DemonChronicles
NES Member
Simply put, yes they are, completely.
-
If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
SHOCKING VIDEO: Los Angeles Police Shoot and Kills a Black Homeless Man
- Thread starter Reptile
- Start date
Simply put, yes they are, completely.
Doesn't have to be a threat to all 3. Say some guy is robbing your brother at gunpoint, and you and your wife shoot the robber.
Lol, you're going to "re assess" the threat in the span of 3 seconds that elapsed from the time the first shot was fired? Good luck with that garbage.
![[rofl]](/xen/styles/default/xenforo/smilies.vb/013.gif "ROFL [rofl]")
The amount of time that elapsed was barely more than one person's OODA loop probably is. Good luck "re evaluating" anything that fast. -Mike
hmm no. "he's reaching for my gun!" Well, luckily you have that rolling hood on your holster to retain your firearm. A "gun grab" should be responded to by covering the gun with your strong and support hand and twisting your entire core to release the grasp... it works. That, followed by control techniques- 5 on 1. That is one officer for each arm (with their knees on his shoulders to keep him there), one for each leg, and still leaves you with an officer to sit on the perp's torso. Instead, they hung back, hit the guy with the taser and decided that since that didnt work, they would go ahead and turn him into swiss cheese from less than a yard away. Stupid, stupid.
That is a distinct possibility.
No argument there. It's a great way to shoot your partner.
Doesn't have to be a threat to all 3. Say some guy is robbing your brother at gunpoint, and you and your wife shoot the robber.
Lol, you're going to "re assess" the threat in the span of 3 seconds that elapsed from the time the first shot was fired? Good luck with that garbage.
-Mike
Yes. That is what is taught and what is used out in the field. These are (I am assuming) trained officers. If it was one officer that fired all 5 rounds, OK. That is not the case here. When you move up and down the force continuum, you are supposed to use "that force reasonably necessary to compel compliance" ... clearly in the video, one officer fires first and the others jump on board just moments later.
If the perp is a threat of death or grave bodily injury to a single officer, the other officers are justified in using deadly force to protect the threatened officer. They don't have to be threatened themselves to use deadly force.
- - - Updated - - -
Stop the personal attacks or I will hand out infractions.
Yes, there is an ignore tool. Go to your setting page.
If the guy was grabbing the cops gun, shooting him would be a reasonable response from any of them. If Marcus Jeter has taught is anything, a video that doesn't show a guy going for or not going for a cops gun while a cop tells that he is, you should be highly skeptical. Thankfully Mr. Jeter was not killed and a second video came out.
I agree. So, the threat being "he is going for my gun." Ok...hmm interesting that the officer chose to respond (whichever one) by lighting him up. I suppose everything else at this point is speculation until more information comes out. From my interpretation, it should not have ended this way and although one officer felt that himself or fellow officer(s) were in grave danger and decided the threat warrented deadly force, the "popcorn" effect of the other officers shooting afterwards is questionable...as is their entire strategy for gaining control of this suspect. Anways, I will have to check in with the news for updates...
2 different scenarios here...
1) "He is going for my gun." Is your gun drawn? Why? Your fellow officers are all around you attempting to gain control of the perp. If you fire, you risk hitting one of them.
2) "He is going for my gun." Is your gun holstered? Great, you have a way to deal with someone that goes for your gun (which doesnt include drawing said gun and shooting the person). Did your friend hear you say "He is going for my gun"? Good- he can come in and assist you. Because, if you are scrapping with the perp, your "buddy" risks shooting you WHILE trying to neutralize the gun grab (the dude would have to be literally within arms reach of the officer-that is a dangerous shot to make!)
If these fools are having a royal rumble with somebody on the ground with guns drawn, they are idiots...
Last edited:
I think that is perhaps overstating the opinions of some of us. Did the police mishandle this? I think they probably did. They should have been able to handle him by going hands on.
However, if the perp was able grab an officers gun, the fact that they police screwed up is somewhat immaterial -- however they got there, the perp is now a deadly threat and deadly force is justified.
All I've said is that if deadly force was justified (and it isn't clear to me whether or not it was -- that video isn't great), then 5 shots in that timeframe does not seem to be excessive. And if the one officer was justified in shooting then all officers were justified in shooting.
Well I guess if the cop yelled "drop the gun" it has to be true because when they yell stop resiting it always is.[emoji6]
Ill wait for more video and fa ts of the case come out. I wonder how that position in the liberal dream world that only police and ex-police should have firearms holding up these days.
Ill wait for more video and fa ts of the case come out. I wonder how that position in the liberal dream world that only police and ex-police should have firearms holding up these days.
Agree that you can't see enough from this camera angle to fully understand what was happening.
That being said, I can't help but wonder if there isn't a better way to remove homeless sleepy people than physically struggling with them. If contact hadn't been initiated by the police there would have been no opportunity for the non-LEO person grabbing the officer's gun.
That being said, I can't help but wonder if there isn't a better way to remove homeless sleepy people than physically struggling with them. If contact hadn't been initiated by the police there would have been no opportunity for the non-LEO person grabbing the officer's gun.
I agree. It goes both ways too.
DemonChronicles
NES Member
SO tell me Mr. Operator, just how many times have you done this?
Exactly.
THIS too.
Last edited:
Dude, OAF. In all seriousness, what are you referring to? How many times has someone grabbed my gun? Zero. How many times have I practiced "gun grab" (both handgun and long gun) holstered and otherwise drills? Countless... is that what you are asking about??
Edit: Hey! You tricked me with the "blah blah blah." I was thinking to myself, I would never say that. Not a direct quote dood. ****edit inappropriote. edit inappropriote.
Last edited:
Exactly right. People like to ignore all the factors that lead up to the shooting so long as what happened IMMEDIATELY prior to it make the shooting justified (in this case, assuming the guy did grab one of the cops guns). It is likely the situation could have been handled where no violence was used by anybody and no opportunity would exist for a cops gun to get grabbed.
Here are two police shootings that I think given the circumstances, were justified, though those circumstances were at least partially the fault of the cop in the first place.
Though the guy wasn't cooperating, he wasn't fighting the cop. The cop decided to escalate it by kneeing him in the head. Predictably, the guy responded back. The cop decided to get himself into a one on one wrestling match and was losing badly. He put himself in a position where he had little choice but to shoot or get beaten to death. The whole thing should have never escalated that far.
Though the guy was angry and yelling, he wasn't being physical. The cop then decided the best way to calm him down was to shove him. Predictably, the guy responded back. He swung the shovel at the cops head, and the cop responded in kind by shooting him or risked getting his head bashed in. The situation should have never escalated that far.
Both are examples of cops escalating controllable situations until the culminate with deadly force. There is a definitely problem with this type of policing. It is possible for the shootings themselves to be justified, but that doesn't mean all the actions the cops took were.
Last edited by a moderator:
Obamas uncle still works at conte's liquer in framingham. Sadly the restaurant/bar he was at prior to his DUI is closed. Nothing to do with the DUI, the owner couldn't run the business. Very successful prior but the new owner owned an excavating co, could transition to food. The chicken bone was on bar rescue too.
- Joined
- May 23, 2013
- Messages
- 4,784
- Likes
- 4,912
It seems these days all any LEO has to do is start yelling "stop resisting" to be able to get away with whatever they want, like when 5 or 6 of them are wailing the sh*t out of someone they've pinned to the ground. "Stop resisting" has seemed to become the equivalent to the South Park "it's coming right for us".
[video=youtube_share;Nt6kKhlX8vU]http://youtu.be/Nt6kKhlX8vU[/video]
I think that's it's become so commonplace to see things like this that we've all become desensitized to it, especially in the more urban areas. Using "professionals" may be a bit of a stretch when it seems the training is to escalate the situation instead of trying to find alternate solutions. Unless the guy was indeed pulling a "it's coming right for us" a guy sleeping on the sidewalk doesn't seem that much of a threat. Whatever happened to the shotgun and beanbag round as an alternate solution? Last time I knew someone having a difficulty breathing also had difficulty fighting(and yes I know, regular bullets also lead to difficulty in breathing).
As for if it was a clean shoot or not, who knows with what that video shows. I don't expect much to come from it, just like a lot of similar cases.
Last edited by a moderator:
I'm surprised the officer making contact with Mr. My Business Shovel Man didn't issue a lawful order to put the shovel down.
The counterpoint to the officer shoving him was the fact that Shovel Man decided to make an aggressive hand gesture right over the officer's head.
Not a very good counterpoint though. People tend to make hand gestures when they are fired up. I'm no expert, but if I'm the cop, and I'm telling him he needs to calm down, my first action to try and get him to calm down isn't going to be to shove him. Shoving him is likely to do the exact OPPOSITE of calming someone down. It was a pure escalation of the situation where the opposite needed to occur. If a guy is swinging a shovel at someones head, shooting them may indeed be an appropriate response. If a guy is yelling at someone, shoving them is NOT an appropriate response. And that is where the problem lies.
If you are instigating, getting a free pass when you kill the person who responds to your instigation isn't right. It's taking advantage of your power. Cops are about the only class of people who can get away with it too. When the system allows this, examples like the above will only continue.
If you are instigating, getting a free pass when you kill the person who responds to your instigation isn't right. It's taking advantage of your power. Cops are about the only class of people who can get away with it too. When the system allows this, examples like the above will only continue.
Can't tell what's going on there, but you have to expect police to escalate force until they get compliance. That's just the way it works. They are not going to have some guy sit there and ignore them. So, they get physical. A normal person facing a physical threat reacts to it, but if you do that they will escalate. React to the escalation, etc., and you end up dead. Again, just the way it works. Faced with a mob of LEOs demanding compliance that guy was looking at two end games: doing what they demanded (willfully or via force) or dying. Not a surprising outcome at all.
More generally, we at present live in a society where one either submits to authority or gets executed. That's not hyperbole. Even the most minor of infractions (as seen here) or nonviolent offenses (say, not paying taxes) ultimately lead to one of two outcomes: you do what the authorities demand, by will or by force, or you resist up the chain of force escalation until you die.
More generally, we at present live in a society where one either submits to authority or gets executed. That's not hyperbole. Even the most minor of infractions (as seen here) or nonviolent offenses (say, not paying taxes) ultimately lead to one of two outcomes: you do what the authorities demand, by will or by force, or you resist up the chain of force escalation until you die.
Sadly you aren't kidding. Also sadly, many people don't see any problem with this.
Similar threads
