How far will the excuses to shoot go?

[DreamingNaiad]

I'm really not seeing what the issue is here. If someone with a gun tells you to stay back and you keep advancing, you get shot. That seems fairly obvious. The cop had a right to defend himself, even if we ignore his responsibility to keep someone from taking his gun.

And if he wasn't on LSD he might have been able to figure that out. Considering he was naked and screaming that he was on a spiritual quest I doubt he was thinking that clearly.

The question is, after seeing that he was impaired should the cop have attempted to bring him in without killing him.

I agree cops have a right to defend themselves. But there wasn't a high risk he would have been killed. He would likely have had a few impressive bruises but people shouldn't be killed to avoid bruises.

 

[Sledge]

And you are basing these assumptions on...?

 

[triforcharity]

And you weren't shot? Wow. I thought some people were saying American cops would shoot you if you could even possibly be a threat.

Nope, all my holes are original, and once done, I got in my car and left. Imagine that!!

 

[p0lka]

sorry, 1st post messup

 

[DreamingNaiad]

And you are basing these assumptions on...?

The assumption that he wasn't a likely deadly threat? The lack of news stories about naked, unarmed men killing cops.

It is better than the assumptions being made that the naked unarmed man was so likely to be dangerous that shooting him was ok.

The result of my assumption would most likely be a bruised, annoyed cop and a bruised, embarassed student.

 

[triforcharity]

What has illegally held guns got to do with the topic?

Not really sure, but you're making claims that apply to all gun incidents, and not just one specific type of gun incidents.

It is based on research of DGUs and gun ownership by the likes of Kleck, Gertz, Hemenway etc.

Linkey?

Handgun purchases are primarily for self defence and not sport or hunting.

Yep, that's their primary purpose. Imagine that. Handguns, which are designed for self defense, are used for that purpose.

And imagine this wizardry, a fishing boat is primarily used for fishing!! I know, shocking, isn't it?

I may have been contradicted, but I have not been shown to be wrong. Having a gun compared to not having a gun makes shooting more likely.

Imagine that, if you've got an oven, you're more likely to cook something in that oven, as opposed to someone who DOESN'T have an oven.

And people who have fishing poles are more likely to fish than those who don't.

Wow. That's for that wisdom there Nessie. I would have struggled with this concept without your assistance....

Drawing your gun compared to keeping it holstered makes its use more likely.

Kinda hard to shoot a gun while it's holstered......

Oh, and citation please?

Going for a gun instead of baton, cuffs or CS makes the use of the gun more likely.

HOLY ****!! Imagine that!! If I go to cook something, and I go grab a brick instead, chances are I am NOT going to be doing much cooking. WOW!!

There was an earlier post by a US cop about his training regards to guns and arrests which detailed that.

In his opinion.

There have been studies which show carrying a gun makes you more scared and more likely to use it

http://www.smartplanet.com/blog/thinking-tech/study-carrying-a-gun-can-make-you-more-paranoid/10875

False. Categorically false. The study mentioned nothing about paranoia. It is an interesting study. I think the biggest flaw, was that they took people at random. Why not people who actually carry a firearm regularly? Just random volunteers. No mention of any training or education on the use of a firearm, just random people.

Interesting study, but not really applicable to this discussion.

http://www.newscientist.com/article...ncreases-risk-of-getting-shot-and-killed.html

I haven't read the entire paper, however, just a cursory look at it doesn't take into account who started the altercation, and if the gunshot victim was the aggressor, or if they were legally carried, or criminals.

Useless study without having some other info.

 

[triforcharity]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...NYPD-accused-of-fatal-road-rage-shooting.html

http://investmentwatchblog.com/nypd...rmed-national-guardsman-for-cutting-them-off/

Witnesses ay he kept his hands on the steering wheel as well.

Yep, whomever fired their weapon should be charged with murder.

Unless of course there's something else we're not privy to....

 

[triforcharity]

When I have received confirmation form the people I was referring to I have stopped. I do not care if you say something about someone else, I want it from them.

I refuse to be dissuaded from asking follow up questions to get more detail about people's stances.

So if someone says, shoot 100% that needs clarification and will attract follow up questions to and from them. Not you.

Follow up questions are fine. It's the strawman arguments, and assigning an opinion that some do not hold.

Don't get snippy when you're called on it.

 

[Sledge]

The assumption that he wasn't a likely deadly threat?

And you are basing that assumption on...?

 

[fuelair]

Yes, I had a go and cuffs and baton are under a second, so long you do not fluff undoing the clip. Then it can be 2 seconds.

The clip (button, snap) is what I worry about on that too!!

 

[triforcharity]

But use of guns for defence and the lame excuses used afterwards is bang on topic.

How about the hundreds and hundreds of cases where the police/citizens got it RIGHT???

DGUs primarily involved handguns, not rifles or shotguns.

Citation and an explanation required.

Baton use does not mean grappling (as in you now have hands on each other). Baton use for us is fend offs and strikes to create distance and is a defensive not offensive weapon.

Well, that's different. Never heard of getting CLOSER to a suspect, actually allows you to be farther away....

I wish Austin had holstered his gun and gone with other more appropriate means.

I bet he wishes he didn't have to shoot anyone, let alone a kid.

I wish you would link to evidence more.

Wow, pot, meet kettle.

 

[triforcharity]

Please clarify for me. Do you think that a competent cop can or cannot instantly adapt to a changing scenario?

No. I'll say no because sometimes even the police are caught off guard.

For instance, back about 1996 (IIRC) there was a bank robbery in North Hollywood California. Two dudes dressed in full body armour, armed to the teeth with AK-47 fully automatic rifles, robbed a bank, and ended up in a shootout with police.

It took quite some time (more than 10 minutes) for the cops to commandeer rifles powerful enough to penetrate their body armour.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Hollywood_shootout

So, no, not instantly. And certainly sometimes even cops fail.

 

[DreamingNaiad]

And you are basing that assumption on...?

I already answered that. In that very post. I can't find any occasions where naked, unarmed students have killed cops.

Do you think he was a likely deadly threat?

Or just a possible one?

 

[triforcharity]

I say you are the one who is based on theory and ideology. From the facts about the case and how the police should operate, DreamingNaiad and I have been dealing in practice and reality.

Wait, are you seriously claiming that your opinions are based on reality, when you are obviously already biased against US police, and Americans in general, and basing your opinion on what YOU would do, based on your training in ANOTHER country?

And you claim your opinion is more in tune with reality?????

Wow. Delusions. Pure delusions.

 

[DreamingNaiad]

No. I'll say no because sometimes even the police are caught off guard.

For instance, back about 1996 (IIRC) there was a bank robbery in North Hollywood California. Two dudes dressed in full body armour, armed to the teeth with AK-47 fully automatic rifles, robbed a bank, and ended up in a shootout with police.

It took quite some time (more than 10 minutes) for the cops to commandeer rifles powerful enough to penetrate their body armour.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Hollywood_shootout

So, no, not instantly. And certainly sometimes even cops fail.

There is a bit of a difference between shooting an unarmed man and not carrying armour piercing rounds as standard though.

Of course cops can fail. But if he shot someone when he could have just arrested them he needs to be punished in some way.

 

[triforcharity]

We don't know what drugs the cop was on so we cannot say to what degree he was aware of his surroundings.

Huh? What are you attempting to say here?

But the news article said the second officer arrived as the shot was fired.

Have you seen the dispatch logs or the video? No? Awesome. Just wanted to clarify.

Unless these campus cops drive around at night with their lights off, he would have been aware that a car was approaching. He would have also heard the engine and tire noise from a block or more away.

Assumes facts not in evidence, and speculation.

Then there is the other piece of standard police equipment that you rarely see an active officer without, the radio.

Agreed 100%.

If Austin had taken his radio and remembered to turn it on, he would have heard the dispatcher putting out the call for backup. He would also have heard the responding officers reply. I'm surprised that the radio transcripts have not been released yet.

He didn't take his radio? Can you cite some good source for that?

 

[triforcharity]

Does Alabama law say you are allowed to kill someone just because you are scared? I have not looked up the particular statutes but usually there is a qualifier there.

Strawman. 000063 didn't claim that. Go back and read the post again.

 

[DreamingNaiad]

Wait, are you seriously claiming that your opinions are based on reality, when you are obviously already biased against US police, and Americans in general, and basing your opinion on what YOU would do, based on your training in ANOTHER country?

And you claim your opinion is more in tune with reality?????

Wow. Delusions. Pure delusions.

People *have* been focussing on the possible threat he posed rather than the likely threat he posed.

And it's fair to ask why a US cop was unable to subdue this student when a UK cop would have at least tried. Gun laws have nothing to do with this case really.

He would pose just as much threat in either country but he wouldn't have died in the UK.

Do you think our cops would have taken too much of a risk attempting to subdue him without guns?

The main thing we all seem to disagree on is the likelihood of an unarmed man killing a cop.

 

[DreamingNaiad]

Huh? What are you attempting to say here?



Have you seen the dispatch logs or the video? No? Awesome. Just wanted to clarify.



Assumes facts not in evidence, and speculation.



Agreed 100%.



He didn't take his radio? Can you cite some good source for that?

If he had his radio he probably would have been able to hear that back up was on it's way.

 

[triforcharity]

I just disagree that he was a legitimate threat.

We'll have to agree to disagree. The only person who knows for sure is, unfortunately dead.

A possible threat maybe but not legitimate.

Possible? Someone who refuses to obey a cop with a weapon drawn is clearly a probable threat.

Doesn't it concern you that he would likely be alive in the UK?

Concern? No. I don't concern myself with useless speculation about things I have no control over.

Does it make me think? Yes.

Surely if our cops can do it, yours can.

Surely if your cops came here, they'd be getting their asses kicked a lot more often, and constantly dropping their weapons. Surely if OUR cops and fire a 45 cal SA Glock accurately, yours should too, right?

False dilemma logical fallacy.

Do you think the UK police take too many risks by not having more force?

Sometimes, yes. However, most UK citizens do not have the access to firearms like the US does, so it's a moot point.