Drug fugitive shot dead in a hail of bullets as he takes his wife hostage

[mikiea]

2 minutes ago, mikiea said:

well now ... ehhh.... whats her name is now a widow ? hmmmm.... leme alookie hear ....

all alone now .... she may need comfort and care .... yea dats it comfort and care .........

[apalink_thailand]

2 hours ago, ksamuiguy said:

Does Thailand even have a trained SWAT team?

Where is the Police Training Academy?

In the past, they have been trained by US SWAT, usually retired US police officers. I happen to know two who were part of that program.

[apalink_thailand]

Thoughts and prayers ;-)

[bluebluewater]

"SWAT"  my arse.  The very term suggests some competence and I doubt that they really have any at all.

 

It was more probably like a circular firing squad and they young lady is lucky to be alive.

[F4UCorsair]

If I was in power, the first response in any hostage situation would be to send in the snipers.

 

It's the same for car chases.  Send up a helicopter with a sniper, or two, and the first opportunity to get a shot where loss of control of the vehicle won't harm anybody else, the shot to kill should be taken.  Evading police in a vehicle, at high speed, is not much different from firing a shotgun at random on a public road.   Sooner, or later, you will hit and kill someone.

 

 

[Chris Lawrence]

Was she on the phone?

[mesterm]

Watching too many Thai soap operas?

[DLang]

The whole thing was on Facebook Live.

[Khon Kaen Dave]

Swat? Sniper.two words not in the Thai dictionary.

[Caveat Emptor]

29 minutes ago, F4UCorsair said:

If I was in power, the first response in any hostage situation would be to send in the snipers.

 

It's the same for car chases.  Send up a helicopter with a sniper, or two, and the first opportunity to get a shot where loss of control of the vehicle won't harm anybody else, the shot to kill should be taken.  Evading police in a vehicle, at high speed, is not much different from firing a shotgun at random on a public road.   Sooner, or later, you will hit and kill someone.

 

 

The problem with car chases is that they can start and end in no time and even if protracted could a helicopter be airborne in time to help.

Does Thailand have helicopters on standby at any given time especially with marksmen  ?

[mike324]

1 hour ago, Scouse123 said:

 

 

Yes,

 

And these ' safe houses '  which are anything but, are just rooms where they hand out torture, elicit bribes, and have been used to extra judicially kill people. These should not ever be allowed. These are the places where plastic bags are put over peoples heads and electric shocks are administered.

 

They were supposed to be illegal.They are not government areas of detention.

 

Why was the guy not transported to a police jail cell?? If he had been correctly arrested, why the need for going to some ridiculous ' safe house ' away from public view, no access to lawyers ( not that they are any good at the best of times but something to keep Dad's Army in check ) and questioning eyes and/ or journalists, who are known to hang around police stations for their stories.

 

The drug dealing guy I have no sympathy for, the processing of alleged criminals however, should be dealt with in transparent fashion. A photo can be looked at and mean anything and has probably only been released as it seems to show it was the fugitive acting dangerous and aggressive.(If it had showed armed forces in anything less than favorable, it wouldn't be out there). Was it through being angry of getting caught or fear of being severely beaten?

 

How do we know that he wasn't beaten in the ' safe house ' leading him through fear, to take desperate measures?

 

he was in the safe house because they were trying to catch bigger fish ....

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

How many different details  in the OP report raise some odd questions...

 

Quote

--he was shot in the back multiple times

 

--Earlier on Sunday he had escaped from custody in a safe house where he was being held after his arrest for having 25,000 Ya Ba pills. 

 

--He had grabbed a Glock 16 from a soldier when the military man was distracted

 

--A SWAT team shot him many times in the center of his back with the bullets emerging through his chest.

 

--His wife was hit in the right leg and lost the middle finger on her right hand. She was seriously hurt.

 

 

[HOOD Robin]

Very sad what happened there... feel for the girl !

But a "SWAT" team that starts fireing when he holds a hostage with him ? My a*s !

This comes straight from all those RIDICULOUS daily soaps on TV...

Thais really do NOT know the difference between fiction and non-fiction !

Seemingly the SWAT (??) team was trained by these guys in the image...

[NCC1701A]

once a crim opens fire it is 'weapons free' everyone gets to return fire. with so many guns around the wife is lucky to be alive. putting snipers in place and getting a clear shot is not as easy as you might think. good job by the shooters in this this case. one dead crim and no other fatalities.  

Not when there is a hostage.

If he was alone, then you would be correct.

Then only a sniper or a officer with a clear head shot can act after getting authorization from the incident commander on scene.

And only after it was clear he was going to kill the hostage.

One shot to the back of the head from one officer and everyone else holds their fire until the hostage is clear.

This is a good example of what not to do in a hostage situation.

No reason for the woman to be shot by police.

[raphoedon]

If you fly with the crows ........

[Aussieroaming]

The scourge of drugs

[MockingJay]

One down, 2.869.543 left... go, SWAT teams GO!!!! 

[ClutchClark]

Yaba users are so predjctable in their unpredictability.

 

An autopsy will show his brain looked alot like swiss cheese.

 

When a crazed gunman takes a hostage then officers have a duty to shoot.

 

 

[silent]

6 hours ago, leeneeds said:

One wonders what training the soldier had having his pistol taken away in the safe house,

then you think about SWAT , does that mean special weapons and tactics, who"s skill in placing single shots away from the centre mass,

it all just seems to be a bit cowboy-ish, 

 

Lucky lady. It couldn't have been planned better really. One shot in the head to take him down would have scarred her for life with survivor guilt. This way she was shot too, has that to think about and soon probably will be too bad hubby, you shouldn't have treated me like a piece of armor. 

[ClutchClark]

That cameraman was not in a very safe spot ;-)

[DipStick]

4 hours ago, Raymonddiaz said:

shot a the back. In any civilized country, there would be an investigation, we don't shoot in the back unless it is a self defense.

I guess it could be argued that this was in self defence. In self defence of the hostage !

[williamgeorgeallen]

58 minutes ago, NCC1701A said:

Not when there is a hostage.

If he was alone, then you would be correct.

Then only a sniper or a officer with a clear head shot can act after getting authorization from the incident commander on scene.

And only after it was clear he was going to kill the hostage.

One shot to the back of the head from one officer and everyone else holds their fire until the hostage is clear.

This is a good example of what not to do in a hostage situation.

No reason for the woman to be shot by police.

he reportedly fired a number of times at the cops. doubt they had time to designate who was going to be the single guy doing the return fire. cops did a good job. crim is dead, hostage is alive.

[pgrahmm]

5 hours ago, digibum said:

 

There's no such thing as shooting to wound.  You shoot to kill.  I'm currently sitting in the same office with someone who's husband is a SWAT officer in the US and I can assure you that he would get a good chuckle if someone suggested he try to only wound a suspect.  

 

I'm not saying Thai SWAT couldn't use better training and perhaps there were ways to deescalate the situation but once it becomes a gun fight, shooting to wound is something cooked up by Hollywood.  

 

Keep in mind, 70% - 80% of bullets fired by police in the US miss their target.  A gun fight is a highly stressful situation and shots are often taken on the move either seeking cover or revealing oneself from a covered position.  There are very few people in the world who could land an intentional "wound" shot (vs. a kill shot) under those conditions.  
 

 

 

NO - Jason Bourne, Mechanic 2, Jack Reacher, Liam Neeson know what they're doing......They never miss LOL...

 

SWAT team is probably just a useful (aggressively kind) term for a swarm of 100 - well 99 armed men in a posse....She's lucky to still be alive.....

[jacksam]

Lot of criticism of police. Maybe they need copy the USA model. Didn't recently a bloke get shot in US  three times while laying on ground with cop on top of him and couple of others. 

[laislica]

6 hours ago, digibum said:

 

There's no such thing as shooting to wound.  You shoot to kill.  I'm currently sitting in the same office with someone who's husband is a SWAT officer in the US and I can assure you that he would get a good chuckle if someone suggested he try to only wound a suspect.  

 

I'm not saying Thai SWAT couldn't use better training and perhaps there were ways to deescalate the situation but once it becomes a gun fight, shooting to wound is something cooked up by Hollywood.  

 

Keep in mind, 70% - 80% of bullets fired by police in the US miss their target.  A gun fight is a highly stressful situation and shots are often taken on the move either seeking cover or revealing oneself from a covered position.  There are very few people in the world who could land an intentional "wound" shot (vs. a kill shot) under those conditions.  
 

 

 

 

Come in Walker - Texas Ranger! or

Cono - Hawaii 5 0 or ........

see lots can LOL

 

[ClutchClark]

8 minutes ago, jacksam said:

Lot of criticism of police. Maybe they need copy the USA model. Didn't recently a bloke get shot in US  three times while laying on ground with cop on top of him and couple of others. 

 

Oh yeah that one.

 

Guy was resisting and had a stolen firearm in his right front pocket.

 

Two officers were wrestling with the man trying to subdue him but the guy continued to resist and his right hand was "free" and reaching for the pistol.

 

interesting to note the guy had been arrested for the very same thing of posession of stolen firearm and resisting arrest a few years earlier.

 

That resulted in him being a convicted felon and he was not allowed to be in posession of any firearm. Nor was he allowed to resist arrest. Nor did he have a right to try and use pistol to shoot police.

[louse1953]

4 hours ago, digibum said:

 

Unless he began firing at police officers which is what he did.  Then they are fully justified in returning fire and neutralizing the danger.  

 

And for all of those folks appalled that he was shot in the back, the report doesn't indicate whether or not police where already behind him.  Which means one possible scenario that hasn't been considered by this group is that he was surrounded (highly likely if enough time  had elapsed for SWAT to get on scene).  And in that case, if he fired on police, police to his rear would have opened fire to protect their fellow officers as they had the best shot that minimized risk to the hostage.  

Best shot does not equate to a hail of bullets.Undisiplined amateurs.

[ClutchClark]

3 minutes ago, louse1953 said:

Best shot does not equate to a hail of bullets.Undisiplined amateurs.

 

Poetic license?

 

I noticed a few catchy headlines today, "passengers Run for Their Lives" etc..

 

or was the number actually reported?

 

any chance you were SAS?

 

thanks

[jacksam]

These situations seem to go smoothly in other countries. Not

There never seems to be disquiet amongst the public. Seems only los has problems. 

Sarcastic

[off road pat]

7 hours ago, Raymonddiaz said:

shot a the back. In any civilized country, there would be an investigation, we don't shoot in the back unless it is a self defense.

well,...? in some civilized country's they shoot unarmed black people on the streets,...some in the back to and some just for a minor traffic offence. what ells would you like me to say ?

In this case the guy had to be put down ! so in the head or in the back would do just fine. Just to bad the hostage was hurt to.And I ask my self ? if they were in his back why didn't they aimed for the head ???

pffft,...incompetence and inefficiency !!!!!