←back to thread

628 points nodea2345 | 5 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
easytiger ◴[] No.21124910[source]
Obviously China is evil etc etc.

But isn't it pretty obvious these people are physically attacking armed officers as they are retreating? And they are beating up and kicking another downed officer in the head?

Whilst I might have sympathy for their cause the kid struck an armed officer with a weapon whilst he wielded a gun as his friends beat another armed officer. I have very little sympathy for anyone who makes such poor decisions in a group delerium of impunity.

Edit: If anyone downvoting would care to offer another option, that would be appreciated

replies(3): >>21124925 #>>21126846 #>>21132128 #
1. simonh ◴[] No.21126846[source]
There are two things to unpack here.

One is, what it the police officer right there and then supposed to do? Police forces across the world have faced similarly violent protests, and even riots while managing not to shoot anybody. It's part of their job. Police in the UK in riot situations aren't even armed with firearms. Pretty much the only situations in which UK police ever get issued firearms is when facing similarly armed criminals. If they are getting themselves in situations, against protesters not armed with guns, where they feel the need to shoot their way out, they have badly screwed up.

Secondly, HK police routinely assault and very severely beat even non-violent protesters. They have frequently provoked and incited violence. This isn't an isolated example of defensive violence by peace keeping law officers. This is a further escalation to potentially lethal violence by a hostile force that has repeatedly upped the scale of violence in HK.

replies(1): >>21127057 #
2. easytiger ◴[] No.21127057[source]
I'm afraid that's not even close to an accurate comparison. Indeed I find it entirely disingenuous. There are plenty of armed officers in the UK for a start, I see them most days. Riot police in the UK are supported by authorized firearms officers in most cases.

Secondly most world police forces have weapons, and the citizenry in those countries are aware of that. At the end of the day, a small group of officers were being attacked by a larger group of people. An officer is on the ground being kicked as violently and as brutally as possible. Another officer is being attacked despite warning use of his weapon and I'm afraid seems well within his rights to protect himself here, with unfortunate outcomes.

You cannot excuse the role of the protesters in provoking this action.

replies(1): >>21128826 #
3. simonh ◴[] No.21128826[source]
Police officers on diplomatic protection, airport security, etc are usually armed, and there may well be armed officers available in riot situations, but they are backup not front line.

I said myself it’s not the same elsewhere, many other police services are armed but even so using live ammunition against protesters is unacceptable anywhere.

I agree the protesters know what they are doing, but just as I cannot deny their role, equally can you really deny the role the HK police have played in deliberately provoking and escalating the violence? Do you think that is acceptable?

replies(1): >>21129598 #
4. easytiger ◴[] No.21129598{3}[source]
> Do you think that is acceptable?

I think it irrelevant. You don't hit a guy with a gun pointed at you with a pipe and expect not to be shot. The wider situation is not relevant unless the chap wanted to be shot.

> but they are backup not front line.

Also incorrect. I see armed patrols every day

replies(1): >>21133742 #
5. simonh ◴[] No.21133742{4}[source]
Having a gun and pointing it at people does not give anyone the right to shoot them.

That last comment was referring specifically to police in riot situation.

replies(1): >>21134856 #