Hostages taken in Sydney + bomb threat

note the bold. according to you, everyone would have died anyways, so the police only having 2 deaths is quite the good record if you ask me.

the only reason people escaped was cause of the hero Tori Johnson not cause of police negotiations. the first time he tried to take the weapon from the guy which resulted in 5 people escaping some of those legged it saying they needed to go to the toilet. at the climax the rest escaped cause he tackled the gunman to the floor where all the rest legged it.

you forget the main point. these are extremist terrorists they would kill everyone in the end eventually. you think they just gonna get what they want and surrender ? this guy adored IS and you know what they do ? kill people.

Oh, so because he might eventually have killed everyone it would be better to just risk everyones lives right from the beginning?
What kind of pineappleing logic is that?

Could you seriously look the families of the lost ones in the eye and say "Yeah we knew about the threat of bombs but we still just shot him so he blew up everyone lol, i mean we could've waited it out and attempted to save the vast majority but we just went for a risky move and ended up killing them all, sorry!"

Man i'm glad you're not in charge of any kind of hostage situation.
The police went for the options that would allow them to potentially save as many people as possible, they didn't just not shoot him because they'd prefer to take him alive, believe me if they knew 100% that shooting him would save all the hostages and that he had no accomplices and so on, they would've almost 99.99% surely taken the shot.
But they didn't know all that so they went with the best option with the given information.

Just shooting the gunman and just hoping that things work out seems to be just about the worst pineappleing option.

Oh, so because he might eventually have killed everyone it would be better to just risk everyones lives right from the beginning?
What kind of pineappleing logic is that?

Could you seriously look the families of the lost ones in the eye and say "Yeah we knew about the threat of bombs but we still just shot him so he blew up everyone lol, i mean we could've waited it out and attempted to save the vast majority but we just went for a risky move and ended up killing them all, sorry!"

Man i'm glad you're not in charge of any kind of hostage situation.
The police went for the options that would allow them to potentially save as many people as possible, they didn't just not shoot him because they'd prefer to take him alive, believe me if they knew 100% that shooting him would save all the hostages and that he had no accomplices and so on, they would've almost 99.99% surely taken the shot.
But they didn't know all that so they went with the best option with the given information.

Just shooting the gunman and just hoping that things work out seems to be just about the worst pineappleing option.

whats the point of waiting for the inevitable in the case he did have bombs. what do you think waiting will do if he had bombs there. you think hes just gonna dis arm then while surrendering ? no hes not.

are you kidding me ? the police were too scared sif they want to take him alive rofl. the police went for the option which was the lowest risk for them where they wont be blamed for anything if it goes wrong since they got no balls. o lets wait for the guy to make the first move then we move in. thats the police response to this situation. if you are dealing with an armed man without reason what other option can there be besides shooting him or waiting for him to kill someone first which he did in this case

whats the point of waiting for the inevitable in the case he did have bombs. what do you think waiting will do if he had bombs there. you think hes just gonna dis arm then while surrendering ? no hes not.

are you kidding me ? the police were too scared sif they want to take him alive rofl. the police went for the option which was the lowest risk for them where they wont be blamed for anything if it goes wrong since they got no balls. o lets wait for the guy to make the first move then we move in. thats the police response to this situation. if you are dealing with an armed man without reason what other option can there be besides shooting him or waiting for him to kill someone first which he did in this case

For the inevitable? What do you fucking mean? If his goal was to kill people he would've just done so, since he kept hostages he clearly had a goal in mind and this leads to the possibility that.... they can get everyone out without anyone dying! There's a possibility of negotiation, there have been multiple cases in the past where all hostages are saved through negotiating with the criminal.

Your method would've possibly just killed everyone while the the results of what actually DID happen resulted in most people surviving.

It has nothing to do with not having any balls and everything about the police's goal not being just killing him but the safety of the people inside.
This might seem like a FUCKING CRAZY AND WILD concept to you, but the police don't actually care of the gunman lives or dies, what they DO care about is the safety of the people inside, which was their priority. Crazy right? The police is worried about the lives of others, is this such a crazy concept to you?

Your line of thought would've possibly just killed everyone for the sake of killing a single madman. Like are you actually too dumb to understand the concept of bombs and accomplices?

>Shoot man keeping hostages while there's a threat of bombs and potential accomplices
>The accomplice blows up the bombs
>Everyone fucking dies and nothing is achieved

Like i seriously think you suffer from some kind of mental problem or lack of empathy if you think risking everyone's lives just to kill a single madman is the best thing to do in these situations.

Like seriously, what does just killing him right away when there's a risk it would kill everyone achieve?

Like i seriously think you suffer from some kind of mental problem.

Jokes on us, he's just pretending.

whats the point of waiting for the inevitable in the case he did have bombs. what do you think waiting will do if he had bombs there. you think hes just gonna dis arm then while surrendering ? no hes not.

are you kidding me ? the police were too scared sif they want to take him alive rofl. the police went for the option which was the lowest risk for them where they wont be blamed for anything if it goes wrong since they got no balls. o lets wait for the guy to make the first move then we move in. thats the police response to this situation. if you are dealing with an armed man without reason what other option can there be besides shooting him or waiting for him to kill someone first which he did in this case

Attempting to kill the guy immediately is hyper aggressive and in most cases unnecessary. The news talks about a Hero, by your strategy they would talk about an apathetic police force that didn't use all their tools before bum rushing, and were monsters. You're saying by not applying their basic training they are incompetent in their job, which most likely would result in them losing their job anyway.

Also sniping, or these imaginary teams you have in mind don't work the way you think they do. Otherwise every hostage scenario would be fixed instantly by snipers, that really is not reflecting a realistic understanding of how that works. You're dealing with someone who is trigger happy, the polices job is to ensure everyone's safety, to ignore collateral damage for the greater means of saving as many as people as possible, disrespects everyone's life in that circumstance. It becomes a gamble of who survives and the police would probably lose a ridiculous amount of confidence from the community.

There are so many repercussions to your opinion and flat out ignoring any consideration to someone in that position that your opinion just leads to evidence of ignorance.

Attempting to kill the guy immediately is hyper aggressive and in most cases unnecessary. The news talks about a Hero, by your strategy they would talk about an apathetic police force that didn't use all their tools before bum rushing, and were monsters. You're saying by not applying their basic training they are incompetent in their job, which most likely would result in them losing their job anyway.

Also sniping, or these imaginary teams you have in mind don't work the way you think they do. Otherwise every hostage scenario would be fixed instantly by snipers, that really is not reflecting a realistic understanding of how that works. You're dealing with someone who is trigger happy, the polices job is to ensure everyone's safety, to ignore collateral damage for the greater means of saving as many as people as possible, disrespects everyone's life in that circumstance. It becomes a gamble of who survives and the police would probably lose a ridiculous amount of confidence from the community.

There are so many repercussions to your opinion and flat out ignoring any consideration to someone in that position that your opinion just leads to evidence of ignorance.

australia's police suck at situations like this their training is beyond useless what tools do they have exactly ? cause negotiations just led to no where. sniping works, this place had open windows and they had clear shots at him so many times yet they didnt take the shot. i bet you this if the hero did nothing more people would of died.

they are alrdy losing the communities confidence. people saw just how dumb the police were in this situation thats why people have been questioning the police's actions. you arent even from australia you havent seen just how dumb police are on so many situations like this they over commit to the dumbest of things and are just dumb founded at serious situations.

australia's police suck at situations like this their training is beyond useless what tools do they have exactly ? cause negotiations just led to no where. sniping works, this place had open windows and they had clear shots at him so many times yet they didnt take the shot. i bet you this if the hero did nothing more people would of died.

The USA and EU would handle it the same way to be honest. I think your allegations are groundless and are just parroting what you've heard.

they are alrdy losing the communities confidence. people saw just how dumb the police were in this situation thats why people have been questioning the police's actions. you arent even from australia you havent seen just how dumb police are on so many situations like this they over commit to the dumbest of things and are just dumb founded at serious situations.

I don't have to be from Australia, but you do kind of have to have some type of understanding how police training works. I don't think you do, especially with an asinine suggestion as "SNIPER TEAM GO". Look at the feedback of your posts, you're a minority here and most likely in Australia.

Honestly just stop bi`tching about it, you look ignorant as f`uck. You're free to do so, but hey, them the brakes. You just look like an angry man yelling at a cloud at this point, I won't continue with such irrational perspectives, you're free to do so though.

For the inevitable? What do you pineappleing mean? If his goal was to kill people he would've just done so, since he kept hostages he clearly had a goal in mind and this leads to the possibility that.... they can get everyone out without anyone dying! There's a possibility of negotiation, there have been multiple cases in the past where all hostages are saved through negotiating with the criminal.

Your method would've possibly just killed everyone while the the results of what actually DID happen resulted in most people surviving.

It has nothing to do with not having any balls and everything about the police's goal not being just killing him but the safety of the people inside.
This might seem like a pineappleING CRAZY AND WILD concept to you, but the police don't actually care of the gunman lives or dies, what they DO care about is the safety of the people inside, which was their priority. Crazy right? The police is worried about the lives of others, is this such a crazy concept to you?

Your line of thought would've possibly just killed everyone for the sake of killing a single madman. Like are you actually too dumb to understand the concept of bombs and accomplices?

>Shoot man keeping hostages while there's a threat of bombs and potential accomplices
>The accomplice blows up the bombs
>Everyone pineappleing dies and nothing is achieved

Like i seriously think you suffer from some kind of mental problem or lack of empathy if you think risking everyone's lives just to kill a single madman is the best thing to do in these situations.

Like seriously, what does just killing him right away when there's a risk it would kill everyone achieve?

you dont get it do you. like i've said before negotiations led to no where. the gunman asked for an IS flag and a talk with tony abbott which wasnt going to happen. so what exactly is there left to negotiate about ? you think hes just gonna so welp cant get what i want im surrender ? this guys whole goal was to kill everyone but in a different way, first try get what u want and the most attention then kill everyone for maximum affect.

there was the variable of the hero in this situation without his attempts to take the gunmans gun most of the hostages wouldn't of escaped. so what does that have to do with the police when they were standing outside and refusing negotiations.

The USA and EU would handle it the same way to be honest. I think your allegations are groundless and are just parroting what you've heard.



I don't have to be from Australia, but you do kind of have to have some type of understanding how police training works. I don't think you do, especially with an asinine suggestion as "SNIPER TEAM GO". Look at the feedback of your posts, you're a minority here and most likely in Australia.

Honestly just stop bi`tching about it, you look ignorant as f`uck. You're free to do so, but hey, them the brakes. You just look like an angry man yelling at a cloud at this point, I won't continue with such irrational perspectives, you're free to do so though.

this case is different though you are dealing with Islamic terrorists taking up hostages. theres a difference between some guy who isnt terrorist affiliated and one whos not terrorists cannot be reasoned with. USA and EU have not had a situation like this before.

typical police training is all the same. but the culture of australia's police is different, they arent used to all the violence as seen in america so they are much more hesitant and in experienced even if u have training cause actual fieldwork proves better as australia is innocent.

why do you see the need to swear just makes you sound un educated. and the way you talk makes you sound like your on some high horse please get off it thx.

this case is different though you are dealing with Islamic terrorists taking up hostages. theres a difference between some guy who isnt terrorist affiliated and one whos not terrorists cannot be reasoned with. USA and EU have not had a situation like this before.

typical police training is all the same. but the culture of australia's police is different, they arent used to all the violence as seen in america so they are much more hesitant and in experienced even if u have training cause actual fieldwork proves better as australia is innocent.

why do you see the need to swear just makes you sound un educated. and the way you talk makes you sound like your on some high horse please get off it thx.

It's called emphasizing. Yes the united states and EU have dealt with terrorists handling hostages before. Are you even related to anything regarding the police force or are these just your personal observations without any contextual evidence what so ever? Are you even familiar with the federal guidelines regarding terrorism? It's actually WORSE than Australia's. Let's face it, you've spent too much time on the comment sections.

Wow I can't believe the pomegranate this guy is spewing out. You ignorant fucker.

The families of the victims have said nothing negative about the police and how they dealt with the situation. Our Police force is not hopeless and is certainly trained for these events.

How many times does this need to be said and the police have explained they were unable to "Snipe" the guy because he made threats of having a bomb. He could've easily had a dead mans switch. How the pineapple would you know? Were you on the scene standing with the Police or sitting behind your computer calling the shots of a situation you clearly no nothing about?

The things you say are insulting to Australia & it's people.

kthxbyebitch

It's called emphasizing. Yes the united states and EU have dealt with terrorists handling hostages before. Are you even related to anything regarding the police force or are these just your personal observations without any contextual evidence what so ever? Are you even familiar with the federal guidelines regarding terrorism? It's actually WORSE than Australia's. Let's face it, you've spent too much time on the comment sections.

how would you know they are worse than australia's ? and yes through my personal observations i can see how crap australia's police are.

Wow I can't believe the pomegranate this guy is spewing out. You ignorant pineappleer.

The families of the victims have said nothing negative about the police and how they dealt with the situation. Our Police force is not hopeless and is certainly trained for these events.

How many times does this need to be said and the police have explained they were unable to "Snipe" the guy because he made threats of having a bomb. He could've easily had a dead mans switch. How the pineapple would you know? Were you on the scene standing with the Police or sitting behind your computer calling the shots of a situation you clearly no nothing about?

The things you say are insulting to Australia & it's people.

kthxbyepeach

why would the families say anything lel they all got out alive.

the guy was obviously bluffing a skilled person could obviously tell that when talking to him. yeah i there at martin place the whole time since it started.

how dare you say that im insulting to australia and it's people you have no right to say that just cause i have a different opinion you label me as un australian just shows how ignorant you are to other peoples views.

kthx

how would you know they are worse than australia's ? and yes through my personal observations i can see how crap australia's police are.

...Because, much like most LAWS they are POSTED on the INTERNET. Unfortunately your OBSERVATIONS are SHALLOW and with NO experience. You're just the peanut gallery with NOTHING contribute to add besides groundless criticism. You sound like a child exclaiming "If I was the leader of the world..................world peace and cupcakes for everyone!".

...Because, much like most LAWS they are POSTED on the INTERNET. Unfortunately your OBSERVATIONS are SHALLOW and with NO experience. You're just the peanut gallery with NOTHING contribute to add besides groundless criticism. You sound like a child exclaiming "If I was the leader of the world..................world peace and cupcakes for everyone!".

calm down friend. kk i read now. and whats wrong with world peace and cupcakes for everyone i do believe in that too. government agencies like the police need to be criticised in order for them to become better.

Yea, I have the feeling this guy's one of those "F the Police Cop Block" kinda of people.

calm down friend. kk i read now. and whats wrong with world peace and cupcakes for everyone i do believe in that too. government agencies like the police need to be criticised in order for them to become better.

"SNIPER TEAM GO" is not a worthy suggestion nor m akes it better. You're essentially requesting a /more/ militarized police force, which is even more ridiculous.

Who cares about the lives of innocents anyway, i mean as long as we can put a bullet in the gunman it doesn't matter if the hostages live or die right?
Because that's literally what this idiot is saying, that the police should have simply not given a pineapple about the lives of the hostages and just gone for the kill.

This is some sociopath-level disregard for others, i'm out.

Most ideal situation: police negotiators go in, successfully negotiate with the guy to surrender, all hostages freed safely, no one gets hurt. Guy gives information to police, and in this case it's very important for fighting terrorism, e.g. where he went, how he converted, if there are other cells in the city etc. etc.

Dead people don't talk.

Also, any death is not ideal at all. In a hostage situation of, say, 20 hostages and 5 hostage takers, sacrificing 1 hostage to save the rest of the 19 is not an option. Sacrificing 1 police to save all 20 is also not an option. Unless there is a very very clear evidence of the hostage takers' intent to kill all the hostages (in which case there's very little benefit to them) then will the police move in with force. The case of the failed rescue effort in Yemen is a good example, but in this case the Islamic State probably has little to lose and far more to benefit, in a sad twist of story.

And, for the sake of being obvious, snipers can only shoot what they can see. They can't see behind walls...

Hadriel

Who cares about the lives of innocents anyway, i mean as long as we can put a bullet in the gunman it doesn't matter if the hostages live or die right?
Because that's literally what this idiot is saying, that the police should have simply not given a pineapple about the lives of the hostages and just gone for the kill.

This is some sociopath-level disregard for others, i'm out.

yup who cares about lives just yolo and kill everyone right ?

cya

Most ideal situation: police negotiators go in, successfully negotiate with the guy to surrender, all hostages freed safely, no one gets hurt. Guy gives information to police, and in this case it's very important for fighting terrorism, e.g. where he went, how he converted, if there are other cells in the city etc. etc.

Dead people don't talk.

Also, any death is not ideal at all. In a hostage situation of, say, 20 hostages and 5 hostage takers, sacrificing 1 hostage to save the rest of the 19 is not an option. Sacrificing 1 police to save all 20 is also not an option. Unless there is a very very clear evidence of the hostage takers' intent to kill all the hostages (in which case there's very little benefit to them) then will the police move in with force. The case of the failed rescue effort in Yemen is a good example, but in this case the Islamic State probably has little to lose and far more to benefit, in a sad twist of story.

And, for the sake of being obvious, snipers can only shoot what they can see. They can't see behind walls...

Hadriel

there are windows, the sniper even saw one of the hostages get shot thus sparking the police to move in.

Use of snipers isn't generalizable.

And please stop double posting.

Hadriel