Several dead in German knife attack

seenitall

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

I've read that four times and still can't work out what you're attempting to say, try harder next time :rolleyes:

Excellent, cos that’s kind of a compliment coming from you

There won’t be a next time, getting bored now.

kildare lad

kildare lad wrote: »

What organs of your body are contained in the centre mass of the body

Almost every vital organ. Heart , lungs, liver etc.

Timberrrrrrrr

kildare lad wrote: »

What organs of your body are contained in the centre mass of the body

Most of the major ones, it still doesn't guarantee death, if the police are "shooting to kill" as you claim then why call an ambulance after the act? Why perform first aid after the act?

The fact is police are NOT trained to kill they are trained to stop, this sometimes results in death.

Timberrrrrrrr

seenitall wrote: »

Excellent, cos that’s kind of a compliment coming from you

There won’t be a next time, getting bored now.

Off you toddle then kiddo.

LillySV

MEGA BRO WOLF 5000 wrote: »

Religion of peace. I'll bet the house on it.

Why is there a yellow sign beside this ?

LillySV

LillySV wrote: »

Why is there a yellow sign beside this ?

I'd wager because it was unnecessarily inflammatory at the time of posting and breached the "don't be a dick" rule.

kildare lad

kildare lad wrote: »

What organs of your body are contained in the centre mass of the body

Very vital one in your head too......

LeBash

kildare lad wrote: »

From going by everything I've ever read, it's very bad practice to shoot someone like that in the leg. If he had a suicide vest he'd still be able to trigger the bomb . The police want to kill them as quick as they can without putting more loves at risk , he'd already killed 3 people why risk him killing anymore . They'd be better off killing him than wasting hundreds of thousands of taxpayers money keeping him locked up for life .

If there is a potential suicide vest, shooting to kill is even more dangerous until you know the trigger for the vest going off. The contact can be N/C and not N/O (triggered on the release of something, not the pushing of something). Killing the guy could potentially have brought down a building.

LeBash

LeBash wrote: »

If there is a potential suicide vest, shooting to kill is even more dangerous until you know the trigger for the vest going off. The contact can be N/C and not N/O (triggered on the release of something, not the pushing of something). Killing the guy could potentially have brought down a building.

If there's a lad slashing and stabbing people with knives, you should shoot the prick until he can't move.

kildare lad

LeBash wrote: »

If there is a potential suicide vest, shooting to kill is even more dangerous until you know the trigger for the vest going off. The contact can be N/C and not N/O (triggered on the release of something, not the pushing of something). Killing the guy could potentially have brought down a building.

Operation Kratos was a set of tactics developed by London's Metropolitan Police Service for dealing with suspected suicide bombers, most notably firing shots to the head without warning. The tactics were developed shortly after the 11 September 2001 attacks, based in part on consultation with Israeli and Sri Lankan law enforcement agencies on how to deal with suicide bombers. Little was revealed about these tactics until after the mistaken shooting of Jean Charles de Menezes on 22 July 2005, in the wake of the 7 July 2005 London bombings. The term is no longer used by the Metropolitan Police, although similar tactics remain in force.

[Deleted User]

[Deleted User] wrote: »

If there's a lad slashing and stabbing people with knives, you should shoot the prick until he can't move.

Can you provide any proof that the police didn't use the necessary force or behaved improperly? Cause so far it's just seeming like a bloodlust on your part more than anything.

Timberrrrrrrr

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Can you provide any proof that the police didn't use the necessary force or behaved improperly? Cause so far it's just seeming like a bloodlust on your part more than anything.

Too much call of duty will do that to lads, meanwhile in the real world they would run in the opposite direction.

Deleted User

Deleted User wrote: »

Can you provide any proof that the police didn't use the necessary force or behaved improperly? Cause so far it's just seeming like a bloodlust on your part more than anything.

None whatsoever.

Never claimed that they didn't though.

I would have assumed that anyone causing immediate threat to innocent bystanders should be dealt with with immediate lethal or (at least) incapacitating force.

Not sure where the claim I have bloodlust stemmed from, but it wouldn't be off brand for you to attribute incorrect motive.

Deleted User

Deleted User wrote: »

Can you provide any proof that the police didn't use the necessary force or behaved improperly? Cause so far it's just seeming like a bloodlust on your part more than anything.

None whatsoever.

Never claimed that they did though.

I would have assumed that anyone being an immediate threat to innocent bystanders lives should be dealt with with immediate lethal or (at least) incapacitating force.

Not sure where the claim I have bloodlust stemmed from, but it wouldn't be off brand for you to attribute incorrect motive.

[Deleted User]

[Deleted User] wrote: »

None whatsoever.

Never claimed that they didn't though.

I would have assumed that anyone causing immediate threat to innocent bystanders should be dealt with with immediate lethal or (at least) incapacitating force.

Not sure where the claim I have bloodlust stemmed from, but it wouldn't be off brand for you to attribute incorrect motive.

There seems to be annoyance at the fact they didn't kill him. That's my reasoning tbh. If you're fine with how they handled it, fair enough. Actually thought I was responding to Kildare in this case, he seems to think it was a liberal agenda that led to not killing him.

Timberrrrrrrr

[Deleted User] wrote: »

None whatsoever.

Never claimed that they didn't though.

I would have assumed that anyone causing immediate threat to innocent bystanders should be dealt with with immediate lethal or (at least) incapacitating force.

Not sure where the claim I have bloodlust stemmed from, but it wouldn't be off brand for you to attribute incorrect motive.

So someone glasses another person in your local tonight, they should be shot on sight by the police?

Deleted User

Deleted User wrote: »

There seems to be annoyance at the fact they didn't kill him. That's my reasoning tbh. If you're fine with how they handled it, fair enough. Actually thought I was responding to Kildare in this case, he seems to think it was a liberal agenda that led to not killing him.

Well I disagree with that premise.

I can't speak for kildarelad but I don't think there was any liberal agenda whatsoever.

I wouldn't have shed a year for the bastard, but I'm not sad he wasn't killed.

Timberrrrrrrr

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

So someone glasses another person in your local tonight, they should be shot on sight by the police?

That's a very dishonest way of framing what I said.

I'm not even going to bother explaining the difference between a jihaddi knife attack and a row in the local between two people.

Timberrrrrrrr

[Deleted User] wrote: »

That's a very dishonest way of framing what I said.

I'm not even going to bother explaining the difference between a jihaddi knife attack and a row in the local between two people.

You said

anyone causing immediate threat to innocent bystanders should be dealt with with immediate lethal or (at least) incapacitating force.

Police arrive, one person is covered in blood another has a broken bottle in his hand and is being aggressive, should he not be treated the same?

Now let's change bottle to knife, should he be met with "immediate lethal or (at least) incapacitating force"?

Timberrrrrrrr

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

You said



Police arrive, one person is covered in blood another has a broken bottle in his hand and is being aggressive, should he not be treated the same?

Now let's change bottle to knife, should he be met with "immediate lethal or (at least) incapacitating force"?

If someone has a sharpened knife/broken bottle and has stabbed or slashed people and is likely to do the same to others then yes, I think they should be incapacitated as soon as possible if they are an immediate danger to others around them.

I'm nearly as radical as those amnt I?

But I would also hope the police used discretion and ascertained, as any normal folk who weren't being needlessly obtuse on an internet forum would do, that there is a huge difference between a pub brawl and a jihaddi knife attack.

However, if someone was at risk of being murdered, the end result should be the same.

Timberrrrrrrr

[Deleted User] wrote: »

If someone has a sharpened knife/broken bottle and has stabbed or slashed people and is likely to do the same to others then yes, I think they should be incapacitated as soon as possible if they are an immediate danger to others around them.

I'm nearly as radical as those amnt I?

Now imagine that is your brother/cousin/best friend. Should the police shoot first and ask questions later?

But I would also hope the police used discretion and ascertained, as any normal folk who weren't being needlessly obtuse on an internet forum would do, that there is a huge difference between a pub brawl and a jihaddi knife attack.

However, if someone was at risk of being murdered, the end result should be the same.

The way the German police did you mean?

Manic Moran

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Fùcking irony overload there :pac:

Police are NOT trained to kill! They are trained to shoot accurately, they are trained to aim for the center mass as this is the largest part of the body and easiest to hit (head too difficult, arms and legs moving and harder to aim for).

One shot to the center mass can kill you, then there are people who have been shot many times and survived.

You know, in all fairness I do not know how Wurzburg beat police are trained. It is possible that their training does include deliberately shooting someone in the leg.

If so, I would believe it to be an exceedingly misguided policy and there’s a reason why your statement above is correct as a general rule for most forces. Further, it is not as if you can’t shoot a leg’s femoral artery and cause death anyway.

Timberrrrrrrr

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

You said

Police arrive, one person is covered in blood another has a broken bottle in his hand and is being aggressive, should he not be treated the same?

Now let's change bottle to knife, should he be met with "immediate lethal or (at least) incapacitating force"?

If the gentleman in question is refusing to put down his broken glass/knife or other lethal weapon, is aggressive, not responding to directions and other people might be harmed, then yes, absolutely, the gentleman in question should be met with whatever force is required to incapacitate him all the way to riddling.
If this results in his death, its unfortunate.

You'd imagine the police would do some sort of situational risk assessment though, with several outcomes possible depending on the circumstances.
Secure the area, withdraw and observe.
Non lethal force could be tried.
Rush him in riot gear
His nan could be brought in to scold him.
Shooting is probably the last option, but maybe the only option.

When innocent people are at risk, a nations security services are required to mitigate that risk.

Timberrrrrrrr

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Now imagine that is your brother/cousin/best friend. Should the police shoot first and ask questions later?



The way the German police did you mean?

Shoot first. Obviously.

If my brother/cousin/best friend is stabbing people with reckless abandon, either shoot them or give me the gun so I can do it.

I didn't once make any accusation that the police were incorrect. They acted with more restraint than I would have but from what I've seen, I have no complaints.

Not sure why you added that in.

Strumms

bubblypop wrote: »

They are trained to stop people, not kill.
Jesus what kind of country would train their police to kill people FFS

Pretty much every country.

If it’s appropriate to kill an armed and dangerous criminal to ensure that innocent lives are protected... that’s what has to be done...

Fûck all use wounding somebody and them still having the ability to kill or maim.

Again, arm yourself with a gun or knife, it needs to be presumed you’ll use said weapon to the full scope of its capabilities and kill. You can kill if wounded.

DaTown

So was it confirmed that it was a white supremacist???

It's just I didn't hear anything about it.

Sweetemotion

Deleted User wrote: »

Do you have any proof that the police acted improperly, your complaint appears to be that they failed to kill him. There's every indication that they used the necessary force and handled things appropriately.

Asks for proof that the police were acting improperly, then claims they acted appropriately with no proof either.


The guy was running riot stabbing people.

Sweetemotion

peasant wrote: »

I'm just going to leave this here:

The suspect ... was receiving psychiatric treatment, according to the Bavarian minister of the interior*

Ye can all wind your collective xenophobic / islamophobic necks back in again ...the guy's gaga first and foremost.s

You can leave what you want here.


Psychiatric treatment = Gaga now?


And yet, you have the gall to tell others to wind their necks in.

Strumms

If the guy is ‘gaga’ that’s simply more reason to stop him as he is less likely to listen to reason... Gaga, or suffering from a psychological disorder doesnt mean he should be left loose and a danger.

Needed to be stopped, was stopped.

biko

Allowing people in with mental issues that will attack the host population is not good politics.
But they keep doing it and some people keep voting for it. Go figure.

According to Der Tagesspiegel he said to police he was waging Jihad.

Der Somalier Jibril A. habe bei der Vernehmung durch die Polizei gesagt, er habe seinen „Dschihad“ verwirklicht, sagten Sicherheitskreise am Samstag dem Tagesspiegel. Mit Dschihad ist der heilige Krieg gegen Ungläubige gemeint.

https://www.tagesspiegel.de/politik/motiv-des-taeters-weiter-ungeklaert-was-wir-ueber-den-messerangriff-in-wuerzburg-wissen/27366310.html

biko

The three killed were all female.

The 24-year-old suspect, a Somali immigrant, grabbed a knife from the kitchen section of a department store, attacking several inside.
He then lashed out at people outside.
Five women and a child were also injured in the attack.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-57624115

Police searched a homeless shelter, where he was registered to be living, and found his phone and leaflets with hateful messaging, police said.
A witness reported that the suspect shouted "Allah Akbar" during the attack, said Mr Herrmann.

JuanBerrosa

biko wrote: »

The three killed were all female.

The 24-year-old suspect, a Somali immigrant, grabbed a knife from the kitchen section of a department store, attacking several inside.
He then lashed out at people outside.
Five women and a child were also injured in the attack.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-57624115

Police searched a homeless shelter, where he was registered to be living, and found his phone and leaflets with hateful messaging, police said.
A witness reported that the suspect shouted "Allah Akbar" during the attack, said Mr Herrmann.

I'm sure the Guardian will find a way to spin this about a crime against women and how sexism in society is what caused this.

A society that is a white male patriarchy .

So you see white male misogyny is whats to blame here !!!

Danzy

They hit him in the leg but that was not their intention.

They shot for center mass, to Stop the target and to reduce risk to the public from the bullets.

It wasn't a dereliction of duty that made him aim for the leg, just that that is where the bullet hit.

Danzy

JuanBerrosa wrote: »

I'm sure the Guardian will find a way to spin this about a crime against women and how sexism in society is what caused this.

A society that is a white male patriarchy .

So you see white male misogyny is whats to blame here !!!

The comment section will expand on how Zionism played a part.

JupiterKid

Yet another example, if any were needed, that large scale immigration to the West from barbaric medieval countries where Islam is dominant and Islamism and religious extremism are par for the course is a bad thing and can only ever end in very negative outcomes.

Unfortunately the cognitive dissonance from the"right on" brigade will be, predictably, strong on this one, as they are for all other incidents of this type - and an array of mealy mouthed excuses will be wheeled out. Allowing people like this deranged 24 year old murderer into the West just endangers the lives of those in the host societies and has no good outcome. None.

Islam and secular Western values are utterly and fundamentally incompatible. You don't need a PhD in politics or sociology to work that out.

JupiterKid

JupiterKid wrote: »

Yet another example, if any were needed, that large scale immigration to the West from barbaric medieval countries where Islam is dominant and Islamism and religious extremism are par for the course is a bad thing and can only ever end in very negative outcomes.

Unfortunately the cognitive dissonance from the"right on" brigade will be, predictably, strong on this one, as they are for all other incidents of this type - and an array of mealy mouthed excuses will be wheeled out. Allowing people like this deranged 24 year old murderer into the West just endangers the lives of those in the host societies and has no good outcome. None.

Islam and secular Western values are utterly and fundamentally incompatible. You don't need a PhD in politics or sociology to work that out.

And are his mental health issues because he is muslim?

biko

bubblypop wrote: »

And are his mental health issues because he is muslim?

He shouted Allah Ackbar during the attack. Did he do that because he has mental issues, or because he's muslim?

biko

biko wrote: »

He shouted Allah Ackbar during the attack. Did he do that because he has mental issues, or because he's muslim?

I have no idea.
If I shouted it what would you think?
If the guy has mental health issues it doesn't matter if he shouted ' Daniel O Connell is the greatest living singer in the world'

biko

If you shouted Allah Ackbar I'd think you were Muslim.
If you started stabbing people around you while shouting Allah Ackbar I'd still think you were a Muslim.

The only thing they can do to gain my trust is stop killing people while shouting Allah Ackbar. Maybe the mental issue is to not realise that?

Galwayguy35

1 million were let in to Germany by Merkel back in 2015 which is the same year this guy arrived there and now they are having problems because they had no idea who any of these people were at the time.

I think Merkel knows she made a mistake but its too late now.

And we are not immune to this kind of thing here either, sure didn't the Gardai find a few lads who would like to see us all living back in the 14th century spreading their toxic message in this country recently.

Danzy

"Mental health issues" in these events usually means strict Sunni Muslim.

It's a media styling at this stage.

biko

Maybe this shop should follow IKEA's example after a double murder by an Eritrean asylum seeker - ending the sale of kitchen knives in-store.

If the left won't stop murderers, how about trying to stop the sale of murder weapons?

Mic 1972

bubblypop wrote: »

I have no idea.
If I shouted it what would you think?
If the guy has mental health issues it doesn't matter if he shouted ' Daniel O Connell is the greatest living singer in the world'

the mental issue argument is just pointless
Aren't serial killers mentally unstable too, they still get jailed

Mic 1972

Mic 1972 wrote: »

the mental issue argument is just pointless
Aren't serial killers mentally unstable too, they still get jailed

No, do you think all serial killers suffer from mental health issues?

biko

biko wrote: »

If the left won't stop murderers

The left?
Who or why is the left responsible for stopping murderers?

Wibbs

bubblypop wrote: »

No, do you think all serial killers suffer from mental health issues?

By defiintion being a serial killer means they have a mental illness/condition/disorder. Psycopathy, a near given in such people, is a personality disorder.

Wibbs

Wibbs wrote: »

By defiintion being a serial killer means they have a mental illness/condition/disorder. Psycopathy, a near given in such people, is a personality disorder.

No.
By definition a serial killer is a person who commits a series of murders, usually three or more.

I'm sure some are mentally ill, but that's not the definition of serial killers.

kildare lad

bubblypop wrote: »

I have no idea.
If I shouted it what would you think?
If the guy has mental health issues it doesn't matter if he shouted ' Daniel O Connell is the greatest living singer in the world'

If he had shouted " Daniel o Donnell is the greatest living singer in the world " you'd know he definitely had mental problems , but he didn't. He shout Allah Akbar and started randomly killing and maiming people .

I've already said it before on this thread about Ireland having one of highest rate of mental illness in Europe and yet we don't get people going randomly stabbing strangers on the street shouting Allah Akbar . Strange that .

I wonder would you be so quick to defend him if it'd been a family member he'd murdered . He may have had mental issues that does not excuse murder , he also had a criminal record , these killings could have been easily avoided if the police deported him when he committed crimes . I suppose all them hundreds of women who were sexually assaulted on new years eve a few years , were all committed by mentally ill people to .

It's amazing that people like yourself are willing to make excuse after excuse when migrants are involved in crime , just for the sake of multiculturalism . I'm not against immigration btw , but taking millions of young men from north Africa into Europe has been nothing but a disaster even Angela Merkel said it herself . If anything the left have shot themselves in the foot because they've managed to resurrected the right in Europe , well done , bravo !!

I'm not defending anyone.
Any criminal should be dealt with by the full force of the law.
He murdered people, of course I'm not defending him.

Police don't deport people either, just fyi

biko

Why do you think this particular person committed these crimes, bubbly? Why do you think he shouted Allah Ackbar? What could have been done to prevent these murders?