Britain uses Israeli tactics....Shoot to Kill.
SHOOT TO KILL Current rating: 0
by The Guardian
(No verified email address) 23 Jul 2005
Briton uses tactics learned from Israeli counterpart....Shoot to Kill.
Shoot to kill
--------------------------------------------------------------
Seconds to decide if suspect is suicide threat
Special armed squad first to use tactics developed with Israeli aid
Vikram Dodd
Saturday July 23, 2005
Guardian
The shooting yesterday at Stockwell tube station was the first time police used special tactics developed to tackle the threat of suicide bombers.
Under Operation Kratos a senior officer is on standby 24 hours a day to authorise the deployment of special armed squads, who will track and if needs be, shoot dead suspected suicide bombers.
One of the most senior officers involved in protecting London confirmed there were special teams of armed officers ready to be deployed.
A senior Metropolitan police source with knowledge of firearms procedures said of the shooting at Stockwell: "This was an intelligence led operation, within the parameters of Kratos." Officially the Met will not talk about Kratos, but the tactics have been in place for a year and were developed after British officers learnt from their Israeli counterparts how best to tackle suicide bombers.
A spokesman for the Association of Chief Police Officers insisted that there had been no change in the law or in firearms policy. The relevant law is section three of the 1967 criminal law act, which reads: "A person may use such force as is reasonable in the prevention of crime."
Acpo's guidance to officers, revised in February this year, says: "You may open fire against a person only when absolutely necessary after traditional methods have tried and failed, or must, by the very nature of the circumstances, be unlikely to succeed if tried.
"To sum up, a police officer should not decide to open fire unless that officer is satisfied that nothing short of opening fire could protect the officer or another person from imminent danger to life or serious injury."
The threat to life must be clear and present, say Acpo guidelines which add that weapons should be used when "police officers need to shoot to stop an imminent threat to life. The imminence of any threat should be judged in respect to the potential loss of life ... and consideration of necessity, reasonableness and proportionality."
Challenge
The guidance says shots to the upper chest area "are likely to be effective in achieving rapid incapacitation. Shots which strike the other parts of the body cannot be depended upon to achieve this."
Officers from Kratos or following their tactics are reported to be authorised to shoot to kill, and aim for the head to avoid triggering explosive devices attached to the chest or waist. Suicide bombers targeting public transport present a unique challenge. As July 7 showed, if they succeed the result is mass murder.
One senior police source suggested tactics had changed according to the "different scenarios" posed by a suicide bomber suspect. A senior Met source said: "The operation would have been authorised by a senior officer, and the armed officers would be able to self-deploy, open fire if they saw an imminent threat. They can get authority retrospectively. Once the officer decides to shoot, it's shoot to kill."
This is a view shared by another senior Met officer. He explained why shoot to kill is the only option once armed officers are deployed: "If you start debating whether I should shoot him in the leg, the suspect could come back."
This officer said there was nothing new in firearms officers being given permission to shoot suspects in the head. "You shoot where it best suits the situation, it depends on many factors, such as the angle you are at to the suspect. When the officer believes he has the right to use lethal force he will shoot wherever."
Solicitor Daniel Machover said that even if the suspect shot dead had no weapons or explosive, officers could have a defence against a murder charge. Mr Machover, who has has taken legal actions against police after shooting incidents, said: "If the perception in the officers' minds was that the suspect was posing an immediate threat to them or others, opening fire may well have been lawful. The test is the threat they perceived when they opened fire." He said a defence against a lesser charge would be more complex. The shooting in Stockwell capped a fortnight of mounting pressure on Britain's biggest police force and its commissioner Sir Ian Blair. The elite anti-terrorism and serious crime groups are working mammoth shifts, and throughout the force of more than 30,000 officers the pressure is telling.
Visibility
To reassure the public, the force is engaged in high visibility policing, getting as many constables and part-time officers on the streets as possible. The force has to keep London going, while mounting a hugely pressured and complex investigation into the July 7 attacks. One senior officer said: "We don't think we can sustain the demands of high visibility policing, guarding mosques, manning endless cordons. Officers are working 12 hour days, we are way over budget, we are bursting at the seams."
On top of this, police know they cannot be seen to be heavy-handed with people from Muslim communities - not just because of civil rights, but because investigators believe the communities must be reassured that the police are on their side, so they will pass on any information on terrorism that may come their way. The shooting yesterday showed the dynamic at work. The moderate Muslim Council of Britain was deeply concerned. Its spokesman, Inayat Bunglawala, said: "From his press conference Ian Blair seemed to imply that the man shot dead was not one of the four attempted suicide bombers. That increases the urgency of the question of why this man was shot dead as opposed to being disabled or arrested. There may be good reason, but the police need to explain what their reasons are. There has been a marked increase of nervousness among Muslims today"
Massoud Shadjareh of the Islamic Human Rights Commission said: "We have raised concerns about the Met sending officers to learn from the Israelis about suicide bombers. They have a policy of assassinating people - why should our police learn these tactics and these values?"
See also:
http://htpp://www.guardian.co.uk
by The Guardian
(No verified email address) 23 Jul 2005
Briton uses tactics learned from Israeli counterpart....Shoot to Kill.
Shoot to kill
--------------------------------------------------------------
Seconds to decide if suspect is suicide threat
Special armed squad first to use tactics developed with Israeli aid
Vikram Dodd
Saturday July 23, 2005
Guardian
The shooting yesterday at Stockwell tube station was the first time police used special tactics developed to tackle the threat of suicide bombers.
Under Operation Kratos a senior officer is on standby 24 hours a day to authorise the deployment of special armed squads, who will track and if needs be, shoot dead suspected suicide bombers.
One of the most senior officers involved in protecting London confirmed there were special teams of armed officers ready to be deployed.
A senior Metropolitan police source with knowledge of firearms procedures said of the shooting at Stockwell: "This was an intelligence led operation, within the parameters of Kratos." Officially the Met will not talk about Kratos, but the tactics have been in place for a year and were developed after British officers learnt from their Israeli counterparts how best to tackle suicide bombers.
A spokesman for the Association of Chief Police Officers insisted that there had been no change in the law or in firearms policy. The relevant law is section three of the 1967 criminal law act, which reads: "A person may use such force as is reasonable in the prevention of crime."
Acpo's guidance to officers, revised in February this year, says: "You may open fire against a person only when absolutely necessary after traditional methods have tried and failed, or must, by the very nature of the circumstances, be unlikely to succeed if tried.
"To sum up, a police officer should not decide to open fire unless that officer is satisfied that nothing short of opening fire could protect the officer or another person from imminent danger to life or serious injury."
The threat to life must be clear and present, say Acpo guidelines which add that weapons should be used when "police officers need to shoot to stop an imminent threat to life. The imminence of any threat should be judged in respect to the potential loss of life ... and consideration of necessity, reasonableness and proportionality."
Challenge
The guidance says shots to the upper chest area "are likely to be effective in achieving rapid incapacitation. Shots which strike the other parts of the body cannot be depended upon to achieve this."
Officers from Kratos or following their tactics are reported to be authorised to shoot to kill, and aim for the head to avoid triggering explosive devices attached to the chest or waist. Suicide bombers targeting public transport present a unique challenge. As July 7 showed, if they succeed the result is mass murder.
One senior police source suggested tactics had changed according to the "different scenarios" posed by a suicide bomber suspect. A senior Met source said: "The operation would have been authorised by a senior officer, and the armed officers would be able to self-deploy, open fire if they saw an imminent threat. They can get authority retrospectively. Once the officer decides to shoot, it's shoot to kill."
This is a view shared by another senior Met officer. He explained why shoot to kill is the only option once armed officers are deployed: "If you start debating whether I should shoot him in the leg, the suspect could come back."
This officer said there was nothing new in firearms officers being given permission to shoot suspects in the head. "You shoot where it best suits the situation, it depends on many factors, such as the angle you are at to the suspect. When the officer believes he has the right to use lethal force he will shoot wherever."
Solicitor Daniel Machover said that even if the suspect shot dead had no weapons or explosive, officers could have a defence against a murder charge. Mr Machover, who has has taken legal actions against police after shooting incidents, said: "If the perception in the officers' minds was that the suspect was posing an immediate threat to them or others, opening fire may well have been lawful. The test is the threat they perceived when they opened fire." He said a defence against a lesser charge would be more complex. The shooting in Stockwell capped a fortnight of mounting pressure on Britain's biggest police force and its commissioner Sir Ian Blair. The elite anti-terrorism and serious crime groups are working mammoth shifts, and throughout the force of more than 30,000 officers the pressure is telling.
Visibility
To reassure the public, the force is engaged in high visibility policing, getting as many constables and part-time officers on the streets as possible. The force has to keep London going, while mounting a hugely pressured and complex investigation into the July 7 attacks. One senior officer said: "We don't think we can sustain the demands of high visibility policing, guarding mosques, manning endless cordons. Officers are working 12 hour days, we are way over budget, we are bursting at the seams."
On top of this, police know they cannot be seen to be heavy-handed with people from Muslim communities - not just because of civil rights, but because investigators believe the communities must be reassured that the police are on their side, so they will pass on any information on terrorism that may come their way. The shooting yesterday showed the dynamic at work. The moderate Muslim Council of Britain was deeply concerned. Its spokesman, Inayat Bunglawala, said: "From his press conference Ian Blair seemed to imply that the man shot dead was not one of the four attempted suicide bombers. That increases the urgency of the question of why this man was shot dead as opposed to being disabled or arrested. There may be good reason, but the police need to explain what their reasons are. There has been a marked increase of nervousness among Muslims today"
Massoud Shadjareh of the Islamic Human Rights Commission said: "We have raised concerns about the Met sending officers to learn from the Israelis about suicide bombers. They have a policy of assassinating people - why should our police learn these tactics and these values?"
See also:
http://htpp://www.guardian.co.uk
Comments
Display the following 7 comments