bert the fert 28 Posted July 13, 2010 Report Share Posted July 13, 2010 I just seen on the news that Raoul Moat was tasered using two long range shotgun tasers that have not been approved for use by the home office an they were used by two officers that have had no time to carry out the training required to use them and it seems that the chief of police knows nothing about the existance of these weapons.....Looks like there is going to be a long drawn out investigation that will cost the taxpayer a fortune...I think that the two untrained officers that fired these weapons should face chargesand the investigation should also aim to uncover who gave the order that they should be used....this is necissary to stop Britain turning into a police state it seems that they think they are above the law...I know that Raoul had murdered someone and shot two others but everyone deserves a trial...Did the use of these taser shotguns cause Raoul to squeeze the trigger.....Maybe it was an intentional act by the officers to make sure Raoul never got his day in court. I WOULD LIKE TO ADD THAT I DO NOT CONDONE WHAT RAOUL DID BUT I DO NOT THINK THAT THE TWO OFFICERS ACTED WITHIN THE LAW EITHER The police did what they had to do. Mebbe the officers saved the area from another Derek Bird type of rampage. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
TOPPER 1,809 Posted July 13, 2010 Report Share Posted July 13, 2010 he shot a copper there was noway they were going to let him live , the police acted as jury and executioner and they will get away with it and for the record this is now a police state!! whats the difference between a POLICEMAN AND A POLICE OFFICER POLICEMAN == SERVE AND PROTECT AND UPHOLD COMMON LAW POLICE OFFICER== RAISE REVENUE PROTECT THE ESTABLISHMENT Quote Link to post Share on other sites
scothunter 12,609 Posted July 13, 2010 Report Share Posted July 13, 2010 he shot a copper there was noway they were going to let him live , the police acted as jury and executioner and they will get away with it and for the record this is now a police state!! whats the difference between a POLICEMAN AND A POLICE OFFICER POLICEMAN == SERVE AND PROTECT AND UPHOLD COMMON LAW POLICE OFFICER== RAISE REVENUE PROTECT THE ESTABLISHMENT im no lover of cops,but surely if that was the case they would have shot him stone dead.why even try using tasers?the use of tasers makes me think they wanted to end it without him dying.the fact he got a round off was just unlucky on his part. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Night Hunter 109 Posted July 13, 2010 Author Report Share Posted July 13, 2010 It will be interesting to see how this unfolds.... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
stainlee 27 Posted July 13, 2010 Report Share Posted July 13, 2010 I have heard from a reliable source high up in government,that whenever possible police are ordered to eliminate ginger people from the gene pool. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
SportingShooter 0 Posted July 13, 2010 Report Share Posted July 13, 2010 I read the BBC version of events, which I am more inclined to believe than the Daily Mail any day of the week. It seems that the two shots from the XREP Tasers were fired by West Yorkshire Police officers, not Northumbria. It also states that a police force can choose which weapons it uses without them being approved by the Home Office as long as it is reasonable and lawful use of force, therefore whether Northumbria Chief Constable knew of their existence is irrelevant, as I can't find a quote from West Yorkshire's Chief as to whether he knew of their use or not. There is a great deal of supposition, even in the posts here, about what actually happened and until all evidence at the inquest is heard, no one will know the full story apart from those two police officers and Raoul Moat who is not here to answer to it. Contrary to the above, where it is said that it was an intentional act to get him to end it all, it could easily have been the opposite, with them trying to save him, again not something we will know for some time. It was down to those policemen to decide to fire, no one else, so we'll see what they have to say at the inquest hearing, which i'm sure will be highly publicised by the media every inch of the way. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
weasle 1,119 Posted July 13, 2010 Report Share Posted July 13, 2010 The question should be why wasnt he shot on the spot instead of paying god knows how many poilce to stand around for six hours! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
2434me 13 Posted July 13, 2010 Report Share Posted July 13, 2010 Armed and dangerous !!! He should have been shot on sight! The investigation should be about WHY he wasnt!! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
poacher3161 1,766 Posted July 13, 2010 Report Share Posted July 13, 2010 Maybe its because he was a grass and would have been more usefull alive to the old bill as he would have been looking at 30 years and might have told them a lot more as he had nothing to loose Quote Link to post Share on other sites
mud 2,044 Posted July 13, 2010 Report Share Posted July 13, 2010 ask yourselfs this.what wuld you do if you just got out of jail an another man had took over your whole family. and you bird was getting banged by the police. . Quote Link to post Share on other sites
FightTheBan 1,147 Posted July 13, 2010 Report Share Posted July 13, 2010 ask yourselfs this.what wuld you do if you just got out of jail an another man had took over your whole family. and you bird was getting banged by the police. . Get a divorce then start from scratch like any other ordinary human being... What I dont get is people giving this shithead their condolances and support - he was a murderer and no better then the Cumbrian shooter - it's just thet he didn't manage to inflict as much pain and suffering as the latter, and not from lack of trying. FTB 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
scothunter 12,609 Posted July 13, 2010 Report Share Posted July 13, 2010 if the facts are true and he was a grass then f**k him Quote Link to post Share on other sites
IanB 0 Posted July 13, 2010 Report Share Posted July 13, 2010 Who cares. Good riddance to some bad shit. I'd rather he was 6 ft under than him costing us taxpayers a feckin fortune - and also to prevent the worry he will inevitably one day be released to possibly carry out a similar crime. , someone prepared to do that could never be trusted again IMO. FTB Now that I agree with Quote Link to post Share on other sites
readie 184 Posted July 13, 2010 Report Share Posted July 13, 2010 Who cares. Good riddance to some bad shit. I'd rather he was 6 ft under than him costing us taxpayers a feckin fortune - and also to prevent the worry he will inevitably one day be released to possibly carry out a similar crime. , someone prepared to do that could never be trusted again IMO. FTB Now that I agree with got to agree,the idiot shot 3 innocent people all because his ex girlfriend was not under his control anymore.shame police could not have ended it sooner. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
readie 184 Posted July 13, 2010 Report Share Posted July 13, 2010 ask yourselfs this.what wuld you do if you just got out of jail an another man had took over your whole family. and you bird was getting banged by the police. . she was not getting banged by police,even if she was relationships end,he just couldnt hack it that someone else wanted is ex.typical bully. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.