[Express]

Originally Posted by fatgrandma

A bunch of LAPTOP CEO'S insulting each other, because they have different opinions on a youtube video.

fixed it for ya

[ghosthi32]

Originally Posted by express705

fixed it for ya

[E90SoFlo]

Originally Posted by express705

fixed it for ya

id a mad bro because he isn't. lol

[import36]

Originally Posted by immiketoo

Ok, I've finished my doughnut and the renegade skateboard calls, so here goes. In a vaccuum (have not read any articles) it looks like a fully justified use of force. The guy looks to be carrying conduit bender and has already exhibited violent tendencies before police arrival.

Lethal force is justified to protect yourself or another from great bodily harm (GBH) or death. It is allowed BEFORE GBH, so the officer does not have the requirement to wait until the offender decides.

Also, in most TASER situations, there is a TASER officer and a lethal cover. Department policies and national best practices prevent having a TASER and a firearm out at the same time, so when the offender turned toward the TASER officer and shouldered the weapon, the lethal cover officer saw the threat and did his job.

The offender did not obey officer commands despite the display of a variety of weapon systems and then turned on an officer. Seems pretty cut and dry to me. Justified by all outward appearances.

To address those complaining about the number of shots: Once deadly force is justified, it is irrelevant how force is applied, whether it be gun, back hoe, or tire iron. While it is objectionable to many civilians, the number of rounds do not matter. We are trained to stop shooting once the threat is stopped. Apply the reasonable officer standard here. Was the 1.5 seconds from start to finish a reasonable amont of time to decide to make the biggest decision of your career, act on that thought, be concerned for stray rounds considering the number of civillian personnel standing around and then realize that the threat was over before emptying his weapon?

That's for the courts to decide, but based on my training and experience, that's how the trial will go down.

Now, could there have been a viable alternative to handling this? Perhaps, but its easy to pick it apart from behind our computers with varying degrees of bias and life experience.

/thread

[Beemw335]

Some people get really sensitive over this shit haha.
I wonder how many of you would have the same opinion if that was your kid in the video, who happened to have a drug problem and wasnt aware of what he was doing at the time. Knowing that an officer could have stopped him from causing harm to his partner and potentially saved his life, but instead wanted to make sure he was finished.

As for insulting, I did nothing but post my opinion until some hot shot police officer decided to insult me or doing so. Hos other thread on cops was closed for a reason, he takes this stuff too seriously/ sensitively.

[infinitekidM2C]

Originally Posted by import36

/thread

.

[ghosthi32]

Originally Posted by infinitekid2002

.

.

the noob needs to stop posting

[CollinsE90]

Originally Posted by Beemw335

Ya ya I know hes your buddy. Ive quoted him in other threads and have always been friendly.
I gave my opinion on the video and he called me an idiot, so I could care less about being "out of line".

He is SWAT in a very big city, he knows more on this topic than all of us and the officers in the video. SWAT trains extensively for stuff like this, exactly like this.

[Beemw335]

I know who he is, I can also he see threads lol
Anyways, that was my opinion just like uou all have your own opinions.
/thread

[!JGunz_325]

Always aim for center mass! Why do you think practice targets have a silhouette of a torso? I love it when people start saying what they would do in situations like this like they're Rambo or something, you never know how you're going to react until that moment's there.

[Templar]

Originally Posted by !JGunz_325

Always aim for center mass! Why do you think practice targets have a silhouette of a torso? I love it when people start saying what they would do in situations like this like they're Rambo or something, you never know how you're going to react until that moment's there.

More like elmer fudd!

[Kroy]

I don't think the cops were wrong to shoot the suspect. He was clearly unstable and was behaving in a very threatening manner. The fact he ripped the tazer off his face like it was a mosquito probably freaked everyone out too. I think the first set of shots fired upon him were completely justified; he earned those bullets with his actions/inaction.

I'll freely admit that there may have been more going on that I realize, but I don't agree with the latter 5 shots fired upon him when he was downed. Maybe Mike (or someone with more combat experience) can shed some light on how dangerous a downed man with 5 pieces of lead in him can be. I don't know if he was capable of swinging his weapon at that point. To my civilian self, he seemed incapacitated.

I agree it's the officer's duty to incapacitate him with lethal force; it's a fine line but not sure I can justify a police officer deciding to finish him off. Was the suspect shot in the chest/back once he was downed? I think I heard someone say he was shot in the back. I know you guys are arguing that once lethal force has been determined, it doesn't matter how many shots were fired. I may be wrong in my belief, but I feel once the suspect has been incapacitated, the officer's duty has been fulfilled. And in this case, wasn't it a 2nd officer that shot him on the ground?

I think the officer just got spooked and shot him; which is understandable. But from the video, I can't tell if it was justified. And for the record, I support the decision to shoot him; I'm just hung up on a technicality.

[The1]

Originally Posted by Kroy

I don't think the cops were wrong to shoot the suspect. He was clearly unstable and was behaving in a very threatening manner. The fact he ripped the tazer off his face like it was a mosquito probably freaked everyone out too. I think the first set of shots fired upon him were completely justified; he earned those bullets with his actions/inaction.

I'll freely admit that there may have been more going on that I realize, but I don't agree with the latter 5 shots fired upon him when he was downed. Maybe Mike (or someone with more combat experience) can shed some light on how dangerous a downed man with 5 pieces of lead in him can be. I don't know if he was capable of swinging his weapon at that point. To my civilian self, he seemed incapacitated.

I agree it's the officer's duty to incapacitate him with lethal force; it's a fine line but not sure I can justify a police officer deciding to finish him off. Was the suspect shot in the chest/back once he was downed? I think I heard someone say he was shot in the back. I know you guys are arguing that once lethal force has been determined, it doesn't matter how many shots were fired. I may be wrong in my belief, but I feel once the suspect has been incapacitated, the officer's duty has been fulfilled. And in this case, wasn't it a 2nd officer that shot him on the ground?

I think the officer just got spooked and shot him; which is understandable. But from the video, I can't tell if it was justified. And for the record, I support the decision to shoot him; I'm just hung up on a technicality.

my thought is that if he could rip the tazer out of his face, then if he survived the bullet shots, he probably barely felt them either. If he was on some major drugs that made him feel invincible, a couple bullets aren't going to keep him laying on the ground, if his back was to the cops, and he was trying to get back up, then they would need to use more force to keep him on the ground.

like i mentioned in a different post in this thread, once the guy was down behind the car that was interfering with our already shitty view, there's no telling what the guy was doing because we simply could not see him.

so anything we say or do is all speculation based on the fact that we really don't know.

this is why this thread has become useless and out of hand.

All that's happening is people are going to keep arguing these "non-facts" till everyone is pissed off and until the story is in the news, and even then, newspapers can be pretty inaccurate.

[The1]

plus, if i'm laying on my stomach, i can still swing my arm with something in it at somebody.

and maybe he was shot in the back because he was rolling over to get up and still showing signs of resisting.

again. If everyone keeps speculating, nothing is going to happen except people getting angry.

[ragingclue]

Originally Posted by Kroy

I don't know if he was capable of swinging his weapon at that point. To my civilian self, he seemed incapacitated.

If you don't know what kind of drugs he's on (if any), then there's no way to tell whether he's "done sir done". They way he brushed off the previous attempt at being subdued, I don't think it was inappropriate to assume there was potential the guy had something in his system. The insurgents used to pump themselves full of shit like adrenaline, amphetamines, PCP, and crack. It was as close to a zombie situation as you can get in real life. When someone's on that stuff, you never know when you've actually incapacitated them. It's scary. I'm not saying they should assume every perp is high on shit, I'm just saying after the previous events in this case, it had to be considered.

That's just my guess though. I'm no expert.

[The1]

Originally Posted by michaelthepsycho

I shoot plenty and nope, that situation was NOT justified. A melee weapon vs a firearm. Just step away. That many shot? Lol... At least the dead person won't be suing. Kind of like truck drivers backing up to run a wounded person over.

Let's see... If someone was holding a knife and you had a gun, would you CONTINUALLY get closer and closer? Because that's what the idiot cops were doing. You can tail him and keep a gun-ready range. That hammer's what? Five feet long? Then don't get within 10 feet of him... Unless you're that fat you can't dodge that. Don't be stupid. Always defending the police isn't fashionable or COOL or make you a good person. There are times when the police are right, this is not one of them.

how do you apprehend a perp from 10-15'? They move in closer and closer because they are trained to.

also the closer you are, the less likely you are to miss your target.

[Templar]

Originally Posted by The1

how do you apprehend a perp from 10-15'? They move in closer and closer because they are trained to.

also the closer you are, the less likely you are to miss your target.

Hey now, he said he shoots plenty so I am sure he is all knowing and the only subject matter expert on this point.

[The1]

Originally Posted by Templar

Hey now, he said he shoots plenty so I am sure he is all knowing and the only subject matter expert on this point.

lol.

Fire arm handling and law enforcement (gun or no gun) are different things, and i think people are missing that here...

oh well...

[Templar]

Originally Posted by The1

lol.

Fire arm handling and law enforcement (gun or no gun) are different things, and i think people are missing that here...

oh well...

Hit the nail on the head.

Shooting at a paper target in a controlled environment is pretty simple

[The1]

Originally Posted by Templar

Hit the nail on the head.

Shooting at a paper target in a controlled environment is pretty simple

I wouldn't know, never shot a gun, but from what everyone one here is saying, it sounds like it's almost as easy as walking.

[Kroy]

Yeah, I knew there was a lot I didn't consider. And I think that guy was high on something potent. Just wasn't sure how dangerous he could still be in the position that he was in, armed with a decent sized blunt instrument. Not sure how much strength someone in his position can have.

Doesn't getting shot weaken you? I never put myself in that position so I'm in the dark but I can only assume you can't move as well when your body is damaged by bullets.

I just want to know why cop2 decided to unload 5 more shots. I'd understand the situation more if cop 1 was the one that unloaded all 10 shots, but he stopped at 5.


What's that saying you always say around here, "Play stupid games, win stupid prizes." I think this was a perfect example.

[jlstyle]

Wow some people on this thread have really no idea.
Why not shoot on legs or arms? Haha.
You guys watched too many movies where people shoot on suspects' arm/legs in split second. Get real.
Imagine you being a police and there is this suspect with whatever weapon on his hand approaching you after you taze him. What would you do?
Would you just jump on him to subdue? shoot him carefully on his legs just to get him down so you don't kill him? Are you a chuck norris?
It's matter of danger involving death. One mad person can kill the other with plastic knife. It doesn't matter what kind of weapon he/she has, it's matter of his will.

You don't risk YOUR life for a criminal to save his life who is about to attack you.
Get real boys.