I'm not totally up on what happened there, and it seems confirmed that there was a knife involved, but how many times do you shoot a man in the back for that?
I have to say that it sounds excessive force. And I think he just died.
A violent criminal is wanted for rape. He's at the home of the alleged victim and he has a knife. He is resisting arrest. Your taser fails to stop him.
how many times do you shoot a man in the back for that?
Until the threat ends. Sometimes people drop from a pellet gun ricochet. Sometimes they don't drop the RPG until the third burst of .50 rips through them after the JDAM proved ineffective.
Remember that video that was posted the other day from Elijah Schaffer on Twitter where a rioter pulled a gun from his pocket, aimed it at the camera, pulled the trigger (unloaded), and walked off?
That video was 3 seconds long. That's how fast it happens. These officers need to be cognizant of that at all times. That is why following directions is so important.
That moment they lost sight of his hands -- because remember, he's reaching in a car -- they had to assume the worst to protect themselves. It's not a risk they should be forced to take either. Officer's are trained to eliminate a threat to their life.
And that's why Malice Green got shot in my earlier story. It wasn't what he had in his hands, it was that he hid them. But that point, of course, got lost in the media noise. And that happened like a million years ago, the same shit is still happening. I guess blacks are just dumber than dogs, and can't learn, and it'll take 'em a few more generations to evolve to the point where they can, but that takes selection. As for the media, they've always been a bit of a cuntish lot. Fifth estate my ass, more like fifth columnists.
We still don't know what happened, but...
If he grabbed a knife after he opened the door of the car the officer behind him had only a split second to react before he might have gotten stabbed multiple times.
If you do have to shoot someone who has a knife a single round, or two, or even three, frequently fails to do the job. Even if they are mortally wounded by several shots, someone with a knife might still have enough gas in the tank to kill you before they succumb to injuries.
Because of these quite indisputable facts (for which you can find ample video evidence) police are trained to shoot until the threat is gone, i.e. suspect drops or they are clearly no longer a threat.
Its rough, and looks very bad on video, but its rarely as callous and one-sided as it at first seems to people unfamiliar with the nature of such close-quarter confrontations.
At the start I was slightly leaning on excessive force but I'm leaning towards justifiable shooting at this point. He was fighting the cops right before the first video started recording. Another angle shows him breaking free of the cops and then him walking towards the car door.
Poor training or policy is what caused the cops to shoot him in my opinion. The guy should have never made it to the car door and been tackled and cuffed before reaching it.
Doesn't have to be a faulty unit. If the prongs miss, break, or don't have a wide enough spread, the effectiveness drops like a lead brick. Tazers aren't the magic Star Trek stun phasers like noguns and Euros seem to think they are.
As stated above, using a firearm in self defense means shooting until the threat has ended (i.e. is no longer capable of harming you). Unless you get lucky and tag something that instantly incapacitates (a direct hit to the brain), chances are that even a mortally wounded person will still be able to fight for up to 2-3 minutes, give or take, before blood loss renders them unconscious and therefore unable to fight back. This is further complicated that pistols and other such small caliber, lower velocity sidearms do not have enough "oomph" to get the job done like a rifle (much faster projectile) or shotgun (heavier/numerous projectile) would. Hence why a mag dump into the aggressor is warranted.
Note: The subject of "killing power" is hotly debated among gun people. i would recommend taking a detailed look at that particular subject from good sources to get a better idea of what I am rambling about.
Correct me if i'm wrong. But that problem of the person still being able to fight after being shot wouldnt be solved with more stopping power, like using a revolver?
I remember my dad always telling me that a 9mm would kill but you wouldnt know it while a revolver .38 would put you on the ground death or not
I'm not totally up on what happened there, and it seems confirmed that there was a knife involved, but how many times do you shoot a man in the back for that?
I have to say that it sounds excessive force. And I think he just died.
A violent criminal is wanted for rape. He's at the home of the alleged victim and he has a knife. He is resisting arrest. Your taser fails to stop him.
You shoot him until he stops resisting arrest.
Here's a story of a bank robber that took 14 .45 ACP rounds and didn't stop until the cop SHOT HIM THREE TIMES IN THE HEAD.
Holy shit.
You can do it in one of your crit chance is high enough
Until the threat ends. Sometimes people drop from a pellet gun ricochet. Sometimes they don't drop the RPG until the third burst of .50 rips through them after the JDAM proved ineffective.
Remember that video that was posted the other day from Elijah Schaffer on Twitter where a rioter pulled a gun from his pocket, aimed it at the camera, pulled the trigger (unloaded), and walked off?
That video was 3 seconds long. That's how fast it happens. These officers need to be cognizant of that at all times. That is why following directions is so important.
That moment they lost sight of his hands -- because remember, he's reaching in a car -- they had to assume the worst to protect themselves. It's not a risk they should be forced to take either. Officer's are trained to eliminate a threat to their life.
And that's why Malice Green got shot in my earlier story. It wasn't what he had in his hands, it was that he hid them. But that point, of course, got lost in the media noise. And that happened like a million years ago, the same shit is still happening. I guess blacks are just dumber than dogs, and can't learn, and it'll take 'em a few more generations to evolve to the point where they can, but that takes selection. As for the media, they've always been a bit of a cuntish lot. Fifth estate my ass, more like fifth columnists.
as many as it takes that he stops presenting an active threat.
Maybe you should get yourself "totally up on what happened there" before you start spouting dumbfuck ideas about it.
Don't get my hopes up
People downvoting you for a reasonable question?
We still don't know what happened, but... If he grabbed a knife after he opened the door of the car the officer behind him had only a split second to react before he might have gotten stabbed multiple times. If you do have to shoot someone who has a knife a single round, or two, or even three, frequently fails to do the job. Even if they are mortally wounded by several shots, someone with a knife might still have enough gas in the tank to kill you before they succumb to injuries. Because of these quite indisputable facts (for which you can find ample video evidence) police are trained to shoot until the threat is gone, i.e. suspect drops or they are clearly no longer a threat. Its rough, and looks very bad on video, but its rarely as callous and one-sided as it at first seems to people unfamiliar with the nature of such close-quarter confrontations.
At the start I was slightly leaning on excessive force but I'm leaning towards justifiable shooting at this point. He was fighting the cops right before the first video started recording. Another angle shows him breaking free of the cops and then him walking towards the car door.
Poor training or policy is what caused the cops to shoot him in my opinion. The guy should have never made it to the car door and been tackled and cuffed before reaching it.
IDK if its true, but I kept hearing reports that the cops already tried tasing the dude, and it had no effect, likely a faulty unit.
Doesn't have to be a faulty unit. If the prongs miss, break, or don't have a wide enough spread, the effectiveness drops like a lead brick. Tazers aren't the magic Star Trek stun phasers like noguns and Euros seem to think they are.
There's also cases of people just resisting tazers. Usually due to drugs and alcohol.
I'm reserving a conclusion in lieu of clearer evidence, still observing.
Shooting a man in the back 7 or 8 times sounds abusive to me at this point. But I wouldn't go out and set the city on fire in response either.
Why does it matter that it was in the back? Should they have asked him nicely to turn around so they could shoot him in the front?
Well yea. They should at least ask. Manners and all. =)
why are you trying to apply historic honor standards for duels to police interactions with violent criminal suspects
As stated above, using a firearm in self defense means shooting until the threat has ended (i.e. is no longer capable of harming you). Unless you get lucky and tag something that instantly incapacitates (a direct hit to the brain), chances are that even a mortally wounded person will still be able to fight for up to 2-3 minutes, give or take, before blood loss renders them unconscious and therefore unable to fight back. This is further complicated that pistols and other such small caliber, lower velocity sidearms do not have enough "oomph" to get the job done like a rifle (much faster projectile) or shotgun (heavier/numerous projectile) would. Hence why a mag dump into the aggressor is warranted.
Note: The subject of "killing power" is hotly debated among gun people. i would recommend taking a detailed look at that particular subject from good sources to get a better idea of what I am rambling about.
Correct me if i'm wrong. But that problem of the person still being able to fight after being shot wouldnt be solved with more stopping power, like using a revolver?
I remember my dad always telling me that a 9mm would kill but you wouldnt know it while a revolver .38 would put you on the ground death or not