|
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. |
I'm extremely confused by the people advocating a debilitating shot.
First off they are against the use of deadly force when an officers life is in danger, yet they would risk the death of a noncompliant suspect prior to him attacking the officer. They say shoot him in the leg while he is stumbling toward him. Besides being unrealistic and far more dangerous to bystanders(legs move A LOT), they are saying to shoot(Use Deadly Force) against a suspect that has only been ignoring instructions. Also a shot to leg is not guaranteed to bring someone down unless you shatter a bone or hit a tendon.
Another thing is that people can take a surprising amount shots (from small arms) while staying upright provided they are hyped up on adrenaline or drugs. Obviously the massive trauma and blood loss will bring them down quickly, but not immediately. If I am wrong about this correct me, as this part of my post is just hearsay from a large number of people over the years.
On January 26 2012 08:59 Flonomenalz wrote:
You guys are talking about general police scenarios like that's what I care about.
I don't care about what cops are taught.
I'm talking about a police officer aiming at an individual within 6 or so feet, you're telling me it's unrealistic to expect that he could have shot at his leg, arm, or shot less than 5 bullets in his CoM, and that in the 4 seconds that the guy turned around and showed intent to swing, he could not have released the dog. Being trained to shoot on instinct rather than being trained to quickly evaluate scenarios or have good aim... so many flaws with the situation and the system.
Ricocheting and hitting a bystander when there wasn't a bystander within 40 feet.
You do know that a bullet can be deadly from up to a mile away? Obviously a ricochet is going to lose some momentum, but it isn't stretching by any means to say that it could kill someone 500 feet away.
|
On January 26 2012 08:59 Flonomenalz wrote:
You guys are talking about general police scenarios like that's what I care about.
I don't care about what cops are taught.
I'm talking about a police officer aiming at an individual within 6 or so feet, you're telling me it's unrealistic to expect that he could have shot at his leg, arm, or shot less than 5 bullets in his CoM, and that in the 4 seconds that the guy turned around and showed intent to swing, he could not have released the dog. Being trained to shoot on instinct rather than being trained to quickly evaluate scenarios or have good aim... so many flaws with the situation and the system.
Ricocheting and hitting a bystander when there wasn't a bystander within 40 feet.
I cannot even continue, enjoy your day, gentlemen.
well there is one person who hasn't learned a thing from this thread.
I am sorry that you refuse to believe the reality of the situation, I truly am, but it changes literally nothing.
It is not unrealistic to shoot less than 5 bullets, but it is also not what he was trained for.
Frankly the amount of fallacities and ignorance in your post makes me weep.
I hope you never come close to any weapon in your life, and I also hope the police worldwide never tries to do what you are suggesting they do. Because if they did we would have a different tragedy to discuss ("3 bystanders shot by missing bullets""police officer XY killed in action, partner missed the subjects arm")
|
On January 26 2012 09:06 ChronicleEU wrote:
@JinDesu
Please, as you can see from my displayed Country (Germany), english is not my native language, could please use a little less... "practicale" english? xD' I don't really understand the whole meaning of your post, sorry.
Ah sorry, the general meaning of my post is to say that it's not so easy to disable someone wielding a weapon (agreeing with you original post)
|
On January 26 2012 08:59 Flonomenalz wrote:
You guys are talking about general police scenarios like that's what I care about.
I don't care about what cops are taught.
I'm talking about a police officer aiming at an individual within 6 or so feet, you're telling me it's unrealistic to expect that he could have shot at his leg, arm, or shot less than 5 bullets in his CoM, and that in the 4 seconds that the guy turned around and showed intent to swing, he could not have released the dog. Being trained to shoot on instinct rather than being trained to quickly evaluate scenarios or have good aim... so many flaws with the situation and the system.
Ricocheting and hitting a bystander when there wasn't a bystander within 40 feet.
I cannot even continue, enjoy your day, gentlemen.
1) You seem to think that shooting handguns is easier than it really is.
http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2008/05/08/nyregion/08nypdgraphic.ready.html
Typically TRAINED officers only hit their target ~ 1/3 of the time. This hit rate would decline tremendously if the officer was to quickly change their target (from chest to leg) and have to re-aim.
2) Quickly evaluating the scenario is difficult when the scenario is constantly changing and there is a person involved who is acting in an irrational manner. Watching the video over and over again you KNOW what's going to happen but in R/L you have just a couple seconds to react.
|
On January 26 2012 08:25 Flonomenalz wrote:Show nested quote +On January 26 2012 08:18 DoubleReed wrote:On January 26 2012 08:03 Flonomenalz wrote:
Wow this thread is ridiculous.
All I have to say is if you think the cop couldn't have shot him in the leg, arm, or even just let the dog on him to subdue him/scare him, you need a new set of eyes. Yes, cops are supposed to do their job, but the guy had no firearm, he had a fucking crowbar. A crowbar.
Gotta love the hardasses saying "Lol derp shoot to kill". Sure, when the criminal is actually posing a lethal threat. Winding up to swing a crowbar against multiple cops with fully loaded guns and a dog is not a lethal threat. Awful decision, but what's done is done, a guy is dead for trying to swing a crowbar. Yea a fucking crowbar. Do you understand how much damage you can deal to a person with a crowbar? It wasn't a pillow. A single swing from a crowbar can seriously maim someone. The hell is wrong with you? I've never ever heard of a police force that shoots people for the intent of slowing them down. I've got to be honest, that sounds pretty weird to me. There are stun guns for that sort of thing. They used nonlethal force, and when it didn't work, and the man attacked him, they reacted accordingly. Oh yeah, because Cop #1 can't use his legs and move away when he sees the guy winding up to swing the crowbar, while Cop #2 shoots the guy in the leg, he goes down, problem solved.
That's way too much trouble though, it's much easier to shoot him 20 times. Yea, they should just reload the game and do that. Seriously, what the hell? The guy was about to strike him with a crowbar. If he hadn't shot, the other officer would probably have been seriously injured. Did you SEE the wind up the guy had with the crowbar? Like, he literally was winding up for almost 2-3 seconds.
There wasn't even a windup. The man postured himself in a threatening position but didn't actually move to swing at all.
|
On January 26 2012 09:10 JinDesu wrote:Show nested quote +On January 26 2012 09:06 ChronicleEU wrote:
@JinDesu
Please, as you can see from my displayed Country (Germany), english is not my native language, could please use a little less... "practicale" english? xD' I don't really understand the whole meaning of your post, sorry. Ah sorry, the general meaning of my post is to say that it's not so easy to disable someone wielding a weapon (agreeing with you original post)
Ah, thank you for explaining ^^
And to say it again (not for you):
Just because the K9 was present, doesn't mean he had to be used.
As often said befor, the actual situations K9's are used for are chasing fleeing criminals, restraining UNARMED criminals, restraining criminals which hide in places unable to be easly accessed or finding drugs.
It is by NO MEANS trained and intended to enter combat with armed criminals who are NOT feeling. period
|
On January 26 2012 09:15 Stratos_speAr wrote:Show nested quote +On January 26 2012 08:25 Flonomenalz wrote:On January 26 2012 08:18 DoubleReed wrote:On January 26 2012 08:03 Flonomenalz wrote:
Wow this thread is ridiculous.
All I have to say is if you think the cop couldn't have shot him in the leg, arm, or even just let the dog on him to subdue him/scare him, you need a new set of eyes. Yes, cops are supposed to do their job, but the guy had no firearm, he had a fucking crowbar. A crowbar.
Gotta love the hardasses saying "Lol derp shoot to kill". Sure, when the criminal is actually posing a lethal threat. Winding up to swing a crowbar against multiple cops with fully loaded guns and a dog is not a lethal threat. Awful decision, but what's done is done, a guy is dead for trying to swing a crowbar. Yea a fucking crowbar. Do you understand how much damage you can deal to a person with a crowbar? It wasn't a pillow. A single swing from a crowbar can seriously maim someone. The hell is wrong with you? I've never ever heard of a police force that shoots people for the intent of slowing them down. I've got to be honest, that sounds pretty weird to me. There are stun guns for that sort of thing. They used nonlethal force, and when it didn't work, and the man attacked him, they reacted accordingly. Oh yeah, because Cop #1 can't use his legs and move away when he sees the guy winding up to swing the crowbar, while Cop #2 shoots the guy in the leg, he goes down, problem solved.
That's way too much trouble though, it's much easier to shoot him 20 times. Yea, they should just reload the game and do that. Seriously, what the hell? The guy was about to strike him with a crowbar. If he hadn't shot, the other officer would probably have been seriously injured. Did you SEE the wind up the guy had with the crowbar? Like, he literally was winding up for almost 2-3 seconds. There wasn't even a windup. The man postured himself in a threatening position but didn't actually move to swing at all.
Thank you, you just said it yourself: threatening position!
Once you pose a threat to the life of a civilan or fellow teammate, measures to completly stop your threat will be taken, that's it.
If you don't want to get shot: don't pose a threat.
|
I can't believe some of you are still arguing that the cops are in the wrong. You don't dick around with someone with a weapon. If he threatens someone with it, you eliminate him. That's it. There's no bullshit about shooting him in the arm or leg, you just stop him, and that's what the cops did.
|
@IMoperator:
I would like to point out that you don't "eliminate someone" but you try to "stop the threat" someone poses. It may sound the same, but it isn't.
|
On January 26 2012 09:15 Stratos_speAr wrote:Show nested quote +On January 26 2012 08:25 Flonomenalz wrote:On January 26 2012 08:18 DoubleReed wrote:On January 26 2012 08:03 Flonomenalz wrote:
Wow this thread is ridiculous.
All I have to say is if you think the cop couldn't have shot him in the leg, arm, or even just let the dog on him to subdue him/scare him, you need a new set of eyes. Yes, cops are supposed to do their job, but the guy had no firearm, he had a fucking crowbar. A crowbar.
Gotta love the hardasses saying "Lol derp shoot to kill". Sure, when the criminal is actually posing a lethal threat. Winding up to swing a crowbar against multiple cops with fully loaded guns and a dog is not a lethal threat. Awful decision, but what's done is done, a guy is dead for trying to swing a crowbar. Yea a fucking crowbar. Do you understand how much damage you can deal to a person with a crowbar? It wasn't a pillow. A single swing from a crowbar can seriously maim someone. The hell is wrong with you? I've never ever heard of a police force that shoots people for the intent of slowing them down. I've got to be honest, that sounds pretty weird to me. There are stun guns for that sort of thing. They used nonlethal force, and when it didn't work, and the man attacked him, they reacted accordingly. Oh yeah, because Cop #1 can't use his legs and move away when he sees the guy winding up to swing the crowbar, while Cop #2 shoots the guy in the leg, he goes down, problem solved.
That's way too much trouble though, it's much easier to shoot him 20 times. Yea, they should just reload the game and do that. Seriously, what the hell? The guy was about to strike him with a crowbar. If he hadn't shot, the other officer would probably have been seriously injured. Did you SEE the wind up the guy had with the crowbar? Like, he literally was winding up for almost 2-3 seconds. There wasn't even a windup. The man postured himself in a threatening position but didn't actually move to swing at all.
So police are suppose to react post threat to life and limb?, so if a person points a gun at an officer he's just threating, he may or may not be pulling the trigger obviously an officer should wait and see. That is what you're essentially saying, that holding a weaponing and threating with it does not diverse swift rebuke. The point is that the weapon is large enough to cause serious bodily harm, just because it's not a long sword of a gun doesn't make any less of a weapon. So threating an officer with it should end badly, just like it did.
|
On January 26 2012 08:51 DannyJ wrote:
This thread has been the same back and forth for the past 30 pages.
I agree they should just close this by now.
|
I think this is one of the more obvious shootings so far to call. He moves into position to strike one of the officers and is then shot down, the police that was targetted fires another 4-5 shots to make sure he goes down because he's still standing up. They were threatened by a deadly weapon and decided to eliminate the threat. I wouldn't even consider the last 4 shots excessive seeing how there was still risk he'd turn around for redemption and they had to think about their own safety first.
|
On January 26 2012 08:59 Flonomenalz wrote:
You guys are talking about general police scenarios like that's what I care about.
I don't care about what cops are taught.
I'm talking about a police officer aiming at an individual within 6 or so feet, you're telling me it's unrealistic to expect that he could have shot at his leg, arm, or shot less than 5 bullets in his CoM, and that in the 4 seconds that the guy turned around and showed intent to swing, he could not have released the dog. Being trained to shoot on instinct rather than being trained to quickly evaluate scenarios or have good aim... so many flaws with the situation and the system.
Ricocheting and hitting a bystander when there wasn't a bystander within 40 feet.
I cannot even continue, enjoy your day, gentlemen.
Uhh there were people all around, what are you talking about? the friggen camera guy was 20 feet away.
|
People seem to ignore the fact that when someone is defending the shot in the leg option, that shot is not supposed to take place when the "attacker" is at the point that he can reach you with the weapon. I remember similar situations i saw on Cops usually involving someone clearly desperate or mentally ill holding a knife where officers spend up to 5 minutes shouting at the him to drop the weapon while letting him walk around and eventually get closer to the officer up to the point where its very likely it can only end with one of them badly injured or death.
I think shooting someone in the legs can be a valid and better option in this situations, what i am not sure is if most officers can keep the composure needed to execute it well, even with proper training.
|
The policeman didnt react accordingly.
A warning shot or one shot at the limb or somewhere else then head or chest would have sufficed in my opinion.
The man, you cant even call him an attacker because he didnt attack anything was "armed" with a meele weapon and didnt pose a great threat at all.
Even if the man was dumb shooting him is even dumber.
Maybe he had a bad day because his girlfriend left him and was drunk and got shot because he caused a little trouble without actually harming anyone.
As long as he didnt harm anyone seriously or poses a serious threat you cant simply shoot someone ...
I would go so far as to say that if the man was able to shoot the policeman, the man would have acted in self defence because the policemen was a massive threat to his life. Even if some buystander would shoot the policeman after he had given of the first shot I would say he was defending a life.
A cop is only allowed to shoot someone like and citizen is allowed to shoot someone. If his life or that of others is seriously threatend and that was not the case.
You cant simply run around and shoot people with crowbars, baseball bats or what not if they dont pose a serious threat or if every other possible measure of resolving the situation has failed.
This Policemen should loose his job should not be allowed to carry a weapon ever again in his life and be imprisoned for some years. Also education standards and regulations for police should be improoved.
|
On January 26 2012 09:41 Holy_AT wrote:
The policeman didnt react accordingly.
A warning shot or one shot at the limb or somewhere else then head or chest would have sufficed in my opinion.
The man, you cant even call him an attacker because he didnt attack anything was "armed" with a meele weapon and didnt pose a great threat at all.
Even if the man was dumb shooting him is even dumber.
Maybe he had a bad day because his girlfriend left him and was drunk and got shot because he caused a little trouble without actually harming anyone.
As long as he didnt harm anyone seriously or poses a serious threat you cant simply shoot someone ...
I would go so far as to say that if the man was able to shoot the policeman, the man would have acted in self defence because the policemen was a massive threat to his life. Even if some buystander would shoot the policeman after he had given of the first shot I would say he was defending a life.
A cop is only allowed to shoot someone like and citizen is allowed to shoot someone. If his life or that of others is seriously threatend and that was not the case.
You cant simply run around and shoot people with crowbars, baseball bats or what not if they dont pose a serious threat or if every other possible measure of resolving the situation has failed.
This Policemen should loose his job should not be allowed to carry a weapon ever again in his life and be imprisoned for some years. Also education standards and regulations for police should be improoved.
I'm sorry, but after 73 pages of people like you being refuted, I'm forced to believe that you are 100% without a doubt, completely clueless, and oblivious to your surroundings. Go read the thread very very carefully. And then stop and think about it for a day. Sleep on it if necessary....But what you said makes absolutely no sense at all, and only goes to show that you did not read a single post that anyone has made in this entire thread.
|
Shooting at arms and legs might not be the best idea, when a victim is coming at you in baggy sweatpants and a sweatshirt from 5 feet away while swinging a crowbar it wouldn't be hard to miss the arms and the legs, possibly just shooting through the victims clothes if you even hit him, while missing the actual limbs.
|
Completely justifiable. What is sad about this is that the guy looked like he was faking swinging the crowbar. Unfortunately for him, that makes this a justifiable shooting. The cops felt like they were being threatened.
|
On January 26 2012 09:15 Stratos_speAr wrote:Show nested quote +On January 26 2012 08:25 Flonomenalz wrote:On January 26 2012 08:18 DoubleReed wrote:On January 26 2012 08:03 Flonomenalz wrote:
Wow this thread is ridiculous.
All I have to say is if you think the cop couldn't have shot him in the leg, arm, or even just let the dog on him to subdue him/scare him, you need a new set of eyes. Yes, cops are supposed to do their job, but the guy had no firearm, he had a fucking crowbar. A crowbar.
Gotta love the hardasses saying "Lol derp shoot to kill". Sure, when the criminal is actually posing a lethal threat. Winding up to swing a crowbar against multiple cops with fully loaded guns and a dog is not a lethal threat. Awful decision, but what's done is done, a guy is dead for trying to swing a crowbar. Yea a fucking crowbar. Do you understand how much damage you can deal to a person with a crowbar? It wasn't a pillow. A single swing from a crowbar can seriously maim someone. The hell is wrong with you? I've never ever heard of a police force that shoots people for the intent of slowing them down. I've got to be honest, that sounds pretty weird to me. There are stun guns for that sort of thing. They used nonlethal force, and when it didn't work, and the man attacked him, they reacted accordingly. Oh yeah, because Cop #1 can't use his legs and move away when he sees the guy winding up to swing the crowbar, while Cop #2 shoots the guy in the leg, he goes down, problem solved.
That's way too much trouble though, it's much easier to shoot him 20 times. Yea, they should just reload the game and do that. Seriously, what the hell? The guy was about to strike him with a crowbar. If he hadn't shot, the other officer would probably have been seriously injured. Did you SEE the wind up the guy had with the crowbar? Like, he literally was winding up for almost 2-3 seconds. There wasn't even a windup. The man postured himself in a threatening position but didn't actually move to swing at all.
I saw a windup.
|
That other video posted with the traffic stop is so messed up. The scream and his gargled breathing than his breathing stopping as the guy took the last shot while yelling "Die mother fucker". I think i am scared for life thanks.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
