How far will the excuses to shoot go?

[The Dark Lord]

It seems he thought it might be dangerous. So the sensible thing was was to go out with his gun ready.

 

[triforcharity]

It is a question that you should be able to answer as it is not just the police who deal with out of their face drug addicts. So how do others do it

Usually when "others" deal with them, (paramedics, doctors, etc) they've already been subdued by the police, who are there to make sure the other responders are safe.

and why are you saying the police should just shoot them?

And there's the straw man. Nobody is claiming that. Nobody. In fact, quite the opposite. You're intentionally wording your responses to be loaded and poisoned.

 

[triforcharity]

I only looked at the opening frame of that video and it looks like there are more than one officer on the scene. Austin however exited the police station alone with only his gun between him and the unknown. He should have stayed inside where he was safe until backup arrived.

Dereliction of duty is just as bad. By NOT responding, the risk to the other students is high.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

His attorney claims that he was calm, but there's no way to know because he does go outside of the camera's view at some point, and I haven't seen the video. Do you have a link by chance? My google-Fu is giving me issues tonight....

The video is not available, and the accounts from the reporters who have seen it differ in certain respects.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Usually when "others" deal with them, (paramedics, doctors, etc) they've already been subdued by the police, who are there to make sure the other responders are safe.

No, not always. Violent patients are a specific risk to health care workers. And EMS can easily be the first on the scene depending on who called for help and why. Yet it would seem absurd for health care workers to arm themselves because patients are sometimes violent.

And there's the straw man. Nobody is claiming that. Nobody. In fact, quite the opposite. You're intentionally wording your responses to be loaded and poisoned.

That seems to be going both ways in this thread.

So what are you saying if not, just shoot them?

 

[triforcharity]

You have failed to follow this discussion, I have repeatedly asked TragicMonkey and others, is shooting really the only option? I am not making the claim shooting is the only option, the complete opposite is what I have been arguing for.

I see shouting stop and maintaining a distance as part of and not separate to pointing a gun at someone. You cannot point a gun at someone, say nothing and then walk right up to them or walk miles away from them.

Now if the cop had opened a window and tried to speak to the student, or had come out with baton or cuffs whilst his armed partner headed back to the police station, I would have seen that as trying something else.

But walking out with a gun pointing at the student, shouting stop and maintaining a distance needed to get off an accurate shot, that is only one option.

Actually, a point blank shot (less than 5 feet) is usually the most accurate.

Secondly, you keep talking about these cuffs. You do realize that every police officer has at least one set, right? And they carry them all the time, right? You also realize they're not magical, right? They don't possess some sort of wizardry that will instantly calm someone down.

 

[triforcharity]

I am a police officer, 23 years experience, 21 of which have been front line.

Cool. In the US or elsewhere? Oh, right, not the US. So, your OPINION is going to greatly differ from that of US officers.

I worked on my own in a single manned office for a number of years. I had people banging on windows. I would turn on the outside light if required, put on my utility belt with baton, cuffs and CS

Why is it not on while you're on duty? You should have it on at all times to be prepared.

and go out and investigate shouting as I went who is there or similar.

Since it took you a full minute to get there, the person banging was fleeing a group of thugs who've now shot him, and he's bleeding out on your front door step, and you're looking down the barrel of a .357 revolver.

I would not have my CS or baton drawn. I would wait to see who was there and consider options of just speaking to them, going back inside or drawing my baton or CS.

BANG!!! .357 goes off, and now you and the victim are now bleeding out on the front door step of the police precinct. Good job officer!

That is exactly what that cop should have done first.

And now that you're bleeding out, and you forgot your radio inside on your desk, you're ******!! Congratulations officer!! You protected zero lives, and now the group of punks is fleeing, while you're bleeding out!

(I am not advocating your death, just illustrating what could happen here in the US.)

Going out with his gun drawn severely limited his options and now a student is dead.

Nope, his lacking LTL tools limited his options, as did the actions of the suspect.

 

[triforcharity]

I'm giong to go out on a limb and assume the door to the campus police office is lockable.

And he certainly is obligated to defuse the situation in the least violent way possible. Which would mean going inside, locking the door, grabbing a taser, calling for back-up and keeping an eye on the guy through the window.

Which puts the other people on campus at risk of personal injury or worse.
Did you also forget that he had reportedly attacked other students prior to this?

And the shooting occurred approx. 30 secs after the cop came out. It doesn't seem like he tried to talk him down for very long before resorting to deadly force.

Or maybe his hand was forced by the suspect?

Are cops in the US really so terrified of physical conflict that they would rather shoot people than risk it?

Nope, but they also will not allow a suspect to beat on them before using deadly force. It's not the way it works here. Beat on our officers, and you're done.

 

[triforcharity]

You do want to be too close or you risk losing the gun, you do not want to be too far away, especially with a hand gun as they are not that accurate.

WTF???

Wrong again. A few F-bombs, so NSFW




OOPS!! 9mm at about 30 yards. Good call on that one officer!

Want another?



100 meters you say? Inaccurate you say???

BBBBZZZTTTTTTT!!!!!

 

[Dan O.]

BANG!!! .357 goes off, and now you and the victim are now bleeding out on the front door step of the police precinct. Good job officer!

Like I said, if he perceived the situation was so dangerous that he needed to step out of the door with his weapon drawn, he should have stayed inside and waited the extra 30 seconds for backup to arrive. Pretending that there could be a time bomb that will go off if he doesn't rush out there instantly and water board the suspect doesn't excuse the action.

 

[WildCat]

Like I said, if he perceived the situation was so dangerous that he needed to step out of the door with his weapon drawn, he should have stayed inside and waited the extra 30 seconds for backup to arrive. Pretending that there could be a time bomb that will go off if he doesn't rush out there instantly and water board the suspect doesn't excuse the action.

How does he know backup is 30 seconds away?

 

[triforcharity]

Congratulations! A single brownie point!

I cannot remember TriForCharity's comments. But if firefighters can subdue people without shooting, so should cops be able to do the same thing, unless they have run out of all options.

And guess what, he was!

Not really. By the time I get them, they're usually 4-pointed with leather straps, and sometimes even more than that. Tape helps.

 

[Dan O.]

WTF???

Nessie tends to drop a few nots. Possibly a translation thing.

 

[triforcharity]

And if he had gone back inside and waited for back-up? (While keeping an eye on him through the window. Which you lot seem to think is a ludicrous idea for some reason.)

It is. Our officers aren't chicken ****s like other countries. We also expect our officers to actually act, and do their job.

When was he making threats? I haven't read that anywhere.

I think he's talking about the aggressive actions of the suspect, and wasn't clear.

 

[Dan O.]

How does he know backup is 30 seconds away?

It's called communications. It's one of the skilz police used to have.

 

[triforcharity]

I wouldn't call trying to talk to the suspect for 30 seconds 'trying repeatedly'.

Ok, here's 30 seconds of talking. Ready?

What's wrong? Please step back from me sir. Sir, please lay down on the ground. SIR! STOP THERE SIR! NOW!! LAY DOWN ON YOUR BELLY NOW!! SIR, I WILL SHOOT YOU!! LAY DOWN ON YOUR BELLY WITH YOUR ARMS OUT!! NOW!! GET DOWN NOW *******!!! STAY BACK, I'LL SHOOT!!! NOT ANOTHER STEP!! LAY DOWN ********!!! LAY DOWN NOW!! STAY BACK SIR!! BANG!!!!

I just re enacted that with my son, and it took 27 seconds. You tell me, did he give plenty of chance?

But he was no danger to the cop until the cop brought out a gun and didn't retreat to a safe place.

Wrong.

He was clearly unable to understand what was happening so of course he didn't listen or back down. The cop should have taken that into consideration. The police are there to protect all members of society, even the ones who act like idiots or are compromised with drugs or alcohol. That they would rather end someone's life than 'risk' being hurt in an altercation is baffling.

Dreaming,

I would be willing to bet that the officer feels terrible that he had to fire his weapon and kill the kid. But, as you've just seen in the previous video, sometimes one punch is all it takes.

You may as well abolish the police force and let anyone shoot to kill when the feel threatened. Cuts out the middle-man and saves tax-payers money.

Actually, Florida kinda already has that law. I can legally shoot someone if I reasonably fear for my life. Ask George Zimmerman.

Don't like it? Don't put me in fear of my life, or the lives of those around me.

When the only two options are 'someone definitely dies' or 'someone maybe dies' they should always pick option 2.

Isn't hindsight cool??

 

[triforcharity]

It's not a dodge to say that the officer should have controlled the situation better so that he wasn't 5 fee away.

Walking backwards slowly saying 'stop' is a **** poor retreat.

So, he should have turned his back to the suspect and ran? Yeah, that's a good idea....

I wasn't saying officers shouldn't feel fear or return fire (clutch those straws!) but they shouldn't kill someone to prevent a fistfight. It's disproportionate. There was only a danger the guy could grab the gun because the officer brought it.

Um, just FYI, since it seems some people ITT forget that the vast majority of LEO's in the US carry a sidearm, this assertion is silly.

 

[triforcharity]

Post 399 you and in post 400 and Triforcharity backed you up, saying people who attack the police should expect to be shot. You have been arguing the cop was attacked by the student. What am I supposed to think?

That you're twisting my words, and TragicMonkey's words also.

Expect to be shot and SHOULD be shot are two different things.

IIRC, I stated early on ITT, that the officer should have had LTL options available to him, but for one reason or another, didn't have a tazer and didn't deploy his mace.

I support the officers decision 100%, at least at this time. If further information comes out that proves the officer acted incorrectly, I of course will revise my opinion.

 

[triforcharity]

This is not misunderstanding. There are some here such as TragicMonkey and Triforcharity who say anyone who attacks the police deserve to be shot. They made no distinctions, they said anybody.

So not unreasonably I asked if that included the mentally ill and students high on drugs, people who are out of their mind and who are not attacking out of malice or to avoid arrest. People who cannot be held fully responsible for their actions.

I find it staggering I have yet to get much of a response and have been pilloried for asking such a question.

I suspect it is because as soon as people say, no the police should not shoot students high on drugs or the mentally ill, they cannot then support the cop who shot the student. Neither can they say all people who attack the police deserves to be shot.

I do think that if you attack a police officer, you should not only EXPECT to be shot, but if you do that to me (being a concealed weapons permit holder, and armed 99% of the time) you will be shot.

I'm not going to make distinctions and exceptions about who shouldn't expect to be shot, or who cops are not allowed to shoot, since sometimes those people are the worst risk to an officer's safety. For instance, a manic depressive people, with no desire to live, and is too chicken to take his or her own life, is VERY dangerous to an officer and their safety. Ever heard the expression "suicide by cop"?


I want all of our police officers going home to their families, and if some crazed turd wants to try to hurt an officer, they should expect to be shot.

Take it as you will though. You'll claim that I said all people with mental illnesses should be shot, and the rest of us will all point and laugh because we KNOW that is not true.

But, feel free to prove me wrong.

 

[triforcharity]

So if the student had been cooperative, then the use of deadly force would not have been justified? I think that the lack of sound on the video makes it more difficult to gauge his level of cooperativity than if sound were available.

I'm not an officer, but I do know a few, and have trained with them in shooting situations.

I would be willing to bet that the officer ordered the man to lay down, get down, stop, or some variation of those, before he fired his weapon.

If the student had complied with any one of those orders, and the officer still shot him, then it's murder, or manslaughter at the least.

If the student was in fact on his knees, with his arms out, and the officer shot him while he was in that position, then yes, he is out of line, and should be charged with a capital crime.