• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Van driver runs over multiple people in Toronto - terrorism not ruled out[W:21]

Re: Van driver runs over multiple people in Toronto - terrorism not ruled out

I think they should have shot him, it's shameful they didn't. If you know someone is dangerous enough to kill 10 people they should shoot first unless he's apprehended unarmed. They pose a risk to public safety
Nonsense.

Sent from my F8331 using Tapatalk
 
Re: Van driver runs over multiple people in Toronto - terrorism not ruled out

Nonsense.

Sent from my F8331 using Tapatalk

Dude said he had a gun and was "reaching" for one. He's already killed 10 people, going to let him shoot some more?
 
Re: Van driver runs over multiple people in Toronto - terrorism not ruled out

I think they should have shot him, it's shameful they didn't. If you know someone is dangerous enough to kill 10 people they should shoot first unless he's apprehended unarmed. They pose a risk to public safety

He was unarmed......Although acting crazy..The police felt he should be taken alive at that point
 
Re: Van driver runs over multiple people in Toronto - terrorism not ruled out

Dude said he had a gun and was "reaching" for one. He's already killed 10 people, going to let him shoot some more?
He didnt shoot anyone, he ran all 10 people over with his rental van
 
Re: Van driver runs over multiple people in Toronto - terrorism not ruled out

Dude said he had a gun and was "reaching" for one. He's already killed 10 people, going to let him shoot some more?

Not everyone is as ready to shoot as US cops.
 
Re: Van driver runs over multiple people in Toronto - terrorism not ruled out

I think they should have shot him, it's shameful they didn't. If you know someone is dangerous enough to kill 10 people they should shoot first unless he's apprehended unarmed. They pose a risk to public safety

At the point the cop was dealing he isn't "the guy who mowed down 10 people with a van" he's "the guy who is suspected of mowing down 10 people with a van." For the cop to act as you suggest turns him into judge, jury and executioner. That is wrong, plain and simple. The cop's job is to arrest and let the criminal justice do it's thing.
 
Re: Van driver runs over multiple people in Toronto - terrorism not ruled out

Yeah, thought the same thing too. The officer had to assess the situation quickly and from his actions it shows that he quickly realised the guy wasn't holding a real gun. When the officer sheaths his gun and instead draws his baton it's clear he's in control of the situation.

Agreed. Not only that but the followup reports show that he is having what I would call normal "post stress reactions".

On the other hand, you do have to admire him for continuing to be a police officer after the earlier incident in his career when his cover was broken and "the bad guys" stuck a gun in his mouth.

I would say this arrest video should be regularly shown in US police training camp but you have to remember that according to many B.S. American posters here, we can't compare US gun laws and shootings against anywhere else.

I believe that there are some posters who are taking the position that the police officer should have simply gunned down the loser who killed people because he couldn't get laid.

Since one of the inevitable results of that loser's murders is that some female will come forward and agree to have sex with him, I can see some (incredibly slight) reason for doing that as simply shooting him down like a rabid dog would have denied him the success ("getting laid") that he was seeking. However, I'd deal with it slightly differently and impose a sentence which banned him from physical contact with women until the end of his sentence.

He wants to claim to be an "In-Cel", well, I'll be more than happy to help him along and make that "-Cel" REALLY "In".
 
Re: Van driver runs over multiple people in Toronto - terrorism not ruled out

I think they should have shot him, it's shameful they didn't. If you know someone is dangerous enough to kill 10 people they should shoot first unless he's apprehended unarmed. They pose a risk to public safety

Shameful? Everyone else in the English-speaking world is lauding the cop for his courage and control of a difficult situation and you're calling him 'shameful?
Read your own post, and pay attention to the bolded part. The cop apprehended the guy unarmed. Right? The guy was unarmed, out on the sidewalk and you think it's 'shameful' the cop didn't shoot him.
It's hard to believe the stupidity of this opinion, and hard to believe someone would write it for the world to see.
 
Re: Van driver runs over multiple people in Toronto - terrorism not ruled out

My understanding is that Canadian police agencies, in response to shooting incidents that were similar to those we have in the US, have been training their officers in de-escalation techniques and trying to get their officers out of a "shoot first and ask questions later" mindset.

That mindset has never been as strong amongst Canadian law enforcement agencies as it has been amongst American law enforcement agencies.

[HISTORICAL ASIDE - The NWMP sent an Inspector, one Sergeant, and three Constables to "deal with" Sitting Bull and his 5,000 followers when they fled to Canada after the Battle of the Greasy Grass. 1 :: 1,000 is potentially a higher ratio than the (1 Riot :: 1 Ranger) one that the Texas Rangers are so proud of.]

Since the criminals don't worry so much about simply being blown away by the cops they have a lower tendency to blow the cops away prophylactically.

If so though, we probably can learn some lessons from our northern brothers.

Just introducing the concept "maybe there is a different way that is better - even if we didn't think of it ourselves" tends to help with solving problems.
 
Last edited:
Re: Van driver runs over multiple people in Toronto - terrorism not ruled out

I think they should have shot him, it's shameful they didn't. If you know someone is dangerous enough to kill 10 people they should shoot first unless he's apprehended unarmed. They pose a risk to public safety

You did notice that that pathetic loser WAS "apprehended unarmed" didn't you?

Or is your definition of "apprehended unarmed" the same as your definition of "gunned down regardless of whether they are armed or not"?
 
Re: Van driver runs over multiple people in Toronto - terrorism not ruled out

He didnt shoot anyone, he ran all 10 people over with his rental van

Agreed.

Maybe "Digsbe" was thinking that the policeman should have shot that pathetic loser if that pathetic loser reached for his car keys.
 
Back
Top Bottom