[QUOTE=Headhumpy;51852376]A lot of them follow the same philosophy that Zillamaster does, namely 'don't point a gun at something/someone unless you intend to destroy it/them'. Therefore they do not subscribe to the idea of a warning shot, or shooting for extremities rather than centre of mass.[/QUOTE]
i think you misunderstand the point of that statement. it has more to do with gun safety, not the idea that warning shots do not work?
[QUOTE=OneFourth;51852410]i think you misunderstand the point of that statement. it has more to do with gun safety, not the idea that warning shots do not work?[/QUOTE]
Also keep in mind we have liability issues. A deliberate warning shot that maims someone can be constructed as cruelty, and if there's a racial component, things turn into a clusterfuck in a hurry. By training to only shoot to kill, and only when necessary, you make the policy simpler, and easier to uniformly apply, which makes arguments about it's application more cut and dry. It's hard to claim racial discrimination when the policy is barebones simple and uniformly applied, even if the policy isn't entirely sensible.
Call it a more extreme version of the zero tolerance polices that cause schools to suspend the victims of bullying. The end goals and causes are the same. Liability. It's a byproduct of how sue happy we are on this side of the pond.
[QUOTE=OneFourth;51852410]i think you misunderstand the point of that statement. it has more to do with gun safety, not the idea that warning shots do not work?[/QUOTE]
I know, and my point was that the use of warning shots constitutes a violation of gun safety and would therefore piss off many US gun enthusiasts.
[QUOTE=Saturn V;51852147]lol a lot of these dont even specify if it was coming from above[/QUOTE]
The Mythbusters addressed this specific thing. They concluded that bullets still have a lethal velocity because they retain their kinetic energy even when fired into the air - as long as they are not fired directly upwards, so that the bullet actually comes to almost a stop before falling. Even a steep angle could be enough to kill someone.
What if this was orchestrated by the us gov and trump forgot what date he told them to incite it
I'm really hoping the rest of the world sees how hard it is to integrate people of opposite culture into a progressive, western culture. Giving asylum to everybody of a different culture will lead to clashes like this
[QUOTE=Zillamaster55;51851759]The fuck is wrong with them?
You shoot to kill, you don't flail around and try to spook people. You draw that gun, you draw it to eliminate a threat.
And before you construe this as "So you support rioters, huh???", I do not.[/QUOTE]
It's a [b]warning[/b] shot, it means: You fucks better behave yourself or else the next bullet is going into your head.
[QUOTE=Zillamaster55;51851812]Then maybe don't fire a gun willy nilly?[/QUOTE]
Why are you so adamant on making assumptions.
Show me where it said they fired lethal rounds "willy nilly" as warning shorts, when it might have been anything else that makes a loud bang.
[QUOTE=Headhumpy;51852376]A lot of them follow the same philosophy that Zillamaster does, namely 'don't point a gun at something/someone unless you intend to destroy it/them'. Therefore they do not subscribe to the idea of a warning shot, or shooting for extremities rather than centre of mass.[/QUOTE]
My policy is don't point a gun at someone unless you intend to use it, not intend to kill. The point of that statement is it's pointless to piss someone off by pointing a gun at them only to not actually use it and have the pointee get the drop on you. But that policy is very compatible with warning shots, and shooting limbs instead of organs.
[QUOTE=paul simon;51852849]Why are you so adamant on making assumptions.
Show me where it said they fired lethal rounds "willy nilly" as warning shorts, when it might have been anything else that makes a loud bang.[/QUOTE]
Unless they always load the first round to be a blank, I think it's reasonable to assume they used live ammunition for the warning shot (as afaik police officers here do. To my knowledge there was never an injury due to that, but there is some danger involved for sure. Officers firing their gun in a confrontation is really rare here too, though).
Thank you multiculturalism
[QUOTE=Tamschi;51852890]Unless they always load the first round to be a blank, I think it's reasonable to assume they used live ammunition for the warning shot (as afaik police officers here do. To my knowledge there was never an injury due to that, but there is some danger involved for sure. Officers firing their gun in a confrontation is really rare here too, though).[/QUOTE]
It's just generally bad practice to come with accusations and argue them so strongly when information is simply lacking.
LMAO at the guy in this thread who thinks US police tactics make physics. Most modern police forces implement warning shots and when you actually know what you're doing you can fire a gun without danger to bystanders. It's sad and scary when a police officer is scared of his own gun because he doesn't know how it actually behaves.
[editline]21st February 2017[/editline]
[QUOTE=Headhumpy;51852376]A lot of them follow the same philosophy that Zillamaster does, namely 'don't point a gun at something/someone unless you intend to destroy it/them'. Therefore they do not subscribe to the idea of a warning shot, or shooting for extremities rather than centre of mass.[/QUOTE]
Oh no, I'll kill the ground.
[QUOTE=Zillamaster55;51851759]The fuck is wrong with them?
You shoot to kill, you don't flail around and try to spook people. You draw that gun, you draw it to eliminate a threat.
And before you construe this as "So you support rioters, huh???", I do not.[/QUOTE]
Whoa, chill the fuck out. We don't shoot to kill because someone has a packet of peanuts in their hands here in Europe.
I find the idea that people think the US police is the standard of good police work laughable.
[QUOTE=gastyne;51852943]I find the idea that people think the US police is the standard of good police work laughable.[/QUOTE]
I've always said if police were more like Britain I'd consider decent gun legislation.
I mean maybe not here, but it's always a thought in my mind.
Well nowadays this is what you call a Monday in Sweden.
over some guy getting arrested with most likely weed.
[QUOTE=SweetTea;51853062]over some guy getting arrested with most likely weed.[/QUOTE]
If that is the case, I fully understand why they are upset. Still a riot isn't a good idea
[QUOTE=Zillamaster55;51851939]It's an extremely risky move that could lead to someone getting injured or killed, something the police are not given their jobs to do.[/QUOTE]
So is 'shooting to kill' but I'd take a warning shot over that any day.
[QUOTE=Zillamaster55;51851759]The fuck is wrong with them?
You shoot to kill, you don't flail around and try to spook people. You draw that gun, you draw it to eliminate a threat.
And before you construe this as "So you support rioters, huh???", I do not.[/QUOTE]
It was not a warning shot, it was meant to hit.
[URL="http://www.aftonbladet.se/nyheter/a/PQoWb/nya-uppgifter-om-rinkeby-polisen-skot-verkanseld"]Source[/URL] in swedish
A solution is to let the Police go in with full force and mass arrest known criminals, from lower crimes to larger ones.
Or allow the Police to use any means to end this as fast as possible, tbh they say violence breeds violences and in some cases that's true but the Police need to show force so these retards can think twice.¨
The only language these people understand is violence, they will continue to do stuff like this because there are no consequences
[QUOTE=SEKCobra;51852909]LMAO at the guy in this thread who thinks US police tactics make physics. Most modern police forces implement warning shots and when you actually know what you're doing you can fire a gun without danger to bystanders. It's sad and scary when a police officer is scared of his own gun because he doesn't know how it actually behaves.
[editline]21st February 2017[/editline]
Oh no, I'll kill the ground.[/QUOTE]
considering a bullet fired into the air can travel for several miles and retain lethal kinetic energy depending on the type of round, the weapon used, the angle, and atmospheric effects, the warning shot fired could easily have hit in the middle of downtown stockholm, depending on the direction it was fired. you can fire a gun without danger to bystanders if you can clearly see where you are firing at, but into the air is not such a situation. it is quite rare for a bullet fired into the air to hit someone but it is not unprecedented.
if you're going to do a warning shot, you should use a shotgun with birdshot (which i think is likely what they did use in this situation). makes a nice, loud, scary boom which gets attention quick and minimizes the danger inherent in firing into the air.
I don't know what to feel anymore.
Police go into suburb to arrest a wanted suspect. Immigrants start rioting and looting.
I would be shocked if they were Muslim immigrants... Right?
[QUOTE=DogGunn;51853142]I don't know what to feel anymore.
Police go into suburb to arrest a wanted suspect. Immigrants start rioting and looting.
I would be shocked if they were Muslim immigrants... Right?[/QUOTE]
This would happen in any neighborhood with a decent community. The fact that Rinkeby is more than 90% immigrant is completely unrelated.
It's natural human behavior to throw rocks at authority figures and social service workers.
[QUOTE=Zillamaster55;51851812]Then maybe don't fire a gun willy nilly?[/QUOTE]
The Dutch police just like most European police use warning shots as well. This usually means shooting in the air. Since nobody has a gun here, this immediately strike fear into anyone involved.
Our countries are culturally different. That's why warning shots are useful in one country and unacceptable in another.
The dark side:
There is one instance known where a Dutch officer fired it's warning shot to low and hit an innocent bystander at a music festival on the beach.
The good side:
The police only killed 7 People last year. On a population of 17 Million
[QUOTE=lanhacker1488;51853288]
It's natural human behavior to throw rocks at authority figures and social service workers.[/QUOTE]
So you're confirming Sweden actually is a third world country now? What the fuck am I reading, still not sure if this isn't sarcasm.
-snip-
[QUOTE=SEKCobra;51852909]Oh no, I'll kill the ground.[/QUOTE]
Because things cannot ricochet ever. Nope. Doesn't happen. There is no risk in firing into the ground whatsoever.
Zillamaster, the DN article mentions that the cops were trapped between the protesters an the cars. We don't know for sure but can assume that they weren't properly equipped to deal with the situation at that time, thus being forced to react as they did. It may not be the optimal solution but sometimes that is what you have to do. I'm sure they were aware of the risks.
[url]http://www.dn.se/sthlm/polis-skot-for-att-traffa-i-rinkeby/[/url]
The shots fired weren't warning shots. They were trying to hit rioters. They just missed. That's all.
[QUOTE=JCDentonUNATCO;51853389]So you're confirming Sweden actually is a third world country now? What the fuck am I reading, still not sure if this isn't sarcasm.[/QUOTE]
You're saying people don't throw rocks at social workers or cops every time they enter white suburbs in the US? Are Americans robots?
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
