When the officer is to the side of the person, tazer isn't reliable at all.
Uh, so? If officer one tries a taser and misses with the smaller target or it doesn't work and officer two still ends up having to shoot him what's the problem?
Also too far for pepper spray, that wouldn't have been reliable at all.
Uh, so? Fuck it, why not, if you're just going to go and shoot the person otherwise might as well try it. :shrug: Who knows, right?
This person is already not complying with basic instructions, so enraging them with spray probably wouldn't have helped the situation.
Uh, so?
Look here. Your wording is fucking terrible. The end result was essentially putting down another human being like a dog and you say hitting them with pepper spray probably wouldn't have helped the situation. What situation? Shooting them? How could it hurt the "situation," assuming you mean keeping the person alive more than shooting them in the chest? This is INSANE.
Everywhere else you're like reliable this, reliable that, get this, nobody would give two shits if it was tried and didn't work and the end result was still this person dead. Wouldn't be a fucking issue outside of friends and family, everyone else would say they(the police) tried and carry on.
Do you not see the absurdity in this?
My guess, you're not going to be in a situation where you think it's reliable enough to be your first choice am I right? Probably have to be a naked handcuffed person lying face down on the ground before using a taser would be reliable enough to use.
The point is, is that as a cop you know in the end that you might have to shoot a person, right? So how is trying something that might not work worse than not trying at all and just shooting that person? You come up with all these excuses not to try something, for what? Why? Like I said, if they didn't work and they still had to shoot it is what it is.
This comes back to my previous question. One on one I get it. I wouldn't pull pepper spray or a taser first when responding to a call about an armed person I'd have my gun out too. I get it. Once more people show up though I'd feel like there were more opportunities to try something else. So why don't you? Is it because of your weapon's reliability, afraid everyone but you would miss or have their guns jam and the one person who tries an unreliable non-lethal use of force first was the only one who's weapon would have worked and hit the target?
So it comes back to my question of how many cops would it take before it's safe enough for them to try something unreliable? How many?
Now again, these guys apparently didn't have anything else so just did a poor job of stalling, or perhaps intentionally stopped stalling to purposefully end it.