Thoughts on the London police shooting ...

So news has come out that the suspected terrorist in London who was shot in the subway was just an innocent bystander. (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/4713753.stm)

The guy, Jean Charles de Menezes, had been living in London for three years, on an expired Visa, but apparently he did not learn to speak or understand English in that time. That is the only possible explanation, because when the cops told him to stop, he ran. That's bright there, kid. London has just been bombed, you are dressed suspiciously, and you run from the cops.

I'm sorry, the kid was an idiot. If a cop tells me to stop, I stop. Its as simple as that. They have guns and I don't. They have the law on their side and I don't. The math is real simple.

I do, however, believe that the cops were a bit overzealous. Seven head shots is a bit much. And I don't go in for the argument that London cops have only had guns for five years and aren't comfortable with them yet. I don't own a gun and I know that people go down when shot in the head once.

I won't say that the kid deserved what he go, because I don't believe that. No one deserves death (except Charles Manson and Serial Killers). But I do feel that the kid was an idiot who brough this upon himself. I feel sorry for his family, having lost their son in this way, but I understand the cops. If I were in the same situation, I would have done the same (though with less bullets, and no head shots).

We are talking about the safety of a city and its millions of inhabitants. In this day and age, we all need to think.

But maybe the fact that I've spent time in post-Franco Spain gives me a different perspective.

I hate Double Standards!

I am entitled to two paid 15 minute breaks and one 30 minute unpaid break to do with as I choose, as long as I don't use them to go home early. This is what I am legally entitled to.

I have been informed by my workplace that this 60 minutes of breaks includes my pee breaks. As a point of fact, it doesn't. Denying me time to use the facilities is illegal, but I am only a temp, and not really allowed to complain. I do have to say that I understand their point of view. We, the employees, are paid to work. It's a bit anal, but I see their point.

In fact, I wouldn't really be upset if it wasn't for the fact that the smokers get a different treatment. I get yelled at for spending two minutes in the toilet, but its okay for them to take four 20 minute breaks during the day for smokes, plus a full hour at lunch! No one says anything to them, but I get chewed out for taking my time dealing with ladies' issues in the john.

I am so glad that I only have a few days left at this place, and I now fully understand why they can't keep staff here.

If I were to claim that I'm addicted to caffeine, they wouldn't let me take four 20 minute breaks a day to go to Starbucks! What's the difference between the two? Smokers get irate without their smokes? Well I get irate without my coffee!

I think they should just learn to deal, or the management should open their eyes. Of course, management all smoke. Surprise, surprise!

... God, I need a coffee ...