Presumably, those calling for shoot-to-kill as sole police tactic don't want terrorists on trial to get testimony about links, reasons.
-
-
Replying to @zoemavroudi
We've never heard these people speak or discuss how they were radicalized in a court of law. Keeping it this way is useful to whom exactly?
1 reply 11 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @zoemavroudi
Isn't it ironic that governments listen in and read your calls/emails but would rather shoot-to-kill than arrest and interrogate terrorists?
1 reply 5 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @zoemavroudi
I'm assuming the point of fake suicide vests was "don't arrest me." Why play in to that?
1 reply 2 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @zoemavroudi @asteris
Because, perhaps, at the time, law enforcement did not know them to be fake?
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @MikeParmele @asteris
Shoot to incapacitate then? Explosion still likely when the person is killed. But you'd have to ask the experts.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @zoemavroudi @asteris
Experts would tell you shooting to wound is unsafe and not smart.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @MikeParmele @zoemavroudi
Often taken to extremes, as we see in the myriad shootings of black youths in the US. Even w actual "tangos" (Boston being an exception.)
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @asteris @zoemavroudi
It's my understanding that units are trained to shoot to "stop the threat." Which, as the article says, targets the largest body mass.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
Arguably, the fact that these canisters looked ridiculous to me doesn't mean officers neutralizing them could discount them as harmless.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.