Police excuses for shooting turns out to be a lie
Stolen air rifle was pointed but not fired
Police have admitted a man they gunned down pointed a stolen air rifle but never fired before they started shooting. And the man's brother says it wasn't loaded.
Well, well, well - what do we have here? The Police originally claimed that they had gunned down a citizen because of a 'gunfight', then that was downgraded to a 'couple of shots', now it's 'oh he didn't fire once'. Now if we cast our minds back, Greg O'Connor was using this very example as proof of why the Police needed to be armed, really? Why did the Police need to be armed in a situation where the citizen gunned down didn't actually end up shooting one bullet at the cops???
Do we really want to arm all cops based on a lie about shooting at a citizen who didn't fire one shot?