Death by cop bombers

It's been a couple of weeks since my last post. Somewhat disappointed that I can't locate this page with a Google search yet. How does that work, then? Should I set up my own site rather than a "blogspot"?

Hopefully some final thoughts on the London bombings, though, despite a few wishful thinkers, I agree with the majority view that this is something that's going to hang over us indefinitely. The atmosphere of early July - Live8, the Olympic bid win, leading the world on Africa and climate change at G8 - has been totally changed by a few screwed up kids (and their puppetmasters). Why couldn't they have just started a band?

The effect of the failed bombs on 21/7 has been more dramatic than those of 7/7. There was panic apparently on 21/7 and, I read, on a bus which caught on fire a few days ago. I've been to London a few times over the last couple of weeks and the tubes are, basically, deserted. I read somewhere that passenger numbers are down something like 15%. But that probably represents (at least) 50% of those using the tube voluntarily, rather than to get to work. So during the day the carriages are practically empty.

The shooting on 22/7 was the worst aspect of the panic, and just totally unacceptable, however much Ian Blair tries to justify his shoot to kill policy. I don't really see this as a policy question, anyway. A 6 year old child could tell you it is better to shoot a suicide bomber rather than let him (or her, careful cops) kill others. The issue is the need for certainty.

The Menezes shooting was idiotic (as I say, panic) not just because of the surveillance failure (he came out of a different flat, had travelled on a bus(!) and could have been stopped much sooner etc.) but also due to superficial evaluation of the situation. First, there is no reason to suppose that the current bombers have the technology to make bomb-belts. Otherwise, they'd already be using them. Second, maybe I've watched too many movies, but bullets go pretty fast. Is there a need to shoot a man when you can see his hands? At root cause this must be due to poor training and briefing.

The so-called "policy" is also misinformed. It underestimates the costs of (as occurred) shooting the wrong man AND of shooting a bomber. I understand the policy is based on that in Israel, but the situation here is quite different. We're not yet a as close to a war zone as Israel/Palestine. We're trying to get back to normality, so the cost of "collateral damage" is much higher. As the West Midlands force demonstrated, the value of taking the bomber alive is extremely high. In Israel they do not expect to find all the bomb-makers and other conspirators. Here we expect to. We therefore need all the evidence we can get.

This policy needs to be properly thought through, and reflected in police firearms training, before it's too late and we do become a war zone. I'm sorry, it's just not good enough.