• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Police shoot and kill unarmed man in New York

Status
Not open for further replies.

KDR_11k

Member
I kinda doubt he just backed off after smashing the radio over their heads so the officers were still in a brawl, possibly dazed from being hit in the head. I don't expect much of a calm response in that situation.

What kind of logic is this? Other countries can afford it do America can as well? Do I really have to explain to you that different countries have different financial situations? That America has more police than any other country. Not to mention Cities within Counties within States have different budgets and revenue.

America is effin' rich compared to most countries. You're talking like other countries don't have bankrupt/heavily indebted cities or counties. It's just a matter of prioritization. America can manage top level university education, I'm sure it can manage police education as well.
 

SapientWolf

Trucker Sexologist
How long is the training period to become a police officer in the US?
Should be at least 2-3 years and I don't think its to much to ask for police officers who can hit a leg from a few meters away.
Or even better: Police officers who are able to stay calm and assess situations the right way, like this american police officer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ysGtZdeZT0k
He could've easily shot the guy. The guy had his hands in his pockets acting like he had a gun, he was charging at the officer, he even pushed the officer to the ground. Shooting him would've been viewed justified. But thats not the police work we want. What the officer did is the police work we want.



I doubt that has anything to do with how strong a country is. Generally countries don't interfere much with other countries internal problems.
Shooting under stress is difficult, even for a well trained individual. Center of mass is the most reliable tactic so that's what they're trained to do. Plus, even shots to the legs can be lethal, so if lethal force is not justified then the officer should not be using his firearm at all.
 

minx

Member
Maybe the US should re-evaluate its priorities then. If a country like the US can't afford to train its police force properly somethings wrong.




Most of the cases we see on a daily basis show that badly trained police officers are the problem. Not highly aggressive criminals with weapons.
Cases like the one of Eric Garner, or the recent one were Walter Scott was shot have nothing to do with the gun problem.

If anything, the fact that everybody in the US potentially carries a gun is another reason to improve training for police men.

I agree more training is needed. It's just not as simple is that.

The best training is interactive videos including areas ala Men in Black. Unfortunately hardly any departments can afford something like that.
 

DeathyBoy

Banned
Other countries can afford it, the US should be able to afford it, too.
Training takes 2.5 - 3 years in germany, for example.


Works in other countries, why can't american officers do it?

It works in films, because films are bullshit. In real life, if you can even get a 'clean shot' off, chances are an artery will be hit. And then that person is going to bleed to death unless the cops know how to stem the flow of an arterial bleed, which isn't a guarantee. Not to mention the fact that getting a single accurate shot FROM A HANDGUN at medium to far range is extremely difficult.
 

RS4-

Member
Police Officers are trained to only use their guns on extreme situations, so aiming for legs can be deadly for police officers or innocents they are trying to protect, as it requires more precision and time

Cops are shooting at people for giving them the wrong look. Possibly breathing.
 
I agree more training is needed. It's just not as simple is that.

The best training is interactive videos including areas ala Men in Black. Unfortunately hardly any departments can afford something like that.

That's a case of priorities for the richest country in the world. That training is not a priority despite the huge amount of dead people, well, what are we to think about that?
 

lednerg

Member
What.

I mean, American cops maybe, but Americans in general?

As long as there are voices being broadcast from America to the world justifying this sort of behavior, then that's what's going to be perceived as the American attitude in general. When an American jury saw fit to justify George Zimmerman shooting an unarmed teen during a fist fight; that became a part of who we are as a people. Same is true here. This dude was shot dead by an officer of the law for assault via walkie talkie?... Oh well, that's those Americans for you. They shoot first and think later.
 

Nightbird

Member
It works in films, because films are bullshit. In real life, if you can even get a 'clean shot' off, chances are an artery will be hit. And then that person is going to bleed to death unless the cops know how to stem the flow of an arterial bleed, which isn't a guarantee. Not to mention the fact that getting a single accurate shot FROM A HANDGUN at medium to far range is extremely difficult.

So no different from the current Situation then? Because shooting a Lung or the Heart doesn't sound much safer, and yet this is what Cops do when aiming at the Torso.
 

geardo

Member
I guessing you aren't from the USA based on your comments. Who is going to pay for 2-3 years of training for officers? Most cities and States don't have enough money to even buy officers their uniforms, firearm, and equipment.

Also guessing you have never shot a pistol at a small moving target in a high stress scenario. This isn't the movies. Aiming for the legs is not a realistic scenario.

Yes, aiming at the legs is unrealistic, but training officers to deescalate a situation instead of using lethal force isn't some impossible thing.

The federal government, instead of handing out grants for surplus military equipment, should offer grants for better training.
 

MikeyB

Member
It's not unheard of for health care workers to be assaulted like this (it's even more comparable if the man was mentally ill). Would they also be justified in shooting a patient who became violent? If not, what's the difference?
 
Another day another innocent man slaughtered by Police. Unless he was armed and dangerous the Police had no right to kill him.
 

YoungHav

Banned
Can we just officially have the law changed? Anything above a citation and a ticket, police officers should be able to slay you like the knights in Oblivion. It should be applied fairly to all.

My 5'2" female cousin worked in a halfway house and had to deal with violent wards. She handled herself somehow, all this time she should have just been killing folks to make room for new wards.
 

DeathyBoy

Banned
So no different from the current Situation then? Because shooting a Lung or the Heart doesn't sound much safer, and yet this is what Cops do when aiming at the Torso.

Exactly. It doesn't change anything. But the argument for 'shoot the leg' is that it'd be a magical wound that would have no permanent effects. Which is absolute bollocks.
 

onken

Member
Better hire those Swedish Police Officers.

You can deal with violent persons without pulling the gun

3451_1.jpg
 
I don't understand why lethal force is so favourable when someone is violent. I'm not American so I don't have the same understanding of the police force there but where I'm from lethal force is only used when lives are in imminent danger - someone being violent does not make another civilian's life or an officer's life in immediate danger. Part of police training is assessing a situation and making the correct choice and not necessarily the easiest choice to diffuse a situation.

A while back a German police officer stopped a deranged man that had a machete + rifle that was approaching him and causing havoc, the officer shot him in the legs to incapacitate since there's no reason to take lethal action. It's all in the difference of police training.
 

dork

Banned
If the story is true then the man hit the officers with the radio and caused it to break. I would take that, if it was me, as trying to kill me so the shot seems justified if from a fear perspective.
Agreed. You don't know what he woulda done next if that woulda knocked one of them out.
 
Shooting under stress is difficult, even for a well trained individual. Center of mass is the most reliable tactic so that's what they're trained to do. Plus, even shots to the legs can be lethal, so if lethal force is not justified then the officer should not be using his firearm at all.

Nobody said beeing a police officer will be an easy task. Of course there will be difficult situation, but the highest priority should always be the citizens safety, no matter if innocent citizens or suspect of crime.
Of course a shot to the legs can be lethal, too. But thats a lot less likely than a shot in the chest, so its worth going that route.



I agree more training is needed. It's just not as simple is that.

The best training is interactive videos including areas ala Men in Black. Unfortunately hardly any departments can afford something like that.
I'm sure it won't be simple, but I think spending a lot of money to have a capable police force is money well spent.

I mean look at that: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KUdHIatS36A
There is money, but its spent on the wrong things. Especially 10:53... a small town in georgia has a fucking tank.



It works in films, because films are bullshit. In real life, if you can even get a 'clean shot' off, chances are an artery will be hit. And then that person is going to bleed to death unless the cops know how to stem the flow of an arterial bleed, which isn't a guarantee. Not to mention the fact that getting a single accurate shot FROM A HANDGUN at medium to far range is extremely difficult.
Cops should know a lot about first aid and medical treatment and the should have basic medical equipment in their car.

I just don't get why we have to find all kinds of excuses why these problems can't be worked on.
Of course the US is different than Norway or Sweden or the UK or Germany, but that doesn't mean that there isn't a lot of room for improvement in the US.

There are stories coming out of the US on a daily basis that would cause a huge scandal and weeks of political debates in other countries, and in the US people just shrug their shoulders and act like there is nothing that can be done.
There is at least some talk about racist background in these cases, and I'm not saying that not a problem but in my opinion poorly trained cops are the much bigger problem.

I'm also wondering why cops themself don't speak up. Because these incidents make it harder for the good cops to do their jobs because citizens become more hostile around cops, less trust etc.
And afterall things get safer for the cop, too when he is trained better.



I don't live in the US, I have family living there but I haven't been living there myself, so my opinion on the police over there isn't first hand, but from what I've seen and heard I think there is a lot that can be improved.
I live in munich and a friend of mine is police officer here. Each year during Oktoberfest there are police exchanges happening. Mainly officers from other european countries coming over to help the german officers at Oktoberfest, since there are a lot of foreign visitors its always good to have officers who speak their language fluently.
There also are some american officers and they always say that its a very valuable lesson to see policework in different countries. I think countries can learn a lot from each other. If you want to improve its always a smart thing to ask other parties for tips. Not only when it comes to policeforce but also healthcare and other issues.

German government recently sent a delagation to canada to learn about their immigration policies. Stuff like that should happen more often.
 

Randam

Member
You don't consider somebody (who you know has a history of violence) beating you over the head with intent as a violent act?

I think they had the right to defend themselves, even if the gun was a step too far.

I don't consider someone beating me, even if it is with a walkie talkie as "trying to kill me".




if this continues, people will start to say, it was justified to shot him in the back, he could have ran home, to get something to kill me with.
 

Patrol

Banned
Both officers went to the hospital with injuries to their head - that tells me GBI was at play; thus, justifiable use of force. Fighting and struggling for a full five minutes is an insanely long time. I hope both officers make a full recovery.
 
If the story is true then the man hit the officers with the radio and caused it to break. I would take that, if it was me, as trying to kill me so the shot seems justified if from a fear perspective.

My nephew hit me on the head with a toy truck once that broke, so I killed him ... his mother said I did the right thing in fear.
 

Enzom21

Member
Not remotely the same and you know that. Nice try.



The very first thing most officers go for isn't their gun. The headlines are only when an officer shoots an unarmed black male. No one is interested when a criminal resists arrest and attacks the officer while the officer then apprehends the criminal using proper use of force. Happens too many times a day to be notable. We don't know exactly how this scenario went down to know if it was a last resort. Body cameras would help and they are coming at an accelerated rate.
Why should cops doing their jobs correctly get the same media coverage as a cop shooting an unarmed black male? Cops having to deal with difficult suspects is part of the job, killing unarmed black males is not. It is disturbing that you compared the two.
 

jond76

Banned
It's not unheard of for health care workers to be assaulted like this (it's even more comparable if the man was mentally ill). Would they also be justified in shooting a patient who became violent? If not, what's the difference?

Can we just officially have the law changed? Anything above a citation and a ticket, police officers should be able to slay you like the knights in Oblivion. It should be applied fairly to all.

My 5'2" female cousin worked in a halfway house and had to deal with violent wards. She handled herself somehow, all this time she should have just been killing folks to make room for new wards.

The difference is that a cop is armed and your cousin is not. If your cousin gets knocked out, others will run in and subdue an unarmed person. If the cop gets knocked out, you suddenly have an armed suspect.

You have to assume in this scenario that if the guy smashes you over the head and knocks you out, then he will take your gun and kill you whoever else he can. So if you are getting smashed, you have a brief moment to to prevent a disaster.
 

zeemumu

Member
There are a lot of Straw Man arguments going on in here.

Yes, there are non-lethal ways to deal with this.

No, no one is openly inviting the idea of shooting every person who hits you.

That said, cops should have better training to act under pressure so they don't think "I'm about to die, better pull out the gun" when they take a police radio to the head. It doesn't make anyone feel safe when a cop loses their cool as easily as another person because they're supposed to be more disciplined than that.
 

lednerg

Member
The difference is that a cop is armed and your cousin is not. If your cousin gets knocked out, others will run in and subdue an unarmed person. If the cop gets knocked out, you suddenly have an armed suspect.

You have to assume in this scenario that if the guy smashes you over the head and knocks you out, then he will take your gun and kill you whoever else he can. So if you are getting smashed, you have a brief moment to to prevent a disaster.

You realize there is a solution to this problem, right? One that is used in the majority of the civilized world.
 

Rafy

Member
What happened to kneecapping people, or other non-lethal takedown methods for that matter? Batons don't exist for the sole purpose of beating protesters.
 

antonz

Member
What is up with all the shit posts in here?


Yes people. If your head is getting bashed in with an object Police Officer or not you are justified to use deadly force in protection of your own personal well being.
 

lednerg

Member
What is up with all the shit posts in here?


Yes people. If your head is getting bashed in with an object Police Officer or not you are justified to use deadly force in protection of your own personal well being.

In America as it is now for reasons.
 

entremet

Member
What happened to kneecapping people, or other non-lethal takedown methods for that matter? Batons don't exist for the sole purpose of beating protesters.

Really hard to make judgment like this without video on the incident or knowing about how police are trained.

The fact that he went for their walkie talkies meant he could've easily went for their guns.

A bigger discussion is the poor state of mental health treatment as this man was obviously unstable.
 

Lothar

Banned
This is a really horrendous title. It makes it seem like the police were doing something wrong by not saying what the unarmed man was doing.
 

braves01

Banned
If he hit them with a radio, I think that would make him technically armed, no? Regardless, the thread title omits material information and is misleading.
 

Defuser

Member
Cop get hit in the head, gets fucking pissed,pulls out a gun to kill.

Sounds like this cop needs to check in the halfway house instead.
 

Scrooged

Totally wronger about Nintendo's business decisions.
You could also, you know, retreat. Or use the non lethal weapon at your disposal. Or work to de-escalate the situation to begin with.

The guy could have grabbed the officer's gun and used it himself. He was unhinged and showed signs that he would do anything in his power to resist arrest.

As long as police have guns they will be used if they feel their lives are at stake. Simple as that.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom