EPT
![[image loading]](http://img.ibtimes.com/www/data/images/full/2011/11/19/192897-us-davis-police-lt-john-pike-dousing-seated-students-with-pepper-spray.jpg)
Hope this puts that situation into perspective.
Suspect with crowbar killed by police - Page 66
| Forum Index > General Forum |
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. | ||
|
Sweeper8
United States25 Posts
Hope this puts that situation into perspective. | ||
|
iFU.pauline
France1554 Posts
On January 26 2012 05:25 Weedk wrote: Why do people think that cops are trained to make takedown shots like that? They are trained specifically to aim for center mass, and this is exactly what happened. And please do tell this story of how cops shot a guy who was trying to steal a car. http://www.topix.com/forum/city/honolulu-hi/T0VPGJIM6EUJBATP6 That's the only link i found talking about it, though as they say on the forum, it wasn't a young guy but a man in his 40's and please don't deny it, i was on this island when it happened so I remember very well. This is just one example, i'm sure if you dig a bit more you would find tons of other cases. I was surprised the way it has been showed on tv like it was random news. | ||
|
WhiteDog
France8650 Posts
At least I can understand the police officer, he is most likely a guy that has a boring life at work (because that's the reality of the police), never get his pistol out, never fire it except in training. Then one day, for no reason, he find a crazy guy with a crowbar and can't face the situation in any way except shotting the guy 10 times despite the fact that he could have put him in check or even kill him with 1 or 2 shots (not to mention the dog lol). But that's not rational, because in the action it's really hard to be rationnal. Now when a young kid, who has never been in any tough situation in his life come in a forum and say the crowbar kid had what he deserved... then that's just being plain stupid. | ||
|
Kojak21
Canada1104 Posts
| ||
|
WhiteDog
France8650 Posts
On January 26 2012 05:50 Kojak21 wrote: awful lot of blind hate from cop haters in here If you are a young men and don't hate cops at least a little, then you are not living man. And i'm half serious. | ||
|
FT628
United Kingdom14 Posts
It is much better to be safe than sorry. especially when you don't know if he has a handgun or another weapon. imagine losing a friend and having to explain to their family that he died because you didn't fire another shot - it's a sad reality that people die this way, but you can't swing a weapon at an armed police officer and expect them to give you a slap on the wrist - if your going to attack someone you need to be prepared to die in my opinion... but that is just my thought on the situation. | ||
|
ClanRH.TV
United States462 Posts
On January 26 2012 05:18 lain2501 wrote: They could have easily shot him in the leg, they are fuckin trained to do that and the guy was like 3meters away, anyway i've seen cops killing a guy who was trying to steal a random car in the US. It's sick how easy they would just fire at you. If some of you think it's normal you're simply out of your mind. You're on drugs bro. Shoot him in the freaking leg?!? Really? Pepper spray and a tazor don't work so lets try putting a small hole in his leg and hope that prevents him from bashing my face in. I sense an area of this world needs to let go of their "no one deserves to die" attitude. People who try to kill you for no reason deserve to die. | ||
|
stratmatt
United States913 Posts
On January 26 2012 05:54 FT628 wrote: Just from my personal perspective, it's not very often that I see a news report or video of US police using the correct level of force, but I do believe in this instance the officer who fired the shots reaction can be justified. If someone just tried to use lethal force on my partner I would definitely open fire. In this situation you know he has the intent to seriously harm / potentially kill, even disable such as blindness and other terrible afflictions I would never wish upon anyone. It is much better to be safe than sorry. especially when you don't know if he has a handgun or another weapon. imagine losing a friend and having to explain to their family that he died because you didn't fire another shot - it's a sad reality that people die this way, but you can't swing a weapon at an armed police officer and expect them to give you a slap on the wrist - if your going to attack someone you need to be prepared to die in my opinion... but that is just my thought on the situation. That's probably because cops doing a good job(which happens all the time) will never go viral the way cop brutality videos do. | ||
Myles
United States5162 Posts
On January 26 2012 05:53 WhiteDog wrote: If you are a young men and don't hate cops at least a little, then you are not living man. And i'm half serious. I'm normally quite critical of cops, but in this case the only thing I can say is that the second burst of fire may have been unnecessary. But even then, we can't see if the guy was reaching for anything or anything else he may have been doing. | ||
|
Tula
Austria1544 Posts
On January 26 2012 05:46 WhiteDog wrote: I will always be amazed at people justifying that kind of thing. At least I can understand the police officer, he is most likely a guy that has a boring life at work (because that's the reality of the police), never get his pistol out, never fire it except in training. Then one day, for no reason, he find a crazy guy with a crowbar and can't face the situation in any way except shotting the guy 10 times despite the fact that he could have put him in check or even kill him with 1 or 2 shots (not to mention the dog lol). But that's not rational, because in the action it's really hard to be rationnal. Now when a young kid, who has never been in any tough situation in his life come in a forum and say the crowbar kid had what he deserved... then that's just being plain stupid. Did you even watch the video? It seems pretty clear that 2 different officers fired the two salvos. They very clearly tried to solve the situation differently. Were mistakes made? Yes, the 2nd officer should not have taken his eyes of the suspect. Was the shooting justified? Hell yes. If you attack (or convincingly threaten to attack) an officer of the law with a deadly weapon they have every right to defend themselves. Your entire post reeks of ignorance. You have no idea how police officers are trained, or how you instinctively react in such a situation. Yes it would be better if you didn't mention the dog, since you obviously have no idea about the role dogs play in police action. The dog was a severe handicap for the police in the situation, but they can't magically clap their hands and he is back in his kennel... Releasing him on an armed suspect is both against procedure as well as flat out idiotic. Until the point where the subject started posturing to attack (about 0.5s before the first shot is fired), the entire situation looked like a routine arrest of a pretty drugged out person. There was no indication he would suddenly turn around and decide to commit suicide by cop. So you are saying they should have released the dog as a just in case measure, to attack someone who had up to that point not done anything present a clear risk of life and limb, that would have gone over swell... | ||
|
ZasZ.
United States2911 Posts
On January 26 2012 05:53 WhiteDog wrote: If you are a young men and don't hate cops at least a little, then you are not living man. And i'm half serious. lolwut? I'm all for bending some of the laws that I think are silly are stupid, but they're not of the sort that will get me involved with cops. If you hate cops, then it sounds like you're committing felonies, and if that's your idea of "living" then so be it I guess. And way to make the suspect look like a victim here. If he was "just a kid" he wouldn't have been hopped up on narcotics, vandalizing public property, and attempting to kill officers of the law. | ||
|
Tula
Austria1544 Posts
On January 26 2012 02:09 maartendq wrote: Perhaps you should go tell that to the Japanese police. Those guys are trained intensively in abovementioned martial arts, and then some. What people don't seem to realize is that these martial arts were once rather effective on battlefields, when people were swinging swords, daggers and whatnot at your face. Those arts were used by people whose job it was to kill others. They have enormous potential but you need to TRAIN yourself (and stop looking at silly youtube videos). Of course, in an age where every other Joe invents his own training system because he thinks he's awesome, good and experienced teachers are few and far between. Actually, it wouldn't be bad if those schools were attacked by others once in a while to test how good they were, but we like to believe we're more civilized nowadays. It would be ironic that martial arts that were once known for their battlefield effectiveness would advise you to "run away" when somone produces a knife, wouldn't it, especially since both have quite a few disarmament techniques in their repertoire. I'm not saying that extensive martial arts training should replace guns, batons or tazers (though I consider the latter to be way too prone to abuse to be allowed to be legal), but they may give officers a healthy dose of confidence many of them seem to lack. while i agree to some extent you are missing some key aspects: 1) comparison to Japanese or any other police force needs to be made carefully. Yes they might be trained in this specific area, but such training doesn't just appear out of thin air. They have the specific cultural background which made it necessary that every police officer was trained such. Ours (meaning almost all western nations i can think of) don't train their rank and file in such a way. 2) Martial arts were seldom at best used against armed opponents by unarmed opponents. I am not sure where that missconception comes from, but most martial arts were developed either with weapons included, or after weapons fell out of widespread use. Historically almost every police force (or military force filling similar roles) employed a weapon which could be used with rudimentary training, because they did not have the time/money to train for 10 years to do their job. Clubs and batons, or halberds/spears were the standard equipment for quite a long time (centuries). 3) No matter the training, if you engage someone who has significant reach or better equipment you run risks. Maybe if the skill gap between two persons is big enough they can make up for those risks, but frankly it is not that hard to use a blunt weapon which is end heavy effectively. Most military forces train their soldiers to use their spade pretty effectively for very close quarter combat. The conduit bender in the video should definitly belong in the same category ("capable to inflict lethal wounds"). Is it possible to subdue such a person with martial arts or meele combat? Most definitly, but not after about 2 weeks of training. That is approximatly the time allotted to the hand to hand combat training of routine patrol officers. Most of that time is spent learning and practicing takedown moves and grapples to subdue people who are unarmed. Is that a mistake and too little? Maybe, but frankly meele combat is always a loose/loose proposition for police. You cannot judge a persons level of skill from the outside. You could try to arrest and resist a run of the mill gangbanger and suddenly find yourselve fighting someone who is a MMA fighter of prodigious skill. That is exactly the reason why police don't do that. Frankly i prefer tazers, those may carry some risks, but at least it doesn't mean our police will get beat up all the time. To the guy who wants to bring the idiotic pepper spray thing into this discussion, frankly leave it in its own thread. It has nothing to do with this situation. | ||
|
Leporello
United States2845 Posts
On January 26 2012 05:05 tjosan wrote: The guy smashed windows. He got shot. What were his options? He could run away and perhaps smash another window on the way... the reason they shouldn't have engaged is the same reason why you don't chase cars regardless of the situation - because it can put people in danger. That's really more disturbing than the rest. Those shots were in the direction of a populated street. If moving in close in that situation so they were forced to fire in self defense isn't reckless endangerment I don't know what is. Another good point not mentioned enough. I love how everyone just assumes that cops can't be expected to shoot with enough accuracy to hit arms or legs..... but they have enough accuracy to rapid-fire in the direction of a public street without hitting anyone? Derp. The cops were on one side of him... why didn't they contain him at least a little? Why wasn't one cop somewhere to the other side of the perp? Why didn't they maximize their distance between themselves and the perp, since there aren't any civilians between them? Why is the one cop holding the gun horizontally, like he's a "gangsta", completely without training? Why are there two volleys of five bullets, with little time inbetween to reassess the situation? Really, this cop is clearly not showing good judgment in a wide variety of ways. And someone died as a direct result of his incompetence, but apparently that's okay because he's a criminal. **** this country, people here are just so numb to this crap, and actually seek to justify it. Sorry, but I want our police to be better than this. | ||
|
Kojak21
Canada1104 Posts
| ||
|
Leporello
United States2845 Posts
On January 26 2012 06:53 Kojak21 wrote: oh my god, you mean a cop wasnt perfect? i always thought they were robots Perfection=/=competency. No one is arguing for perfection. | ||
|
Uracil
Germany422 Posts
On January 26 2012 06:12 Tula wrote: while i agree to some extent you are missing some key aspects: 1) comparison to Japanese or any other police force needs to be made carefully. Yes they might be trained in this specific area, but such training doesn't just appear out of thin air. They have the specific cultural background which made it necessary that every police officer was trained such. Ours (meaning almost all western nations i can think of) don't train their rank and file in such a way. I don't know about all western nations but at least the german police force is trained in martial art. It's a special form of martial art designed for police work. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_Ju-Jutsu | ||
|
Traeon
Austria366 Posts
On January 26 2012 06:53 Kojak21 wrote: oh my god, you mean a cop wasnt perfect? i always thought they were robots This is just asking for a cool head and some common sense, not perfection. | ||
|
fenix404
United States305 Posts
On January 25 2012 05:18 iNcontroL wrote: excessive? Police are supposed to shoot to kill.. it isn't like he reloaded and unloaded on the guy again. If a cop EVER shoots it's not to stop or slow down someone or something.. it's to kill him. this. when you are taught to shoot, you are taught, shot once, check target, shoot one more, check target (obviously quickly), then empty the clip. while i do think they could maybe have taken out his legs or something, a crowbar can do a lot of damage. my only complaint here is it's melee weapon vs gun... and while i feel most police go for the excessive side more quickly, it appears that guy w/ the crowbar must not have thought this through at all... (and it is THEIR lives on the line, regardless of the situation. the police have families, too) | ||
|
Believer
Sweden212 Posts
On January 25 2012 05:18 iNcontroL wrote: excessive? Police are supposed to shoot to kill.. it isn't like he reloaded and unloaded on the guy again. If a cop EVER shoots it's not to stop or slow down someone or something.. it's to kill him. I sincerely hope that this is trolling or some sort of humour I don't understand. I still respect you as a player though. I myself believe that this is completely unjustified and horrible, these officers (both of them) should be stripped of their badges and sent to court. It can never be justified to kill another person unless it is a completely vital situation, this was not. One shot to the leg would have stopped the suspect in his tracks and left the other officer backing further off and regaining control of the situation. Edit: Removed unnecessary profanity. | ||
|
AttackZerg
United States7454 Posts
Every shot fired while the suspect was still standing was fully justified. If you attack men with guns, and your unarmed you die. The end. | ||
| ||
