Similar Posts

- Advertisement -

32 Comments

  1. yup we’re lucky our police are unarmed. hate to see what would happen if they are armed ?

  2. I’m sure it’s not difficult to shoot someone without a gun several times in the thigh when you have a repeating-fire weapon.

    If police officers are not capable of immobilising someone without killing them they obviously need better training. Or different instructions.

    Disturbing parallels between 21st century NZ and 1930s Germany………

    1. You always shoot to kill, trying to shoot someone in the leg or something is just plain stupid.

      1. If a duck-shooter can down a fast-moving bird at 20-30 metres, I’m sure someone with a shotgun can hit slow-moving human legs at 10 metres -unless they are aiming for the face or torso, of course.

        1. At 10 metres close range, a shotgun pattern, even if using birdshot No. 8 or 10, is intense … and will blow a huge hole in a human. Don’t know what the cops use, might actually be heavy stuff, like OO buckshot or No. 2s – even more lethal and damaging.

    2. Yes this is very disturbing now as the police look more like the SS Gestapo than they do like their former self as a friendly cop on the beat now.

      Key is a monster alright.

  3. This article makes important observations, raises valid questions and provides valid conclusions.

  4. Is it that what we can do is encourage our own children to join the police force taking our values with them to see the culture we desire prevail?

  5. (1) “We sleep soundly in our beds because rough men stand ready in the night to visit violence on those who would do us harm” (attributed to Geo Orwell).
    (2) “Ratbag” sounds almost affectionate. The deceased in this case, if you read the reports, is not well placed to be a posthumous posterboy to garner sympathy out there in middle NZ for your cause.

    1. The reports from the MSM? That is the problem, the media only give one view & people like you who accept all they say without questioning it allow them to keep the truth hidden. The only reliable information I have (from various sources) is that the police were called, the deceased had previous interactions with the police, the deceased threw his weapons at the police, the police deny shooting him in the back. I can accept that the deceased was no angel but as the article demonstrates the media statement & subsequent inquiries are only to sanitize what happened.

  6. Provided guns aren’t involved, it’s high time the police were obliged to have demonstrated that all non-lethal options had been extinguished before their guns are even allowed out of their car boots:

    LOUDspeakers…long batons…net guns…bolas…rubber bullets…anaesthetic gun…police dogs…paintball guns…shotguns loaded with rocksalt…water canon with diluted vinegar……

    Even if the gatlings do come out, do they really have to aim at the abdomen or head? These guys are supposed to be crack shots even in the heat of the moment, a .22 round in the leg will slow most assailants down enough to safely resolve the crisis.

  7. Might be best to wait for all the facts, Tim. Taking the word of family and friends, after the emotion of the event, isn’t very sensible.

    In the meantime, I’ll give the benefit of the doubt to police over a man wielding a machete.

    1. True, but the point of the article is that ‘wait(ing) for all the facts’ is regularly circumvented by the police, who have a extremely vested interest in the nature of information the public receives.

      The police should not be allowed to report directly to the public without oversight. At the very least in such cases their reports should be subject to check from an independent body for bias prior to release.

      1. “‘wait(ing) for all the facts’ is regularly circumvented by the police,”

        At the end of the day, the ‘facts’ do come out, the Police have no special privilege that prevents this. And neither should they.

        “The police should not be allowed to report directly to the public without oversight. ”

        Why not? The family are free to make whatever claims they like; surely the Police are allowed a right of reply as soon as possible? History will show who is correct. Invariably it has been the police.

        1. At the end of the day, the ‘facts’ do come out…
          … The family are free to make whatever claims they like; surely the Police are allowed a right of reply as soon as possible?

          Enter the magical balance fairy.

          No, it’s not OK.

          It’s not OK that in the interim the police are allowed to spin and distort in the name of some sort of balance.

          It’s not lying competition, although I agree with professor Greg Newbold’s observation that that is what much of the the Court process boils down to (and he was commenting on the police giving dodgy evidence).

          The police should be held to very high standards, something that doesn’t happen much on day to day basis in NZ.

          In all police shootings police conduct rightly comes under scrutiny. They may be culpable, so I repeat that they ought not be commenting on the case without oversight.

          1. “It’s not OK that in the interim the police are allowed to spin and distort in the name of some sort of balance.”

            That’s where we disagree. The police are ultimately subject to a robust review of their activities. The family, meanwhile, get a free ride in a compliant media. If the police are wrong, they will be exposed, as they should be.

            “The police should be held to very high standards, something that doesn’t happen much on day to day basis in NZ.”

            Yes. No. The police are held to very high standards every day. For the most part they carry the publics support because for the most part they do a very good job.

  8. Appalling they shot him from inside their car the cops are now saying! But they will get away with it as they have so many times before. Remember Steven Wallace in Waitara there was never ever justice for him.

    1. “POLICE NOW CONDUCT DRIVE BY SHOOTINGS”

      NEXT WE WILL NEED BULLET PROOF VESTS JUST TO MOVE AROUND OUR COMMUNITIES!!!!!!!

      MAN IN THE MIDDLE GROW UP!!

  9. I wonder if these police are being given amphetamines for such situations. After all, all wars are run on drugs. 100,000 allied soldiers including New Zealanders were given amphetamines before the battle of Al Alamein according to the author of this book interviews on National Radio. I’d say the SAS are given them to start with.

    From Vikings high on mushrooms to soldiers on speed in Vietnam… Historian Lukasz Kamienski says we have been fighting wars ‘on drugs’ for thousands of years. Bryan Crump talks with Lukasz Kamienski, author of Shooting Up: A Short History of Drugs and War

    http://www.radionz.co.nz/national/programmes/nights/audio/201798782/drugs-and-warfare

  10. I’m a supporter of police, but shooting an offender in the back? If a civilian did this then they would never get away with it as a defence.

    If NZ does not want to go the way of USA where cops shoot dead people as a matter of course then NZ needs to investigate properly and take away these police badges. Yep policing is a very difficult job, but allowing police to shoot people is a slippery slope to racial tension, distrust of police and further violence. We have the roast busters, Louise Nicholas, Peter Pakau and it is clear that the public expect accountability from police to keep public trust in them.

    Murder/Manslaughter is Murder/Manslaughter no matter how ‘bad’ the victims is supposed to be.

    1. 1000% SAVENZ.

      I CANT SEE THIS GETTING BETTER WHEN THE POLICE ARE NOW SETTING THE COMMUNITY IN THEIR HARMS WAY BY KILLING LIKE THE US COPS DO.

      1. Take a deep breath mate. Yelling in caps won’t make it better. Just wait for the coroners report to come out. Regardless of the IPCA report the coroner can pretty much tell if the guy wa shot in the front or back.

  11. Still waiting to see the police involved prosecuted for breaking a kids back in Northland.

    “Resisting arrest”!

  12. I will wait for the facts too before passing judgement, the rants above are just silly.

    1. We can assume that whilst you wait you’re happy to lap up the police line.

    2. Yes the Police investigating the police that’s cute are you real waiting until more people get shot to death????

Comments are closed.