• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

How far will the excuses to shoot go?

Nessie said:
Those who know about policing always questioned Austins decision to leave the office without his kit, when that was thought o be the case. Those not in the know tried to excuse him fot doing that. Now we know the 4 years service officer fid fo what he was supposed to do.

Now by going straight to his gun we know he ignored other options and if that was to avoid an assault he did use excessive force. If he wanted to avoid a wrestle he had othrr options as well.
Click to expand...

The officer was walking out into an unknown situation alone. I actually think he would be expected to draw his weapon here in the US.

The officers who I shot with yesterday thought that was the best option. Unknown situation, draw weapon was the vast consensus.
 
triforcharity said:
Wow, and yet YOU are the one claiming "facts" and yet, nothing to back them up, only to find out that, they are, not facts, but opinions.

Cool.
Click to expand...

No my opinion backed up by facts. You don't back up your opinion with anything other than other shooters think it was justified actions by Austin.
 
triforcharity said:
And you've never worked in US law enforcement.......so.....your opinion is just as valuable as mine....
Click to expand...

That is a dodge to ignore my point about use of cuffs.

I did work as a security guard in Boston. I was the one without a gun.
 
triforcharity said:
Texas Sharpshooter logical fallacy.
Click to expand...


Though they are not random unrelated facts. If you apply that fallacy here you devalue it as it can be then used to dismiss all facts brought to a debate.

I am one up on you as you bring no facts to the debate other that the bleeding obvious that a wrestler or unarmed man can hurt you or in very rare extreme cases kill you.
 
DreamingNaiad said:
Police get assaulted all the time. Shooting people to avoid any assault would be extreme.

Unless it's to avoid serious injury or death.

Nessie's post seemed to be asking if any officers had been assaulted/beaten to death.

Being assaulted and being killed are different things.
Click to expand...

As far as I know, shooting someone who is physically assaulting you is legal in most, if not all, states. You aren't required to wait until your injuries reach a critical level. You aren't required to try to judge how badly you will be injured by your assailant. You only need a reasonable fear of GBH.

An officer is under no obligation to stand there and be assaulted. A physical assault is, by definition, a risk of GBH. With a police officer in the US, it may also be an attempt to steal the officer's gun.

The idea that because someone is naked, or small, they are less of a threat, is just more wishful thinking.

Alabama seems to have basically the same law as Florida and other states. A firearm can legally be used to defend yourself against fists and feet, and you don't have to wait to be beaten up, and you have no duty to retreat.

http://law.onecle.com/alabama/criminal-code/13A-3-23.html
 
What did he see?

triforcharity said:
The officer was walking out into an unknown situation alone. I actually think he would be expected to draw his weapon here in the US.
Click to expand...
Did Officer Trevis see Gil Collar before stepping out, or did he just hear banging on the door/window?
 
LTC8K6 said:
As far as I know, shooting someone who is physically assaulting you is legal in most, if not all, states. You aren't required to wait until your injuries reach a critical level. You aren't required to try to judge how badly you will be injured by your assailant. You only need a reasonable fear of GBH.

An officer is under no obligation to stand there and be assaulted. A physical assault is, by definition, a risk of GBH. With a police officer in the US, it may also be an attempt to steal the officer's gun.

The idea that because someone is naked, or small, they are less of a threat, is just more wishful thinking.

Alabama seems to have basically the same law as Florida and other states. A firearm can legally be used to defend yourself against fists and feet, and you don't have to wait to be beaten up, and you have no duty to retreat.

http://law.onecle.com/alabama/criminal-code/13A-3-23.html
Click to expand...
Except he wasn't attacking. Reports indicate he was walking towards the officer with his hands facing the officer palm first.
 
halides1 said:
Did Officer Trevis see Gil Collar before stepping out, or did he just hear banging on the door/window?
Click to expand...

He just heard banging, I think. Most people would probably have thought it was drunk students being idiots. He thought banging on the window meant he should draw a gun.
 
DreamingNaiad said:
Except he wasn't attacking. Reports indicate he was walking towards the officer with his hands facing the officer palm first.
Click to expand...

Sure, and that's been discussed at length already and interpretations of the video vary.

It hasn't been released, so there's little to go on there except second hand info.

Not sure how anyone could say "He wasn't attacking" from the descriptions of the video. Unless you mean he hadn't actually reached the officer yet, when he was shot, which doesn't really mean much. A person can pursue, and then attack, while walking.

When the investigation is complete, we will hopefully know more.

We should also have something from a Grand Jury.

The reports that Collar got up twice and had to be pursued and handcuffed after being shot are interesting. If true, that could indicate quite the berserk high. (or possibly just the typical poor ammo choices of many police departments)

I'd also like to know if Collar was saying or yelling anything.
 
LTC8K6 said:
As far as I know, shooting someone who is physically assaulting you is legal in most, if not all, states. You aren't required to wait until your injuries reach a critical level. You aren't required to try to judge how badly you will be injured by your assailant. You only need a reasonable fear of GBH.

An officer is under no obligation to stand there and be assaulted. A physical assault is, by definition, a risk of GBH. With a police officer in the US, it may also be an attempt to steal the officer's gun.

The idea that because someone is naked, or small, they are less of a threat, is just more wishful thinking.

Alabama seems to have basically the same law as Florida and other states. A firearm can legally be used to defend yourself against fists and feet, and you don't have to wait to be beaten up, and you have no duty to retreat.

http://law.onecle.com/alabama/criminal-code/13A-3-23.html
Click to expand...

Self defence by pre-emtive strike is fraught with dangers when people get it wrong. I can only think of one case in the UK where someone who assaulted another was found not guilty as they claimed they hit first to stop getting a beating. The England and Liverpool footballer Steven Gerrard

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/fo.../5900172/Steven-Gerrard-found-not-guilty.html

When you say "The idea that because someone is naked, or small, they are less of a threat, is just more wishful thinking." what are the less of a threat in comparison to?
 
Nessie said:
Self defence by pre-emtive strike is fraught with dangers when people get it wrong. I can only think of one case in the UK where someone who assaulted another was found not guilty as they claimed they hit first to stop getting a beating. The England and Liverpool footballer Steven Gerrard

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/fo.../5900172/Steven-Gerrard-found-not-guilty.html

When you say "The idea that because someone is naked, or small, they are less of a threat, is just more wishful thinking." what are the less of a threat in comparison to?
Click to expand...

This is not Old Blighty, so what happens there is really not relevant here.

When I say? I didn't say that...I referred to others.

A naked man acting crazy and closing the distance to me when I try to open it up, is a threat to me as far as I am concerned. I'm not waiting for him to finally get to me on one of his tries. Legally, I have no duty to retreat from the threat.

But again, we don't have a full report on this incident, and that report could change everything.
 
Police firing squad in action

http://edition.cnn.com/2012/08/16/us/michigan-police-shooting/index.html

Five police in a line fire apparently 46 shots and kill a guy who is clearly hacked off, has a history of crime including assaults, apparently mental health issues and a knife.

1 - there was minimal effort to establish any kind of negotiation. A female officer is heard to shout put the knife down, but that is about it. The deceased is clearly open to talking as he does a lot of it. None of the cops make any real effort to talk him down.

2 - I would like to know what the police dog was for. If it was out then I assume it is not a search or explosives dog, it is one trained specifically for angry men with knives or guns. So why not use it?

3 - there were batons there to be used, I wonder what else could be used such as CS instead of guns.

4 - which police officer was at danger as not all of them were. So pick one who was at danger and then explain why the others all had to shoot.

5 - the deceased was walking across the police line not towards it when they shot. So why chose that moment to shoot?

6 - is any effort made to check no one is out of view behind the deceased to make sure they are not hit by stray bullets or ricochets?

An excuse for the shooting "because apparently, at this point in time, he was threatening to assault police."

A former cop said ""One of the things the public has to understand, an individual wielding a knife at you at about 20 feet can be on top of you in a split second," he said. "The public doesn't know this because they don't do this for a living."

That assumes you stay put. It does not take much to be summarily executed by firing squad in the USA.
 
Nessie said:
Police firing squad in action

http://edition.cnn.com/2012/08/16/us/michigan-police-shooting/index.html

Five police in a line fire apparently 46 shots and kill a guy who is clearly hacked off, has a history of crime including assaults, apparently mental health issues and a knife.

1 - there was minimal effort to establish any kind of negotiation. A female officer is heard to shout put the knife down, but that is about it. The deceased is clearly open to talking as he does a lot of it. None of the cops make any real effort to talk him down.

2 - I would like to know what the police dog was for. If it was out then I assume it is not a search or explosives dog, it is one trained specifically for angry men with knives or guns. So why not use it?

3 - there were batons there to be used, I wonder what else could be used such as CS instead of guns.

4 - which police officer was at danger as not all of them were. So pick one who was at danger and then explain why the others all had to shoot.

5 - the deceased was walking across the police line not towards it when they shot. So why chose that moment to shoot?

6 - is any effort made to check no one is out of view behind the deceased to make sure they are not hit by stray bullets or ricochets?

An excuse for the shooting "because apparently, at this point in time, he was threatening to assault police."

A former cop said ""One of the things the public has to understand, an individual wielding a knife at you at about 20 feet can be on top of you in a split second," he said. "The public doesn't know this because they don't do this for a living."

That assumes you stay put. It does not take much to be summarily executed by firing squad in the USA.
Click to expand...

Charging crazy men armed with knives just doesn't happen. It's fantasy.

I don't even want the police to try.

An officer who successfully did so would be called a hero.

Not to mention that the officers involved here were punished for not following department policies, but not for shooting the crazy knife man.
 
A female police officer responded to the call and radioed in for backup when she encountered Hall, who was being aggressive and threatened the officer with a knife, according to Thomas.

Investigators said Hall refused to drop the weapon, despite police orders to relinquish the knife and came within a few feet of the officers.

"He's coming at us every time we exit the vehicle," according to the female officer's voice, which was broadcast to reporters during Wednesday's press conference. "He wants us to shoot him."

"We can't let him get out of this area," the officer added. "He's going to kill somebody."
Click to expand...

She should have put on her Wonder Woman costume and taken him on...
 
Nessie said:
4 - which police officer was at danger as not all of them were. So pick one who was at danger and then explain why the others all had to shoot.
Click to expand...
Are you serious? Why should that make a difference?

Nessie said:
5 - the deceased was walking across the police line not towards it when they shot. So why chose that moment to shoot?
Click to expand...
Not true, there were 6 police there. 4 in a line, and 2 others off to the side. He was going towards the 2. Did you not notice that?

And prosecutors cleared the officers of any wrongdoing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom