![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Bang and Blame
Jul. 24th, 2005 06:55 amThe man the police shot on the Tube the other day was a Brazilian tourist. Kind of puts paid to the debate about whether it was a necessary shooting, doesn't it?
Worst part about all this? Ken Livingstone saying, "The police acted to do what they believed necessary to protect the lives of the public. This tragedy has added another victim to the toll of deaths for which the terrorists bear responsibility."
Did the big bad terrorists chase an unarmed, frightened man with no English from a Brazilian neighbourhood with a high murder rate into a crowded Tube train, pin him to the floor and then put several bullets in him? No.
If you want to say that the police tried their best to defend life, fine; I won't argue ... well, not very much. I'll argue about the execution (no pun intended), but not with the intention. But do not go blaming this on the terrorists. Frankly, if people in authority are blaming terrorism for every rash move they themselves make, the terrorists are winning. After all, there's obviously panic somewhere in this city if the police are trained to kill anyone who's behaving remotely suspiciously without even giving them a chance to answer questions. If you change the way in which you run a country, from its policies on immigration to the method undertaken by its police for dealing with "suspicious people", in such a radical, fundamental way, terrorists are getting exactly what they want -- a culture of fear, paranoia and badly-suppressed anger. Blaming mistakes on the terrorists does not take away from that. I think the mood's supposed to be, "Ooh, this wouldn't have happened if not for the terrorists..." and that's true enough. However, Livingstone's taking it too far. Root cause does not denote blame. People, and law enforcement bodies, make their own decisions ... and their own mistakes.
Worst part about all this? Ken Livingstone saying, "The police acted to do what they believed necessary to protect the lives of the public. This tragedy has added another victim to the toll of deaths for which the terrorists bear responsibility."
Did the big bad terrorists chase an unarmed, frightened man with no English from a Brazilian neighbourhood with a high murder rate into a crowded Tube train, pin him to the floor and then put several bullets in him? No.
If you want to say that the police tried their best to defend life, fine; I won't argue ... well, not very much. I'll argue about the execution (no pun intended), but not with the intention. But do not go blaming this on the terrorists. Frankly, if people in authority are blaming terrorism for every rash move they themselves make, the terrorists are winning. After all, there's obviously panic somewhere in this city if the police are trained to kill anyone who's behaving remotely suspiciously without even giving them a chance to answer questions. If you change the way in which you run a country, from its policies on immigration to the method undertaken by its police for dealing with "suspicious people", in such a radical, fundamental way, terrorists are getting exactly what they want -- a culture of fear, paranoia and badly-suppressed anger. Blaming mistakes on the terrorists does not take away from that. I think the mood's supposed to be, "Ooh, this wouldn't have happened if not for the terrorists..." and that's true enough. However, Livingstone's taking it too far. Root cause does not denote blame. People, and law enforcement bodies, make their own decisions ... and their own mistakes.