nobody intends to budge their opinion, which is fine and well.
But I will say that they acted in accordance with all the SOPs and directives they were taught.
It would have been too dangerous to fire a shot at the ceiling in an enclosed area.
-
Originally posted by maurizio13:
Most Singaporean kids these days lack empathy.
Social Disenchantment.
This is neither an issue about singaporean kids nor an issue of empathy. Look at the letters in the ST written by retired SPF POs who also feel that it was justified. My father, a retired PO currently instructing at home team academy, also agrees.
The same people who insist that the PO was wrong to fire a direct hit are likely to be the same people who would have complained that the PO should be hanged if he had injured passerbys with warning shots or hesitated long enough with his finger at the trigger and allowed the "victim"(in maurizio's words) to take hostages or even assault them.
What the hell was he doing with a 15cm long weapon in a crowded public place? Doubt he was planning to turn himself in anytime soon.
-
I think most of us could agree that the Policeman was not wrong in shooting that man but it was a regrettable incident as a life was lost.Not everyday people get to be a hero and he would have been one if nobody died that day.
-
didnt we establish that SPF and SAF RoE is different ? You could prpbably ask why... but we're aren't the ones who set RoEs so...
The 'shot to the ground' might be a missed leg shot, which actually endangered the officer as the
attacker actually got into melee range with a chopper.And of course, Police Academy did not teach me to fire warning shots to the ground. ( Tell me which sane officer would do that? )
In fact, i only remember 1 scenario where the firing of warning shot was actually preferred... It was to break up mass fights with weapons, where many lives were at risk at anytime.
There was also a case whereby a warning shot from the ground hit a resident living several floors above a building in Hong Kong. This is probably why the 'warning shot' is not advocated in SPF.
Fellow PA grads kindly correct me if anything's wrong.
-
Originally posted by Sagara:
didnt we establish that SPF and SAF RoE is different ? You could prpbably ask why... but we're aren't the ones who set RoEs so...
The 'shot to the ground' might be a missed leg shot, which actually endangered the officer as the
attacker actually got into melee range with a chopper.And of course, Police Academy did not teach me to fire warning shots to the ground. ( Tell me which sane officer would do that? )
In fact, i only remember 1 scenario where the firing of warning shot was actually preferred... It was to break up mass fights with weapons, where many lives were at risk at anytime.
There was also a case whereby a warning shot from the ground hit a resident living several floors above a building in Hong Kong. This is probably why the 'warning shot' is not advocated in SPF.
Fellow PA grads kindly correct me if anything's wrong.
x2 =)
-
Hmmmm. Lets see, if u were in that situation with a gun and a man is charging at u. Wad would u do?
U think so easy to aim leg and hand at such a distance considering the situation. U gotta be kidding.
-
About targeting..
We were taught to target the body part that is easiest to hit, namely the torso. Not the head / legs / arms.
Our range shooting target is also the torso and we get like 10push-ups for every shot to the head.
Consider the options that the officer had...
Shot to Arm - Hardest to hit and probably the height / angle of shot would have endangered passer-bys if he missed.
Shot to Legs - Would not be easy to hit in target practice and even moreso, when in a life-threatening situations, where you need to factor in mental stress, adrenaline, surroundings, lighting etc. Bullet might ricochet if missed.
Shot to body - Easiest to hit which could then prevent attacker from causing hurt to others (eg PO, hostages)
1,000 post :)
-
This still going on!
"Why the police officer don't shoot the leg?"
Ans: You ask me, I ask who?
If 'shoot the leg' is really the practice, we will definitely one day have a case where a suspect is hit in the balls. Then we will have a field day.
-
~ sorry, double post ~
-
Originally posted by maurizio13:
I am not opposed to the idea of using force to STOP the assailant.But warning has to be given, warning not heeded, then force should be used to stop the assailant, not kill him with a single shot to the chest.
You must be quite daft to think that 13 is the age of a person, proceeding with your line of logic, don't tell me you are just a small boy.
Such infantile logic, sheesh, number associating with a name is the age.
In the case of Boon Lay Hawker center, the policeman fired a shot into the ground to serve as a warning to the man charging with a chopper.
On your ROE (Rules of Engagement):
I don't know what you were taught in the police force or army.
In the army we were taught.
1) challenge the aggressor to stop
2) if he failed to stop, fire a shot as warning
3) if he still fails to stop, aim at his leg to injure him, not to kill
Even if the policeman lacks the time to progress from stage 1 to 3.
Should he just shoot at the legs?
Why did the policeman shoot at the chest where there are vital organs?
Obvious reason is, he panicked and point the gun at shoulder level and fired a shot.
in the army, at army camps? in field? where you have a lot of space between you and the aggressor? where it is open air and you can shoot sky? where you can take time to aim with yr SAR? come on lah SAR is so much more accurate than pistol of course can aim to shoot leg and somemore there are little or no innocent bystanders there. corebooster already said the bullet doesnt go where you aim. of course he did not aim the chest but the torso,just so happens it hit his chest.
If the PO did not panick what would he do? charge at him with his bare body? he did not even have a shield! engage him with baton? try fighting with short sticks with a friend and you will know how hard it is. plus that guy has a knife. knife VS baton which one more dangerous?
Pls don be a armchair PO. I know Im not a PO, but at least i went for IMT before(so i know a rifle is more accurate than a pistol) and i painstakenly read through all the post in this thread.
-
tis is not CS ok... police gan jiong spider and aim at the largest target available, the chest lor.
if u play paintball u know wat i mean.
-
so no one died. Did the parang wielding person actually killed anyone ?
Anyways , i just saying. 2 well trained police officer. 1 parang wielding man. Where is the pepper spray ?LOL.. or the only manner to disable an assailant is through extreme force and that is by pistol ah. Did the guy run towards the police or walk towards. All these little facts will determine whether the police had the right to shoot or not. If there are no S.O.P's , so much power to the police , i fear for the citizens of Sg.
Since those that so support the shot , maybe should also give full support to how the government is running things in the name of stability. =P
Of course most of us will commend the police officer , but i am just saying maybe if they regard human life a little more , they couldve used alternative ways to take him down.
But i guess its not THAT bad , he didn't die . heh
-
get your facts right first leh...
-
marizio 13: ok, so I was wrong in assuming your age, sorry.
anyway, the reason I am worked up is because I dun know how a justifiable, act done in self defence and others can cause the shooting officer to draw so much flak from opposers. There is a reason why I quote the penal code, and that is show what the officer did is justified.
I wouldnt call him trigger happy. I mean, look, if he did not do what he did, the cop would be the victim here in this case.
The core duty of the police is to protect life and property, including their own. At a 3m distance, even if I am to walk towards you, I would take like 1 second to cover the distance. Moreover, a man with IMH record, earlier killed another man, and wanting to avoid being arrested thus attempting to attack the officers would not take his own sweet time to walk... So if you think you can take down an armed crazed man without use of firearms... glad you are not a cop facing such a situation, or there be a ceremonial parade for you, with pall bearers.
-
crap...another comparison with SAF and SPF...get it rigt..these are 2 different organisations with 2 different objectives. Dun get carried away. These 2 cannot be compared side by side cos they serve different purposes and have different trainings. There's Directives,SOPs,GOMs,and etc. matured people wun compare this 2. especially those who have served both.
military men are not familiar with police procedures. and neither are policemen with military maneuvers. So stop these squabbling and comparisons.
Honestly, it's just fate. Too bad, the man died. Move on. Face it. Nobody told him to charge. Nobody told him to hold onto a knife in public place. He's fated to die that way. even if shot in the legs,thigh,shoulder,anywhere, if it's meant to be, it's meant to be.
the main factor here is distance. That's the only factor, distance. Crowd is secondary. think about it. think about the distance. less than 10 metres, an enemy charging with knife drawn...u draw, u shoot. where u shoot? the biggest surface area of course, which is the chest. all firearms instructor will agree that the chest is the best place to aim, regardless of distance. simple logic, biggest surface area, higher probability of hit. not to kill, but to stop. where it hit, leave it to fate. there are people who survived head shots and shotgun shots.
so why this squabble and name calling. here is to share ideas, not pick on anyone,or any organisation.
-
i think the murderer deserved it.....afterall, he killed the man.......wot does he think life is? a game? he think this is gta.....can go around wacking cops arh