Shooting of homeless man was justified, apparently. (disturbing video)
138 replies, posted
[QUOTE=anis;44336402]Summary execution.
"A person is accused of a crime and then immediately killed without benefit of a full and fair trial."
edit:
Funny to watch you guys attempt to rationalize the gunning down of a mentally disturbed homeless guy.[/QUOTE]
What.
Arizona statute 13-405 (Justified Deadly Force)
[quote]A. A person is justified in threatening or using deadly physical force against another:
1. If such person would be justified in threatening or using physical force against the other under section 13-404 [Self Defense], and
2. When and to the degree a reasonable person would believe that deadly physical force is immediately necessary to protect himself against the other's use or attempted use of unlawful deadly physical force.
B. A person has no duty to retreat before threatening or using deadly physical force pursuant to this section if the person is in a place where the person may legally be and is not engaged in an unlawful act.
[/quote]
[QUOTE=cherry gmod;44338401]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.[/QUOTE]
I dunno about him being in control. Every time he yelled, they would step back. Every step he took, they moved 3x that distance in the opposite direction. It seemed like he was controlling them. If he had started walking down the street, they'd move around him. If he hopped in one of the cars, he would be able to take off before they tried anything. There was nothing they could do to stop him that wouldn't risk themselves, and they weren't willing to do that, thus he had more control than they did.
In America, if you charge at a cop with a knife, you get shot. Everyone knows this everywhere, and they all know it's a terrible idea. And for the most part, it works, and people don't go apeshit on armed police like they own the world. And if they do, they got shot, and it's 100% their fault.
[editline]24th March 2014[/editline]
[QUOTE=ChestyMcGee;44338405]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[/QUOTE]
Easy, they aren't willing to touch the guy, he's got all the personal space he needs to do all those things.
[QUOTE=ChestyMcGee;44338405]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[/QUOTE]
you can probably run faster than a police issue vauxhaul astra anyway
[QUOTE=Mr. Someguy;44338456]I dunno about him being in control. Every time he yelled, they would step back. Every step he took, they moved 3x that distance in the opposite direction. It seemed like he was controlling them. If he had started walking down the street, they'd move around him. If he hopped in one of the cars, he would be able to take off before they tried anything. There was nothing they could do to stop him that wouldn't risk themselves, and they weren't willing to do that, thus he had more control than they did.
In America, if you charge at a cop with a knife, you get shot. Everyone knows this everywhere, and they all know it's a terrible idea. And for the most part, it works, and people don't go apeshit on armed police like they own the world. And if they do, they got shot, and it's 100% their fault.
[editline]24th March 2014[/editline]
Easy, they aren't willing to touch the guy, he's got all the personal space he needs to do all those things.[/QUOTE]
Then why didn't he? If he had every opportunity as you say to get out of there why didn't he?
At the end of the day he was subdued and he was NOT shot to death. Which is a 100% better outcome than being shot to death in my opinion.
[QUOTE=Trunk Monkay;44336258]The guy had a 20 year long criminal history with history of violence against law enforcement, he was armed with a few blades and was pulling a knife on the dog when he was shot.
like is it REALLY that hard to read the entire article, not just the 2 or 3 out of context lines the OP posted?[/QUOTE]
He was pulling a knife when he turned around and bent over?
[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]
Look up the Dinkheller traffic stop. The situation with mentally unstable suspects can go downhill faster than an officer can control. It's a huge gamble and a dangerous senario.
Not saying police should walk around executing mentally handicapped people but when they're armed they're unpredictable.
[QUOTE=cherry gmod;44338503]Then why didn't he? If he had every opportunity as you say to get out of there why didn't he?
At the end of the day he was subdued and he was NOT shot to death. Which is a 100% better outcome than being shot to death in my opinion.[/QUOTE]
I don't know why he didn't, that's his prerogative. I'm saying he could have if he wanted to. [del]And if he did, he probably could have escaped too, since iirc English police are also forbidden to get into chases after a certain point (do tell me if I'm wrong on this one, btw)[/del].
Anyway, this works for you because Europe in general is a lot more tame. The police are more tame, criminals are more tame. It doesn't work like that here, criminals are a lot more violent (product of society and healthcare), so police need to be better armed and more alert.
[QUOTE=Mr. Someguy;44338565]English police are also forbidden to get into chases after a certain point (do tell me if I'm wrong on this one, btw).
[/QUOTE]
That ones an urban myth. We don't stop chases, no matter what the daily mail would like you to believe. And we have a fair few helicopters to keep track from the sky.
Also, i doubt the police leave their keys in the ignition. :v:
I think if someone is a knife wielding madman he should be treated as such, a madman who has a knife, so be subdued rather than killed.
I will agree with you that the violence stems from a problem which is quite separate from police with guns, however, i feel that having police armed with deadly force does not do anything to help quell that violence. In the same way that the death penalty does nothing to stop such serious crimes.
Obviously there are loads of things which would have to change, i just feel that this is one of them, along with improved quality of life, stricter gun control (or even banning them outright), better healthcare, more rational police force.
[QUOTE=Code3Response;44338444]What.
Arizona statute 13-405 (Justified Deadly Force)[/QUOTE]
What's your point?
Just quote the statute and everything is alright?
Are you incapable of thinking for yourself?
The problem I have with crap like you just quoted is that you apply it broadly over many situations, in which there are bound to be cases where it is unjust or immoral. It's almost as if the cops are robots following some strict, inflexible rules. Wait...
[QUOTE=Mr. Someguy;44338565]I don't know why he didn't, that's his prerogative[/QUOTE]
and i'm willing to bet the police could tell that was his prerogative too... because they are trained police men
although it looks messy as hell, i think those officers gauged and responded to that situation perfectly - they could tell the guy was crazy but they could tell there was no real commitment in any of his movements. you can tell just looking at that video that the guy isn't really going anywhere and none of his lunges at the police have any sort of real commitment or weight behind them
in the end, they arrested the guy and from the looks of things no one was hurt. if it was america he'd be dead. and that isn't a "hurr america is shit" british dig, that's kind of just a fact - american law enforcement protocol would state that bloke should have been shot until he was no longer moving
After watching the video and seeing the guy holding two massive kitchen knives in each hand, even after being shot, I get why the police acted the way they did. Hell, if some crazy dude possibly high off PCP or who knows what else threatening to stab me, i'd probably shoot them too if I had a gun.
[QUOTE=anis;44338839]What's your point?
Just quote the statute and everything is alright?
Are you incapable of thinking for yourself?
The problem I have with crap like you just quoted is that you apply it broadly over many situations, in which there are bound to be cases where it is unjust or immoral. It's almost as if the cops are robots following some strict, inflexible rules. Wait...[/QUOTE]
Its suppose to be applied to many situations. Its how you justify the use of deadly force. Just because you think its immoral doesnt mean everyone else does. Morals are relative. The officers involved were cleared in the shooting by a jury of citizens.
[editline]24th March 2014[/editline]
[QUOTE=cherry gmod;44338672]
Obviously there are loads of things which would have to change, i just feel that this is one of them, along with improved quality of life, stricter gun control (or even banning them outright), better healthcare, more rational police force.[/QUOTE]
I would agree with all of these, minus the national police force. We're just too diverse and vast to have one central force. Policing in the mountains of WV is not the same as policing in the fields of IA. Same goes for policing in New York City vs Alabama
[QUOTE=Mr. Someguy;44338360]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]
Look at the video, they didn't try anything else to stop him from not doing anything. He just stood there. They could do so much more than just shooting him. Send the dog on him, tazer him, shoot him with those bag guns they used on him after he dropped to the ground. Hell even shoot him in the legs. But that shit they did right there, that wasn't thought out at all. Just brutal abuse of power.
[QUOTE=dannass;44339743]Look at the video, they didn't try anything else to stop him from not doing anything. He just stood there. They could do so much more than just shooting him. Send the dog on him, tazer him, shoot him with those bag guns they used on him after he dropped to the ground. Hell even shoot him in the legs. But that shit they did right there, that wasn't thought out at all. Just brutal abuse of power.[/QUOTE] Yeah, send the dog on him! We know for a fact he wouldn't try to stab it or anything!
Life is just one big game of DarkRP
[QUOTE=dannass;44339743]Look at the video, they didn't try anything else to stop him from not doing anything. He just stood there. They could do so much more than just shooting him. Send the dog on him, tazer him, shoot him with those bag guns they used on him after he dropped to the ground. [B]Hell even shoot him in the legs.[/B] But that shit they did right there, that wasn't thought out at all. Just brutal abuse of power.[/QUOTE]
there's always THAT guy in these threads.
i fucking hate the police, first they flash the guy and he says he cant move. and was not able to hear from that flash bang most likely. wtf.
fuck the police
Seems to me that they just lost patience with him and decided to take him down, even though they had no reason to other than he had a knife.
where the hell is areolop
[QUOTE=CabooseRvB;44337552]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]
I'm not sure how high above the eyes the helmet cams are but it looks like he was aiming with the flashlight, that's not very precise.
[QUOTE=formatme;44341006]i fucking hate the police, first they flash the guy and he says he cant move. and was not able to hear from that flash bang most likely. wtf.
fuck the police[/QUOTE]
I've had a flashbang used against me in a mock arrest for demonstration. I drove a car and had two SWAT SUV's do a high-risk stop where they ram into the front and rear of your vehicle (though they didn't actually crash into me) and then they threw two flashbangs on either side of the car I was in, windows down, and it was loud and scared the hell out of me, but I was not deaf, just disoriented by the loud, sudden noise.
When someone's reaction, after a 3 hour standoff, having a flashbang go off and a dog charging you, is to grab a knife, that person is insane. It was scary enough having geared out police with M4's flashbang and pull me out of a car and throw me to the ground in a mock scenario.
It's unfortunate the man had to die, and that lethal force was used when they could have beanbagged him first, but he was clearly insane to resort to violence seeing how escalated the situation had become, it would be a suicide by cop if the man was in a right state of mind.
[QUOTE=lintz;44341227]where the hell is Code3Response[/QUOTE]
I am here. Shooting was justified in the eyes of the jury.
Quick breakdown from what I can from the article:
At the begining you can hear the suspect say "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" which to me would indicate a mental health problem. Going further the article says that the man had a 20 year record of violence and spent most of that time in and out of jails and mental institutions.
As for the shooting. The officers only shot the man once he pulled a knife on the K9. The K9 handler did not have a weapon drawn so the officers acted to protect him and the dog. Less lethal was used before this point in the form of a beanbag round in conjuncture with a flashbang. Flashbangs do not completely blind you nor make you deaf completely. The suspect should have followed the orders past that and not pulled a knife out.
While many believe that the shooting should have never happened, it was to protect the K9 and its handler. Anyone saying they should've done something else needs to watch the video and see the beanbag shotgun being used more than once to get compliance along with a flashbang.
That being said, as soon as the knife came out, it was time to use deadly force. He already made threats to the officers. Following IMAO: He has the Intent, Means, Ability, and Opportunity to hurt the officers. Lethal force justified.
[QUOTE=outlawpickle;44341386]I've had a flashbang used against me in a mock arrest for demonstration. I drove a car and had two SWAT SUV's do a high-risk stop where they ram into the front and rear of your vehicle (though they didn't actually crash into me) and then they threw two flashbangs on either side of the car I was in, windows down, and it was loud and scared the hell out of me, but I was not deaf, just disoriented by the loud, sudden noise.
When someone's reaction, after a 3 hour standoff, having a flashbang go off and a dog charging you, is to grab a knife, that person is insane. It was scary enough having geared out police with M4's flashbang and pull me out of a car and throw me to the ground in a mock scenario.
It's unfortunate the man had to die, and that lethal force was used when they could have beanbagged him first, but he was clearly insane to resort to violence seeing how escalated the situation had become, it would be a suicide by cop if the man was in a right state of mind.[/QUOTE]
Training flashbangs are generally used for demonstrations. The are loud and have a bang like a flashbang, but they aren't anything approaching the real severity. Real flashbangs are dangerous and can cause pretty serious damage or start fires. Just like all less-than-lethal products.
Two flashbangs in a car would leave you completely unable to function and potentially with eardrum damage.
[QUOTE=GunFox;44341602]Training flashbangs are generally used for demonstrations. The are loud and have a bang like a flashbang, but they aren't anything approaching the real severity. Real flashbangs are dangerous and can cause pretty serious damage or start fires. Just like all less-than-lethal products.
Two flashbangs in a car would leave you completely unable to function and potentially with eardrum damage.[/QUOTE]
They were real flashbangs, and were thrown on the pavement next to the car, specifically to not cause a fire. We were on a firing range because the SWAT leader wanted to use real flashbangs to get the full effect. I have no doubt that a flashbang in an enclosed space, or right next to your head, would have greater effect, and they still did make me jump and disorient me but they're nowhere near the effect of flashbangs in a video game.
There was very little else I could do or think from the time of the flashbangs going off to having an M4 barrel pointed at me through the driver's seat window. They're incredibly effective at disorienting someone to get that split second to take control of a situation, don't get the wrong idea, there just wasn't any ringing in my ear or loss of vision, which was what my prior virtual experience with them led me to believe.
Why not just tase him or use rubber bullets?
I mean sure he was a threat, but he was carrying a knife, not an handgun or anything.
[QUOTE=Code3Response;44341567]He has the Intent, Means, Ability, and Opportunity to hurt the officers. Lethal force justified.[/QUOTE]/thread
only in america
lol @ cop yelling BOOYAH
[QUOTE=headshotter;44341805]Why not just tase him or use rubber bullets?
I mean sure he was a threat, but he was carrying a knife, not an handgun or anything.[/QUOTE]
they were using beanbag rounds already.
[QUOTE=dannass;44339743]Look at the video, they didn't try anything else to stop him from not doing anything. He just stood there. They could do so much more than just shooting him. Send the dog on him, tazer him, shoot him with those bag guns they used on him after he dropped to the ground. Hell even shoot him in the legs. But that shit they did right there, that wasn't thought out at all. Just brutal abuse of power.[/QUOTE]
A taser fires its probes at a relatively slow 55 m/s [del][i]once[/i][/del] (nevermind, there's a 2 shot version in use by law enforcement but I don't know if they had these. Still not the safest option.) If you miss, you are dead. Everything else you said has absolutely no guarantee to work, and shooting him in the legs could puncture the femoral artery and cause death anyways. Pain compliance doesn't work against someone on heavy stimulants, and if that happens to be the case, you are dead. The only guaranteed way to incapacitate someone is to disrupt their central nervous system. So [i]clearly[/i] they should've shot him in the spine and paralyzed him, obviously they killed him because they're a bunch of pussies who can't aim.
[QUOTE=Altimor;44343274]A taser fires its probes at a relatively slow 55 m/s [i]once[/i]. If you miss, you are dead. Everything else you said has absolutely no guarantee to work, and shooting him in the legs could puncture the femoral artery and cause death anyways. Pain compliance doesn't work against someone on heavy stimulants, and if that happens to be the case, you are dead. The only guaranteed way to incapacitate someone is to disrupt their central nervous system. So [i]clearly[/i] they should've shot him in the spine and paralyzed him, obviously they killed him because they're a bunch of pussies who can't aim.[/QUOTE]
They[I] are[/I] a bunch of pussies who can't aim.
At that range an AR-15 would be laser accurate. A fucking handgun would be laser accurate. No windage, no drop, no nothing.
He wasn't an immediate threat and approaching him is dangerous. Shooting extremities even with live rounds would be preferable to rushing him like an idiot. Your femoral artery doesn't extend to the knee. Shoot him in the knee. 5.56 through your knee will permanently cripple you and render you incapable of using the joint. Mind you, I'm NEVER the guy saying "should have shot him in the leg", so recognize that when I say they should have shot him in the leg, I'm not just spewing bullshit. Neutralizing a man with a knife and neutralizing a man with a gun are two different things. If he can't run, he can't effectively employ knives.
When your life is threatened you never aim for extremities. When you are all standing there and you need to disable someone at a distance, police sharp shooters do indeed shoot for arms and legs.
This "oh all our non lethal options failed, lets rush the guy with the knife" plan was fundamentally moronic. No shit if you close to knife distance, the guy with the knives becomes a threat.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.