|
I WAS surprised to read that police had used a firearm in a crowded MRT station in last Friday's report, 'Knife-wielding suspect shot dead at MRT station'. In my view, it is reckless and irresponsible. It could have quite easily ended in the death or injury of an innocent bystander. Are police officers here not trained to handle close-combat situations? Can they not disarm a man with a knife? I would have understood if the man had a firearm instead of a knife. Police should also not equip young recruits with firearms. They are not psychologically mature enough to be able to make sound decisions on the use of deadly force. In Britain, for example, only highly trained and mature officers can carry firearms and even then, only in specially adapted vehicles and never as a sidearm. There are much better and just as effective ways to disable a suspect.
People were quick to point out: 'The man was a murderer.' But was this proven? No one knows for sure he did not act in self-defence, then panic and ran away. In any case, police should have isolated the suspect and then overpowered him.
Also, if police officers are expected to handle situations like this - which is highly likely - they should be equipped with protective vests.
Juergen Fechner
IN LUTON, England, last year, a police officer died after he was stabbed in the neck by a knife-wielding assailant. The officer was not armed, as is the custom in Britain. All he had for protection was a baton and stab-proof vest that wasn't effective in this instance.
Incidents like this are always tragic but, if anyone has to die, it should be the assailant and not the police officer.
Paul FitzPatrick
|
