Monday, December 15, 2014

Why is the hostage taker still alive?

I don't understand the softly-softly default position the police take in hostage siruations.

The one going on right now in the heart of Sydney is a perfect example.

A gunman has people in a cafe held hostage, for over ten hours now. The police are out in force of course, armed to the teeth.

After hours of waiting they say they're now negotiating with the hoodlum.

He's been in full view of a window, as shown on TV:

So why didn't they shoot the bastard?

The deputy commissioner has been saying that the safety of the hostages and the general public is paramount.

Well, the best way to ensure everyone's safety is to eliminate the threat.

Forget the negotiators, there must be sharpshooters all round the place. They know what he looks like so they should have orders to shoot to kill at any opportunity he gives them.

Anything less is not making the safety of hostages and the public paramount.


David Blackwell said...

What if he has an explosive device on his body which could be triggered if he is shot? Or what if he has an accomplice? A bit reckless isn't it calling for the police to just shoot they guy when there could be any number of unforeseen consequences of doing so?

Seabee said...

You seem to think they had no intelligence on what was going on David. No listening devices, no vision, no info from escapees, no background on him. They had all that.