Debate Mansion

   

A shame ful day for Mumbai police?!! (Page 2)

Post Reply New Post

Page 2 of 3

Page 1
Page   of 3
Page 3 Page 3

Gauri_3

IF-Sizzlerz

Joined: 12 November 2006

Posts: 13617

Posted: 27 October 2008 at 5:17pm | IP Logged
THE ACCOUNT OF THE MEMBER WHO POSTED THIS MESSAGE HAS BEEN TEMPORARILY BANNED.

If you think this is an error please Contact us.

Dear Guest, Being an unregistered member you are missing out on participating in the lively discussions happening on the topic "A shame ful day for Mumbai police?!! (Page 2)" in Debate Mansion forum. In addition you lose out on the fun interactions with fellow members and other member exclusive features that India-Forums has to offer. Join India's most popular discussion portal on Indian Entertainment. It's FREE and registration is effortless so JOIN NOW!

return_to_hades

IF-Veteran Member

return_to_hades

Joined: 18 January 2006

Posts: 20775

Posted: 27 October 2008 at 6:17pm | IP Logged
Taking the given situation objectively as a remote incident.

We have a renegade youth with a gun taking innocent commuters as hostage. The person is armed and within the confinement of a bus. There is no known history of the person, nor is his intent clearly known. We have no idea if he would cause harm or kill more people, or is actually just feigning threat. We have no information if the person is armed beyond a visible weapon.

Now cops have to tackle the situation. They can either negotiate or lay siege and attack. One of the cardinal rules of dealing with armed suspects is to disarm and disengage. Even when negotiating, the aim is to disarm and disengage. If violent means are necessary then so be it, because an unstable armed person could cause death intentionally or unintentionally. The armed suspect even initiated retaliatory fire.

The final outcome is the cops shot back, a total of four shots. The renegade youth was injured and died succumbing to injuries.

To consider the cops guilty of killing as in murder we have to prove mens rea. Were the cops acting in malice or reacting to a situation. If the cops were reacting to the situation, did the situation provide enough time and opportunity for a less deadly reaction.

The renegade youth is guilty of an act of terrorism. He may have noble motives, and he may have secondary justifications for his acts. However, by risking the safety of innocent civilians and using violent unlawful means to achieve his ends he has committed an act of terrorism. His death is unfortunate, he probably deserved a second chance and it is sad that youth in our country could be driven to this. But despite that we ought not martyr him. He knew the risks when he chose the extremity.

There is not enough evidence to deem the cops as murderers. If evidence does prove that they acted with an intent to purely kill the suspect and did not weigh options, they are guilty of murder. If they acted with the intent to indeed cause bodily harm then they are guilty of homicide. If they reacted to a situation, but could have used non lethal measures they are guilty of reckless homicide and breach of conduct. If they provided minimally acceptable reaction to the gravity of the situation and a less lethal measure had no complete guarantee of effectiveness, then they have done absolutely nothing wrong.

As for blaming teh entire police force for acting on one situation and not another. Orders come from above. Sometimes cops are just doing as ordered. It is unfair to blame the entire police force for the corruption of the powers above that be.

chal_phek_mat

Senior Member

chal_phek_mat

Joined: 07 March 2008

Posts: 958

Posted: 29 October 2008 at 11:51am | IP Logged
Originally posted by Gauri_3

Originally posted by chal_phek_mat

 
LOLLOL
 
Make that a member of MNS and that makes him a goonda in your verbiage, but if he is not he should have known betterWink, tsk tskLOLLOL

Originally posted by chal_phek_mat


In principle I gotta support Rahul Raj here, he felt he and his people were getting a raw deal he felt the govt machinery was too busy playing politics. He took the law in his own hand, "questionable" sure, but understandable


Look, who's sitting on the fence nowWink "tsk tsk"TongueLOL
 
ok, let me explain, this AGAIN using my own quote
 
Originally posted by chal_phek_mat


In principle I gotta support Rahul Raj here,
 
Above means I support Rahul Raj
Originally posted by chal_phek_mat

 he felt he and his people were getting a raw deal he felt the govt machinery was too busy playing politics. He took the law in his own hand, "questionable" sure, but understandable
 
even though he broke the law, his reasons for doing what he did were understandable, his methods were "questionable". But I understand
 
same logic as for MNS supporters during their voilent actions earlier in "this" episode, I understand why they did it, questionable methods, but understandable, I dont call him a goonda in one place and then change my terminolgy next time around.
 
 
If someone 2nd grader reads the above reaaaaaaaaaal slooooooooooooowly, he/she will be able to decipher. I support Rahul Raj here
 
I dont change my logic based upon where the person hails from , unlike a lot of othersWink
 
 


Edited by chal_phek_mat - 29 October 2008 at 11:54am

Gauri_3

IF-Sizzlerz

Joined: 12 November 2006

Posts: 13617

Posted: 29 October 2008 at 1:14pm | IP Logged
THE ACCOUNT OF THE MEMBER WHO POSTED THIS MESSAGE HAS BEEN TEMPORARILY BANNED.

If you think this is an error please Contact us.

Gauri_3

IF-Sizzlerz

Joined: 12 November 2006

Posts: 13617

Posted: 29 October 2008 at 1:16pm | IP Logged
THE ACCOUNT OF THE MEMBER WHO POSTED THIS MESSAGE HAS BEEN TEMPORARILY BANNED.

If you think this is an error please Contact us.

chal_phek_mat

Senior Member

chal_phek_mat

Joined: 07 March 2008

Posts: 958

Posted: 29 October 2008 at 3:02pm | IP Logged
Originally posted by Gauri_3

Originally posted by chal_phek_mat


In principle I gotta support Rahul Raj here, he felt he and his people were getting a raw deal he felt the govt machinery was too busy playing politics. He took the law in his own hand, "questionable" sure, but understandable
 
Originally posted by chal_phek_mat

 
LOLLOL
 
Make that a member of MNS and that makes him a goonda in your verbiage, but if he is not he should have known betterWink, tsk tskLOLLOL



Looks like you were cornered on this one incident since it came close on the heels of RT tyranny which you support wholeheartedly.  That's why getting desperate for someone else to join in and say all that you would like to say yourself....as in your second post aboveWink
 
Swinging both ways...eh buddyTongueLOL
 
I think I gotta explain everything like I am in a kindergarden here
 
the first response was part of a response
Originally posted by chal_phek_mat

In principle I gotta support Rahul Raj here, he felt he and his people were getting a raw deal he felt the govt machinery was too busy playing politics. He took the law in his own hand, "questionable" sure, but understandable

there should be a judicial inquiry into this matter to get to the bottom of the issue, what caused him to do this act, what caused those people who creaed the situation to act in this fashion

If a govt official is found guilty he should be punished with the maximum extent of the law
and I responded to your post saying when for you one time the same act is goondaism and the other time it is regional hate
Originally posted by chal_phek_mat

 
LOLLOL
 
Make that a member of MNS and that makes him a goonda in your verbiage, but if he is not he should have known betterWink, tsk tskLOLLOL
 
The act of this kid is the same as the MNS activists, they felt they got sidelined based upon where their region and they hit back in the same fashion, Voilently, taking the law in his/their hands. Both acts are the same. I said the root cause should be identified in both the cases and anyone responsible for the root cause should be punished.  That is the same line of thinking in both the cases. Same Situation same response.
 
In the other case  even though you had no clue about the details it did not stop you and the others to start bashing RT. But this time around you have to wait and find what the details are
 
You cant find ways to debate that is why once you want to get personal accuse me of being regionalistic and in another debate for taking a false standLOL
 
I am out of this debate
 
 
Next time please debate the issue, not the person, these  unneccesary personal attacks wont be neccesary.
 
Next time there is a debate you debate for Thackeray's, I will debate against(I guess around the middle of Feb if I am still here on IFWink) I will debate without getting personal but as passionately. lets see if you can do it on the other side. But would be useless if there is chiming sessionWink

Gauri_3

IF-Sizzlerz

Joined: 12 November 2006

Posts: 13617

Posted: 29 October 2008 at 4:03pm | IP Logged
THE ACCOUNT OF THE MEMBER WHO POSTED THIS MESSAGE HAS BEEN TEMPORARILY BANNED.

If you think this is an error please Contact us.

chal_phek_mat

Senior Member

chal_phek_mat

Joined: 07 March 2008

Posts: 958

Posted: 31 October 2008 at 10:32am | IP Logged
Originally posted by Gauri_3

is it still that hard for you to get that you'll never ever see me debating for the likes of thackreys or laloos or mulayamsD'oh
 
 
I think I mentioned to you, I dont have that limitation, I dont have a problem debating either side of it, without getting my personal affiliations involved in the debate(I know, I know it is hard for anyone to beleive that). Anyway what is anyone's personal affiliation? RT, Mulayam, Laloo or any debate does not buy me or anyone anything personally, it hurts me personally at some points like any other fellow Indians, sure, but that is life and this is a debate. For me I do gain personaly when I take a side that I maynot beleive in, it makes me do a little bit of research why the issue is there, again that is me, for a lot of people trying to understand why the opposite side react a certain way is unacceptable and that is fine. It makes the debate more passionate
 
 
It is a debate for me, I offered to you, I will debate from the other side if you are concerned about my personal affiliations being involved, but that causes you into
Originally posted by Gauri_3

 After agreeing with what I was saying all along, the debate gotta die...hai naWink  It would have been nice though if you had quit without cribbingTongueLOL
 
For the record. I took the "For" side here first, so that makes me the winner(and you took a similar position later on, so you are a co-winner. But if that makes you happy. I will let you declare yourself the winner(and me a loser, even though we were on the same side of the debate) 
 
and subsequently the debate dies, what is the debate gonna be after that? who is more in favorLOL? Who is truly beleiving in it?
 
Again it is a debate and this is a debate mansion.
1. You can be either for a side
2. Against a side
3. Against all sides
4. For all sides
5. Wax poetic
 
If I take #3,#4, #5, it really isnt a debate, it is a chiming session, as most of the debate threads go here.
if I take #1 or #2 and everyone is on my side, it again is a chiming session
It is only becomes a debate(IMO) when someone is on #1 and someone is on #2
 
Again as I said there is no more a debate here, so you can write whatever you want here, but there wont be a responseSmile


Edited by chal_phek_mat - 31 October 2008 at 10:50am

Post Reply New Post

Go to top

Related Topics

  Topics Topic Starter Replies Views Last Post
Should police visit every crime victim ?? WillSmith456 0 344 21 November 2009 at 9:19am
By WillSmith456
Slumdog millionaire, shame or great?

2 3

Shambo 23 1475 07 October 2009 at 7:32am
By Shambo
Amar SIngh...Leader Or Shame for Nation Golden iron 5 578 28 October 2008 at 7:02pm
By Gauri_3
Shame on Indian media!

2 3

Pradarshak 18 1029 20 September 2007 at 7:47pm
By Pradarshak
Fraudulent conversion-a shame on humanity osprey 2 836 04 October 2005 at 12:44am
By sawagat

Forum Quick Jump

Forum Category

Active Forums

Debate Mansion Topic Index

Limit search to this Forum only.

 

Disclaimer: All Logos and Pictures of various Channels, Shows, Artistes, Media Houses, Companies, Brands etc. belong to their respective owners, and are used to merely visually identify the Channels, Shows, Companies, Brands, etc. to the viewer. Incase of any issue please contact the webmaster.