Police group oks shooting suicide bombers in head
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - An international organization representing police chiefs has broadened its policy for the use of deadly force by telling officers to shoot suspected suicide bombers in the head, The Washington Post reported on Thursday.
The International Association of Chiefs of Police issued new guidelines to its 20,000 members about two weeks before British police shot dead a Brazilian electrician because they mistook him for a suicide bomber, the newspaper said.
U.S. law enforcement officers typically had been authorized previously to use deadly force if lives were in imminent danger, the newspaper said.
Jean Charles de Menezes, 27, was shot repeatedly in the head by plainclothes officers on July 22 at a London underground station as police hunted suspects in a failed bombing attack on the city transit system a day earlier.
The Washington Post said the international police chiefs group produced a new training guide for confronting suicide bomber suspects after the July 7 attacks on three London underground trains and a bus that killed at least 56 people, including four bombers.
According to the newspaper, the guide recommends that if lethal force is needed to stop someone who fits a certain behavioral profile, the officer should "aim for the head." The intent is to kill the suspect instantly so the person could not set off a bomb if one is strapped to the person's chest, the newspaper said.
The Reuters article seems to indicate that the International Association of Chiefs of Police are calling for the shooting of anybody who looks suspicious. In the head, no less. But I'm not quite sure that's what they're saying.
This is from later in the Reuters article:
According to the newspaper, the new guidelines also say the threat does not have to be "imminent" -- as in traditional police training -- an officer just needs to have a "reasonable basis" for believing a suspect can detonate a bomb.
And then there's this from the actual Washington Post article mention by Reuters:
The police group's guidelines also say the threat to officers does not have to be "imminent," as police training traditionally teaches. Officers do not have to wait until a suspected bomber makes a move, another traditional requirement for police to use deadly force. An officer just needs to have a "reasonable basis" to believe that the suspect can detonate a bomb, the guidelines say.
This is really just a minor change intended to recognize the inherent differences between a confrontation of someone who is packing a firearm and someone who is packing a bomb. Its certainly not as simple as the "Police group oks shooting suicide bombers" statement made in the Reuters headline. If an officer is facing someone who is wielding a gun there are some clear signals they can observe that will tell them if that weapon is about to be used on them. The gun needs to be retrieved from where its being carried or stored. Then it has to be aimed. With a bomb this isn't the case. It doesn't need to be aimed and can be detonated by anything from a hand-held switch to a timer to a cell phone.
And, frankly, I don't trust that Reuters and/or the Washington Post hasn't taken some of this out of context. Here's the website of the group in question. I've searched if for the guidelines mentioned in the article, but I can't find them. It'd be nice to read the whole section dealing with this issue.
Is there room for mistakes to be made? Sure there is. Human error isn't something that can be removed from the scenario. But I think there is more being made of this then there needs to be. The key is not to put yourself, and the officer(s), into a situation where a mistake could happen. All you have to do is not act suspicious. If you're wearing bulky clothing unzip your jacket or something so that its obvious you aren't hiding something. Don't skulk around. If you are confronted by an officer be polite and cooperative.
This stuff isn't rocket science.
If you ask me, this is just another issue for the terror apologists and the "its really our fault" crowd to hype as a way to shift focus away those we should be focusing on: The terrorists.