Knife Attack, Marseille

[mushroom25]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-41461107

2 victims, and the "perpetrator" neutralised. too early to speculate on the identity or motive of the attacker.

under their current emergency situation, the French authorities are taking a robust approach to events like this; result, attacker dead, even though the magnitude is some bit less than other attack events in France. is the "shoot first" tactic the right one? or would it be right to permit an attacker "some leeway" if such an approach guaranteed arrest (and bringing to justice) of the attacker, at the expense maybe of a few more victims?

[jno]

I'm quite in favour of bringing people to justice - and taking the opportunity to interrogate them about their friends. Such opportunities aren't that common and it's a shame to lose them.

[-Talbot-]

Shoot them

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-41459237

[youngmafbog]

Shoot first is exactly the correct tactic.

No chance of any right-on liberal or 'ooman rights lawyer getting him/her out.

[youngmafbog]

jno, often in these cases the authorities already know the perpetrator and his/her friends.

[-Talbot-]

Let's pray that they were home grown terrorists eh?

[youngmafbog]

//too early to speculate on the identity or motive of the attacker. //

"Two passengers are killed as attacker shouting 'Allahu Akbar' slits a woman's throat with a butcher's knife and stabs another at Marseille station"

I think we know the motive.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4938248/Police-shoot-dead-knife-wielding-man-Marseille-station.html

[jno]

sometimes, ymb, not always. The closer we get to "always" the better as far as I'm concerned.

[dannyk13]

If you shoot first ,and the attacker was part of a gang, then you lose the opportunity to interrogate him about his associates.

[Mamyalynne]

I am more than happy to let those charged with dealing with such incidents decide on the best tactic.

I sure as heck have no expertise to fall back on in their line of work.

[mushroom25]

just playing devil's advocate, jno, danny - how long would it be reasonable to wait before pointing the gun - in a quest for justice, how many lives would be "too many"?

[-Talbot-]

And what if is vest wasn't made up of string but wires, Mushroom?

[-Talbot-]

His*

[tamborine]

Parsons Green bomber arrested but his younger bruv is free to attend college my friend teaches at. She shudders everytime he enters her classroom.

[dannyk13]

Pointing the gun is no problem, but shooting to kill (unless there is a likelihood of the assailant being armed)should be a last resort for reasons stated in my post at 16.49.

[-Talbot-]

So he is happy to open a person's throat from ear to ear but catch him alive because he will immediately squeal on his fellow terrorists.

I'm thinking not.

[mushroom25]

//I am more than happy to let those charged with dealing with such incidents decide on the best tactic. //

indeed, but only as long as those that have that responsibility are allowed to decide based on the circumstances pertaining, and do not have their ability to decide slanted by a fear of life-sentence-inducing charges if they do make a decision.

[Mamyalynne]

My reply was made purely on my lack of knowledge of such situations, I know many are happy to tell the authorities how to conduct themselves.

I don't as I have outlined.

I can only answer based on what I see and know of any given situation.

[dannyk13]

// because he will immediately squeal on his fellow terrorists// I was not suggesting that at all, but once he is dead then any chance of gleaning useful information is lost.

[Togo]

“Anger may in time change to gladness; vexation may be succeeded by content.
But a kingdom that has once been destroyed can never come again into being; nor can the dead ever be brought back to life.”
― Sun Tzu, The Art of War

[youngmafbog]

Danny, often in these cases the authorities already know the perpetrator and his/her friends.