TN Cop fatally shoots ax-wielding woman, Chivalry confirmed not dead - Polidicks

[QUOTE]GALLATIN, TN (AP) Authorities in Tennessee say an officer fatally shot a woman who attacked with a medieval-style ax. News outlets report 40-year-old Laronda Sweatt of Gallatin became combative when Sumner County sheriff's deputy Gary Pickard accompanied housing authorities to serve an eviction notice on her Wednesday.[/QUOTE] [URL]http://www.wrcbtv.com/story/31668007/tennessee-police-officer-fatally-shoots-ax-wielding-woman[/URL] [URL]http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/tennessee-police-officer-fatally-shoots-ax-wielding-woman-38217567[/URL] The body camera footage is available on Liveleak For those that don't wish to see it - Additional Officer shows up, steps out gun drawn - Instructs Sweatt to get on the ground - Sweatt continues towards officer, Cops back up continuing to yell - Officer backs up all the way to another cop car that's behind his, Sweatt is still continuing towards him and as such the officer fires two shots Say what you will, but the cop didn't have too much of a choice.

Why didn't he taze her in the knee?

Well someone didn't see raiders of the lost ark.

Wow, yeah he rolls up and she is immediately on top of him. That second cop was seconds behind and even he was too late to have changed the outcome.

There's definitely some nuts in Gallatin which is the neighboring city to where my home is.

It sucks that this had to be the outcome, but considering the distance between the ax and the cop you couldn't have delayed the inevitable.

[QUOTE=LtKyle2;50090640]Why didn't he taze her in the knee?[/QUOTE] Should've gone with a suplex tbh

[QUOTE=LtKyle2;50090640]Why didn't he taze her in the knee?[/QUOTE] Pretty sure when someone comes at you with an axe, the training that kicks in is going to tell you to go for your service weapon and not a taser.

[QUOTE=Dirty_Ape;50090973]Pretty sure when someone comes at you with an axe, the training that kicks in is going to tell you to go for your service weapon and not a taser.[/QUOTE] Pretty sure he was joking but I might be wrong

[QUOTE=Dirty_Ape;50090973]Pretty sure when someone comes at you with an axe, the training that kicks in is going to tell you to go for your service weapon and not a taser.[/QUOTE] Pretty sure when someone comes at you with a battle ax, the training that kicks in is going to tell you to use a long sword instead of a war hammer.

[QUOTE=Derposaurus;50091014]Pretty sure he was joking but I might be wrong[/QUOTE] Yeah because everytime that something like this happens there will be 20 people in the thread saying "why didn't they use their taser!!!?"

If someone came at me with an axe I sure as fuck wouldn't be thinking twice. Could've been handled better, but I can understand this one. Plenty of warning before the bite. You see yellow and orange you don't pick it up.

Reading the article, I like how her mother said "I don't why he had to do her like that, she only weighed 94 lbs" Since when did weight have anything to do, especially when you are wielding a fucking axe. I mean if he kept backing up, and told her to get on the ground, its on her. I didn't know beginning bipolar meant you could act batshit insane and get away with it. Not to sound cold hearted to those who suffer from the effect of begin bipolar.

[QUOTE=Daddy-of-war;50091385]Reading the article, I like how her mother said "I don't why he had to do her like that, she only weighed 94 lbs" [/QUOTE] Playing the victim roll, going to hope to sue the police department to get some money because she charged after the cop with a weapon like shes the joan of ark of her trailer park.

[QUOTE]Chivalry confirmed not dead[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=Richard Simmons;50091048]Pretty sure when someone comes at you with a battle ax, the training that kicks in is going to tell you to use a long sword instead of a war hammer.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=Richard Simmons;50091562]charged after the cop with a weapon like shes the joan of ark of her trailer park.[/QUOTE] God damn, this thread has barely started and i'm already in tears from laughter.

[QUOTE=LtKyle2;50090640]Why didn't he taze her in the knee?[/QUOTE] You know the United States. It's against quota to use non-lethal weapons. There's no real formal penalty for using your firearm as your first choice. Up north even one shot comes with a mountain of paperwork and post-incident investgating. You don't want to get busted using your gun unnecessarily. But really, why didn't they opt for the tazer instead of the gun? That boils down to how they are trained.

She has my family name, i find it kind of an uncommon name so i wonder if im related to her:v:

[QUOTE=pentium;50091606]You know the United States. It's against quota to use non-lethal weapons. There's no real formal penalty for using your firearm as your first choice. Up north even one shot comes with a mountain of paperwork and post-incident investgating. You don't want to get busted using your gun unnecessarily. But really, why didn't they opt for the tazer instead of the gun? That boils down to how they are trained.[/QUOTE] Well for starters a taser in perfect condition has a lot more chances to fuck up than a handgun in perfect condition. If anything happens to either of the pins, the thing won't work and all you'll have accomplished is prick a tiny hole into someone who's trying to chop you up with an ax. Moreover, tasers don't remove the threat. They temporarily stop it, and in this sort of situation, you're left with a temporarily stopped threat who's still carrying a deadly weapon. You'd then have to get close to that deadly weapon, secure it and restrain the criminal all within the effects of the taser, which isn't necessarily all that long. I may also be wrong on this, but tasers aren't used on life-threatening targets, they're used on disobedient or misbehaving people who disregard direct orders or show signs of aggression without intent to kill, or at least without a weapon to actually act on that intent. The instant someone holds a lethal weapon of any description, tasers become irrelevant. Paperwork aside, a policeman in canada would probably not have a lot of difficulty justifying shooting someone who's ignoring orders and walking towards them with an axe in hand.

[QUOTE=pentium;50091606]You know the United States. It's against quota to use non-lethal weapons. There's no real formal penalty for using your firearm as your first choice. Up north even one shot comes with a mountain of paperwork and post-incident investgating. You don't want to get busted using your gun unnecessarily. But really, why didn't they opt for the tazer instead of the gun? That boils down to how they are trained.[/QUOTE] This is definitely not a situation for a taser. The sole objective is to eliminate or incapacitate the threat. Guns are more effective at doing that, and doing so in a reliable fashion. There are plenty of situations where a taser would be acceptable, but are in a bit of a grey area where lethal force is justifiable as well. This is not one of those situations. When someone is coming at you with a sharp object, reliability and effectiveness trump all else. Especially when you consider that the two officers responding were backup after she had already stabbed one officer beforehand.

Odd choice of weapon considering she looks like a spear chucker. [highlight](User was banned for this post ("Shitposting/Racism" - Novangel))[/highlight]

[QUOTE=Ahyred Ghun;50091919]Odd choice of weapon considering she looks like a spear chucker.[/QUOTE] :speechless: Well, that was moderately racist.

[QUOTE=Richard Simmons;50091923]:speechless: Well, that was moderately racist.[/QUOTE] She just looked like she was in her track and field gear ;)

[QUOTE=Megadave;50091341]Could've been handled better[/QUOTE] The woman forced him into a corner and he only fired once his back was against the wall. They handled it the best they could.

[QUOTE=pentium;50091606]You know the United States. It's against quota to use non-lethal weapons. There's no real formal penalty for using your firearm as your first choice. Up north even one shot comes with a mountain of paperwork and post-incident investgating. You don't want to get busted using your gun unnecessarily. But really, why didn't they opt for the tazer instead of the gun? That boils down to how they are trained.[/QUOTE] Did you miss the part that says he's on administrative leave pending an internal investigation? News splash it's exactly the same here in the US.

Should've rolled for the armor save.

[QUOTE=pentium;50091606]You know the United States. It's against quota to use non-lethal weapons. There's no real formal penalty for using your firearm as your first choice. Up north even one shot comes with a mountain of paperwork and post-incident investgating. You don't want to get busted using your gun unnecessarily. But really, why didn't they opt for the tazer instead of the gun? That boils down to how they are trained.[/QUOTE] Are you implying officer involved shootings don't have investigations? [editline]8th April 2016[/editline] Like IA doesn't show up at every crime scene pat the cop on the back and say, "Haha great shoot! Welcome back to active duty!"

this might sound really stupid but why dont we just invest more in police armor like honestly i feel like a lot of policemen end up shooting potentially dangerous civilians because of the threat they directly pose to others, and also out of fear for themselves. just always keep one huge guy on the team and designate him as the tackle dude and give him a thick-ass ballistic shield and some full-body armor. crazy guy waves at you with a kitchen knife? just knock his ass over.

She seemed head-strong to die. Video, if anyone's interested: [url]http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=1ac_1460073499[/url]

[QUOTE=FinalHunter;50097285]lol seriously? You want to roll out a bunch of cops in full SWAT gear? First, that's expensive. Second, it would scare the public. Third, it restricts moment. Forth, it's impractical for 99% of what police do.[/QUOTE] i never said a whole team, but considering how some police departments range from having full-on paramilitary armanents to shit-for-equipment, we could at least give them a bit more protection 1. yeah, expenses are a thing. 2. scare the public how? if someone's walking around with a machete ready to chop, i'm [I]pretty sure[/I] seeing law enforcement roll onto the scene is a welcome sight than not. 3 & 4. uhh, did you read what i said? i'm not expecting every single minor incident to be run over by a bunch of 6'4 240 lbs men wearing a EOD suit. i'm just saying in a situation where someone's armed and dangerous, you just [I]maybe[/I] might want some gear for it.

While I think this was entirely justified, I'd like to post the UK video for anyone who hasn't seen the kung fu they're apparently teaching UK cops [media]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cznNf2LUk74[/media]