[sinharishi]

Originally Posted by adroit

• The incident happened at VVIP area where I have never seen the availability of the stones at all.
• Its hard to believe that they were only 3 police man to control so called bikers. To best of my knowledge, this area is full of police people 24x7… all the so called important politicians stay in that area.
• Look at all the pictures displaying the stones at the crime scene. It looks like that someone has dumped the stones at the place.

with all the 3 points.

I have never seen stones(or any sort of debris) lying on the roads of Central Delhi.The area is the most secured part of New Delhi having higher number of PCR vans.The moment i saw the pictures, the series of events as told by the Delhi Police looks like more of a made up story. I still feel ,we are being hidden from the truth.

[sen2009]

Originally Posted by tsk1979

I have seen some real wild police chases on Youtube, and firing at a fleeing suspect was usually the last resort, and happened only when the driver had a weapon, or was a suspect in an armed robbery.
Its a common guideline, even in USA to use firearm discharge as the last resort. Many policemen in countries like UK don't even carry weapons.

......

Thanks for posting this very well organized summary. Me and all other members who have condemned this police action were trying to say this only.

Hope some long lasting is taken after all.

[.sushilkumar]

You Hit the nail on it;s head tanveer. A recent example of these "MOBS" was recent Sab-e-baraat night.

Imagine yourself surrounded by 40-50 hooligans in middle of night with your wife and kids in car & what all option you have to save your family from "comments" of these so called kind hearted wannabe bikers.

NO doubt a life is lost but Unfortunately in India nobody follows law until a "example" is set. Now that Police has set a example , it will be peace until those involved remembered that night .

[tsk1979]

Originally Posted by .sushilkumar

You Hit the nail on it;s head tanveer. A recent example of these "MOBS" was recent Sab-e-baraat night.

Imagine yourself surrounded by 40-50 hooligans in middle of night with your wife and kids in car & what all option you have to save your family from "comments" of these so called kind hearted wannabe bikers.

NO doubt a life is lost but Unfortunately in India nobody follows law until a "example" is set. Now that Police has set a example , it will be peace until those involved remembered that night .

Wrong way to set an Example.
Killing in a democratic country should be the last resort. Not the first resort.
The police never tried to control unruly mobs in this country. All of a sudden they decide to fire.
They send 3 cops to control a mob. More than the policeman who shot the biker, its the superiors who are to blame.
They knew unruly biker mobs are a problem and law and order risk.
This has been happening for years.
Why no concrete action, and then all of a sudden this trigger happy action.

Forget the dead biker. I will not comment whether he deserved it.
Lets for a second assume yes he deserved it.

But look at the cops action. At a public place trying to hit a moving target. What if the bike had gone left instead of wheelie and bullet hit a bystander?

This is not how law enforcement is done.
But these are the same cops who jump in the middle of national highway waiving their hands to stop speeders. This is the same haphazard attitude shown.

Unless police get their act right, or rather the admin unties their hands to deal with mobs, they will never learn how to deal with mobs. Today the biker who some say deserved it got the bullet. Tomorrow it will be a bystander.

They have thrown every book out of the window in doing this, somebody needs to be accountable for this. From the superior who did not mobilize a riot control force(despite repeated infractions by these people) to the cop who thought he was some bollywood marksman.

Coming to the last point whether cops are telling the truth. Let me put it this way. Suppose you buy Desi Ghee from a Kiryana shop and it turns out to be Dalda, will you trust the cops. The cops all over India have been caught lying (Remember Delhi business man shooting case where they did an encounter on the wrong guys then tried to cover it up) when it comes to their shady actions. So everything cops say, or rather anybody connected with govt/law enforcement says, I would take it with a healthy pinch of salt.

[.sushilkumar]

Originally Posted by tsk1979

Wrong way to set an Example.
Killing in a democratic country should be the last resort. Not the first resort.
The police never tried to control unruly mobs in this country. All of a sudden they decide to fire.
They send 3 cops to control a mob. More than the policeman who shot the biker, its the superiors who are to blame.
They knew unruly biker mobs are a problem and law and order risk.
This has been happening for years.
Why no concrete action, and then all of a sudden this trigger happy action.

It;s Been long time ago that we ceased to exist as a democratic country. The very basic Pillars of democracy daily sleep with hooligans , murderer's , rapists and what not, right in middle of parliament. it;s Only on paper that we are a democratic nation. law is applicable to mango people like us only who likes to follow the law of land & are without "connections"

In a country where you connections define Whether you go to jail to a 5 start hotel after being convicted , it;s anybody;s guess whether we are democratic nation or a banana republic

As for police action goes, they might have been on wrong side for firing but These Bikers are regular and has been warned at least thousand times with equal number of challan's issued before hand, So it;s wrong to say that they didn;t tried to control them & are not warned before. at least twice in week , i read in papers about so many bikers challaned in middle of night for unruly behavior, So this was coming up IMO .

As for less number of police personnel goes , they tried best to control with what ever resources they has & on facing immediate threat to their own safety , they fired.

PS : - police and para military forces like BSF , Police and CRPF's are trained never to fire until there is a immediate risk to their own life or Property . Another example of such firing being recent incident in Kashmir where BSF fired to dispel mobs as they were about to loot their firearm stores.

[suman]

Originally Posted by tsk1979

They send 3 cops to control a mob. More than the policeman who shot the biker, its the superiors who are to blame.

I don't think they were sent to control the mob, they were on their regular beat. As in - parked at a spot in their demarcated area.

And there are rarely any bystanders at 2 in the morning.

[adroit]

Originally Posted by sgiitk

Let us not forget if it were the US police would have fired to kill much earlier.

Well we are talking about Delhi Police and not US police... they are far more better than DP when it comes to law enforcement.. and yeah, for both (Police & Public).

[ebonho]

Originally Posted by gd1418

It seems you are not aware of the ground realities here in Delhi/NCR. And going by the logic I must say Bihar gets the police that it deserves (Bhagalpur) and then I can name quite a few all over including your own Pune.

Sure. And I would not take offence where none was intended. This is a forum for debate. We do not necessarily have to agree with each other.

Let us not digress or trivialise the issue.

Let's not. Let's debate the posts and not the person who makes them.

You have to see those rowdies on bikes to believe. They stop busy roads to get a clear stretch and perform their bizzare stunts. The traffic is jammed for hours. Anybody trying to plead to go, gets beaten up, bullied and their vehicles banged upon or windows smashed.

I am a biker. You think I am unaware of city punks? But is the solution to city punks shooting them in the back while they are fleeing?

Now who gives them these rights? Someone somewhere might be having an emergency, but is stuck because these imbeciles are having fun. Do not defend the un-defendable.

Yes, who gives them the rights to make a mockery of the law? Who is responsible for upholding the law? Who has been unable to curb their rise and spread while they openly flout the law? Pertinent questions that any law abiding citizen should and would ask.

VI am not at all justifying the loss of life or the act of the policeman. But do not make any sweeping statements.

You and those like you who point to the misdemeanours of the punks, with a "they had it coming, what is the police to do" line of argument, in a way are indirect apologists for the police high handedness. How's that for a sweeping statement?

There is an old saying - "spare the rod and spoil the child". We have stopped wielding the rod and now are suffering.

Exactly. Who holds the rod in Delhi? Who spared it and let the child run amuck? And who finally (and belatedly) decided that the rod wasn't going to work so a gun was the answer, when the child went beserk?

All because the rod was not used. Not on time. Not big enough. Not near enough.

You see when you get down to it, short of the umbrage some of you have taken to your city being called out, we are really not all that divergent in our viewpoints.

[tsk1979]

Originally Posted by ebonho

Sure. And I would not take offence where none was intended. This is a forum for debate. We do not necessarily have to agree with each other.
.
.
.
.

You see when you get down to it, short of the umbrage some of you have taken to your city being called out, we are really not all that divergent in our viewpoints.

As you put forward your opinion, you also put forward an accusation. You could have just put forward your opinion. Like others did. For example person A said "Police did wrong, they should have used a machine gun"
Person B can say "Police did wrong, they should not have used a gun".

There, end of story. But you proceeded with accusations on the cities character(which is not the subject of this thread) just because others did not agree with you.

When you try to support your argument with name calling, all your justification, logic, arguments... everything goes out of the window. It does not matter how much sense you are talking. The moment you start attacking a group of people you become an internet troll.

I do not agree with many people that police should have fired. But I did not have to attack them, or call them a city of criminals, and what they deserve, and blah blah blah to put forward my argument.

[suman]

Very well said Tanveer! Since there is no "Thanks" button, I would like to pen down my Thanks to you for the useful post below

[ebonho]

Originally Posted by tsk1979

As you put forward your opinion, you also put forward an accusation. You could have just put forward your opinion. Like others did. For example person A said "Police did wrong, they should have used a machine gun"
Person B can say "Police did wrong, they should not have used a gun".

There, end of story. But you proceeded with accusations on the cities character(which is not the subject of this thread) just because others did not agree with you.

When you try to support your argument with name calling, all your justification, logic, arguments... everything goes out of the window. It does not matter how much sense you are talking. The moment you start attacking a group of people you become an internet troll

I do not agree, respectfully.

My statement was very valid and pertinent to the discussion. How could it not be?

We are discussing police attitudes and action here. We are discussing lawlessness in a city's populace here. And the dynamic between the two.

The police of a city is from the city (the mass rank and file - if not the top offices from the IPS). The police of a city, any city, responds and reacts depending on the type of people they are needed to police. Most police shrinks call it a "siege mentality" - especially in the case of cities like New Delhi (and Detroit, and LA, and Rio, and many other crime capitals of the world).

Does pointing that out in a discussion such as this not have a place?

Or should educated law abiding and decent upper crust Delhiites here simply react and get prickly because they feel their personal as well as collective fair image has been tarnished by being forcefully lumped with the lumpen?

I've been on the net actively long enough to know who a troll is and to recognize trolling when I see it.

This is not it. But unlike most, it does not get me upset. After all, it is your opinion, and I have mine.

[tsk1979]

Originally Posted by ebonho

The police of a city is from the city (the mass rank and file - if not the top offices from the IPS). The police of a city, any city, responds and reacts depending on the type of people they are needed to police. Most police shrinks call it a "siege mentality" - especially in the case of cities like New Delhi (and Detroit, and LA, and Rio, and many other crime capitals of the world).

If this logic of yours is correct, it means that if the police was from lets say .... "A small village in Himachal", their action would have been more justified?
This thread is not about the type of police Delhi police is or their Psycho-Analysis.

This thread is about:

In a democratic republic is it okay for the police to shoot at an unarmed fleeing person in a public place?

This is not it. But unlike most, it does not get me upset. After all, it is your opinion, and I have mine.

Yes, everybody has their opinion and are fair to air it. But to put your opinion on a higher pedestial, I will not indulge in name calling. By delving into the type of demographic made by the police, and the type of people inhabiting the city, and lumping them all together, including educated folks who simply go about their lives you did the same thing the policeman did. He shot at the biker like the biker was an armed criminal. Stealing a piece of bread and robbing a bank both are crimes, but one gets much higher punishment. So when you lump together everybody, just because there exists a large section in the city which falls in a certain demographic, its called attacking.

Its like saying "XYZ has a large number of thieves, so all you XYZers are thieves"

[ebonho]

Originally Posted by tsk1979

If this logic of yours is correct, it means that if the police was from lets say .... "A small village in Himachal", their action would have been more justified?

You have it backwards. I am not the one defending the police here. I am accusing them. And I think you did not get the logic of what I am trying to say. So let me say it again.

A city and its people get the police they deserve.

So a laid back city with chilled out, mild but argumentative people, which goes to afternon siesta like clockwork at 1 in the afternoon not to be disturbed till 4, will get police who are by and large reflective of the same.

While a violent, power abusive, corrupt, and uncouth city, where everyone knows someone and gets away with most anything by dint of who they know, will get a police who will adopt a very different persona and attitude as they go about their duties.

Its a classic case of action and reaction.

The police are overworked, over stretched, abused, passed over, de-clawed and de-fanged. "Siege Mentality."

Who are they going to take out this frustration on? The netas and the billionaires? No. The dalits and the minorities and the migrants? No. But something has to give.

And it gave way that night. The whole country can see that. Except the apologists.

Yes, everybody has their opinion and are fair to air it. But to put your opinion on a higher pedestial, I will not indulge in name calling. By delving into the type of demographic made by the police, and the type of people inhabiting the city, and lumping them all together, including educated folks who simply go about their lives you did the same thing the policeman did. He shot at the biker like the biker was an armed criminal. Stealing a piece of bread and robbing a bank both are crimes, but one gets much higher punishment. So when you lump together everybody, just because there exists a large section in the city which falls in a certain demographic, its called attacking.

Its like saying "XYZ has a large number of thieves, so all you XYZers are thieves"

I made myself very clear in what I said in my posts. Delhi is a city of 19 million people.

What percentage of that do those taking offence here represent?

Do they even count in the larger scope of things? Either politicaly or in terms of the law?

No. You (we) are the cream in your (our) ivory towers. There is a different and very ugly world down there, which plays out day after day, night after night.

Taking offense or not online on the internet does not change the reality on the streets.

[manolin]

This is not an inflammatory post. But just try to see the truth of this statement.

Middleclass is the strength of this country in a lot of ways; and middle class morality has the potential to be the bane of this country.


In other follow up news items to this incident:


http://ibnlive.in.com/videos/410454/...ice-claim.html

wow! 'they are not sinners' - as if, if the stunters were sinners, then Delhi Police had any rights to fire.

http://www.hindustantimes.com/India-...1-1101545.aspx

lets see what happens in the future:
http://rajneeti.co.in/delhi-firing-c...al-probe.html/


On delhi police brutality in the past
http://news.worldsnap.com/blog-opini...gy-150120.html

[DerAlte]

Originally Posted by ebonho

... Delhi is a city of 19 million people.

What percentage of that do those taking offence here represent? ...

There is insufficient logic in that expression to justify making an offensive statement, no matter who does it.

To repeat TSK's statement: This thread is not about the type of police Delhi police is or their Psycho-Analysis.

Psycho-analysis, or worse prejudiced typification, of any group or race is a rather ill-informed short-cut way of looking at people and cultures. What you expressed about Delhi is present in Pune too - they only speak a different language. The calm practical going-about-their-lives nature of people is as much there in Kochi as it is in Delhi.

It may have been about the threat perception of the cop who pulled out his gun. Everything about it is "may have been", since all comments here are without actual knowledge of facts. Everyone here has commented at a high level, and expressed - in their opinion - what is to be expected in a decent thinking society. It is equally probable that anyone from this group, in the same cop's shoes, would have pulled out his gun, as it is that he might not. That does not mean that the members who might pull out a gun, come from a less mentally evolved background.

Your statements - "A city and its people get the police they deserve" and "The police of a city, any city, responds and reacts depending on the type of people they are needed to police"- are quite uncalled for under the circumstances. You are definitely entitled to your opinion, but don't expect others to find it palatable, valid, any reflection of any truth anywhere, and definitely not an expression of intellect and culture.