Quote Originally Posted by Gibsie
No, no explosives, nothing to do with the bombings. Although some people are saying that since he was an electrician he probably helped make the detonators for the other bombs. Anything to satisfy that he deserved it.
And some people are saying that since he didn't have any bombs on him, and since he wasn't directly related to the attacks (Or so the police claim. The possibility of them lying to throw off other people they are investigating doesn't seem to be considered.), there is absolutely no possible justification for the police not taking chances - given the knowledge they had at the time and the attire and behaviour of the suspect - with dozens of lives, including their own.

Quote Originally Posted by Cloud No.9
and how can you look like you are carrying explosives? wear a jacket? have a back pack? then i risk being shot on the way to work?
Yes. If there is space for you to be carrying bombs, you could be carrying bombs. They didn't choose to shoot him based on that they, they chose to shot him based on that combined with the fact that he was wearing a winter coat (Which would allow him to conceal explosives) in summer, that he was already under surveillance, that he ran from the police, and that he ran into the tube station. I'm not quite sure how one comes to any conclusion other than "Don't take any chances" here, but apparently it's a common one.

Sir Ian Blair defends the act.

So I am compelled to ask, incidentally, what your reaction would be if the police had caught someone they believed to be carrying explosives, they turned out to actually have them, and this was discovered because the police didn't stop him from detonating, and a dozen people died.