RPG Advocate
Critical Thinker
- Joined
- Sep 19, 2002
- Messages
- 281
And to forestall the "he was advancing on someone else" interpretation:
I think maybe this officer is a liar and a murderer.
When are police killings justified?
- Thread starter lionking
- Start date
And to forestall the "he was advancing on someone else" interpretation:
I think maybe this officer is a liar and a murderer.
Kevin_Lowe
Unregistered
- Joined
- Feb 10, 2003
- Messages
- 12,221
C'mon LK buddy. When you asked if we wanted to see video I assumed that YOU would be posting them, not throwing a link out and leaving it to me to decide which was the one you wanted me to see.
Luckily it was an easy job. The thread had precisely one video where a man was tasered. But it was subsequently found that the Taser was ineffective because it did not engage skin only clothing. This IS a potential problem but I believe they have modified the projectile barbs in an attempt to overcome this without "over penetrating".
So any more - cos I've spent the last 1/2 watching real life situations where the Taser has done it's job effectively every time?
Luckily it was an easy job. The thread had precisely one video where a man was tasered. But it was subsequently found that the Taser was ineffective because it did not engage skin only clothing. This IS a potential problem but I believe they have modified the projectile barbs in an attempt to overcome this without "over penetrating".
So any more - cos I've spent the last 1/2 watching real life situations where the Taser has done it's job effectively every time?
Tapio
Muse
- Joined
- Sep 29, 2008
- Messages
- 756
Yes, I've always wondered about this guideline as well...but there doesn't seem to be more injuries of police officers or the puiblic because of it, though...then again, Finnish people don't pride themselves in owning guns...go figure. Anyway, I've also learned that the shoot first in the leg/arm regulation is not necessarily a valid option, so no need to get into that.
I think it has more to do with what Darat wrote earlier. I mean the general need of police officers to be as restricted as possible when it comes to hurting/killing people. There will always be exaggerated reactions (not talking about the case at hand) and I believe the extent of them to be in relation with how tight the restrictions are.
ETA: Related to topic. Just checked. In Finland a man was killed by the police last February (a clear cut situation - the guy had already shot and wounded another man and was about to continue). The previous Police killing before that was in 1997. It is estimated that less than ten officers (out of 7500) per year fire or even need to unholster their weapon in a situation...
(in the last 92 years 120 Finnish police officers have died while in duty)
Last edited:
Victoria Police is one of the world's largest and most professional police forces (as I recall there are only a few larger). I worked there at the time the effectiveness of tasers was evaluated. They were not effective. If they were they would be in use.
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through
No, it doesn't. But it's a legitimate question: if his back was towards one officer, and the other was in the car, against whom was there a sufficiently immediate threat to warrant shooting the man in the back? I'm not claiming to know the answer, but it seems clear that it should be asked.
Dave
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2006
- Messages
- 54,545
I thought there were 4 shots fired. Which one was that?
Kevin_Lowe
Unregistered
- Joined
- Feb 10, 2003
- Messages
- 12,221
The Victorian police are also the butt of jokes here in Australia for being trigger-happy. To what extent the popular view represents reality I cannot say.
commandlinegamer
Philosopher
I remember an issue of Focus magazine about 10-12 years ago discussing non-lethal methods of entrapment for criminals: thick incredibly sticky glue, nets (remember Running Man), grenades which fire small rubber balls instead of fragmentation. At that time I don't think Tazers were commonly available. Then you have the older methods like rubber or plastic bullets, water cannon.
I can't recall hearing about any of these newer options in a real-world scenario though.
I can't recall hearing about any of these newer options in a real-world scenario though.
Damien Evans
Up The Irons
What? No they're not, don't be ridiculous.
I think RPG Advocate has posted the entire reason that I don't trust anything the cop says about this - no one is being threatened by someone who has their back to them and is not armed with a gun or explosive device. I mean what, the guy was running backwards at him rapidly while waving a sword over his shoulder?
Someone is lying a lot, and it's not the corpse.
Someone is lying a lot, and it's not the corpse.
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2006
- Messages
- 54,545
The thing is that some of those can be lethal, or they depend largely on the target complying because of the pain. The sticky glue can easily block someones airway. Net guns don't seem to be effective in real life, and the rest are just there to hurt.
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through
Presumably, the one the article linked in the OP was talking about when it said he was shot in the upper back. Again, it seems legitimate to me to ask what, given that he was shot in the back, was the nature of the immediate threat.
Dave
Victoria Police - 11,100 personnel
London Met - 31,400 personnel
New York PD - 33,838 personnel
Chicago PD - 13,400 personnel
South African Police - 90,000+ personnel
Personnel does not include civilian admin. I won't even mention other US states and Canada and Russia and India, Brazil and China. That claim is not correct by a long chalk.
I'm sure that your officers are just as good or bad as every force throughout the developed world. Having said that, as recently as 2007 this was suggested;
And spookily, this was an issue that dogged the force throughout the 80's and 90's (my bold):
The full details are here
I'm not attempting to derail, part of this post is entirely relevant. I'm simply setting the record straight with regard to your quoted assertions.
Last edited:
Rasmus
Philosopher
- Joined
- Jul 27, 2005
- Messages
- 6,372
Presumably, there would have been other people around?
rockinkt
Master Poster
- Joined
- May 20, 2008
- Messages
- 2,342
Police officers in Canada have to assess not only the immediate risk to themselves or the general public - but also the potential risk to the public if the perpetrator is allowed to carry on their actions or escape.
ETA: Anybody that thinks a couple of swords being swung by someone on the street who is also behaving erratically is not a potential/possible danger to the general public is just not thinking clearly.
Putting it mildly - it is a very difficult decision to make. Most of the time - in Canada - they get it right. However, to try and claim that they always get it right is pretty silly.
I cannot make a professional assessment of what happened in the situation described in the OP - but hopefully - some facts will come forward that will lend themselves to clearing what seems to be a pretty muddy situation.
BTW Tazers - or conducted energy weapons - are not the panacea that some would like to believe. Tazers can cause the heart to beat erratically or stop.
Even the company that makes them in the US has put out warnings not use them in the chest area.
ETA: Anybody that thinks a couple of swords being swung by someone on the street who is also behaving erratically is not a potential/possible danger to the general public is just not thinking clearly.
Putting it mildly - it is a very difficult decision to make. Most of the time - in Canada - they get it right. However, to try and claim that they always get it right is pretty silly.
I cannot make a professional assessment of what happened in the situation described in the OP - but hopefully - some facts will come forward that will lend themselves to clearing what seems to be a pretty muddy situation.
BTW Tazers - or conducted energy weapons - are not the panacea that some would like to believe. Tazers can cause the heart to beat erratically or stop.
Even the company that makes them in the US has put out warnings not use them in the chest area.
Last edited:
It seems like an unreasonable assumption that the statements support the police officer's account.
Moreover, any number of 'statements' do not destroy physical evidence. Any number of people at all can state that someone grew wings and flew to the moon, but that still doesn't make it physically possible. You cannot grow wings and fly to the moon any more than you can shoot someone who is charging you in the back.
Information Analyst
Penultimate Amazing
I recently r-ewatched a 1993 documentary about the South African police flying squad in Soweto in the last days of apartheid, in which one officer stated that if facing a hostile crowd brandishing anything other than firearms, they were suppose to shoot for the legs in the first instance. Whether they actual did might be another question, but that was what their guidelines were.
In relation to swords there was the similar case in the UK of Simon Murden, who - under the influence of drugs and sleep deprivation - drove his van the wrong way up a dual carriageway and eventually crashed. Armed police arrived on the scene, and when Murden was 14 metres from them, he brandished an African sword. He was shot twice with baton rounds (plastic bullets) to no effect. Another officer then shot Murden twice using a Heckler & Koch MP5 semi-automatic carbine. When Murden did not react, he shot him twice more, which caused him collapse to his knees. When he got up again, the officer fired twice more, and Murden collapsed to the ground. Officers claimed that he appeared to try to get up, whilst pointing the sword in their direction. He was shot three more time. At this point he was still 9 metres away from the officers. A coroner ruled it justifiable homicide, but to me it seems that under the circumstances only the first four live rounds were fully justified. Just because he got to his feet after that doesn't mean he was in a position to immediately harm anyone, given the distance between himself and the officers. This is even more pertinent with shots 7-9, when he was on the ground and merely pointing the sword at the officers.
rockinkt
Master Poster
- Joined
- May 20, 2008
- Messages
- 2,342
I do know for a fact that "...a man armed with weapons in a busy residential area, acting in a dangerous, violent and irrational manner*". (*Direct quote from Coroner Audrey Jamieson's report)
is not one that can be let to wander too long without some sort of police intervention.
<sarcasm> I suggest that a test be conducted where Coroner Audrey Jamieson is confronted by a man armed with weapons in a busy residential area, acting in a dangerous, violent and irrational manner. If she is still alive at the hospital - maybe she could then give us her thoughts on how the situation should have been handled.<sarcasm>