When are police killings justified?

bluesjnr said:
It's difficult to comment on this specific case as there is not enough information. ...snip... There is just not enough info to give an informed opinion but I'm going for unjustified in this instance. Police forces should at all times be in the position to use incapacitating but non-deadly force. These officers do not appear to have had the tools at their disposal (Taser) that would have allowed that.
Click to expand...

Given the same caveats I pretty much agree with what you have posted.

___________

I simply think the police should be constrained in the same way the rest of us are i.e. the only time when I think police are "justified" in killing someone is when someone's life is in imminent danger (or serious injury), otherwise they should be legally constrained to use other solutions.
 
Darat said:
I simply think the police should be constrained in the same way the rest of us are i.e. the only time when I think police are "justified" in killing someone is when someone's life is in imminent danger (or serious injury), otherwise they should be legally constrained to use other solutions.
Click to expand...

I really hope you are not going to come up with the "shoot in the leg" argument?
 
lionking said:
Interesting comment. Are you saying police have never been killed by armed lunatics? Do you want me to name them?
Click to expand...

*bang*
*bang*

That was close, it nearly got me. Oh no, look out Darat, a straw man right behind you!

lionking said:
I really hope you are not going to come up with the "shoot in the leg" argument?
Click to expand...

*bang*
*bang*

I get the feeling that won't be the last of them, either.
 
lionking said:
A coroner in Melbourne has just found that a police officer may have committed an offence when he shot dead a man wielding two swords in a busy Melbourne street.





http://news.theage.com.au/breaking-...police-over-fatal-shooting-20091023-hcfo.html


I'm watching an Australian ABC Four Corners show analysing police killings like this aimed at showing the culpability of police when confronting violent, albeit psychotic, people.

I'm afraid I have very little sympathy for people killed by police in these circumstances. What say you?
Click to expand...

I think it's completely irrelevant whether one has 'sympathy' for the person shot or not. All that matters is whether there was a reasonable alternative to shooting/killing them or whether it was unavoidable.
 
lionking said:
Very funny. Care to post something on topic?
Click to expand...

Lionking, you are trying to find confrontation in peoples posts where there is none. So you are inventing strawman positions for them to hold. People here have not made definitive statements in opposition to your position. Wait for someone to do that and argue with them, at the moment you are really just trolling.
 
Elaedith said:
I think it's completely irrelevant whether one has 'sympathy' for the person shot or not. All that matters is whether there was a reasonable alternative to shooting/killing them or whether it was unavoidable.
Click to expand...
Yeah, sympathy was probably the wrong word.

But I have problems with police doing their duty, as I see it, being criticised by people like the coroner, who has never faced an angry armed man.

Tell me, what would you do if confronted in this way?
 
lionking said:
A coroner in Melbourne has just found that a police officer may have committed an offence when he shot dead a man wielding two swords in a busy Melbourne street.





http://news.theage.com.au/breaking-...police-over-fatal-shooting-20091023-hcfo.html


I'm watching an Australian ABC Four Corners show analysing police killings like this aimed at showing the culpability of police when confronting violent, albeit psychotic, people.

I'm afraid I have very little sympathy for people killed by police in these circumstances. What say you?
Click to expand...
Same thing. Why is your ABC dipsoid crazy??
 
OK, the coroner ruled it unjustifiable because a stun gun was adequate, BUT THEY DIDN"T HAVE STUN GUNS! I could see the coroner ruling that the victim's death was due to a shot to the back, but then shut up and don't over step your bounds. This isn't CSI: Miami we are talking about here. Well, maybe they do it that way in Victoria.

The fact that the officer got out alone may be a bit of useful info, what different scenario could be played out though if both cops got out of the car? TWO shots to the back? A drugged up maniac swing two swords around in public, and then attacks the police? Suicide by Cop is what I call it.
 
lionking said:
Yeah, sympathy was probably the wrong word.

But I have problems with police doing their duty, as I see it, being criticised by people like the coroner, who has never faced an angry armed man.

Tell me, what would you do if confronted in this way?
Click to expand...

The coroner only stated that they did not follow accepted procedure. It is entirely possible that they didn't, and that they did act inapropraitely and that apropriate action might not have resulted in this mans death.
 
Careyp74 said:
OK, the coroner ruled it unjustifiable because a stun gun was adequate, BUT THEY DIDN"T HAVE STUN GUNS! I could see the coroner ruling that the victim's death was due to a shot to the back, but then shut up and don't over step your bounds. This isn't CSI: Miami we are talking about here. Well, maybe they do it that way in Victoria.

The fact that the officer got out alone may be a bit of useful info, what different scenario could be played out though if both cops got out of the car? TWO shots to the back? A drugged up maniac swing two swords around in public, and then attacks the police? Suicide by Cop is what I call it.
Click to expand...

I agree. But at least one cop's career looks like being ruined here.
 
lionking said:
Yeah, sympathy was probably the wrong word.

But I have problems with police doing their duty, as I see it, being criticised by people like the coroner, who has never faced an angry armed man.

Tell me, what would you do if confronted in this way?
Click to expand...

I have no idea what I would do, and that's why I would not apply to join the police force.

Nobody is beyond criticism and everybody is accountable for their actions and whether they carried out their duties appropriately according to their training. If people don't want to find themselves in such situations and be held accountable for their actions, nobody is forcing them to apply for the job.

If the coroner criticised them, presumably the coroner feels that there was an alternative course of action open to them.
 
I have one very, very big problem with the "shoot anyone who's threatening" interpretation of this incident.

Biggs was drug-affected and waving two samurai-style swords when he was shot in the upper back by Sergeant Samuel Cahir at an intersection in Carlton North.
Click to expand...

If he was an immediate threat to the officer firing the shot, how did the shot hit him in the back?

Dave
 
Carlton is a highly populated inner city area. Would you let someone with two samuari swords run away to endanger others?
 
Dave Rogers said:
If he was an immediate threat to the officer firing the shot, how did the shot hit him in the back?

Dave
Click to expand...

Because his back was toward him. Just because his back was toward the one police officer does not mean that the shooting must have been unjustified though.
 
Tapio said:
You know, in Finland that is the official guideline for police officers in situations like this...
Click to expand...

Well that is a guideline certain to endanger police. I have some knowledge in this area. Police are trained to aim for the body mass. Well maybe anywhere other than Finland.
 
lionking said:
Well that is a guideline certain to endanger police. I have some knowledge in this area. Police are trained to aim for the body mass. Well maybe anywhere other than Finland.
Click to expand...

Or kill people having an episode unnessacarily. You can not count on shooting someone in the leg to be non fatal after all.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom