Today the mystery surrounding the alleged shooting over at Pantai Batu Buruk on the 8th of Spetember has been cleared by the Terengganu Police Chief, SAC I Ayub Yaakob today. You can read more about this story through MalaysiaKini.
A blogger that goes by the name of Khairul Faizi has republished MalaysiaKini’s story related to this subject in full today, non-subscribers of MalaysiaKini can read all about it on his Kembara Minda Perjuangan blog.
SAC I Ayub claimed that the shooter was actually a 25 year old police constable who was forced to open fire after being swarmed with some angry mob. So he shot four shots. Unfortunately, two men sustained gunshot wounds probably because of his action. One was shot in the neck and the other one was shot in the chest. Interesting!
SAC I Ayub also claimed that the alleged shooter had no other option. He said, quote:
Self-defense or not, the police constable has no right to use his firearm under such situation. He has no right whatsoever to guess that the coast was clear and it would be okay for him to fire warning shots into the air. Nope, not with his vision temporarily impaired. As far as I’m concerned, the constable’s action is very much bordering on negligence. :-(
By the way…
I’m no CSI personnel but aren’t shots aimed and fired at areas of the neck and chest are supposed to be fatal and deadly?
Isn’t it supposed to cause instantaneous death?
Can anyone answer those questions for me?
Related Posts:Technorati Tags:
A blogger that goes by the name of Khairul Faizi has republished MalaysiaKini’s story related to this subject in full today, non-subscribers of MalaysiaKini can read all about it on his Kembara Minda Perjuangan blog.
SAC I Ayub claimed that the shooter was actually a 25 year old police constable who was forced to open fire after being swarmed with some angry mob. So he shot four shots. Unfortunately, two men sustained gunshot wounds probably because of his action. One was shot in the neck and the other one was shot in the chest. Interesting!
SAC I Ayub also claimed that the alleged shooter had no other option. He said, quote:
“After ushering the women, children and elderly into a nearby building to avoid them from getting hurt, he was suddenly confronted by a group of 20 men carrying sticks.”With all due respect SAC I Ayub, if the police constable’s vision was temporarily impaired during the incident, what gives him the right to fire gunshots in the first place?
“They called him SB (Special Branch) and began hitting him,”
“He had no choice, he used his left hand to fend the blows and with his right hand, he reached for his gun. Because his face was bleeding profusely, he couldn’t see properly as well.
“He was still on the ground, his elbow was on the ground when he fired into the air. He did not even know that someone had been hit (by the shots)”
Self-defense or not, the police constable has no right to use his firearm under such situation. He has no right whatsoever to guess that the coast was clear and it would be okay for him to fire warning shots into the air. Nope, not with his vision temporarily impaired. As far as I’m concerned, the constable’s action is very much bordering on negligence. :-(
By the way…
I’m no CSI personnel but aren’t shots aimed and fired at areas of the neck and chest are supposed to be fatal and deadly?
Isn’t it supposed to cause instantaneous death?
Can anyone answer those questions for me?
Related Posts:Technorati Tags:
1 comments:
Hello,
I've visited your blog and I find it great therefore I would like to invite you to contribute articles
or share some experience, story and advice with Adultforum.com.au members.
Adultforum.com.au is an active forum that is currently strugling due to the lack
of Administrator. The forum is FREE and it contains no pop-up, SPAM or whatsoever.
I hope you can contribute frequently and eventually join us as an administrator.
Regards,
Admin
http://Adultsforum.com.au
http://Aphrodisiac.com.au
http://Adultsecret.com.au
Post a comment
You Should Also Read