We're having a debate about the shoot to kill policy against suspected suicide bombers and I have to argue against - what arguments are there against it? I'm rather stuck so any little bits of help would be much appreciated - thanks dudes and dudettes!

this thread is in the wrong section plus their has been thread about this before ! even though its a intresting topic ! :rolleyes:

I'm against it! There should be due process. The alleged bombers are mere suspects and they should be presumed innocent until proven guilty (beyond reasonable doubt). Most of the civilized countries today have in their Constitution the Bill of Rights wherein it is the policy of the state that no person shall be deprived of life, liberty and property.

 

I think lawmakers formulate laws to be followed by the people. There are legal remedies that can be taken to prove/disprove the guilt of the suspects and these should be resorted into.

 

What if the suspects that they killed were innocent?

I'm for it,shoot the fuckers!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!