turns out the guy the british police shot and killed "in connection to the bombings" had no connection to the bombings at all and is a brazilian citizen named jean charles de menezes. he was earlier described as a "south asian man."
*perplexed*
this can't be good. at all.
4 comments:
you are perplexed? why is that?
perhaps the london police are not the trained professionals you apparently think the nypd are.
this is anything but perplexing. it's utterly predictable.
maybe "troubled" would be a better word.
british police rarely carry firearms, so i would make an educated guess that they aren't as experienced in handling firearms and using them, or refraining from using them as the case may be. then again, i wasn't there.
apparently this is a special unit authorized to carry weapons and shoot if necessary. it sounds like they were pretty intent to kill. five shots to the head would pretty much do it.
the nypd is very experienced with weapons. it doesn't stop them from killing innocent people either.
i know i'm going to get jumped on, but systems are imperfect. humans make errors (which is not to say that people who commit errors should not be held responsible -- those who otherwise act understandably but who breach the duty of care to another person are held accountable for their actions -- that's the basic premise of torts liability, but i digress.)
anyway, yes it it true that police often make tragic errors. and other times, malicious acts take place - see "luima." however, the police do perform an essential function in society, and for the most part, they do good work. there are always bad cops, and even good cops don't always make perfect decisions. as for the london incident, it is definitely a blemish on their record, an innocent life was lost, and it will only fuel distrust.
however, but for the actions of the london bombers, this tragedy would not have taken place. i am not exculpating the london police by any means; what they did had horrific consequences. i think they should seriously re-evaulate their policy. and i think that they should compensate the family of the victim for their loss -- if they even try to duck responsibility, i think it would be completely disgusting. the victim was an innocent bystander. and furthermore, the public was not given notice of this policy, which is a big red flag, and inexcusable. shame on them.
bus, i think the blame should **also** be put on the individuals and groups who subscribe to fundamentalist religious teachings that promote violence and death to those who don't subscribe to their beliefs. if it weren't for their killing of 50+ innocent lives, this latest tragedy would not have taken place. there is no material difference between the london bombers, members of al quaeda, people like eric rudolph (the olympic bomber - and the guy who bombed an atlanta lesbian club), and people who terrorize abortion clinics. the terrorists disapprove so much of our way of life that they are willing to wage a holy war against innocent people. THAT truly disturbs me.
however, i think that islam is getting a bad rep for the actions of a small segment of the islamic population (kind of how christians get a bad rep for asswipes like fred phelps), and the media is partially to blame. why are these stories not getting told? i would like to see more stories on muslims standing up against violent fundamentalists. it happens; we just don't hear about it. instead, we see fox news fanning the flames of fear of islam. it pisses me off.
the fact of the matter is, there is a problem, and we need to deal with it effectively and rationally. easier said than done. this is not a war against a nation-state, and tracking the enemy, which is dispersed all over the world, is difficult. we will run into bumps along the way, but we do need to persevere.
there are many layers to this dilemma, and more than i can get into right now.
Post a Comment