Shoot, Don't Shoot!

"When attacked, never forget officers must protect life, including their own"

“Shoot, don't shoot" - probably the most challenging decision a police officer will ever make. In a split second, with movement, noise and other distractions, including poor lighting in a dynamic situation, you need to present your weapon, issue a warning (if possible), aim, make sure you aren't going to hit an innocent bystander, decide to shoot and then fire. And this isn’t sequential: it’s all going on simultaneously. 

The media, public, judicial authorities, and every pundit with an agenda will spend months and years debating and judging the officer's split-second actions. The officer’s life will never be the same again, especially if he killed someone.

After a shooting, in the melee of opinions, the usual cohort of armchair experts emerge to ask, "Why didn't the officer shoot him in the leg or arm?". Likewise, so-called self-defence experts claim that a few sharp kung fu moves or a taser would be more appropriate. Just for the record, tasers don't always work with an immediate take-down.

Invariably, these commentators, with their opinions formed by Hollywood, have little or no real-world experience of dealing with a violent, determined attacker. A particular subset of "experts" are gamers who believe their hours spent alone playing Medal of Honour and other FPS games qualify them to pass an opinion. Rarely do I hear police officers or soldiers offer up nonsensical comments because they know better.

The truth is that police officers react as trained, using the tools at their disposal. Firearms officers (all police officers in Hong Kong) undergo rigorous drills on ranges and scenario testing, conducting live firing. This training simulates real-world situations with noise, lighting, and mock-ups of streets. And aim for the centre mass of the body, not legs or arms. 

Early in my career, firearm training was simple range work, firing at a static target from a standing or covered position, learning to count the rounds you've fired and quick reloading. Speed loaders arrived when we upgraded from the Colt 38 revolver to the Smith & Wesson for patrol officers. 

Later, the training and annual recertification sessions evolved with video ranges using dynamic moving scenarios. Low lighting, background noise, and the option to use baton strikes, with the simulation reacting to your action, brought greater realism. I'd be tired and a little stressed at the end of these sessions. Moreover, the debriefing by the range staff could be cutting.

The ‘use of force continuum’ applies, recognising that an officer can escalate to lethal force when and if the circumstances dictate.

Meanwhile, specialist units undergo enhanced training in a close-quarters battle house. These sessions involve firing near live 'hostages' to hone their confidence.

Fortunately, Hong Kong has controlled gun crime with strict laws and effective enforcement. Thus, most incidents where officers need to discharge their firearms involve equally dangerous knives, choppers or culprits using vehicles as weapons. As this video clip demonstrates, officers also need to react quickly when knife use is threatened.

Thus, on 15 September, when faced with a man armed with a knife attacking them, an officer opened fire and killed the alleged attacker. It subsequently emerged that the deceased had a history of psychiatric issues. It is unclear that his family, who called the police to the scene, made that known, nor would it be a factor if he presented a danger to officers. 

Never forget officers must protect life, including their own. That’s not an option; it is a duty. In this instance, the man had already attacked his family, prompting the call to the police.

Still, the wife of the deceased has come forward to claim she regrets calling the police and demanding any body camera evidence. In an initial response, the police affirmed the shooting complied with the rules, but that didn't dampen the social media commentary. 

The coroner will now investigate the matter, and the police will conduct an internal investigation. In light of this, and following rules on evidence, the police are restricted in the information that can be released. Still, commentators are jumping to conclusions, making recommendations, and inflaming the situation. There are dangers in this, as the Chris Kaba shooting in the UK amply demonstrates. 

Kaba was shot in the head by an armed officer from a specialist police unit in September 2022. He was alone driving a car known to be involved in a previous shooting and unarmed. Kaba, a young black man, was portrayed as a victim of police prejudice and unprofessionalism. 

​Sympathetic media outlets and politicians described a family man running a construction company going about his business when ambushed and killed.

This narrative played into sentiments around the BLM movement, further damaging police relations with the black community. Politicians, including prominent figures like Diana Abbott and Jeremy Corbyn, didn’t hesitate to exploit the situation to fan the flames of hatred.

"As the terrible fate of Chris Kaba shows, people can lose their lives even when going about their daily lives. Defending all our fundamental human rights is crucial under this dangerous, repressive government."
​
Diana Abbott

Yet, it later emerged that the officers conducting the stop on the car didn't know who the driver was, only that the vehicle was used in a previous shooting incident and it needed stopping for the investigation. Given the suspicion a weapon may be aboard, the tactical plan called for a 'hard-stop' - effectively an armed ambush with blocking of the car.

In a surprising and unprecedented move, a charge of murder was laid against the officer who shot Kaba. In turn, this prompted many outraged firearms officers to withdraw from armed duties, which is a volunteer role in the UK. Facing a shortage of armed officers to cover airports and embassies and mount armed responses to crime, plans to use the military were drawn up. The UK could have the army on the streets to maintain order. 

Last week, it took three hours for a jury to clear the officer of the murder charge after considering the evidence presented at trial. With reporting restrictions lifted, the media was able to report that Kaba is a notorious gunman and gang leader and is suspected of being involved in two recent shootings. 

​Kaba has a lengthy criminal record from the age of 13, including for stabbings and possession of an imitation firearm. Moreover, video footage of the shooting showed that Kaba used the car to ram police vehicles, and he presented an imminent danger to police officers. 

The failed prosecution of the officer has left no one happy. Kaba's family claims they've been denied justice, while police officers assert they are asked to do an impossible job. Now, reports show that Kaba’s gang has put a price on the head of the officer. If true, that is a direct challenge to law and order.

Meanwhile, a picture is emerging that may undermine the basis of acclaimed British justice. It is suggested that the Crown Prosecution Service charged the police officer on the recommendation of the Independent Police Complaints Commission to assuage public sentiment instead of purely on legal principles.

The fact that a jury took only three hours to acquit the officer and the observations of legal professionals give credibility to this allegation. If true, this is a staggering injustice. Charges laid for political reasons or in pandering to sentiment are a slippery slope.

Of course, police officers must account for any use of force. That is proper. Still, the UK is scrambling to rewire its policies given the evident imbalance favouring the criminal fraternity. Officer anonymity is one measure that helps protect them and their families. 

Happily, Hong Kong has avoided the woke culture wars that appear to be a factor in the prosecution of the British police officer. Let’s hope vigilance and adherence to the ‘rule of law’ will maintain Hong Kong’s position.