SINGAPORE — For the second day in a row, the police sought to address lingering questions among some members of the public over their handling of last Sunday’s riot, saying it was a conscious decision not to use deadly force to quell the 400-strong mob.

Questions have arisen over whether the police — which accounted for 22 of the 39 casualties among responders — should have taken tougher measures or even used lethal weapons to bring the Little India riot to an end sooner, but the police reiterated yesterday that no officer faced an imminent threat of death or grievous hurt, and so it did not warrant the firing of weapons.

On Monday, the police had also said they were “very restrained” in dealing with the rioters — despite being pelted with stones, among other items — because they did not want to escalate the situation.

Warning shots were not fired as this tactic might backfire with an alcohol-fuelled mob, they noted.

Expanding on this point at a media briefing yesterday, the police noted that there were also many innocent bystanders at the scene of the riot, and the firing of weapons could have injured or killed these people.

“When the situation escalated, the police’s main objectives were to contain the situation and minimise any injuries to all present, particularly innocent bystanders,” they said. “The use of a non-violent containment approach is among the suite of tactics and operational strategies that the police adopts in the face of different challenges and threats.”

Even the rioters exhibited different behaviour — ranging from aggressive attacks with items and incitement of violence, to jeering and hurling of obscenities at responders and officers — and had varying degrees of criminality, and they decided that the “appropriate strategy was containment”.

That was why officers acted in a “highly calibrated” and “measured” way, using only sufficient force as necessary to disperse the mob and make arrests, while minimising the number of casualties.