AlimNassor
Banned
No, it doesn't. They had no right to shoot him, he was mentally ill and became violent he should have been restrained not shot.
-
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
- Thread starter Log4Girlz
- Start date
- Status
No, it doesn't. They had no right to shoot him, he was mentally ill and became violent he should have been restrained not shot.
NervousXtian
Thought Emoji Movie was good. Take that as you will.
Title is wrong, if he hit the cops with their radios then he was in fact "armed".
Slap, punch or radio, he would still get pissed nonetheless. All it takes is one thing to let loose.
According to the NYPD, he was armed with a walkie talkie.
I think people need to be a bit careful trying to pidgeon hole this situation as another case of police force run amok. I wouldn't argue that the guy deserved to die, but when you are in the process of assaulting someone (regardless of whether or not they are police officer), with a weapon (and yes the radio is a weapon), people should be able to defend themselves. And if they were being overwhelmed by the attacker, they shouldn't be expected to sit there and accept the assault. Lethal force being used is always difficult to justify, because there are so many 'what if's' people can try to use to attempt to change the frame of the debate to a specific agenda. But in this case, pushing that agenda (with an actual assault against a person taking place) seems to drive the focus away from more serious cases of police abuse.
mmazurkiewicz
Member
Yeh dude with previous arrests commits crime and then assaults police officer.
The cop is the bad guy.
There's no way you can know this. And you'd have to compare it to other countries that let their cops carry guns.
Actually it would be interesting to see the stats on how often police in different countries use their gun.
CLaddyOnFire
Neo Member
Police need to start beating the shit out of the resisting criminals as their go-to move. Just throw haymakers and break bones. I know I'd rather be in jail with a broken nose and bloodied face than dead
travisbickle
Member
Do you really believe one man with a walkie talkie was overwhelming two 'trained' police officers? You watch too many movies.
The shit posts are because it wouldn't matter if the person pulled a gun and pointed it at the cops, these people would claim they should have shot it out of his hands. Some people are just looking for any reason to bitch about the police.
A fucking guy beats a woman and robs her, then brutally beats on two cops for 5 minutes, sending both of them to the hospital, but yeah they should have just "retreated" or "talked him down" . GTFO with that nonsense. At least if people are going to do the whole police are the devil thing, pick your battles better. Every time you guys whine about some criminal dying in the act of committing a crime your sympathy angle goes right out the window. No one cares that some dude who assaulted three people got shot and killed by the police other than the born to be outraged brigade, inflammatory Op or not.
Right, the problem is the gun. It's creating more problems than it's solving.
I believe its absolutely possible. Especially considering the officers were hospitalized due to injuries suffered during the altercation. It doesn't take much if the assault was unexpected or they were hit cleanly early.
No, legal force is used when there's a reasonable belief, probable cause, that the suspect's actions will cause great bodily injury or death. Fighting him for five minutes (insanely long time) and then being struck with a hard plastic object - so hard that it broke and caused two officers to go the hospital with injuries TO THEIR HEADS - gives plenty of cause for me to call the use of force justified.
NobleGundam
Banned
Those radios are thick as hell. The mentally ill man bashed it on their heads and caused them to break.
That's pretty serious to me. But not enough to take his life depending on the situation of course. There are other options.
http://media.kentucky.com/smedia/2013/08/21/16/35/GeOot.AuSt.79.jpeg
That's pretty serious to me. But not enough to take his life depending on the situation of course. There are other options.
http://media.kentucky.com/smedia/2013/08/21/16/35/GeOot.AuSt.79.jpeg
You can't possibly believe police shouldn't be armed, can you? With the ease of acquiring a handgun in this country that would be disastrous.
Coriolanus
Banned
This is very faulty logic that should be discarded.
Here's why.
Tasers can be lethal, might as well ditch tasers and just use firearms.
A blow to the head can be lethal, might as well not endanger the officer and just use firearms.
Sure, things CAN BE lethal. Doesn't mean that they're AS LETHAL AS other things. A shot to the leg is, obviously, less lethal than a shot to the torso.
And yes, shooting under stress is quite difficult, which is why, if you're unable to do so properly, you shouldn't be in law enforcement.
--
As for the topic, had the police not been provided with guns, but with batons, pepper sprays or tasers (all of which they probably have, tbh), the result most likely could have been very different. Should have been very different.
Pretty sure a guy in a mental facility is going to be checked for guns and other contraband items. Why the police felt they needed to bring a gun on scene is what I'm questioning. I get that that's their 'thing' and 2nd Amendment and all, but how wise was that?
The posts in this thread are near unbearable to read... Why the hell would you "knee cap" anyone? You do realize the severity of such a wound? If we are talking non-lethal that is the most serious "non-lethal" area one can hit.
You all been watching way too many movies.
Economic ties with politics and U.S have a strong conservative base, which do not desire an increase in U.S spending, except in certain areas like the military. Also in the wrong areas of police funding (equipment like APCs and Carbines), This is not something U.S can just say "we are rich, lets put some laws in, increasing the budget and forcing states to abide by certain training procedures". That is not how U.S works. U.S states work like countries in the EU. Different laws and beliefs, some richer than others, etc. Many police departments are understaffed, don't pay well (especially if there is a training increase), and have their budgets slashed.
It is why you see some state police equipped/trained better than others, because states are given that amount of freedom. A federal level fix, covering all of U.S is not something I would expect to see, which would be the most efficient and faster way to handle this issue.
U.S managing top level university education have very little to do with something like this btw. It is one of the few things conservatives and liberals, Republican and Democrats, agree that U.S needs to lead on. Very different scenario.
I'm sorry, i wouldn't like going to jail for excessive use of force.
Guns are not only for when someone else has a gun.
The notion that two New York police officers tasked with arresting a man accused of beating and robbing his female acquaintance and who has a record of arrests for violent offenses should, what, leave their guns at the office? In their car? Is quite frankly absurd.
And how does this have anything to do with the 2nd Amendment? The 2nd amendment has nothing to do with police.
Absurd, yet it happens in practically every other country in the civilized world.
Listen, I'm not saying our guys are trained as well as the Europeans, but it would be something to strive for. No?
I brought it up because it's our credo. It's the American way. We can't wrap our minds around world in which bringing guns into a situation isn't always going to make us into superheroes.
Oh i realize the severity of such a wound. But i'd rather make someone unable to walk instead of ending their Life forever.
Some of "these Posts" are based on morality and are from people who don't watch Police Movies, but thanks for asking.
America is not Europe. America has much higher rates of violent crime, gun crime and homicide than almost every European country. Restricting officers' access to weapons is not going to fix that.
Actually, I did not see it in a movie but in the local news. A perp was charging towards the cop and even after warning him with his weapon the perp did not stop. Cop shoots his knee perp falls on his face and is arrested. Immediate medical assistance was provided and the man,if I remember correctly (happened many years ago), did not loose the use of his leg. A severe wound,sure, but nobody died.
I'm talking about the wisdom of bringing a gun into a mental facility, since it is literally overkill and it invites the possibility of a mental patient gaining access to it. I'm not talking about taking guns away from officers.
Do they have video of this incident? Because I don't for a fucking second believe any Officer's version of these sorts of events.
Not that getting hit in the head with a radio means you're supposed to get fucking shot though. But I know the apologists: "Hey if you don't want to be killed you shouldn't be doing that to police!" pout pout
Not that getting hit in the head with a radio means you're supposed to get fucking shot though. But I know the apologists: "Hey if you don't want to be killed you shouldn't be doing that to police!" pout pout
Guns are literally designed to kill human beings. Teaching police to use them non-lethally would lead to more casual gun use, and more killing.
Instead, we should be teaching police to use stun-guns and batons in most circumstances. Only use a firearm if your life is in immediate risk. Being hit with a radio can be nasty, but I don't believe it's usually life-threatening.
jakonovski
Member
I'm talking about ought, you're talking about is.
DragonSworne
Banned
Keep telling yourself that lie.
If the story is accurate, then fine...don't assault cops, its pretty simple to see that outcome...and I'm not all that mad about it.
But, I find it hard to believe the story.
And, I'm tired of police being so horrible at controlling unarmed people even when they have them outnumbered, and continually losing possession of their equipment.
Higher standards, better training. The dumb bully kid from high school shouldn't see being a cop as a career path.
But, I find it hard to believe the story.
And, I'm tired of police being so horrible at controlling unarmed people even when they have them outnumbered, and continually losing possession of their equipment.
Higher standards, better training. The dumb bully kid from high school shouldn't see being a cop as a career path.
CouchMaster
Member
You don't even have to shoot someone, usually a warning shot fired in general direction of the suspect but up in the air is enough to bring most people to their senses.
Warning shots are illegal in most of the US. Your rounds can ricochet and hit someone innocent or if you fire into the air, the bullet can hit someone innocent or damage someone's property.
I don't think anyone should be advocating having the police fire 'warning shots'. That's how innocent bystanders get killed.
loaf of bread
Member
"Felix David, 22, was wanted for beating and robbing a female acquaintance"
"had a record of arrests for violent offenses."
"David grabbed one of the detectives’ radios, and used it to strike both officers in the head. David hit the officers so hard, the radio broke, cops said."
I'm not saying the shooting was justified but come on now. Did you read the OP?
CouchMaster
Member
Not sure about US, but that's what cops here do in India, both in movies and real life lol.
Morality doesn't always fit with reality. Which is why you must not argue from a sole "morality" standpoint. Morality is definitely good, but practical application is a necessity.
I am not conservative or republican, but that is really where I agree with them when it comes to liberal/democratic views. A lot of it is moral thinking, without thought for reality.
Yes, because that means all cops can do such a thing, even with more training. You are more likely to miss most of said shots, which will have a chance to ricochet into some bystander and destroy property.
What needs to be done is more restrained use of firearms, not more training officers to make less lethal shots. For example, in a lot of these death by cops videos when there is more than one cop, why do all the other cops there feel the need to also shoot? It is overkill and leads to things like 8 bullets hit and 40+ bullets missing. It is ridiculous and it is despite the fact that many of these people are unarmed or lightly armed.
Cops do need more training, but it is the training on how to diffuse a situation before pulling out what is suppose to be the last resort and a major ethics training. The main issue U.S police system needs adjusting on I would say, is police liability. This itself, would force the departments to take more care of their officer's status and training, I don't mean just suing either.
NOTE: The vast majority of arrests go without death, there are 14 million a year in U.S. What we see on these news are high profiled events. This is a good thing, because it brings to light what needs to be improved on, considering U.S is a 1st world country. However, you all (no offense) seem to go into a hive mind, that U.S's police system itself is a cancer and that U.S police training itself = bad. There is a cancer inside U.S police system, but it isn't the system itself if you get what I mean.
You sound ridiculous. Who are you to say when someone's life is in danger enough to use lethal force?
God forbid you find yourself being beaten on the head with a hard instrument, only to have some idiot standing close by screaming: "It ain't that bad, you'll be ok! Don't worry, if he knocks you out he certainly won't take your gun!"
Kid Kamikaze10
Member
I'm going to quote Ta-Nehisi Coates:
Reform is going to take a lot more than fixing cops. You can't bring a hammer to fix every problem; and we need to modify how we see these problems and honestly, who we call, to fix these problems.
Reform is going to take a lot more than fixing cops. You can't bring a hammer to fix every problem; and we need to modify how we see these problems and honestly, who we call, to fix these problems.
that's not a tank. and it was probably bought using funds from the federal government as an "anti-terrorism" cost, or was just given to them for free.
jakonovski
Member
It's done here in Finland, no bystanders killed ever, full stop.
Also, considering the ridiculous, unaimed fusillades often fired by American cops, warning shots are nothing.
- Status