On February 15 2012 01:48 Warillions wrote: PEOPLE DESERVE RIGHTS AND THE RIGHT TO BE STRANGE WITHIN THOSE RIGHTS!
although what happened was strange and he looks very suspicious. theres a such thing as "calling for backup" shoot the tires out of the car. follow him if he drives off if u cant keep him there,. but 1v1 cop vs random dude acting strange is not there job. add another cop to the scene if anything to verify hes acting strange. and the cop isnt being delusional. cops have protocal and this is what happens when its not followed. cop deserves punishment. ppl deserve rights and the right to be strange within those rights. the cop was out of place for not calling for backup. period.
Did you miss the part of the story where he called for back up?
Plain and simple: the dude got shot because he drove through a gated fence, acted erratically after ignoring several orders, and then entered a car with two young children. Cops will always take decisive action when the suspect does something that could potentially harm other people.
They may have not thought he was armed outside of the car, but they have no way of knowing if he had a gun in the glove compartment and was going to shoot the kids and them himself, drive into a telephone pole, etc etc. It went from being a situation with a dude acting weird but not outwardly agressive, to a situation where he is now drawing two other people into the situation.
i did. just as much as you missed the part about shootin the tires before shooting his face.
On February 15 2012 01:48 Warillions wrote: PEOPLE DESERVE RIGHTS AND THE RIGHT TO BE STRANGE WITHIN THOSE RIGHTS!
although what happened was strange and he looks very suspicious. theres a such thing as "calling for backup" shoot the tires out of the car. follow him if he drives off if u cant keep him there,. but 1v1 cop vs random dude acting strange is not there job. add another cop to the scene if anything to verify hes acting strange. and the cop isnt being delusional. cops have protocal and this is what happens when its not followed. cop deserves punishment. ppl deserve rights and the right to be strange within those rights. the cop was out of place for not calling for backup. period.
Did you miss the part of the story where he called for back up?
Plain and simple: the dude got shot because he drove through a gated fence, acted erratically after ignoring several orders, and then entered a car with two young children. Cops will always take decisive action when the suspect does something that could potentially harm other people.
They may have not thought he was armed outside of the car, but they have no way of knowing if he had a gun in the glove compartment and was going to shoot the kids and them himself, drive into a telephone pole, etc etc. It went from being a situation with a dude acting weird but not outwardly agressive, to a situation where he is now drawing two other people into the situation.
i did. just as much as you missed the part about shootin the tires before shooting his face.
On February 15 2012 01:48 Warillions wrote: PEOPLE DESERVE RIGHTS AND THE RIGHT TO BE STRANGE WITHIN THOSE RIGHTS!
although what happened was strange and he looks very suspicious. theres a such thing as "calling for backup" shoot the tires out of the car. follow him if he drives off if u cant keep him there,. but 1v1 cop vs random dude acting strange is not there job. add another cop to the scene if anything to verify hes acting strange. and the cop isnt being delusional. cops have protocal and this is what happens when its not followed. cop deserves punishment. ppl deserve rights and the right to be strange within those rights. the cop was out of place for not calling for backup. period.
Did you miss the part of the story where he called for back up?
Plain and simple: the dude got shot because he drove through a gated fence, acted erratically after ignoring several orders, and then entered a car with two young children. Cops will always take decisive action when the suspect does something that could potentially harm other people.
They may have not thought he was armed outside of the car, but they have no way of knowing if he had a gun in the glove compartment and was going to shoot the kids and them himself, drive into a telephone pole, etc etc. It went from being a situation with a dude acting weird but not outwardly agressive, to a situation where he is now drawing two other people into the situation.
i did. just as much as you missed the part about shootin the tires before shooting his face.
What good are shot out tires if he's got two hostages in the car with a potential weapon in there? Passive wait and see stuff like that is how you end up with three dead people instead of one.
Oh wow I didn't hear about this, San Clemente is in my school district, I have some friends there too. I took an ROP law enforcement class down here and heard from a lot of different cops down here. They are really well trained, if they think somebody is a threat, especially a marine, they will have to be even more careful. Many officers down here are ex-military service members as well, there's a navy base and a marine base down here. But I remember these officers telling me "whatever needs to be done to see your family at the end of the day, has to be done."
On February 15 2012 01:43 Syracks wrote: As a Marine Corps veteran, I can say this is sad, however, as a marine he knows what kind of threats people can be, He shouldnt have acted erratically, especially in front of his children. Its always sad to lose a brother, but he knew what he was doing, he knew the risks, for some reason he felt like he was untouchable, he was wrong.
Something that you guys should remember, Cops are in no shit danger every time they pull someone over, if you comply with their reasonable requests then everything should be ok. I'm not saying all cops are perfect, but 99% of them are good people and dont want to hurt people unless they feel like their lives, or someone elses lives are in danger, and thats just the truth of it. real life isnt based on bad cop movies you watch on tv or in the theater.
Semper Fi, RIP Brother
this line " I'm not saying all cops are perfect, but 99% of them are good people and dont want to hurt people unless they feel like their lives" is rediculas.
thats like saying all cable guys want nothing more than to fix your cable the right way. the first time. or every sales man wants your satisfaction with every purchase... its a man with a job and nothing more. ppl dont have jobs, they apply for watever they can and roll with watever they can get. im a cable guy now, spent 4 years in the airforce. applied for security job positions and debated law inforcement. but im just a regular guy with a smart ass foul mouth and sometimes pops off at my wife for little reason cause im human. open your eyes the cop was was unstable and unprepared for the situation/job and handled it completely wrong. this sucks yes. nothing more to say about the situation
im sorry if u think thats rediculas.... but thats the truth, yea a lot of cops get "drunk with power" or "power hungry" but it doesn't make them murderers. it just makes them dicks. but if you comply and don't give them a hard time then they wont shoot you, i promise you that. when you have 2 young girls in your possession and u start cursing, swearing, run away, or speed threw locked gates at 4AM, yea guess what, its gonna make the cop more on edge. and if you no shit feel that this crazy guy is a threat to those little girls, then yea, I'd take that shot, i hope that you would too.
bottom line is, dont break the law, and if you do, man up and take the punishment, dont be a coward or a hard head and try to run, and make things dangerous for you and the policemen. that will only cause accidents like this to happen
On February 15 2012 00:55 Nacl(Draq) wrote: Cops are being allowed to get away with murder, there are several cases of police murdering someone and then no charges being presented or names of officers are forgotten.
this what happens when you let the big military companies buy your politicians (in USA) and give weapons to every single person in the country, just restrict your god damn weapons.
OOHHH O.C= orange county, i misread thread and thought it was "marines gets killed by orbital command" i thought it was in wrong section, then i got interested in how that can happen, many wayyyy to early for TL ;D
a man can potentially have a nuclear bomb inside his car, that doesn't mean he has one. A man may potentially go home and stab his wife, but he probably won't do it. If you have a system where you react to situations that may be real, then your system has to go.
At the end of the day, no1 is safe, people will kill people, crime will happen, the only thing that can stop that is an ultra-police state that surveys everything down to your bedroom and your bathroom. Giving authorities such power is wrong imo...Also killing people, even by following protocol should be punishable as well just like normal people get punished from killing innocent people.
We probably won't have more serious information on this matter ( not that we have right now ), but I tell you, my opinion is that if in the next few weeks, no info will be added, I think it's obvious who is at fault.
On February 15 2012 00:55 Nacl(Draq) wrote: Cops are being allowed to get away with murder, there are several cases of police murdering someone and then no charges being presented or names of officers are forgotten.
It is starting to get appalling what cops are able to get away with now a days.
Seems like any idiot can just become one and do whatever they want with no repercussion even when they kill someone
makes me sick
whats more horrible? That its happening or that the common p3eople aren't taking justice necessarily into their hands by demanding imprisonment for the murderers.
The "cop" in question is a shame, to his parents, to his community, and to himself.
On February 14 2012 20:45 bOneSeven wrote: @hyper it's called totalitarianism so yeah lol. @blackjack since when if you run from police, they have authority to shot to kill if you don't represent a legit threat ? The report didn't even mention that the officers suspected the man had a weapon ( he didn't, just saying that the police there said that the cop didnt suspect a gun ).
When you represent "serve and protect" and kill a suspect that doesn't show signs of having a weapon/directly being a threat to anyone before his 14/9 years old children .... If that is not horrible , then what is ? If you really stay and think about it...it's an extremely horrible thing, imagine how the children will evolve from that state on...
Edit: Notice I didn't mention in my OP that the guy had medals or anything ( I don' care if you saved the world, if you go after that and kill 10 people you can rot in jail ). And about a serious investigation and new news .... have fun finding any without real public pressure ( hope I'm wrong and some new info pops out, but since it happened 4-5 days ago and nothing came up recently....)
Who are you to say what represents a legit threat?
You = the cop in this video
Thank you for posting this, to everyone that thinks the cop with the marine was out of line, I want you to watch this video and say where you think the cop here had the right to start shooting. The fact is it needs to be somewhere before the man can pull his arms out of the car because if you're waiting until you see the rifle it is in all likelihood too late, and most people don't dance around and make it obvious that they're ignoring police commands beforehand. If an officer is armed and ordering you to stop you fucking do not put your hands somewhere that they can't see that's asking to get shot and if they don't shoot you then they're asking to get shot. This event sucks, this situation sucks, and every situation like this sucks, but I will side with the guy that has to do this and face the possible psycho with a rifle in his car every single day.
i hop[e you guys realize that the problem isnt that cops have guns, but that almost anyone can own it. for example, people usually never get shot by cops in korea because the threat isnt there for the cops.
On February 15 2012 03:59 LeibSaiLeib wrote: this what happens when you let the big military companies buy your politicians (in USA) and give weapons to every single person in the country, just restrict your god damn weapons.
Exactly. It wasn't that policeman's problem or the strange man's problem. The problem is that everybody in the USA is capable of posessing lethal force, and therefore can be reasonably suspected of carrying said lethal force at any given time.
Here in NZ that situation would have gone completely differently because the chances of anybody having a gun are virtually zero. He probably would have just been tazered.
On February 15 2012 03:59 LeibSaiLeib wrote: this what happens when you let the big military companies buy your politicians (in USA) and give weapons to every single person in the country, just restrict your god damn weapons.
Exactly. It wasn't that policeman's problem or the strange man's problem. The problem is that everybody in the USA is capable of posessing lethal force, and therefore can be reasonably suspected of carrying said lethal force at any given time.
Here in NZ that situation would have gone completely differently because the chances of anybody having a gun are virtually zero. He probably would have just been tazered.
and that's why in the U.S., when you are approached by police, you make sure your hands are visible to them and don't make shady movements to get them concerned about their safety. It's really pretty fucking simple.
On February 14 2012 20:45 bOneSeven wrote: @hyper it's called totalitarianism so yeah lol. @blackjack since when if you run from police, they have authority to shot to kill if you don't represent a legit threat ? The report didn't even mention that the officers suspected the man had a weapon ( he didn't, just saying that the police there said that the cop didnt suspect a gun ).
When you represent "serve and protect" and kill a suspect that doesn't show signs of having a weapon/directly being a threat to anyone before his 14/9 years old children .... If that is not horrible , then what is ? If you really stay and think about it...it's an extremely horrible thing, imagine how the children will evolve from that state on...
Edit: Notice I didn't mention in my OP that the guy had medals or anything ( I don' care if you saved the world, if you go after that and kill 10 people you can rot in jail ). And about a serious investigation and new news .... have fun finding any without real public pressure ( hope I'm wrong and some new info pops out, but since it happened 4-5 days ago and nothing came up recently....)
Who are you to say what represents a legit threat?
Exploiting the video of the officer's death to serve as an argument. You, sir, are a king amongst crooks.
Not shooting a suspect that grabs a gun is different from shooting an unarmed man with his two daughters in the backseat of the car.
You've completely missing the point. "Not shooting a suspect that grabs a gun" is not the mistake the officer made. So according to you, the mistake the officer made is that he missed his shots? No. The mistake is letting him get the gun in the first place. It's incredibly ridiculous to say that a cop can't shoot the guy reaching for the gun, he has to wait until the guy has the gun and is about to blow his head off.
Exactly. Welcome to the horror of "Self-defence", "Geneva conventions" and "rules of war". As a fucking SOLDIER, I don't have the right to shoot, be it at war (against a civilian), on guard or patrol duty (against civilians) in a military base or in a train station, EVEN IF MY GUN IS STOLEN. I can only shoot if a live is directly in danger, and even if the guy has a gun pointed at me, I can get into trouble if I shoot FIRST.
But, as lame and extreme as it sounds, this is the right way to go. Killing a civilian in his car, 50cm away from his two daughters is 1 dead and 2 scarred for life, when a life was not even in immediate danger. He could have blown his tires or blocked the car.
The problem all those stories of cop abuse etc imply, is the lack of middle solution in the US cop reaction. Guy doesn't answer and has a shady behaviour ? What if he was just drunk ? stoned ? does that deserve a death ? You have to be SURE of what's up before killing a guy, else it's a fucking murder, cop or not. Ever heard of presumption of innocence ? It should apply here, too. Until you're not sure, for all you know the guy is innocent, suspicious, stoned, drunk, but who are you to decide on assumptions he deserve a death sentence without a trial...
On February 15 2012 03:59 LeibSaiLeib wrote: this what happens when you let the big military companies buy your politicians (in USA) and give weapons to every single person in the country, just restrict your god damn weapons.
Exactly. It wasn't that policeman's problem or the strange man's problem. The problem is that everybody in the USA is capable of posessing lethal force, and therefore can be reasonably suspected of carrying said lethal force at any given time.
Here in NZ that situation would have gone completely differently because the chances of anybody having a gun are virtually zero. He probably would have just been tazered.
and that's why in the U.S., when you are approached by police, you make sure your hands are visible to them and don't make shady movements to get them concerned about their safety. It's really pretty fucking simple.
Many thugs have handguns and rifles in France, too, yet cops don't shoot on sight. Even when aimed at. When they do there's a shitstorm and riots. Hell, even when they killed a guy who stole a casino, fleed, and opened fire on the cops with an ak-47, there was a shitstorm.
Why do you even NEED a gun ? Because others have them ? Infinite loop. Can't end well.
On February 14 2012 23:22 strongandbig wrote: Plus police officers are only trained to shoot to kill, and only to ever shoot when their life or someone else's is in danger.
No matter what happens, it's terrible for the daughters - I hope they'll be okay, mentally etc.
What the FUCK ? As a soldier, I'm trained to shoot to kill. Policemen (here at least) are trained in ways to disable, too (and primarily), cause there's a justice to do the job. And that's the way it really should be. Street and police is not war. shouldn't be.
And no, the daughters won't be fine, that's a given.
On February 15 2012 03:59 LeibSaiLeib wrote: this what happens when you let the big military companies buy your politicians (in USA) and give weapons to every single person in the country, just restrict your god damn weapons.
Exactly. It wasn't that policeman's problem or the strange man's problem. The problem is that everybody in the USA is capable of posessing lethal force, and therefore can be reasonably suspected of carrying said lethal force at any given time.
Here in NZ that situation would have gone completely differently because the chances of anybody having a gun are virtually zero. He probably would have just been tazered.
and that's why in the U.S., when you are approached by police, you make sure your hands are visible to them and don't make shady movements to get them concerned about their safety. It's really pretty fucking simple.
How is that a more elegant solution than just not having an unending supply of easily accessible weaponry? Here in NZ most people keep their hands visible and don't act shady... But the one guy who hides his hands and acts shady isn't going to get shot - and neither are the police.
.Sic. United States. February 15 2012 07:10. Posts 267 Swede New Zealand. February 15 2012 07:22. Posts 684 Kaitlin United States. February 15 2012 07:24. Posts 1187
Ya this. Cant realy blame the cop. Allowing cops to use lethal force at the slightest suspicion is a consequence of allowing firearms to the public. Guess its one of the manny drawbacks of allowing firearms. Dont get why americans are so found of their right to bear arms, it seems to give nothing but trouble.
Tread title is kinda epic btw lol, should have left it at "marine killed by OC..."
On February 15 2012 01:34 Hawk wrote: Well that's a crappy, misleading op til the edit was put in.
The only facts available to officer at the time: • Car enters a school at a high rate of speed at 4:30 am, crashes through a locked gate • Calls back up, and the man exits car, ignores orders, disappears on football field or something as cops set up perimeter • Unidentified man returns, ignores orders and proceeds to head back to car where two young, unidentified girls are sitting • Officer issues unknown warning (probably stop or you're gonna get shot), shoots.
Going off of that information, it sure as hell seems likely that the cop is witnessing an abudction, the start of a murder, or a murder-suicide. Basically, something that is definitely not looking positive at all.
Once that guy ignores orders and gets back in that car with two children, I think the decision is pretty obvious and the cops did the right thing.
Up for debate would be why did they not have a tazer or mace ready when they found him again and he continued to ignore orders? I could see that being quite dificult to hit at night, possibly in a dark area, or maybe that department doesn't carry tazers. But that aside, once the guy is in the car, they gotta take him out. It's obviously really unfortunate, but to not do would have directly put those two girls at risk since they did not know his intentions at all.
No, they don't *have to take him out*
You DO know there is a third option ? Like... arresting him ? A cop with his backup is surely enough to arrest an unarmed guy, don't you think ? They could even knock him out cold, etc... why the need to SHOOT everything ? Seriously... There's like a 50% chance the girls were his daughters, what have they done for the time the guy was out of the car ? They could have gone there and rescued/got the girls out, there was a million things to do other than killing him.
US cops have that bad habit to always be aiming on the guy they're talking to, so their hands are not free. They can't do anything else while holding a gun. This is a problem. A gun isn't going to magically appear out of thin air in the hands of a suspect. If you have one hand on your holster, it's enough to have the time to draw the gun and shoot before the suspect do.
EPT
