How far will the excuses to shoot go?

[Nessie]

A campus police officer shoots dead a naked student

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/201...of-naked-college-student-mother-asks-why?lite

The reasoning being

"According to the university statement, the officer “was confronted by a muscular, nude man who was acting erratically. The man repeatedly rushed and verbally challenged the officer in a fighting stance.”

Are campus cops so ill prepared for dealing with situations where people act strangely, in a manner that suggests a mental health and/or drug or alcohol episode that they will shoot someone dead and then their employer will come with with excuses as lame as quoted above?

No police officer worth the title should be armed, let alone in the job if they handle such a situation with deadly force.

I though I had heard all the crap excuses to shoot, that American's come out with to claim a justification for killing someone, but this is the worst.

 

[Alt+F4]

Come to NYC, all you have to do is cut the cops off and they will shoot you dead.

 

[Nessie]

It is not just the police who shoot for lame reasons.

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

A Japanese student dressed as John Travolta for a Halloween party goes to the wrong house and is shot dead by someone who like that cop has panicked at the slightest of reasons and reached for their gun.

 

[Segnosaur]

A campus police officer shoots dead a naked student

The reasoning being

"According to the university statement, the officer “was confronted by a muscular, nude man who was acting erratically. The man repeatedly rushed and verbally challenged the officer in a fighting stance.”

Are campus cops so ill prepared for dealing with situations where people act strangely, in a manner that suggests a mental health and/or drug or alcohol episode that they will shoot someone dead and then their employer will come with with excuses as lame as quoted above?

Just wanting to get something straight...

Nobody was denying that the student was nude. Nobody was denying that he was acting 'erratic'. I don't even recall seeing anyone denying where he 'rushed' the police officer.

So the only complaint is: When facing someone who was (from the description) more or less attacking him, he used "deadly force" in response.

Is that about right?

 

[Alt+F4]

The police should know better, morons don't.

 

[Segnosaur]

The police should know better, morons don't.

Better than what though?

Is it because the guy was naked that he should have been considered "not a threat"? Or because he was possibly under the influence of drugs and/or otherwise psychotic?

 

[Seismosaurus]

So the only complaint is: When facing someone who was (from the description) more or less attacking him, he used "deadly force" in response.

Is that about right?

No, not quite. You cannot "more or less" attack a person. You have either attacked them or you have not. This student hadn't.

 

[Segnosaur]

So the only complaint is: When facing someone who was (from the description) more or less attacking him, he used "deadly force" in response.

Is that about right?

No, not quite. You cannot "more or less" attack a person. You have either attacked them or you have not. This student hadn't.

The article states that The officer allegedly asked Collar to stop, but the young student chased him “in a threatening manner and ignored the officer’s repeated commands.”.

Assuming the accounts of the officer are correct, you don't consider chasing someone to be attacking them? Should the officer have waited to see if he was going to get a big hug out of it?

 

[Nessie]

Just wanting to get something straight...

Nobody was denying that the student was nude. Nobody was denying that he was acting 'erratic'. I don't even recall seeing anyone denying where he 'rushed' the police officer.

So the only complaint is: When facing someone who was (from the description) more or less attacking him, he used "deadly force" in response.

Is that about right?

The complaint is that such a situation should never have been dealt with by use of a gun. That is a grossly excessive use of force.

From the University's press release

"The officer with weapon drawn ordered the individual to halt. The officer retreated numerous times in an attempt to calm the situation."

So the first thing he did was escalate the situation to one where deadly force was the most likely option. Then

"...rushing and chasing the officer..."

"...the officer’s repeated commands to stop, the officer fired one shot with his police sidearm, which struck the chest of the assailant."

so his idea of calming the situation is to point a gun and issue commands to stop whilst retreating.

 

[Vic Vega]

The proper weapon for an incident like this is pepper spray.

 

[LTC8K6]

The police officer really cannot risk a fight with a crazy or drugged man. The ending of that is entirely uncertain and could even result in the suspect getting the officer's gun.

A police officer is under no obligation to allow a suspect to attack or injure him before responding.

A citizen also does not have to wait to actually be injured before responding.

I don't know if this officer had options other than his firearm.

At any rate, a taser or mace isn't always effective, particularly if the suspect is on something.

The encounter is on video, and an investigation is ongoing, so hopefully we will know more.

 

[Tiktaalik]

Pepper spray is generally useless in the face of drugs. I've been pepper sprayed multiple times and I can function through it just fine, without the benefit of drugs.

A Taser would likely have worked, though, if the officer actually had one.

 

[Nessie]

The article states that The officer allegedly asked Collar to stop, but the young student chased him “in a threatening manner and ignored the officer’s repeated commands.”.

Assuming the accounts of the officer are correct, you don't consider chasing someone to be attacking them? Should the officer have waited to see if he was going to get a big hug out of it?

No chasing and attacking are different.

If you think the student was after a hug then you are as deluded to the situation as the officer was.

I do not think someone who is incapable of using verbal skills, who lacks the patience needed when it comes to calming some people and who cannot subdue someone with a minimum of force, with the use of baton and or cuffs should be a police officer.

 

[Alt+F4]

The police officer really cannot risk a fight with a crazy or drugged man.

Absolutely correct. But in NYC the police shoot you dead even when you are not crazed or drugged. Just last week the police shot dead an unarmed man who was pulled over for a traffic violation. In August they shot dead a man who was fleeing from an abduction.

 

[WildCat]

No chasing and attacking are different.

If you think the student was after a hug then you are as deluded to the situation as the officer was.

What do you think he was chasing him for then?

 

[LTC8K6]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8AvjMd-u79E

An example of a police officer shooting two unarmed men, and rightly so.

 

[LTC8K6]

No chasing and attacking are different.

If you think the student was after a hug then you are as deluded to the situation as the officer was.

I do not think someone who is incapable of using verbal skills, who lacks the patience needed when it comes to calming some people and who cannot subdue someone with a minimum of force, with the use of baton and or cuffs should be a police officer.

It's not Hollywood, it's the real world.

In the real world, you can easily lose a fight, especially with an erratic person.

 

[Nessie]

The police officer really cannot risk a fight with a crazy or drugged man. The ending of that is entirely uncertain and could even result in the suspect getting the officer's gun.

A police officer is under no obligation to allow a suspect to attack or injure him before responding.

A citizen also does not have to wait to actually be injured before responding.

I don't know if this officer had options other than his firearm.

At any rate, a taser or mace isn't always effective, particularly if the suspect is on something.

The encounter is on video, and an investigation is ongoing, so hopefully we will know more.

Police officers who cannot handle a fight with a drugged or crazed man should not be police officers. Police who cannot protect their guns in a potential fight/arrest should not have guns.

The police should be prepared for and accept that their job can get physical and if they want to avoid that by using a gun as their only means of dealing with someone, they should not be in the police.

Do you favour escalation of threat or are you advocating going deadly straight away, no matter what, even to avoid a minor scuffle and maybe a slap?

Do the police only have guns? Do they not also have cuffs and batons?

Tazer, mace, what about calmness, patience, verbal skills or even in the case of a naked man a boot in the bollocks first?

 

[Nessie]

What do you think he was chasing him for then?

Who knows? The other descriptive use is rushing. Maybe he was chased because he ran away?

 

[Nessie]

It's not Hollywood, it's the real world.

In the real world, you can easily lose a fight, especially with an erratic person.

Why should it even become a fight? Are American police not taught how to clam without pulling their gun out first? In the UK police are trained how to subdue and arrest with minimum force first.