Innocent

[formerly known as hf]

It does sound like the policeman panicked - I don't blame him - the stress that they must be under...

What I disagree with, like priog, is thatrule of engagement have changed. A policeman should never have been told that shooting at someone in the head like that is ever acceptable...

[Floyd]

When dealing with potential suicide bombers, it could be the only way about though..

Think about it, aim for the chest KA-BOOOOM! aim for the legs, or other non-lethal areas, our friend could quite easily detonate himself when he gets hit, as he would obviously prefer to go out in a "Glorious explosion" and take as many people down with him than be arrested.

I completly agree that the authorisation to aim only for the head is un-ethical, however, it does make a hell of alot of sense

[Cdls]

Not to mention the fact that police are trained to not go for the arms or legs. I know this, and have had that confirmed by others. You aim for one of those parts, you can easily miss and hit someone else. The head was the only alternative to the body. The man was shot 7 times, and none missed as far as I know, 6 in the head one in the shoulder.
The fact that the public was warned to get down before any major action was taken should have clarified enough to that person that they were police. He was in an area known to be terrorized twice in one month, and the fact that there would be plain clothed police there shouldnt have come as a surprise.

[formerly known as hf]

shot seven times in the head and none missed - one went into the shoulder... sounds like that must've been from very close range...

A man got arrested yesterday - stopped by a tazer - but, I guess, for the same reason they can't aim at the chest with potential suicide bombers, they can't use an electric charge either.