• Shooting of homeless man was justified, apparently. (disturbing video)
    138 replies, posted
Harassing a homeless man over camping outside? How big of dick do you have to be to enforce the stupid law that prolly wasn't even targeted at the homeless? I guess 'to serve and protect' only applies to people who aren't poor.
[QUOTE=Mudbone;44336692]Mentally ill or not he was armed and apparently on further reading tried attacking the police dog who is considered an officer. They clear as day ordered him to drop the knife and what does he do. Tries taking off.[/QUOTE] He also only pulled the knifes after having a stun grenade blow up within 4 feet, after which I would guess it would be hard to hear anything. Running from law enforcement should never be a valid reason to be shot. You are not threatening when you are running away.
[QUOTE=aydin690;44336789]Harassing a homeless man over camping outside? How big of dick do you have to be to enforce the stupid law that prolly wasn't even targeted at the homeless? I guess 'to serve and protect' only applies to people who aren't poor.[/QUOTE] A crazy armed homeless man who was a threat to practically anyone in the area. Anyway, the twenty-one foot rule (sort of) comes into play here as well as the fact that he could've been reaching for something. They had every right to shoot when he made that movement.
[QUOTE=U.S.S.R;44336858]A crazy armed homeless man who was a threat to practically anyone in the area. Anyway, the twenty-one foot rule comes into play here as well as the fact that he could've been reaching for something. They had every right to shoot when he made that movement.[/QUOTE] The 20 foot doesn't apply when you've got an AR-15 unslung and aimed at your target. I
[QUOTE=U.S.S.R;44336858]A crazy armed homeless man who was a threat to practically anyone in the area. Anyway, the twenty-one foot rule comes into play here as well as the fact that he could've been reaching for something. They had every right to shoot when he made that movement.[/QUOTE] The problem is that the situation should have never been escalated to that point. The cops had no business harassing a homeless dude for 3 fuckin hours, OVER CAMPING OUTSIDE. I used to volunteer with a ngo that focused on the homeless (vancouver has a big homeless problem) and all the cops that i came in contact with during that time tried to get to know the homeless, find out their main problems and do whatever they can to help them. They often turned a blind eye to drug use, etc. But then again, this happened in the US of A. So, the cops are going to get medals for their bravery (read power trip).
[QUOTE=Trunk Monkay;44336868]The 20 foot doesn't apply when you've got an AR-15 unslung and aimed at your target. I[/QUOTE] I think it does when a human officer was no more than six feet away from him when they fired. And, you know, he could have been reaching around instead of turning.
I find it quite disturbing that one of the cops says 'booyah' after shooting the guy.
[QUOTE=aydin690;44336881]The problem is that the situation should have never been escalated to that point. The cops had no business harassing a homeless dude for 3 fuckin hours, OVER CAMPING OUTSIDE. I used to volunteer with a ngo that focused on the homeless (vancouver has a big homeless problem) and all the cops that i came in contact with during that time tried to get to know the homeless, find out their main problems and do whatever they can to help them. They often turned a blind eye to drug use, etc. But then again, this happened in the US of A. So, the cops are going to get medals for their bravery (read power trip).[/QUOTE] Okay, I guess it's fine to let a fucking crazy with a history of violence who has delusions of being a government agent potentially interact with innocents. It was only "harassment" because he refused to go with them. Cops don't escalate it by actually being there, he escalates it by resisting and making threats.
[QUOTE=U.S.S.R;44336889]I think it does when a human officer was no more than six feet away from him when they fired. And, you know, he could have been reaching around instead of turning.[/QUOTE] The 20 foot rule is when a person with a holstered firearm is within 20 foot of a person with a blade. The rule is that the person with the firearm won't be able to unholster it in time before the person with the blade reaches them. [b]This does not apply to a person with an UNSLUNG RIFLE with it already pulled against their shoulder with sights on target[/b]
[QUOTE=anis;44336778][QUOTE=Mudbone;44336692]Mentally ill or not he was armed and apparently on further reading tried attacking the police dog who is considered an officer. They clear as day ordered him to drop the knife and what does he do. Tries taking off.[/QUOTE] If you watch the video you'll see the police dog runs at him, i.e the dog attacks him and not vice versa. If you have a knife you are going to hold it out to defend yourself against an advancing (aggressive) dog. I think you should question setting a dog on someone armed with a knife.[/QUOTE] The dog is still a police officer. If your standard human police officer was running at you, do you have the right to pull a weapon on him/her?
[QUOTE=aydin690;44336881]The problem is that the situation should have never been escalated to that point. The cops had no business harassing a homeless dude for 3 fuckin hours, OVER CAMPING OUTSIDE. I used to volunteer with a ngo that focused on the homeless (vancouver has a big homeless problem) and all the cops that i came in contact with during that time tried to get to know the homeless, find out their main problems and do whatever they can to help them. They often turned a blind eye to drug use, etc. But then again, this happened in the US of A. So, the cops are going to get medals for their bravery (read power trip).[/QUOTE] Since you didn't read the article, you probably didn't see the part where the guy had a 20 year history of violence against police officers, was clearly mentally unstable, and claimed he was apart of DoD. The guy was clearly off his rocker and escalated the situation himself. [quote]“I’m almost going to kill you right now. Don’t give me another directive. Don’t attempt to give me, the Department of Defense, another directive,” said Boyd at the beginning of the incident.[/quote] But clearly since the cops live south of the Canadian border, they're just school bullies on a power trip, lmao.
[QUOTE=Trunk Monkay;44336910]The 20 foot rule is when a person with a holstered firearm is within 20 foot of a person with a blade. The rule is that the person with the firearm won't be able to unholster it in time before the person with the blade reaches them. [b]This does not apply to a person with an UNSLUNG RIFLE with it already pulled against their shoulder with sights on target[/b][/QUOTE] He made a sudden and unauthorized movement, still. You don't wait until he has his hand half way to his hypothetical gun or his knife half way to his target to fire. They told him to get down and he didn't. He payed the price.
[QUOTE=U.S.S.R;44336930]He made a sudden and unauthorized movement, still. You don't wait until he has his hand half way to his hypothetical gun or his knife half way to his target to fire. They told him to get down and he didn't. He payed the price.[/QUOTE] missing my point 101 by: USSR
[QUOTE=Trunk Monkay;44336937]missing my point 101 by: USSR[/QUOTE] No, I got your point. I took another look at the rule. I'm just saying that regardless if it doesn't apply, the movement he made was enough to warrant them firing.
[QUOTE=U.S.S.R;44336930][QUOTE=Trunk Monkay;44336910]The 20 foot rule is when a person with a holstered firearm is within 20 foot of a person with a blade. The rule is that the person with the firearm won't be able to unholster it in time before the person with the blade reaches them. [b]This does not apply to a person with an UNSLUNG RIFLE with it already pulled against their shoulder with sights on target[/b][/QUOTE] He made a sudden and unauthorized movement, still. You don't wait until he has his hand half way to his hypothetical gun or his knife half way to his target to fire. They told him to get down and he didn't. He payed the price.[/QUOTE] He's not saying it wasn't justified or anything, but that the 20foot rule doesn't apply because the situation doesn't meet the criteria of the 20 foot rule. In fact, the 20 foot rule is unrelated to the situation.
Well that was an interesting case.
[QUOTE=FurrehFaux;44336505]They continued firing after he had fallen over because they believed he was faking injury to trap them.[/QUOTE] if all he has is knives and he's on the ground what possible damage could he do if they keep their distance why does he need to be shot more if the threat is not immediate
[QUOTE=anis;44336778]If you watch the video you'll see the police dog runs at him, i.e the dog attacks him and not vice versa. If you have a knife you are going to hold it out to defend yourself against an advancing (aggressive) dog. I think you should question setting a dog on someone armed with a knife.[/QUOTE] well gee maybe it wouldn't have had to come to that if he would have just complied hours ago. They would have probably just booked and released him at the worst. Probably would have just told him to leave. If a cop says to drop your shit you don't really have a choice. If it turns out it was unjustified that's what lawyers and public defenders are for. People act like the cops just roll around "Hey lets go fuck with that guy"
[QUOTE=Venezuelan;44336964]if all he has is knives and he's on the ground what possible damage could he do if they keep their distance why does he need to be shot more if the threat is not immediate[/QUOTE] Because they don't know for a fact that all he's armed with is knives, they don't know for a fact if he's faking his injuries, and they don't know for a fact that he's no longer an immediate threat.
[QUOTE=Trunk Monkay;44336969]Because they don't know for a fact that all he's armed with is knives, they don't know for a fact if he's faking his injuries, and they don't know for a fact that he's no longer an immediate threat.[/QUOTE] that's a lot of assumptions to make to justify lethal force
[QUOTE=WastedJamacan;44336918]The dog is still a police officer. If your standard human police officer was running at you, do you have the right to pull a weapon on him/her?[/QUOTE] Sorry, no - it's a dog. An animal trained by humans for the purpose of police work. Do you honestly believe the dog is equal to a human being? Yes I know that is what they believe and it may be 'procedure', but nonetheless I question the sanity of it.
[QUOTE=Venezuelan;44336974]that's a lot of assumptions to make to justify lethal force[/QUOTE] Sure is, but it's the difference between you dying, one of your friends dying, or the suspect dying. It's a massive gray area and theres no right decision. But it's typically agreed upon to use lethal force before it's used on you; thats why they shot him when he started reaching his hands behind his back.
[QUOTE=Venezuelan;44336974]that's a lot of assumptions to make to justify lethal force[/QUOTE] When it comes to your life or his, you have to think about all possible aspects of the situation. All 3 of those things (possibly armed with more then knives, possibly faking his injuries, possibly still a threat) are exactly what a police officer should think about in this situation.
[QUOTE=anis;44336977][QUOTE=WastedJamacan;44336918]The dog is still a police officer. If your standard human police officer was running at you, do you have the right to pull a weapon on him/her?[/QUOTE] Sorry, no - it's a dog. An animal trained by humans for the purpose of police work. Do you honestly believe the dog is equal to a human being?[/QUOTE] We aren't talking about opinions here, we're talking about the law. It matters not whether I think a dog is equal to a human. In the eyes of the law that dog is. Not sure what's difficult to understand here.
[QUOTE=Venezuelan;44336974]that's a lot of assumptions to make to justify lethal force[/QUOTE] They stopped using lethal force when he was downed. They are supposed to protect their lives over his, even if it means doing something like that.
[QUOTE=Venezuelan;44336974]that's a lot of assumptions to make to justify lethal force[/QUOTE] It's what they're trained to do, iirc.. I don't agree with it, but it's what's up.
[QUOTE=WastedJamacan;44336997]We aren't talking about opinions here, we're talking about the law. It matters not whether I think a dog is equal to a human. In the eyes of the law that dog is. Not sure what's difficult to understand here.[/QUOTE] Erm, sorry, I am talking about opinions. Is that not allowed? It is the basis of a forum, oddly enough.
[QUOTE=Trunk Monkay;44336922]Since you didn't read the article, you probably didn't see the part where the guy had a 20 year history of violence against police officers, was clearly mentally unstable, and claimed he was apart of DoD. The guy was clearly off his rocker and escalated the situation himself. But clearly since the cops live south of the Canadian border, they're just school bullies on a power trip, lmao.[/QUOTE] No, i didn't miss anything. People who are homeless often suffer from mental issues. The cops agitated him. They shouldn't have been harassing him for 3 hours to the point of making him angry enough to utter threats. Also, his criminal history should play no fuckin role here.
[QUOTE=Venezuelan;44336974][QUOTE=Trunk Monkay;44336969]Because they don't know for a fact that all he's armed with is knives, they don't know for a fact if he's faking his injuries, and they don't know for a fact that he's no longer an immediate threat.[/QUOTE] that's a lot of assumptions to make to justify lethal force[/QUOTE] They only used lethal force when he was an immediate threat, which is what they're trained to do. It's the same way in the Army, we're occasionally presented with shitty situations where someone makes a move and you have to pull the trigger so that you or your buddies can live another day, and while we train for it, it's a lot different in training than it is when it actually happens.
[QUOTE=anis;44336977]Sorry, no - it's a dog. An animal trained by humans for the purpose of police work. Do you honestly believe the dog is equal to a human being? Yes I know that is what they believe and it may be 'procedure', but nonetheless I question the sanity of it.[/QUOTE] He's not posting his opinion. The K9 is literally considered a police officer, as is its handler.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.