• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Does this look justifiable to you?

Did the guy pull a gun and point it at the officer on the left? I mean, come on, this has no context, no sound, just the video. Did the police believe he had a weapon? Did he just shoot someone?

Without context I can't say, and neither can you. It sure looked like he had something in his hand right before he got shot, so I'll give the police the benefit of the doubt here.
 
That's how it's not murder. I can't believe they didn't shoot sooner.
 
It's not murder because the civilian missed the cop when he shot at him. Had he shot and killed the cop, it would have been murder.

Wait. You mean how is not murder when cops shoot an armed fleeing suspect who pointed a gun at a cop and was prevented from shooting, but given the next chance just seconds later actually fired a shot at the cops while evading capture in a public place.

I dunno. Ya got me there.
 
Did the guy die?

If he did, then I have to say it's murder. I know it's different in the Wild West, but in Finland the police doesn't have the right to kill anyone, unless it's the ONLY option that can save many lives. Not even for self-defence.

The police could've shot the bastard in the legs or arm. They are trained, so as far as the video clips show it, it would've been possible.

If the guy didn't die, well...serves him right.
 
Tapio said:
The police could've shot the bastard in the legs or arm. They are trained, so as far as the video clips show it, it would've been possible.
Click to expand...


...in low light... in a situation where they are under fire ... with an unpredictable suspect ....

I think if they shot him in the leg or arm, he'd have easily kept shooting - maybe hit a civilian, if not one of the cops brave enough to be getting close to this dangerous person.

Also - it isn't really clear from this clip exactly what happened. Any other related news stories cast more light on this?
 
The idea of a cop shooting someone in the arm or leg is fanciful. It only happens on TV. I'm pretty certain that cops everywhere are trained to fire at the largest body mass - the torso.
 
chillzero said:
I think if they shot him in the leg or arm, he'd have easily kept shooting - maybe hit a civilian, if not one of the cops brave enough to be getting close to this dangerous person.
Click to expand...

Shooting someone deliberately in the leg or arm as a non-lethal take down is something out of bad TV and movies. Those targets are harder to hit and in any situation where a cop is justified in shooting at someone, they're justified in taking a life. Besides, a shot in the arm or leg can easily be lethal. It drives me nuts when some idiot lawyer tries to bring up the argument, "Why didn't they shoot him in the leg?"

There's no context or sound here, but it looks like the cops were entirely justified.
 
ImaginalDisc said:
Shooting someone deliberately in the leg or arm as a non-lethal take down is something out of bad TV and movies. Those targets are harder to hit and in any situation where a cop is justified in shooting at someone, they're justified in taking a life. Besides, a shot in the arm or leg can easily be lethal. It drives me nuts when some idiot lawyer tries to bring up the argument, "Why didn't they shoot him in the leg?"

There's no context or sound here, but it looks like the cops were entirely justified.
Click to expand...

I completely agree.
I was thinking of making the point about movies, but I really wasn't sure how cops are trained.

Thanks.
 
FWIW I did work for Victoria Police, so can say with absolute assurance that this is how they are trained, and I would be astounded if it were different anywhere else.
 
You all are obviously missing the big picture! The police are authorities, and therefore bad automatically. Anything they do is authoritarian, and evil. It's obviously just part of the wickedness of the administration to take away the rights of a law-abiding citizen to use his firearm as he pleases. Jack-booted thugs, that's what they are! We ought to have the police arrest the lot of them! Then have the police arrest them after they arrest them! And so on...
 
lionking said:
The idea of a cop shooting someone in the arm or leg is fanciful. It only happens on TV. I'm pretty certain that cops everywhere are trained to fire at the largest body mass - the torso.
Click to expand...


Thank you for getting this out there early in the thread. It's all about center mass, because any other area of the body is not only much smaller but too mobile to be considered a real target.

Cops know better than anyone that regardless of how well trained you are, in the heat of the moment almost nobody is a sharpshooter. Shoot at the part of the body which is hardest to miss.


ImaginalDisc said:
It drives me nuts when some idiot lawyer tries to bring up the argument, "Why didn't they shoot him in the leg?"

There's no context or sound here, but it looks like the cops were entirely justified.
Click to expand...


In my concealed carry class, they STRESS not to shoot in the arm or leg. If you're at the point where you feel shooting is your only option you shoot to stop the threat. If you shoot the arm or leg, it says to a jury you felt you had other options... which is never going to help your cause to begin with but you're totally screwed if it hits an artery like the bullet that killed NFL player Sean Taylor.
 
Last edited:
Tapio said:
If he did, then I have to say it's murder. I know it's different in the Wild West, but in Finland the police doesn't have the right to kill anyone, unless it's the ONLY option that can save many lives. Not even for self-defence.
Click to expand...
Can't possibly be true.

The police could've shot the bastard in the legs or arm. They are trained, so as far as the video clips show it, it would've been possible.
Click to expand...
Speaking of the Wild West, I think you saw too many Lone Ranger episodes as a kid. It just doesn't work that way in real life.
 
Tapio said:
Did the guy die?

If he did, then I have to say it's murder. I know it's different in the Wild West, but in Finland the police doesn't have the right to kill anyone, unless it's the ONLY option that can save many lives. Not even for self-defence.

The police could've shot the bastard in the legs or arm. They are trained, so as far as the video clips show it, it would've been possible.

If the guy didn't die, well...serves him right.
Click to expand...

Have you ever played witha psitol, I don't think so. I am not a bad shot with a rifle. I have firnds who are crack shots and win competitions. I have seen them miss a milk jug full of water at three feet. Seriouls, you have such a short barrel on a pistol that there is little control. Now witha rifle you have some control.

But sorry, whne you shoot at police officers, there is a consequence.

BTW I do believe in registration of handguns and severe penalties for unlicensed possesion.
 
I've seen episodes of "World's Wildest Police Videos" with both the police and bad guys shooting at each other at point-blank range, and MISSING! Not just a single shot, either, but emptying their magazines.
"Shoot them in the arm." Yeah, that's gonna work...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom