jadedm17
Member
A bit much? Maybe. Do I really have sympathy to spare for this asshole? Not really.
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Don't bring a crowbar to a gunfight
- Thread starter Bad_Boy
- Start date
- Status
A bit much? Maybe. Do I really have sympathy to spare for this asshole? Not really.
The Technomancer
card-carrying scientician
That sums up this entire situation.
That's really nice. I wish this was procedure in my country...
The Technomancer
card-carrying scientician
fastford58
Member
This is the use of force continuum that is common to police training. This is the RCMP's, as a reference.
It appears as if the continuum was followed and action was taken accordingly.
I'm brazilian. Our police force is pretty corrupt and violent IMO. I know there's good cops here, but sadly, at least for me they are the minority.
ultrazilla
Gold Member
They had to be within range of the perp to employ the non-lethal
weapon(taser). It didn't work and he decided to take a swinging
stance at the taser Officer. Was the Officer and his partner supposed
to let him bash their heads in because backup was seconds away?
Seriously?
People bitch when cops use tasers saying "excessive force",
when the cops have to shoot, that's excessive, how come they
didn't taser? What is it?
Most of you probably have little to no training in force continuum,
shoot don't shoot and use of deadly force(which can vary from
State to State).
There's no doubt in my mind this is a justified use of deadly
force by these Officers and you'll read about it once the internal
investigation is over(common practice for Officer involved shootings)
BruiserBear
Banned
It's weird, because we have all these other videos that contradict your statement.
Such as this video, where a guy gets pulled over, gets out of his car with a gun in his hand, the cop demands he drop the gun but gives him time to do it, and then fires 3 shots.
Not only was he alone, the guy walked towards him with a GUN, and he still only fired 3 shots. Not 5. Not 10.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=drLxICQLEJU
In this Carl's Jr situation, I could understand 1-3 shots, but 5, and then 5 more is where the stupid comes in. People who continue to deny that are the ones I just can't understand in this thread. There is a reason the cops lied and said this guy swung at them. They knew they went overboard.
Half and half
Member
3 controlled shots judging on the spacing. But hey, if the guy had a pipe, the cop would've been justified unloading his clip with a side grip and a stray bullet injuring some bystander.
Can you read? The cops fired 10 times because that's how many it took to bring the guy down. You can't even see the guy with the gun in your video when he gets shot. I mean jesus christ, this is the basis of the entire argument and you're completely fucking oblivious. What's wrong with you?
Also, again, show us the police report where they lied. You ignored me last time I asked and have simply repeated yourself.
BruiserBear
Banned
The guy needed 5 shots to go down because they were able to assess all of this in the 1.5 seconds the cop fired the 5 initial shots. Gravity didn't have time to even bring him down entirely, but we're supposed to believe he was still a threat. My eyes can't roll far enough back in my head to react to this notion.
Oh, and then he was on his knees, but still moving, with a 2.5 foot melee weapon, but they needed to finish him off with 5 more shots, because again he was still a "lethal" threat. I can't laugh any harder hearing this nonsense. I'm sorry, not trying to be a dick, but no other response is logical to this heavily flawed opinion that's being expressed in this thread. It's just ridiculous.
Lastly, someone associated with the police told a reporter "the guy swung at the cops more than once", and that is all that needs to be said. Police report or no police report, I doubt this person speaking to the press just made it up on the spot. He was probably told this by one of the cops after the fact. Maybe they got their stories straight by the time they filled out the police report, but it's kind of irrelevant at this point.
He was still on his feet and moving after the first five shots. Apparently your eye sight is as refined as your reading ability.
The police report is all that matters, unconfirmed comments to the press from unidentified officers at unknown times do not. You and others can't even find the quote to begin with, but you're happy to run with it regardless.
That's the only thing you got right. He was still moving because he was backing away from the officers.
Also it was a female officer who told the press that the guy had taken 2 swings at the cop. The dude that shoot the video heard that on TV and decided to release his footage because he felt the police wasn't telling the truth.
It's all in the links posted previously.
And since when the police report from the officers in question is the only evidence that matters?
I'm going to say one thing in this thread and Im out. There were 2 cops, a quick analysis and a very quickly escalating situation.
THE MOST IMPORTANT THING THAT I GOT OUT OF THE VIDEO WAS THIS: Whether true or not, the area seemed to have people in every direction, no one wants a worse situation so the cops being close distance was a vital quick decision. This isolated the lunatic from bystanders. He still was walking away TOWARDS bystanders, with a lethal weapon! You cannot let him get too far or he might kill someone. The cops cannot allow for dead bodies!
It escalated FAST and they tried nonlethal. There was no cooperation on the man's part, no words or replies (lunatic anyone?), no compliance with dropping the weapon, and he was walking off towards people. At this point everyone is in danger. Tasered. But he took off a taser (scary). and then he made a life threatening move towards his partner and possibly friend. Unload that weapon!
Cops here are totally in the clear.
THE MOST IMPORTANT THING THAT I GOT OUT OF THE VIDEO WAS THIS: Whether true or not, the area seemed to have people in every direction, no one wants a worse situation so the cops being close distance was a vital quick decision. This isolated the lunatic from bystanders. He still was walking away TOWARDS bystanders, with a lethal weapon! You cannot let him get too far or he might kill someone. The cops cannot allow for dead bodies!
It escalated FAST and they tried nonlethal. There was no cooperation on the man's part, no words or replies (lunatic anyone?), no compliance with dropping the weapon, and he was walking off towards people. At this point everyone is in danger. Tasered. But he took off a taser (scary). and then he made a life threatening move towards his partner and possibly friend. Unload that weapon!
Cops here are totally in the clear.
What was her name, where is her statement and where was she when this incident occurred? Do her comments reflect what is in the report? There is no lying until we see the police report written by the officers who were there.
Edit
I'm arguing against the claim that we know the police lied. No one can substantiate that claim and in this case the only substantiation would be from the police report. Why can't either of you pay attention here?
This is an 11 page thread, it's not that big just search the link, shouldn't take more than 15 minutes. I'm sorry but I'm at work and I'm not going to waste my time searching for a quote for you.
Every single link posted until now contains testimonials from people that actually were in the vicinity and witnessed this unfortunate event firsthand and question in one way or the other how the officers handled the situation. Why can't you understand that too?
There's no denying that mistakes were made, only the severity of then.
Also I'm not arguing that the first officer shouldn't have shot the first time, I've got no training to handle a situation like that like so many gaffers (who also lack the training) love to point out. I'm arguing that they should have used the dog as he's trained to subdue suspects without killing then and that the second wave of shots wasn't necessary at all.
No one shoots for the legs. That happens in movies and video games, not when real people use real guns. Guns are never used unless the thing you are shooting has to die.
AHahahahahahhahahahaha. That's some ghetto ass mentality. In real life police shoot for legs in movies and video games they shoot to kill.
What? Shooting to wound is dangerous, unnecessary and prohibited by any and every respectable police force or military in the world. You do not ever, ever use a gun unless the person you are using it on needs to die. If they don't you don't use a gun.
Half and half
Member
No, what's ghetto is the side grip the cop is using. I know it's Los Angeles and all, but that cop really thinks he's starring in Menace II Society.
No it's not. In the Netherlands it's never shoot to kill. Of course the suspect can die. When a gun is used.
That's true, but I can't help but feel there's something really wrong over there. Also the way they approached the situation seems pretty stupid as well.
Bullshit. If a situation only warrants a person being wounded, and that person is shot with a gun, the shooter has committed a crime.
You're all over the place. You shoot to stop someone, not to kill, that's ridiculous.
The name of the officer who claimed the guy took a swing at the cops is Sgt. Pauline Panis.
Why do you think she would said something like that? There's only 2 possibilities: the first one she said it because the two officers in question told her that it was how it went down. The second because she didn't know what she was talking about and was trying to cover their asses.
As I said, it was pretty easy finding this link. You could easily have done it yourself if you had any interest in substantiating your claims that the false police allegations were not true.
Also, as violent as brazilian police is, the procedure here is shoot to wound too. The thing is they never follow procedure and hardly answer for their mistakes. Pray that US police doesn't get to the level our police force has reached lately.
What bullshit? It seems for some reason you think a gun is an instakill weapon?
Are they shooting with blow darts or something? That's pretty impressive if so.
Also, the latter bits have been discussed (ad nauseum). There's a difference in how police forces handle situations between countries. As well as possible ways to handle the situation.
edit2: Yup, clearly no one reads the thread anymore.
Those are not the only two explanations, please. She spoke before the police report was prepared. She perhaps misspoke, was misinformed or, yes, lying intentionally. Her comments do not matter, what matters is the official police report. That is the document that hold weight here and it's the document originally said to contain lies.
There's no death warranted. The intent is to resolve the situation, in this case stopping the perp. If the situation calls for using a gun, then you use it, but not with the intent of killing someone. The intention is to stop the person, not to kill. It just so happens that there's a pretty high chance of dying involved.
heliosRAzi
Banned
When I took firearms training, they taught us to tilt the gun sideways if it's in our off (non-dominate) hand so we can use the sights better. During the incident, the cop may be using it in his off hand.
And cops don't normally shoot to injure like they don't normally shoot from moving vehicles. If they aim for the legs or arms, there is a good chance that they might miss and that bullet will have to stop somewhere.
Honestly, I can't believe this thread is still going.
What are you trying to say?
So the USA police force has the right to decide who dies or not. Interesting.
You're really that naive? Or just hopelessly misguided? The only thing that matters is the police report from the two officers in question? Seriously?
Get real. There's a lot of factors to consider and police has already said that they will be using all video recorded to asses the situation. Don't make me search for a link again.
Also, who claimed that the police report contained lies? As far as I'm participating in this discussion (since the first page) I didn't see anyone claiming that. I might have missed it, but it doesn't change the fact that a police officer went on camera trying to paint the situation in a way more inclined to justify her fellow officers abusive use of force.
Mammoth Jones
Member
Semantics. Guns are designed to stop people by killing them. The use of a gun is considered deadly force. If you're pointing a gun at someone...you're not shooting to wound. You're shooting to kill. Period. If they survive but are incapacitated, that's fine. Call an ambulance. But you don't get taught to shoot center mass to increase their survival rate.
That was the claim, that the police report had lies in it. That document is the official report from the participating officers. Comments from sherriff's officials don't matter or carry legal weight, and you can't establish the intent was to lie unless you know where she was and what she knew anyway.
Mammoth Jones
Member
No, but when someone is in the process of attacking a police officer you can bet your ass they are going to use any and all available force to stop the guy before another officer gets hurt.
The USA police force isn't limited to harsh language and time-outs to stop violent criminals...
No need to get so high strung. I just asked you to explain yourself. I meant shooting with a gun with bullets btw.
I guess that explains death toll claimed by the police in the US. The more you know.
Which claim? Please provide me with a link. I bet it was just the 2 cents from someone who had not informed himself about the issue properly. Big deal. If you're going to keep sticking to that point I'm not going to argue with you anymore.
Besides you're missing the whole point. Regardless if and who lied the argument is that the officers from start to finish handled the situation inadequately, and that is something that most posters, even the ones defending the officers seem to agree.
BruiserBear
Banned
You've got a very convenient standard for evidence in this discussion. Statements made by officers to the press hold absolutely no weight. Do you think those people just decide on their own to give statements about a case? They just stroll out on their lunch break and say whatever bullshit they feel like spewing?
Now that a video has surfaced contradicting those initial statements, we're only supposed to value their revised statements. That sounds like great lawyer talk from a third world country.
I'm pretty sure that's what he's hoping for at this point.
Yup.
As I've pointed out before, even the guys in the car doing the videotaping almost immediately commented on the video that they didn't think the officers needed to use that much force.
Nappuccino
Member
guns are designed to kill. officers don't (mostly) use them unless an innocent life or their life is in danger.
There are plenty of other non-lethal weapons to use if you just want the guy to stop, but sometimes that isn't enough.
heliosRAzi
Banned
Nappuccino
Member
if they handled it right, they would have stopped 9/11
edit: for clarity, this is a marky mark joke.
heliosRAzi
Banned
Marky mark is powered by the blood of children
9/11 committed account suicide the other day. Damn MLP orgy pics!
:lol reminds me of the drive-by comment someone made about Chinese people in a hit and run thread. Was banned and unbanned something like 4 times... then the comment was just removed.
Sure, they are designed to kill, but that doesn't mean you have to use it kill someone. Over here it's used pretty well as a restraining weapon.
Sure, but in this case shooting to kill really wasn't neccasairy. Since the non-lethal weapon did nothing to him, but a shots to the legs would have worked wonders. This very situation shows how a gun could be used to restrain him with a few bullet to the leg. Of course that would be in a 1v1. How three people couldn't apprehend someone with a crowbar is beyond me. It shows to me your flawed reasoning. The US police are just way too quick to resort to lethal force and when the US police use lethal force it's pretty much shooting to kill.
- Status