Azelle Rodney: Tough Tits?

There's a bit of a hoo-haa about this geezer Azelle Rodney who was shot dead by police in North London seven years ago.

The police believed he and two other blokes in a Volkswagon Golf were driving to carry out an armed robbery, and when the police stopped them Azelle Rodney was shot dead.

He wasn't armed, but there were guns in the boot.

What is your take on this? Were the police too hasty or is this a case of justice? The guy was quite happy to be in a car with weapons and was obviously up to no good - did he get what he deserved for playing with guns?

If this guy had form the cops were probably itching to fire.

if you play with guns you can't complain when one takes you out.

well thats one way of looking at things.

all criminals deserve to be unjustly murdered because, well, they were up to no good anyway

He was a well known drug dealer with previous for weapons offences. Police had been watching him for a while knowing he was planning to rob a group of Jamaican heroin traffickers, they stopped him on the way to do it.
It's unfortunate he was killed but I'm certain they issued plenty of warnings and if he didn't do as he was told and appeared to be resisting police from a car they knew had weapons in it then, well, you can see how these things happen.

Armed robber/ drug dealer dies while resisting arrest. It's not like we lost a cure for cancer is it? One less scumbag in the world at the end of the day.

See actual video here -

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-19482322

Moral if you play with guns don't cry when you get shot!

Sluffy wrote:
Moral if you play with guns don't cry when you get shot!

Exactly ! People always turn out to make these guys look like saints. The problem with the UK is we pamper to the idiots who think everyone has "rights". If you are a criminal you lose those rights. If you go out on a job armed, that implies you are willing to shoot someone. Tough shit if you end up getting shot. One less criminal for the tax payers to support.

Hipster_Nebula wrote:well thats one way of looking at things.

all criminals deserve to be unjustly murdered because, well, they were up to no good anyway

I knew you'd defend the criminals. I'm waiting for your thread Ian Brady: Should He Be Education Secretary?

I'm not defending them you mong.

but i don't subscribe to random murder.

I don't know anything about this case but if he's threatened the officer with a gun then i agree he should have been fired on.

I don't agree with a random use of firearms because someone just happens to be "up to no good"

I broadly agree with Hipster. Having a gun in the boot of your car is not a capital offence in this country, so if the police shoot someone who is unarmed, it's basic lynch-mob protocol to come out and say "they deserved it".

largehat wrote:I broadly agree with Hipster. Having a gun in the boot of your car is not a capital offence in this country, so if the police shoot someone who is unarmed, it's basic lynch-mob protocol to come out and say "they deserved it".

So you're a cop. You approach a car that intel suggests will be full of armed robbers. One guy makes a move for something you can't see. Are you suggesting you'd wait to see what the guy produced?

TheHateCamel wrote:He was a well known drug dealer with previous for weapons offences. Police had been watching him for a while knowing he was planning to rob a group of Jamaican heroin traffickers, they stopped him on the way to do it.
It's unfortunate he was killed but I'm certain they issued plenty of warnings and if he didn't do as he was told and appeared to be resisting police from a car they knew had weapons in it then, well, you can see how these things happen.

Armed robber/ drug dealer dies while resisting arrest. It's not like we lost a cure for cancer is it? One less scumbag in the world at the end of the day.

^^^ this...

If the cars full of guns, the police think he may be carrying them and they ask him to stand still or they will shoot and the dumb ass still runs off then what does he expect will happen?

TheHateCamel wrote:He was a well known drug dealer with previous for weapons offences. Police had been watching him for a while knowing he was planning to rob a group of Jamaican heroin traffickers, they stopped him on the way to do it.
It's unfortunate he was killed but I'm certain they issued plenty of warnings and if he didn't do as he was told and appeared to be resisting police from a car they knew had weapons in it then, well, you can see how these things happen.

Armed robber/ drug dealer dies while resisting arrest. It's not like we lost a cure for cancer is it? One less scumbag in the world at the end of the day.

A policeman who shot dead a suspected armed robber did not shout a warning or see any weapon before he opened up with two rapid bursts of gunfire, a public inquiry into the killing heard yesterday.

Natasha Whittam wrote:

largehat wrote:I broadly agree with Hipster. Having a gun in the boot of your car is not a capital offence in this country, so if the police shoot someone who is unarmed, it's basic lynch-mob protocol to come out and say "they deserved it".

So you're a cop. You approach a car that intel suggests will be full of armed robbers. One guy makes a move for something you can't see. Are you suggesting you'd wait to see what the guy produced?

Troll, I'm not debating or referring to whether or not the police shot him out of genuine self defence or not. For one thing, I don't know much about the case. For another, it's irrelevant to what I am talking about, which is the predictable "he was a criminal so tough shit" mentality displayed by several posters on this thread.

These are not capital crimes.

largehat wrote:

Troll, I'm not debating or referring to whether or not the police shot him out of genuine self defence or not. For one thing, I don't know much about the case. For another, it's irrelevant to what I am talking about, which is the predictable "he was a criminal so tough shit" mentality displayed by several posters on this thread.

These are not capital crimes.

Underpants folder.

Natasha Whittam wrote:
Underpants folder.

Knickers padlocker.

largehat wrote:For another, it's irrelevant to what I am talking about, which is the predictable "he was a criminal so tough shit" mentality displayed by several posters on this thread.

What is wrong with that mentality? Why is it that you and Hipster love criminals so much? Was your Dad a bank robber?

Natasha Whittam wrote:
What is wrong with that mentality? Why is it that you and Hipster love criminals so much?

It's very easy to display a 'tough shit' attitude when reading the Daily Mail or when it doesn't affect you.

I believe in the integrity and authority of our legal system, which is one of the very best in the world.

I can't speak for Hipster. That twat chip butty is the only person I know of on here who uses two accounts to try to double team people. You know full well Hipster and I are nothing to do with each other, so don't ask me to explain his opinions.

largehat wrote:

Natasha Whittam wrote:
What is wrong with that mentality? Why is it that you and Hipster love criminals so much?

It's very easy to display a 'tough shit' attitude when reading the Daily Mail or when it doesn't affect you.

I believe in the integrity and authority of our legal system, which is one of the very best in the world.

I can't speak for Hipster. That twat chip butty is the only person I know of on here who uses two accounts to try to double team people. You know full well Hipster and I are nothing to do with each other, so don't ask me to explain his opinions.

The accounts are from two separate people.

I can't say for certain that one or the other does not uses each account to post but I doubt it.

It's more likely to me that if you insult one of them the other will simply stick up for them and give you shit back.