|
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. |
On January 25 2012 10:27 shizna wrote:
aren't there are hundreds of thousands of mentally ill people on the streets who could have potentially acted exactly the same as that suspect?
why didn't the cop shoot him in the knee at least? imo shooting the guy 10 times is no different than shooting him once and then decapitating him with a tomahawk... it's rediculous overkill...
or maybe the cop thought he was in a computer game where it takes 25 bullets to kill someone.
It seems you think this is a computer game where it is possible to active slow motion and pull of miraculous shots to knees.
|
On January 25 2012 10:31 Release wrote:
think about it this way:
better 9 too many shots than 1 too few.
In the prior, the end result remains the same. In the latter, many more people get hurt unnecessarily
this
I think the thread can pretty much end with this post, even though it could have ended a long long time ago.
|
Does it matter how many times he got shot? he deserved to get shot and thats what really matters. There is also the possibility that the officer wasn't confident he hit the target which is why more clips were unloaded. Give the police a break, how many times does a guy with a weapon charge you? Never happened to me.
|
As brutal as the video seemed, to me this looked pretty standard. Police officers don't generally fire a gun to subdue or slow down an assailant; they have plenty of other methods at their disposal for that type of thing and will use their gun almost exclusively for kill shots. The man in the video was idiotic enough to turn around and gesture like he was going to attack a cop, what do you guys expect was going to happen? He was clearly given plenty of warnings and the officers even attempted to subdue him with a tazer. It might not be pretty, nor even fair or right but this type of thing happens all the time. In this case the person killed may not have seemed particularly dangerous but a crowbar is absolutely a deadly weapon that he brandished at the police. There have been way way wayyy more corrupt, brutal things that police all over the world have done, this video honestly showed pretty standard police work even if it is unsettling to watch.
|
I've often wondered: have cartoons taught us that crowbars are soft things? That they don't really hurt any more than just a longer arm? Do people not realize that they are bars of steel, basically short baseball bats? Their smaller size meaning that they deliver more damage per unit area than a bat (which is already a deadly weapon if you aim it at someone).
It seem that there are a lot of people who seem to think that the guy wasn't dangerous because he wasn't wielding an obviously deadly weapon like a knife or gun.
On a different matter:
On January 25 2012 10:31 Release wrote:
think about it this way:
better 9 too many shots than 1 too few.
In the prior, the end result remains the same. In the latter, many more people get hurt unnecessarily
If you want to be technical, it's possible for someone to survive a single gunshot to the chest, if medical attention is prompt. You're less likely to survive 10. So the extra shots don't necessarily result in the same thing.
That being said, someone who's swinging a crowbar at persons while cops are holding guns to him has clearly given up on the futility of daily living.
|
The whole situation could have been avoided had they actually kept distance to the suspect. Shame the guy had to die but i believe the fault of the murder( and yes it is murder, justifiable or not) lies with the way the officers handled the situation.
The suspect had not harmed a single person but they put themselves into an awkward spot in an open area for no reason.
The police are there to protect everyone, even the suspect, so that they may stand before a court of law where all the facts are represented.
|
He didn't keep his distance because he tried to use his taser.
|
On January 25 2012 10:39 PoisedYeTi wrote:
The whole situation could have been avoided had they actually kept distance to the suspect. Shame the guy had to die but i believe the fault of the murder( and yes it is murder, justifiable or not) lies with the way the officers handled the situation.
The suspect had not harmed a single person but they put themselves into an awkward spot in an open area for no reason.
The police are there to protect everyone, even the suspect, so that they may stand before a court of law where all the facts are represented.
lulz
This point has already been brought up.
He was about to harm the police officer...
|
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?)
as i said before, 5-10m is standard distance to begin talking in such a situation.
do you know how long it takes to reload a tazer? Obviously i cannot make out the specific model in the vid, but most models i know need at least 3s to reload. IF a suspect is mothing towards you with a weapon raised (thats exactly what he did in the vid) you won't be able to finish reloading.
Frankly that is EXACTLY the situation where the partner who is covering you (in this case the guy with the dog) is supposed to shoot. The officer who went in closer to arrest is under imminent threat.
You can argue that 10 shots is too many (i agree), but it doesn't make a difference in the outcome. For me it means that those cops need counseling before they can be in the field again (which would be mandatory in many countries regardless), becomes they have overreacted in a high stress situation.
There was no indication in the vid that the cops would have shot him, if he had not turned to the officer and raised his weapon. The guy was in the process of reloading his tazer (at least that is what it looked like).
|
On January 25 2012 10:39 PoisedYeTi wrote:
i believe the fault of the murder( and yes it is murder, justifiable or not)
By definition, murder is not justified. Homicide (ie: taking a life) can be justified, but murder cannot. Defense of self and defense of others is not murder. Not in a legal sense and certainly not in a moral sense.
|
On January 25 2012 10:39 PoisedYeTi wrote:
The whole situation could have been avoided had they actually kept distance to the suspect. Shame the guy had to die but i believe the fault of the murder( and yes it is murder, justifiable or not) lies with the way the officers handled the situation.
The suspect had not harmed a single person but they put themselves into an awkward spot in an open area for no reason.
The police are there to protect everyone, even the suspect, so that they may stand before a court of law where all the facts are represented.
welcome to page 30, where we cover Area of intervention and SOP about from what distance you approach subjects to minimize risks for bystanders while still keeping adequate distance to protect the cops.
The instance the subject not only resists arrest but actually approaches an officer of the law with a deadly weapon with intent to harm they give up their right to "protection". Instead it becomes an officers duty to protect themselves with reasonable force (in this case deadly force since that hammer/crowbar thing is a deadly weapon in meele).
Ps: Read up on the definition of murder before you use it.
|
On January 25 2012 10:27 shizna wrote:
aren't there are hundreds of thousands of mentally ill people on the streets who could have potentially acted exactly the same as that suspect?
why didn't the cop shoot him in the knee at least? imo shooting the guy 10 times is no different than shooting him once and then decapitating him with a tomahawk... it's rediculous overkill...
or maybe the cop thought he was in a computer game where it takes 25 bullets to kill someone.
And if mentally ill people acted that way I'd expect the cop to put them down too. It doesn't matter if you "can't help it" or if your intentions were good. If you're endangering the lives of innocent people, or the officers whose job it is to protect them, you're treading on thin ice.
And again with the kneecapping nonsense. I guess you think every police officer in the world is a crackshot with a pistol and could make sure he didn't miss even though it was a high stress, high adrenaline, tense situation? What if he missed and the ricochet off the ground killed a child? If a police officer is going to fire his weapon, it is at the center of mass of the person he's shooting at. No one in real life actually tries to hit somebody in the knee.
|
On January 25 2012 10:39 PoisedYeTi wrote:
The whole situation could have been avoided had they actually kept distance to the suspect. Shame the guy had to die but i believe the fault of the murder( and yes it is murder, justifiable or not) lies with the way the officers handled the situation.
The suspect had not harmed a single person but they put themselves into an awkward spot in an open area for no reason.
The police are there to protect everyone, even the suspect, so that they may stand before a court of law where all the facts are represented.
The suspect was actively threatening innocent people's property and lives. They put themselves in danger so they could stop him from damaging more property, hurting anyone and to arrest him. They tried to detain him without killing with the taser, but when that failed, he began to, potentially lethally, attack an innocent person. The officer protected the innocent from the initiator of force in the only way that he could be sure to succeed.
|
On January 25 2012 10:44 Tula wrote:Show nested quote +On January 25 2012 10:39 PoisedYeTi wrote:
The whole situation could have been avoided had they actually kept distance to the suspect. Shame the guy had to die but i believe the fault of the murder( and yes it is murder, justifiable or not) lies with the way the officers handled the situation.
The suspect had not harmed a single person but they put themselves into an awkward spot in an open area for no reason.
The police are there to protect everyone, even the suspect, so that they may stand before a court of law where all the facts are represented. welcome to page 30, where we cover Area of intervention and SOP about from what distance you approach subjects to minimize risks for bystanders while still keeping adequate distance to protect the cops. The instance the subject not only resists arrest but actually approaches an officer of the law with a deadly weapon with intent to harm they give up their right to "protection". Instead it becomes an officers duty to protect themselves with reasonable force (in this case deadly force since that hammer/crowbar thing is a deadly weapon in meele). Ps: Read up on the definition of murder before you use it.
Not only that but running away from the assailant ("keeping the distance") isn't gonna solve much. They tried to taze him, intimidate him, it didn't work, period.
Does anyone truly believe it's better to stand a mile away and just let the guy run around doing his own thing?
|
On January 25 2012 10:32 Angra wrote:Show nested quote +On January 25 2012 10:29 Sworn wrote:
In this case I think he was completely justified to shoot him. Of course he went over the top but in a moment when someone is swinging a weapon at you or your friend to do harm you don't think you just do. If he only shot him once it would be endangering even more people. What if the guy wasn't put down from one shot, got back up, and pulled a gun on everyone? Entirely possible considering he's already trying to attack someone.
I get that anything is possible in these types of situations, but I imagine that if someone were to rob a place his initial weapon at hand would be a gun, with a crowbar tucked away just in case. Not the other way around...
|
Lithuania884 Posts
The first 5 shots are obviously fine. The other 5 with basically no pause are not. If he had a gun, sure, kill him before he can respond. But he was obviously incapitated, he didn't even have the time to fall down to the ground when they shot another 5 "to make sure". He's not a fucking terminator, they don't know they can BACK OFF for a couple of seconds until he falls down?
Someone on YT video mentioned cops fear NOT killing their victim for the fear of revenge, that would make a lot of sense.
|
On January 25 2012 10:41 Jaso wrote:Show nested quote +On January 25 2012 10:39 PoisedYeTi wrote:
The whole situation could have been avoided had they actually kept distance to the suspect. Shame the guy had to die but i believe the fault of the murder( and yes it is murder, justifiable or not) lies with the way the officers handled the situation.
The suspect had not harmed a single person but they put themselves into an awkward spot in an open area for no reason.
The police are there to protect everyone, even the suspect, so that they may stand before a court of law where all the facts are represented. lulz This point has already been brought up. He was about to harm the police officer...
I cba lol
User was warned for this post
|
The cops were completely justified in shooting him and in using that many rounds. A single small pistol round like the ones they used take a long time to incapacitate someone like this unless they get a lucky shot. This high number of shots was necessary and completely correct.
|
On January 25 2012 10:50 PoisedYeTi wrote:Show nested quote +On January 25 2012 10:41 Jaso wrote:On January 25 2012 10:39 PoisedYeTi wrote:
The whole situation could have been avoided had they actually kept distance to the suspect. Shame the guy had to die but i believe the fault of the murder( and yes it is murder, justifiable or not) lies with the way the officers handled the situation.
The suspect had not harmed a single person but they put themselves into an awkward spot in an open area for no reason.
The police are there to protect everyone, even the suspect, so that they may stand before a court of law where all the facts are represented. lulz This point has already been brought up. He was about to harm the police officer... because they went RIGHT up to him. The tazer failed. The guy is still brandishing a close range weapon. Why don't they back away, they just continue getting closer and closer to him lol Putting themselves in unnecessary danger. What is so hard to understand about this concept. Ranged weapons Vs close, you are not in danger if you keep distance till A) the suspect puts down his weapon B) Deadly force is required if he is likely to strike someone leathally The officers caused B to happen obviously but it could have been avoided.
dunno what cba means, but ok. o.o
|
On January 25 2012 10:50 PoisedYeTi wrote:Show nested quote +On January 25 2012 10:41 Jaso wrote:On January 25 2012 10:39 PoisedYeTi wrote:
The whole situation could have been avoided had they actually kept distance to the suspect. Shame the guy had to die but i believe the fault of the murder( and yes it is murder, justifiable or not) lies with the way the officers handled the situation.
The suspect had not harmed a single person but they put themselves into an awkward spot in an open area for no reason.
The police are there to protect everyone, even the suspect, so that they may stand before a court of law where all the facts are represented. lulz This point has already been brought up. He was about to harm the police officer... because they went RIGHT up to him. The tazer failed. The guy is still brandishing a close range weapon. Why don't they back away, they just continue getting closer and closer to him lol Putting themselves in unnecessary danger. What is so hard to understand about this concept. Ranged weapons Vs close, you are not in danger if you keep distance till A) the suspect puts down his weapon B) Deadly force is required if he is likely to strike someone leathally The officers caused B to happen obviously but it could have been avoided.
Believe it or not, taser barbs do not operate like bullets do. You have to be quite close to use a taser, especially if the suspect is wearing heavy clothing with barely any skin exposed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
