After stabbing a soldier, the terrorist was wounded, seriously, and then Azariah, claiming he felt threatened by perceived movement by the terrorist, shot him dead. It sent off a storm in Israel, politicians' declarations, and a trial.
What happened in London on Wednesday?
A terrorist rammed dozens of pedestrians, stabbed a policemen (who died), was shot and seriously wounded.
But was he shot after wounded and on the ground? By two policemen?
Credit: UK DailyMail
P.S.
And yes, I am, aware that some 10 minutes passed between the downing of the Hebron terrorist and Azariah's shot, unlike the incident in London.
But morally, it doesn't make a difference. The terrorist was down and need not have been shot again, if that indeed was the case.
^
Posts
2 comments:
Ten minutes is the difference between homicide and self defense, a justifiable heat of the moment shooting and manslaughter. The British police do not serve under purity of arms, Israeli soldiers do. Not sure Elroy deserves much jail time but his act was outside of his rules of engagement.
Otherwise your point is quite valid.
Perhaps.
But a good police officer doesn't need more than 5 seconds to realize a man is down and out, unless, like Elor's case, he justifies an on-the-ground shooting by claiming he thought the main was wearing explosives.
And I am not sure rules of engagement apply to terrorists, in fact. Maybe the IDF code of ethics but that's an internal document, not binding in international law.
Post a Comment