Bloody Sunday. This Might Be A Lively Topic.

[Halibut 12]

5 minutes ago, ANGELFIRE1 said:

 

"Unknown number of near misses from the hundreds of rounds fired" like I stated, this is a complete fallacy and simply could not happen.

 

 

 

 

Why could it not happen?

[mickey finn 12]

5 minutes ago, Halibut said:

Why could it not happen?

It could happen, maybe they were meant to miss.

 

[Bob Arctor 11]

If an occupying army starts firing on largely peaceful civil rights protesters (who, let's remember, were campaigning for an individual's right to vote and against imprisonment without trial) it's hardly surprising if lots of people then conclude that violence is the only option left to them. We'll never know how many deaths the Bloody Sunday murders ultimately led to but the least we can do is prosecute anyone suspected to be responsible.

Edited March 14, 2019 by Bob Arctor

[Lex Luthor 10]

9 hours ago, woodview said:

What about the thousands who were killed and injured by both Unionist and Republican terrorists, in acts that were planned over long periods of time. It's been decided to stop those prosecutions and issue amnesties.

How can the two be reconciled?

I appreciate what you're saying and I think you are right that it doesn't seem fair and seems like one rule for one and another for the other.  But on the other hand, the British Army was and is the envy of the world and if we set our standards by what terrorists do or have done, then it's not much of a yardstick to adhere to. 

[Penistone999 10]

1 hour ago, Halibut said:

Is it your view then that shooting unarmed civilians is acceptable behaviour?

A lot of them were Paramilitary Terrorists , not innocent civilians .  

[Halibut 12]

Just now, Penistone999 said:

A lot of them were Paramilitary Terrorists , not innocent civilians .  

Utter rubbish.

[ANGELFIRE1 10]

40 minutes ago, Halibut said:

Why could it not happen?

Because it's an impossability to fire "hundreds" of rounds at "thousands" of people at a close range and only kill 14. 

 

Angel1.

[tinfoilhat 11]

2 minutes ago, ANGELFIRE1 said:

Because it's an impossability to fire "hundreds" of rounds at "thousands" of people at a close range and only kill 14. 

 

Angel1.

Define close range?

[Mister M 1,609]

2 hours ago, Penistone999 said:

No , they shouldnt , never. 

So you don't support the Rule of Law?

[ANGELFIRE1 10]

22 minutes ago, tinfoilhat said:

Define close range?

From what I can find out the ammo used in 1972 would have been 5.56x45mm, I So I imagine close range could have been sub 100 yards or even up to 2/3 hundred yards, which might be unlikely in an urban situation. Only a guess mind.

 

Angel1.

[Mister Gee 812]

7 hours ago, WalkleyIan said:

no mention of the Ballymurphy massacre in the months before bloody Sunday? At least one was shot whilst waving a white flag to go to assist a wounded man.

 

2 Para were said to be involved.

A lot of British soldiers and innocent civilians were killed as a result of the IRA recruitment drive after the Paras actions at Ballymurphy and Bloody Sunday.

 

 

 

[PRESLEY 1,224]

8 minutes ago, ANGELFIRE1 said:

From what I can find out the ammo used in 1972 would have been 5.56x45mm, I So I imagine close range could have been sub 100 yards or even up to 2/3 hundred yards, which might be unlikely in an urban situation. Only a guess mind.

 

Angel1.

SLR's (Self Loading Rifles)   were used firing 7.62 Rounds.