|
To keep this thread open for discussion, please READ THIS BEFORE POSTING:The following types of posts are banworthy: - Nation bashing. - Significantly disrespectful posts toward any of the parties involved. Please familiarize yourself with some of the basics on the use of force in the United States before posting in this thread. If you feel the need to post a reaction to the news, post a comment on the youtube video. Don't bring it here. This thread is for a discussion on the topic, and your post better have substance to it. Low content posts will be met with moderator action. Here is a good post by someone with experience in escalation of force training. Read that too. This post might change your opinion of in the incident. |
Cops were TOTALLY justified in shooting that guy dead. The second cop was in range of the crowbar's attack. That's why you see him backpedalling frantically and going for his gun when the criminal went after him. That's also why the shooting cop had no choice but to act right then and there. Another second and he might have been looking at his partner on the ground with his skull caved in.
It was quite obvious the criminal had violent intentions, seeing as he'd already smashed up the windows, and he was about to retaliate on the cop for trying to taser him. This all could have been avoided if the criminal had put his crowbar down. Instead, he lifted it to attack and advanced on a cop. Totally wrong move.
Also, a lot of people are acting like cops act with perfect knowledge. They don't. They had no idea if this guy had a gun hidden in his hoodie or a bulletproof vest on. They know NOTHING other than he smashed some windows and had a crowbar in his hands. When a cop shoots, he aims to kill. Period.
Otherwise, you could end up with a wounded criminal dropping his crowbar, going for a gun, and shooting back at the cops. Getting shot five times in the chest does NOT make it impossible for a criminal to shoot back, especially if he's wearing a kevlar vest. Kids need to think more before trying to play armchair general.
|
From 0:45 to 0:48, 10 shots were fired in three seconds. There was no indication that the suspect was armed with anything other than a crowbar.
That's nice but he'd already brandished a deadly weapon. "No indication," that's an irrelevant point.
He was actually starting to move away from the officer and unless he starts moving his hands towards his pockets there isnt a logical reason to assume he has any other weapon other than paranoia.
Moving away from the officer - irrelevant. All it takes is a split-second for him to turn around with who knows what in his hand.
Moving hands towards pockets - you don't know, everything but his head is hidden by the car. More to the point, police don't have X-ray vision, he'd already brandished a weapon at an officer and with his back to the officers they can't see what he may be doing.
People need to stop invoking logic in the middle of incredibly illogical comments.
|
I just think, if this man had done what he done in another country, for example somewhere in Europe, lets say England, my country, how differently it would have been handled and how different the outcome could have been.
|
On January 25 2012 09:46 semantics wrote:Show nested quote +On January 25 2012 09:38 Jaso wrote:On January 25 2012 09:04 sMi.EternaL wrote:In USA the police are trained are shoot to kill. This is 100% false. The only time this statement would be correct is when we are discussing a precision shot when snipers are deployed. IE: Hostage situations etc. Military and LEOs' are trained to stop the threat. In virtually every academy or weapons training facility in America that translate to this: Three rounds, center mass. As I said earlier, it is never the intention of the shooter to kill but in a "time is life" situation three shots center mass, repeated as necessary, is the fastest way to stop the threat. Unfortunately yes, the chance of a fatality is high. However, the suspect knows this, it's no secret that if you attempt to harm anyone (officer or civilian) the police will (hopefully) be there to stop you as effectively as they can. at least shoot the knee caps. This only occurs in the movies and tv shows. I can tell you from experience the worlds greatest shooters of paper turn into erratic-at-best shooters when under the type of stress this situation puts on you. As someone so eloquently put earlier, police are sworn to protect everyone, including the criminals. Well, if you go around trying to precision shoot someone in the knee or arm or some such the chances of missing are VERY high and that translates to someone else getting hurt. When you aim center mass you lower your chance of missing which lowers your chance of collateral damage on nearby civilians/friendlies behind or around your intended target. If you ever get the chance there is a very simple very basic test you can do to get a tiny tiny taste of what this is like. If you ever get a chance, go to a shooting range, pick up a pistol and fire a few rounds taking your time and such. Then, do jumping jacks for five minutes to get your heart racing and then try to fire again even half as accurately as you did before. Now multiply that by about ten and attempt to shoot someone in the knee :x It's actually 100% true. I'm not sure about how many shots are supposed to be fired according to protocol, but I know for a fact that if an officer is going to shoot at someone, it's definitely not to "impair" them. They're only going to shoot with the intent to kill. Pretty sure police never openly say shoot to kill, but rather to subdue or something alone those lines just due to how people react to the words shoot to kill. But essentially it is what they are doing if you put 3-5 rounds in the center of a person, unless they are right next to a hospital and are lucky that nothing too important was tore-up/hit they are likely to die. The intent is not to kill them but rather make them stop w.e they are doing, death is more of just bi-product.
I've heard from the mouth of an active officer that they don't shoot unless they're planning to kill.
Maybe some law enforcement agencies do it differently, I know for sure that the officers in my town shoot to kill.
|
Well considering that the guy tried to bash a cop's head in, I think paranoia is justified in this case.
|
On January 25 2012 10:03 Serpico wrote:Show nested quote +On January 25 2012 10:01 dAPhREAk wrote:On January 25 2012 10:00 Corvi wrote:
i wouldnt be surprised if that was more bullets fired than the whole german police force does in an average month. this cop was either traumatized from an similar engagement which went really wrong or is a fucking crazyman. or doing what he was trained to do. 10 rounds into a normal sized male is normal? You're giving the cops a lot of leeway, after the first round of shots you could see the person stumbling backwards anyways.
the guy who trained cops said it was justified. also, i didnt say "normal." dont put words in my mouth.
|
On January 25 2012 10:09 Serpico wrote:Show nested quote +On January 25 2012 10:07 Xinder wrote:On January 25 2012 10:06 Serpico wrote:On January 25 2012 10:05 Whole wrote:On January 25 2012 10:03 Serpico wrote:On January 25 2012 10:01 dAPhREAk wrote:On January 25 2012 10:00 Corvi wrote:
i wouldnt be surprised if that was more bullets fired than the whole german police force does in an average month. this cop was either traumatized from an similar engagement which went really wrong or is a fucking crazyman. or doing what he was trained to do. 10 rounds into a normal sized male is normal? You're giving the cops a lot of leeway. the guy was still standing after 5 rounds. you want the cops to just wait and see if he pulls out a pistol or not? Uhh, define still, because you're way off. If you watch the video more closely, when the first 5 shots end he has his back to the officers but is still standing upright. Not falling down. At this point he could be pulling out a gun from the front of his pants or any other weapon. The 2nd officer then fires the next 5 shots and he then hits the ground. He was actually starting to move away from the officer and unless he starts moving his hands towards his pockets there isnt a logical reason to assume he has any other weapon other than paranoia.
So you'd like the officers to patiently wait to see if he falls down/pulls out a gun/does something else possibly harmful, instead of them doing what they did here by making sure he was on the ground before they stopped firing?
|
On January 25 2012 10:09 Serpico wrote:Show nested quote +On January 25 2012 10:07 Xinder wrote:On January 25 2012 10:06 Serpico wrote:On January 25 2012 10:05 Whole wrote:On January 25 2012 10:03 Serpico wrote:On January 25 2012 10:01 dAPhREAk wrote:On January 25 2012 10:00 Corvi wrote:
i wouldnt be surprised if that was more bullets fired than the whole german police force does in an average month. this cop was either traumatized from an similar engagement which went really wrong or is a fucking crazyman. or doing what he was trained to do. 10 rounds into a normal sized male is normal? You're giving the cops a lot of leeway. the guy was still standing after 5 rounds. you want the cops to just wait and see if he pulls out a pistol or not? Uhh, define still, because you're way off. If you watch the video more closely, when the first 5 shots end he has his back to the officers but is still standing upright. Not falling down. At this point he could be pulling out a gun from the front of his pants or any other weapon. The 2nd officer then fires the next 5 shots and he then hits the ground. He was actually starting to move away from the officer and unless he starts moving his hands towards his pockets there isnt a logical reason to assume he has any other weapon other than paranoia.
And in that situation, paranoia is completely justified. As soon as he made a move towards the cop with a crowbar he signed his death warrant. They certainly aren't going to take any chances, and I find it really hard to believe that you would if you were put in the same situation.
|
On January 25 2012 10:10 StorkHwaiting wrote:
Cops were TOTALLY justified in shooting that guy dead. The second cop was in range of the crowbar's attack. That's why you see him backpedalling frantically and going for his gun when the criminal went after him. That's also why the shooting cop had no choice but to act right then and there. Another second and he might have been looking at his partner on the ground with his skull caved in.
It was quite obvious the criminal had violent intentions, seeing as he'd already smashed up the windows, and he was about to retaliate on the cop for trying to taser him. This all could have been avoided if the criminal had put his crowbar down. Instead, he lifted it to attack and advanced on a cop. Totally wrong move.
Also, a lot of people are acting like cops act with perfect knowledge. They don't. They had no idea if this guy had a gun hidden in his hoodie or a bulletproof vest on. They know NOTHING other than he smashed some windows and had a crowbar in his hands. When a cop shoots, he aims to kill. Period.
Otherwise, you could end up with a wounded criminal dropping his crowbar, going for a gun, and shooting back at the cops. Getting shot five times in the chest does NOT make it impossible for a criminal to shoot back, especially if he's wearing a kevlar vest. Kids need to think more before trying to play armchair general.
What...i've seen this type of reply a few times 'What if he had a gun?' like wtf does everybody in America carry guns and wear kevlar vests? The cops shouldn't have been so close to a guy with a bat, they can't just say 'ohh he had a bar, lets shoot him dead.' why don't they try talking from a decent distance away, try tasing him/spraying him a few times? (Yes I know they tasered him once but come on...that's as far as you go before shooting him dead?)
|
On January 25 2012 10:08 Rygasm wrote:Show nested quote +On January 25 2012 10:07 plogamer wrote:
From 0:45 to 0:48, 10 shots were fired in three seconds. There was no indication that the suspect was armed with anything other than a crowbar. Wouldn't that be the point if the weapon is hidden?
Anyone could have a hidden weapon. So, if two men are having a fist fight, who should the officers shoot? "What if" either of them had a "hidden weapon". This is not argument for that reason.
A hidden weapon cannot be fired by facing your back to the officers. What kind of a hidden weapon could the suspect use in a manner that would not be visible to the officers? (Say a gun, he has to pull it out to fire right?)
|
On January 25 2012 10:13 ZasZ. wrote:Show nested quote +On January 25 2012 10:09 Serpico wrote:On January 25 2012 10:07 Xinder wrote:On January 25 2012 10:06 Serpico wrote:On January 25 2012 10:05 Whole wrote:On January 25 2012 10:03 Serpico wrote:On January 25 2012 10:01 dAPhREAk wrote:On January 25 2012 10:00 Corvi wrote:
i wouldnt be surprised if that was more bullets fired than the whole german police force does in an average month. this cop was either traumatized from an similar engagement which went really wrong or is a fucking crazyman. or doing what he was trained to do. 10 rounds into a normal sized male is normal? You're giving the cops a lot of leeway. the guy was still standing after 5 rounds. you want the cops to just wait and see if he pulls out a pistol or not? Uhh, define still, because you're way off. If you watch the video more closely, when the first 5 shots end he has his back to the officers but is still standing upright. Not falling down. At this point he could be pulling out a gun from the front of his pants or any other weapon. The 2nd officer then fires the next 5 shots and he then hits the ground. He was actually starting to move away from the officer and unless he starts moving his hands towards his pockets there isnt a logical reason to assume he has any other weapon other than paranoia. And in that situation, paranoia is completely justified. As soon as he made a move towards the cop with a crowbar he signed his death warrant. They certainly aren't going to take any chances, and I find it really hard to believe that you would if you were put in the same situation.
I dont see how firing ONLY (lol) 5 shots into his torso is taking a chance. Especially when he is moving AWAY from me (due to getting shot 5 times) with a weapon like that.
|
On January 25 2012 10:14 KryptoStorm wrote:Show nested quote +On January 25 2012 10:10 StorkHwaiting wrote:
Cops were TOTALLY justified in shooting that guy dead. The second cop was in range of the crowbar's attack. That's why you see him backpedalling frantically and going for his gun when the criminal went after him. That's also why the shooting cop had no choice but to act right then and there. Another second and he might have been looking at his partner on the ground with his skull caved in.
It was quite obvious the criminal had violent intentions, seeing as he'd already smashed up the windows, and he was about to retaliate on the cop for trying to taser him. This all could have been avoided if the criminal had put his crowbar down. Instead, he lifted it to attack and advanced on a cop. Totally wrong move.
Also, a lot of people are acting like cops act with perfect knowledge. They don't. They had no idea if this guy had a gun hidden in his hoodie or a bulletproof vest on. They know NOTHING other than he smashed some windows and had a crowbar in his hands. When a cop shoots, he aims to kill. Period.
Otherwise, you could end up with a wounded criminal dropping his crowbar, going for a gun, and shooting back at the cops. Getting shot five times in the chest does NOT make it impossible for a criminal to shoot back, especially if he's wearing a kevlar vest. Kids need to think more before trying to play armchair general. What...i've seen this type of reply a few times 'What if he had a gun?' like wtf does everybody in America carry guns and wear kevlar vests? The cops shouldn't have been so close to a guy with a bat, they can't just say 'ohh he had a bar, lets shoot him dead.' why don't they try talking from a decent distance away, try tasing him/spraying him a few times? (Yes I know they tasered him once but come on...that's as far as you go before shooting him dead?)
Guns in America are unfortunately quite common, so you cannot rule out that possibility. The cop was in danger because you have to be pretty close to tase someone...and the guy was retaliating when the cop was trying to back up. Thats how I read the situation anyway
|
Not sure if anybody knows this but cops in California are trained to shoot to kill not disarm. Right or wrong in the public eyes but they do what they are trained to do.
|
On January 25 2012 10:14 KryptoStorm wrote:Show nested quote +On January 25 2012 10:10 StorkHwaiting wrote:
Cops were TOTALLY justified in shooting that guy dead. The second cop was in range of the crowbar's attack. That's why you see him backpedalling frantically and going for his gun when the criminal went after him. That's also why the shooting cop had no choice but to act right then and there. Another second and he might have been looking at his partner on the ground with his skull caved in.
It was quite obvious the criminal had violent intentions, seeing as he'd already smashed up the windows, and he was about to retaliate on the cop for trying to taser him. This all could have been avoided if the criminal had put his crowbar down. Instead, he lifted it to attack and advanced on a cop. Totally wrong move.
Also, a lot of people are acting like cops act with perfect knowledge. They don't. They had no idea if this guy had a gun hidden in his hoodie or a bulletproof vest on. They know NOTHING other than he smashed some windows and had a crowbar in his hands. When a cop shoots, he aims to kill. Period.
Otherwise, you could end up with a wounded criminal dropping his crowbar, going for a gun, and shooting back at the cops. Getting shot five times in the chest does NOT make it impossible for a criminal to shoot back, especially if he's wearing a kevlar vest. Kids need to think more before trying to play armchair general. What...i've seen this type of reply a few times 'What if he had a gun?' like wtf does everybody in America carry guns and wear kevlar vests? The cops shouldn't have been so close to a guy with a bat, they can't just say 'ohh he had a bar, lets shoot him dead.' why don't they try talking from a decent distance away, try tasing him/spraying him a few times? (Yes I know they tasered him once but come on...that's as far as you go before shooting him dead?)
No, not everybody in America carries guns and wears kevlar vests. As for the ones who brandish crowbars in public, are openly violent, and do not respond to a standard issue taser (implying drug use), you assume those guys have guns hidden in their clothes.
I love how people think this guy is innocent. He was in the middle of swinging a deadly weapon at a police officer when they took him down, and the tragedy is that the perp died? Are you people based in this plane of reality?
|
On January 25 2012 10:14 plogamer wrote:Show nested quote +On January 25 2012 10:08 Rygasm wrote:On January 25 2012 10:07 plogamer wrote:
From 0:45 to 0:48, 10 shots were fired in three seconds. There was no indication that the suspect was armed with anything other than a crowbar. Wouldn't that be the point if the weapon is hidden? Anyone could have a hidden weapon. So, if two men are having a fist fight, who should the officers shoot? "What if" either of them had a "hidden weapon". This is not argument for that reason. A hidden weapon cannot be fired by facing your back to the officers. What kind of a hidden weapon could the suspect use in a manner that would not be visible to the officers? (Say a gun, he has to pull it out to fire right?)
This guy was brandishing a CROWBAR in front of the cops, your argument is invalid. You're telling me without a reasonable doubt that he DIDN'T have another weapon(s)? You don't know that for a fact.
He pulls the gun from his waist band, turns around and fires. That could happen in a matter of seconds, and that's him turning around. He could just pull it out and fire at the people in front of him.
|
What...i've seen this type of reply a few times 'What if he had a gun?' like wtf does everybody in America carry guns and wear kevlar vests? The cops shouldn't have been so close to a guy with a bat, they can't just say 'ohh he had a bar, lets shoot him dead.' why don't they try talking from a decent distance away, try tasing him/spraying him a few times? (Yes I know they tasered him once but come on...that's as far as you go before shooting him dead?)
Some people will just bend over backwards to find any kind of twisty excuse to blame the cops.
Here's a hint: don't carry a deadly weapon into a business (and, presumably, act in such a manner that the employees feel the need to call the police) and then brandish it towards a cop and you won't have to worry about him being so close it causes his partner to shoot you.
|
On January 25 2012 10:14 plogamer wrote:Show nested quote +On January 25 2012 10:08 Rygasm wrote:On January 25 2012 10:07 plogamer wrote:
From 0:45 to 0:48, 10 shots were fired in three seconds. There was no indication that the suspect was armed with anything other than a crowbar. Wouldn't that be the point if the weapon is hidden? Anyone could have a hidden weapon. So, if two men are having a fist fight, who should the officers shoot? "What if" either of them had a "hidden weapon". This is not argument for that reason.
A fist fight is 100% different from a guy who shrugs off a taser shot to the face and charges a cop with a crowbar-like object
|
I'm curious, what are the Americans in this threads opinion on this:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-16712488
'Prosecutors had argued that on the day of the killings Wuterich lost control after seeing a friend blown apart by a bomb, before leading the soldiers under his command on a rampage.'
'They said his decision to send his squad to attack nearby homes went against his training.
"That is a horrific result from that derelict order of shooting first, ask questions later," Lt Col Sean Sullivan told the court.
Among the dead were women, children and elderly people, including a man in a wheelchair.'
Mod Edit: There's already a thread for this http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=305787
|
On January 25 2012 10:14 KryptoStorm wrote:Show nested quote +On January 25 2012 10:10 StorkHwaiting wrote:
Cops were TOTALLY justified in shooting that guy dead. The second cop was in range of the crowbar's attack. That's why you see him backpedalling frantically and going for his gun when the criminal went after him. That's also why the shooting cop had no choice but to act right then and there. Another second and he might have been looking at his partner on the ground with his skull caved in.
It was quite obvious the criminal had violent intentions, seeing as he'd already smashed up the windows, and he was about to retaliate on the cop for trying to taser him. This all could have been avoided if the criminal had put his crowbar down. Instead, he lifted it to attack and advanced on a cop. Totally wrong move.
Also, a lot of people are acting like cops act with perfect knowledge. They don't. They had no idea if this guy had a gun hidden in his hoodie or a bulletproof vest on. They know NOTHING other than he smashed some windows and had a crowbar in his hands. When a cop shoots, he aims to kill. Period.
Otherwise, you could end up with a wounded criminal dropping his crowbar, going for a gun, and shooting back at the cops. Getting shot five times in the chest does NOT make it impossible for a criminal to shoot back, especially if he's wearing a kevlar vest. Kids need to think more before trying to play armchair general. What...i've seen this type of reply a few times 'What if he had a gun?' like wtf does everybody in America carry guns and wear kevlar vests? The cops shouldn't have been so close to a guy with a bat, they can't just say 'ohh he had a bar, lets shoot him dead.' why don't they try talking from a decent distance away, try tasing him/spraying him a few times? (Yes I know they tasered him once but come on...that's as far as you go before shooting him dead?)
No, but plenty of criminals do. He didn't think, "oh he has a crow bar so let's shoot him" he thought "if I don't shoot him right now, he could kill my partner" . Good luck tasing or spraying someone from a distance that can't be closed by a man with a melee weapon in less than a second or two.
|
On January 25 2012 10:19 KryptoStorm wrote:I'm curious, what are the Americans in this threads opinion on this: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-16712488'Prosecutors had argued that on the day of the killings Wuterich lost control after seeing a friend blown apart by a bomb, before leading the soldiers under his command on a rampage.' 'They said his decision to send his squad to attack nearby homes went against his training. "That is a horrific result from that derelict order of shooting first, ask questions later," Lt Col Sean Sullivan told the court. Among the dead were women, children and elderly people, including a man in a wheelchair.'
There's already a thread on that. Try searching for it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
