Shooting of homeless man was justified, apparently. (disturbing video)
138 replies, posted
[QUOTE=WastedJamacan;44337017]They only used lethal force when he was an immediate threat, which is what they're trained to do.[/QUOTE]
But they were still shooting him when he was face down, immobile on the ground a good distance from them with no indication of having a gun
I'm a little amazed at how many people are actually saying the cops are at fault on this one. It's clearly the homeless guy's fault he got shot. His being mentally ill is completely irrelevant. He was a real threat to the officers so they did what they were trained to do in an entirely reasonable manner. Doing otherwise would have endangered officers.
[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]
The police enforce the law. His camping where he was is illegal in that location so they couldn't just ignore it.
[editline]24th March 2014[/editline]
[QUOTE=Venezuelan;44337029]But they were still shooting him when he was face down, immobile on the ground a good distance from them with no indication of having a gun[/QUOTE]
With beanbags and he clearly had a knife in his hand still and wasn't dropping it when commanded to.
[QUOTE=Venezuelan;44337029][QUOTE=WastedJamacan;44337017]They only used lethal force when he was an immediate threat, which is what they're trained to do.[/QUOTE]
But they were still shooting him when he was face down, immobile on the ground a good distance from them with no indication of having a gun[/QUOTE]
Beanbag rounds are not lethal force.
When a person with a rifle is yelling at you to get on the ground, pulling a knife is the last thing you want to do. Although arguing for 3 hours with people with rifles pointed at you is not a good idea in the first place. The guy clearly had mental issues. But that doesn't give him the right to pull knifes out in front of cops. It's an unfortunate situation.
[QUOTE=Moustacheman;44337027]The K9 is literally considered a police officer, as is its handler.[/QUOTE]
Yes, I get that. But the fact that he posts it in defence of the officers suggests that it is his opinion as well.
[QUOTE=Alice3173;44337036]
With beanbags and he clearly had a knife in his hand still and wasn't dropping it when commanded to.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=WastedJamacan;44337050]Beanbag rounds are not lethal force.[/QUOTE]
ah, wasn't aware those were beanbags, I'm bad at guns
edit: and also reading, woops
[QUOTE=anis;44337056][QUOTE=Moustacheman;44337027]The K9 is literally considered a police officer, as is its handler.[/QUOTE]
Yes, I get that. But the fact that he posts it in defence of the officers suggests that it is his opinion as well.[/QUOTE]
Or he could be stating that it's purely illegal to pull a knife on a K9. I tend to post facts to defend a side, not my opinion, so he could be too.
[added]1395646737[/added]
[QUOTE=Venezuelan;44337069][QUOTE=Alice3173;44337036]
With beanbags and he clearly had a knife in his hand still and wasn't dropping it when commanded to.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=WastedJamacan;44337050]Beanbag rounds are not lethal force.[/QUOTE]
ah, wasn't aware those were beanbags, I'm bad at guns[/QUOTE]
I would probably be more understanding if they hadn't yelled "beanbag" half a dozen times before firing.
[added]1395646772[/added]
:v:
[QUOTE=WastedJamacan;44337086]Or he could be stating that it's purely illegal to pull a knife on a K9. I tend to post facts to defend a side, not my opinion, so he could be too.
[/QUOTE]
What I'm getting at is that we shouldn't automatically go 'oh it's standard procedure, that's okay then'. Scrutinize the procedure.
[QUOTE=Venezuelan;44337069]ah, wasn't aware those were beanbags, I'm bad at guns[/QUOTE]
He yelled "Beanbag" though :v:
[QUOTE=Blazedol;44337108]He yelled "Beanbag" though :v:[/QUOTE]
sound's off, people are sleeping in my room
[QUOTE=anis;44337105][QUOTE=WastedJamacan;44337086]Or he could be stating that it's purely illegal to pull a knife on a K9. I tend to post facts to defend a side, not my opinion, so he could be too.
[/QUOTE]
What I'm getting at is that we shouldn't automatically go 'oh it's standard procedure, that's okay then'. Scrutinize the procedure.[/QUOTE]
Alright, let's discuss opinions then. I believe that a dog that has been trained essentially from birth to subdue criminals in a non-lethal way should be treated the same as the police officers who are in command of said dog when a weapon is pulled on them.
[QUOTE=anis;44337105]What I'm getting at is that we shouldn't automatically go 'oh it's standard procedure, that's okay then'. Scrutinize the procedure.[/QUOTE]
The dog is an officer. There is no other way around it. If you're going to try to kill a police dog you might as well be trying to kill the police chief. You'll be shot and it'll be justified.
Police dogs even get pension too
[QUOTE=aydin690;44337005]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] You say criminal history should play no part, but mental issues don't either, the laws the law.
[QUOTE=Alice3173;44337036]I'm a little amazed at how many people are actually saying the cops are at fault on this one. It's clearly the homeless guy's fault he got shot. His being mentally ill is completely irrelevant. [B]He was a real threat to the officers so they did what they were trained to do in an entirely reasonable manner. Doing otherwise would have endangered officers.[/B]
The police enforce the law. His camping where he was is illegal in that location so they couldn't just ignore it.[/QUOTE]
The cops MADE him a threat. Also, no. Cops here realize that their main duty is to serve and protect the public. As i mentioned before, i used to volunteer with a homelessness ngo and all the cops that i came in contact with turned a blind eye to personal drug use and other petty crimes because they realized that the last thing these poor bastards need is a possession charge. Let alone a retarded camping law.
But no, the cops in the video had to be dicks and harass the dude for 3 hours. What the fuck did they want him to do? Tear down his 'house' and set it up again when they go away? Move to a shelter? Most people don't like staying in shelters because fights, robberies, disease, etc are constant problems.
No shit the flashbang didn't do anything. You are outside you mouth breathing fucks, they rely on the concussive force of a contained space to be really effective. Hit him with four or five and you might accomplish something.
Moreover, get the goddamn beanbag shotgun and shoot him in the legs if you can't close to air tazer distance. Good luck stabbing someone after that.
If you flash bang him and nail him in the legs with less than lethal rounds, and he still approaches you, THEN you can shoot him.
And jesus, get rid of the dog.
Nothing even approaching a justified shoot. Sat there for three fucking hours and that was the best plan they could produce.
[QUOTE=GunFox;44337300]No shit the flashbang didn't do anything. You are outside you mouth breathing fucks, they rely on the concussive force of a contained space to be really effective. Hit him with four or five and you might accomplish something.
Moreover, get the goddamn beanbag shotgun and shoot him in the legs if you can't close to air tazer distance. Good luck stabbing someone after that.
If you flash bang him and nail him in the legs with less than lethal rounds, and he still approaches you, THEN you can shoot him.
And jesus, get rid of the dog.
Nothing even approaching a justified shoot. Sat there for three fucking hours and that was the best plan they could produce.[/QUOTE]
For somebody who acts like they know so much about weapons and warfare I can't believe you forgot that YOU DON'T AIM FOR SOMEBODY'S LEGS.
[QUOTE=OvB;44337160]The dog is an officer. There is no other way around it. If you're going to try to kill a police dog you might as well be trying to kill the police chief. You'll be shot and it'll be justified.[/QUOTE]
In practice, probably, but in terms of basic logic that is a sack of shit.
If I get a particularly stupid officer, give him a night stick and then unleash him to chase down armed suspects and proceed to use the immediate danger to the moron attack officer as justification to shoot people, that is utterly ridiculous.
You can't intentionally put your life in danger just so you can justify shooting a guy. Attack dogs are crap and have always been crap. There is no scenario I can think of where attack dogs are better than the alternative.
Bloodhounds are better at tracking, locating illicit goods, and are completely friendly. Given that their nose is 90% of their job, if not more, it makes far more sense to get the dog that is significantly more skilled at using theirs. Many departments already employ them because they are straight up better police dogs.
[editline]24th March 2014[/editline]
[QUOTE=InvaderNouga;44337349]For somebody who acts like they know so much about weapons and warfare I can't believe you forgot that YOU DON'T AIM FOR SOMEBODY'S LEGS.[/QUOTE]
Less than lethal shotguns are always aimed at extremities. Shots to center mass can cause internal bleeding and kill people. It is also why they are always employed alongside firearms equipped with live rounds which people DO use to shoot at center mass, should the bags fail and the suspect rushes officers.
I got this, yo.
I've seen these videos before, american law enforcement is fucking disgusting. He even shot at an angle that could have hit his friends or the dog.
Seriously? how much damage can a hobo do vs a bunch of armored gunnuts and an attack dog, atleast fucking sacrifice the dog if you got to sacrifice something. American tries to be all high and mighty on human rights but the price of a criminals life is non existant.
edited:
oh wow, shooting him in the ass with beanbags from 3 meters away when hes not even moving :v: Jesus Christ.
[QUOTE=Aksi;44337529]I've seen these videos before, american law enforcement is fucking disgusting. He even shot at an angle that could have hit his friends or the dog.
[/QUOTE]
But he didn't hit his friends or the dog.
From the video he only took two shots at the suspect and he had a clear line of sight.
[QUOTE=Aksi;44337529]
Seriously? how much damage can a hobo do vs a bunch of armored gunnuts and an attack dog, atleast fucking sacrifice the dog if you got to sacrifice something. American tries to be all high and mighty on human rights but the price of a criminals life is non existant.
[/QUOTE]
Seriously? Do you really want to know how much damage a hobo with two knives in his hand can do? If I were the cop, I'd rather not see and find out.
Couldn't they taze him?
[editline]24th March 2014[/editline]
[QUOTE=Aksi;44337529]
oh wow, shooting him in the ass with beanbags from 3 meters away when hes not even moving :v: Jesus Christ.[/QUOTE]
They were yelling for him to put his hands behind his back after he got shot and dropped on the ground after which they shot him an extra couple of times. He was fucking unable to move.
How the fuck can someone justify what they did here? This was fucking disgusting.
American police really needs to stop over reacting to everything by shooting and killing people who needs help.
from the video and the backstory i can see that, in that situation, they did the right thing - they didn't really have much of a choice. the guy was waving a knife after a 3 hour standoff and wasn't submissive so they fired
but the situation the police created was fucking retarded. i know it's a cliched non-american post but the american police force seems way too reliant on guns as both the first and last resort. it looks like they weren't even packing a single non-lethal alternative to the situation. in all of these threads i'm always so interested to imagine the hypothetical situation where this goes down in the UK with unarmed officers
The question which hasn't really come up yet is why didn't they beanbag him first? If he comes after you after being shot with a less than lethal round then yeah, subdue him with lethal ammunition.
[editline]24th March 2014[/editline]
[QUOTE=ChestyMcGee;44338298]from the video and the backstory i can see that, in that situation, they did the right thing - they didn't really have much of a choice. the guy was waving a knife after a 3 hour standoff and wasn't submissive so they fired
but the situation the police created was fucking retarded. i know it's a cliched non-american post but the american police force seems way too reliant on guns as both the first and last resort. it looks like they weren't even packing a single non-lethal alternative to the situation. in all of these threads i'm always so interested to imagine the hypothetical situation where this goes down in the UK with unarmed officers[/QUOTE]
Probably like this, use higher numbers and crowding techniques.
Skip to 3:15
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cX5CPx4RKWw[/media]
[QUOTE=dannass;44338219]How the fuck can someone justify what they did here? This was fucking disgusting.
American police really needs to stop over reacting to everything by shooting and killing people who needs help.[/QUOTE]
Yeah why do we even bother with anything. Crazy hobo with a knife? Just let him be, why try to prevent danger? We can worry about him when someone calls 911 and asks for help.
[QUOTE=cherry gmod;44338300]Probably like this, use higher numbers and crowding techniques.[/QUOTE]
this reminds me of a thread where a cop ended up shooting someone and i said "where was his partner? don't the police have partners?"
uk police almost always operate in pairs as a minimum and seriously just doing that must completely negate the need for firearms in 90% of situations
[QUOTE=cherry gmod;44338300][media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cX5CPx4RKWw[/media][/QUOTE]
Funny thing is that guy had total control, not the police. He could do [I]anything[/I] he wanted. He could hop in the fucking police car and take off if he wanted. What are they gonna go about it? They're armed with sticks and he has a big knife.
[QUOTE=Mr. Someguy;44338377]Funny thing is that guy had total control, not the police. He could do [I]anything[/I] he wanted. He could hop in the fucking police car and take off if he wanted. What are they gonna go about it? They're armed with sticks and he has a big knife.[/QUOTE]
yeh probably should have just shot him straight away
[QUOTE=Mr. Someguy;44338377]Funny thing is that guy had total control, not the police. He could do [I]anything[/I] he wanted. He could hop in the fucking police car and take off if he wanted. What are they gonna go about it? They're armed with sticks and he has a big knife.[/QUOTE]
Your misreading the situation, There where more of them and they kept him in one place until the riot police could get there. He was NOT in control. Even if he tried to run, they have cars.
The fact that he was subdued in the end should show that.
Even then, the point I am making is that not every knife wielding madman situation has to end in bullets being fired, something that a few police in america don't seem to get.
But you can't blame them, give a policeman a gun and 90% of the time he will use it in a situation like this.
i'd love to see someone hop in a car, put their knife down to use both hands, turn on the engine, put it in gear, and drive away without being arrested by 30 officers anyway because that would be really impressive
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.