Thread: Police Fire..... Bystander Safety?

Originally Posted by spada

As the OP I agree with the sentiments that if you shoot at a police officer and you are fired upon you deserve what you get.

That said I am amazed that it seems OK to have poorly trained officers using firearms on public streets with what seems total disregard for the consequences.

The number of shots fired with (I believe) only two hits on the target/perpetrator is staggering.
The fact that no innocent parties were hit was pure luck. I'm not talking about the drongo's that put themselves and their children at risk. I'm referring to rounds penetrating windows 200m away.

I don't know what the police rules of engagement are. But surely they include things like check firing zone?????

if not

How would the senior officers justify a member of the public's death (adult or child) collateral damage? bad luck?

How would you????????????

They just don't care!
Basically bullying morons, who fantasize that our streets are a free fire zone. A hand-cuffed man shot in the back while on the ground. A van driver murdered on the Auckland motorway and a truck driver crippled for life in the same debacle .
Ten years on and nothing has changed.

Ross Meurant's position that police who use a firearm on another citizen have to be charged, as would happen to any other citizen, is overdue for implementation.
The courts are the place to decide guilt. Not the police management, not the media or the court of public opinion.

Removal of the police exemption from obeying the arms Act 1983, needs to be another change implemented if police are to be reconciled with the community that they are supposed to be a part of.