Shoot to Kill and such

Here is what I have to say about the shoot to kill policy: I didn't know there was any other way to shoot someone. Let me explain:

A couple of days ago I had a post about the London police shooting a guy on (or is it in) the tube. This guy had been running away from the police and had refused direct orders to stop. The cops thinking that he was a terrorist shot him dead. It turns out he didn’t have a bomb on him and was not about to blow himself up.

I know a little bit about cops. (My first campaign manager was a former cop and I once managed a campaign for an RCMP officer.) So I am not entirely unfamiliar with how police officers work. But I was shocked to learn that there are various policies when it comes to the Police shooting someone. (Shoot to kill vs. shoot to hurt.. etc..)

This seems to me, to be a bit of silly play on words. If you are running away from the cops, you risk getting shot. When you get shot, you risk being killed. Isn't that simple?

Now I recognize the difference between shooting someone 5 times at close range, and shooting someone while they are running away. I just think that we ought to remember that this guy did not die because he looked Middle Eastern, he died because he was running away from the cops. I got pulled over by a cop two days ago. I imagine that being from the Middle East, I look more Middle Easter than some guy from Brazil, but I did not get shot.

You know why? I stopped when I heard the sirens. I then calmly explained that I was speeding because I was from Canada and was lost. The nice California Highway Patrol officer looked at me and said “You’re from Canada EH?” (with the most overdone EH ever) and let me go.

I still think his death was a tragedy and I still think an investigation should be done, but I think everyone knows that good things don’t happen when you run away from the police.