I so sorry for being off topic but...

Status
Not open for further replies.
I dont know enough to pass judgement about the courtroom shooting but I will say every court house should have a firing range. If someone is sentenced to death they dont deserve luxuries like a last meal.
 
Hey, in some people's eyes, if you have a badge, you have the right to do whatever you want to do. Until footage comes out. It's one of the reasons why police are pushing for laws so Citizens cannot film them. They're the masters now instead of the servants. What amazes me are the people that blindly defend them. The people that they are rooting for wouldn't give them the time of day unless they had a badge too.
 
Now that I have had the time to gather my thoughts on the subject.

I am vehemently opposed to any police shooting where if the roles changed and a CCW/CHL Holder were the one doing the shooting they would be prosecuted but the police doing the same thing is "OK."

If you have been shot and you are sitting flat on your ass (sitting position) or crumpled in whatever position lying down and you have a pistol in your pocket, waistband, etc., you are still a threat if you go for the firearm because the bullet is the delivery system for the bullet. You are justified in shooting a person if they have the firearm.

On the other hand, impact and edged weapons need a delivery system, the last time I checked, a crutch would be considered an impact weapon. The impact weapon needs a delivery system, a viable (ambulatory/mobile), hostile attacker. The same would hold true for an edged weapon, period.

A non-ambulatory attacker with an impact or edged weapon - there is no delivery system for the attacker to attack. They have already been incapacitated to the degree that they cannot utilize the weapon they have, edged or impact weapon.

If you were attacked at an ATM by someone with some type of bludgeon or knife and you shot them and they went down, you are then not justified in executing them or attempting to execute them because of what they did before they were incapacitated. If the person has a firearm, as I said before, everything changes because they don't have to be the delivery system for the weapon, a bullet flies of its own accord when the weapon is fired.

What people are cheerleading for is for police to have the right to be judge, jury and executioner at that point. It's un-American and it's wrong.
 
Don Rearic said:
Hey, in some people's eyes, if you have a badge, you have the right to do whatever you want to do. Until footage comes out. It's one of the reasons why police are pushing for laws so Citizens cannot film them. They're the masters now instead of the servants. What amazes me are the people that blindly defend them. The people that they are rooting for wouldn't give them the time of day unless they had a badge too.
Click to expand...

Cops are human and make mistakes. The reason that they are usually given the benefit of the doubt is because they have to make split second life or death situations with very limited information. Those are decisions that the average CCW carrier don't normally have to make. Most cops I know don't want to be the judge or executioner but when faced with a quick decision they would rather go home to their family instead of getting killed.

There are some power hungry bad apples out there but most that I know and associate with are good family people and don't want to kill people like you seem to think.
 
There is no split second, life or death decision to be made with a non-ambulatory attacker who is grounded from a prior injury and being shot and he doesn't have a firearm, period. This is the type of "pass" constantly given that I am talking about.

If the guy was on his ass or his side, on the ground and the only thing he had was a crutch, he had no delivery system. Bad shoot.

First shot? Probably justified. I don't want to get hit in the head with a crutch and don't think cops should have to endure that as a condition of employment. :)

Non-ambulatory attacker with edged or impact weapon and you shoot him again when he is grounded? Assault with a deadly weapon and attempted murder. That's the way we are treated by the system and they should be held to the same standard, not a lower one.
 
OK Each department has a "Use of Force Policy". If you violate that your ass is in a ringer. I know if a person is going for my weapon or another present i am now at deadly force in My policy and i can use that. But I must at all times try to de-escalate. First shot put him down I would cover him ... disarm him if need be and cuff him( or her gender doesnt matter). The second shot for me on the "Information given" is a bit troublesome. OK Lets get down to it... in our training they say part of your senses can go away.... like hearing... you may piss yourself ...shit yourself... while in a deadly force situation. No one knows until they are there. So the officer reacted and shot him twice... cant say what the officer was thinking or not thinking. It is also what you deem is a threat to you and how you deal with it. My 5'2" co-worker will see a 6'5" person more of a threat than I do at 6'2". Crutches....weapon ... who knows either way a officer had to draw his weapon and use it which is a bad day for all parties concerned.
 
Don,

Since you were there in the court room and have all the details I'm sure you are right about what happened. What it sounds like to me is you being the JUDGE with limited information.

I'm holding off judgment until it's been officially investigated. An NPR story is most definitely not an official investigation.

If the threat was stopped...the shooting should stop.. period. Let's wait and see what happened before begrudging the guy.
 
threatx3 said:
Don,

Since you were there in the court room and have all the details I'm sure you are right about what happened. What it sounds like to me is you being the JUDGE with limited information.
Click to expand...

Yeah, it's always that way, isn't it? Of course, if you applaud the officer, then that's OK, but you're still being the judge with limited information, see how it works?
 
This pops up every few months Don and it always goes the same way...you just can't change some peoples minds.

I do recall seeing a movie where someone had crutches that shot bullets or darts, perhaps the officer was just being thorough.
 
Im siding with Don... He has more posts.
Hahaha
That being said all the police around here(Holmes county Ohio) are great.
 
Don Rearic said:
Now that I have had the time to gather my thoughts on the subject.

I am vehemently opposed to any police shooting where if the roles changed and a CCW/CHL Holder were the one doing the shooting they would be prosecuted but the police doing the same thing is "OK."

If you have been shot and you are sitting flat on your ass (sitting position) or crumpled in whatever position lying down and you have a pistol in your pocket, waistband, etc., you are still a threat if you go for the firearm because the bullet is the delivery system for the bullet. You are justified in shooting a person if they have the firearm.

On the other hand, impact and edged weapons need a delivery system, the last time I checked, a crutch would be considered an impact weapon. The impact weapon needs a delivery system, a viable (ambulatory/mobile), hostile attacker. The same would hold true for an edged weapon, period.

A non-ambulatory attacker with an impact or edged weapon - there is no delivery system for the attacker to attack. They have already been incapacitated to the degree that they cannot utilize the weapon they have, edged or impact weapon.

If you were attacked at an ATM by someone with some type of bludgeon or knife and you shot them and they went down, you are then not justified in executing them or attempting to execute them because of what they did before they were incapacitated. If the person has a firearm, as I said before, everything changes because they don't have to be the delivery system for the weapon, a bullet flies of its own accord when the weapon is fired.

What people are cheerleading for is for police to have the right to be judge, jury and executioner at that point. It's un-American and it's wrong.
Click to expand...

What if he is trying to use the impact weapon when the officer is trying to get him back under control?

From what I can ascertain from what has been released (which isn't really much), the guy with the crutches could have been the size of you, Don, and the cop could have (although I really doubt it, even though I've seen them) been only about my size. You could put a serious hurtin' on me, Don, without even an impact weapon, even sitting on your a**, if I'm responsible for trying to get you back under control. :)

The thing I don't understand, now that I think about it, is why the officer wasn't armed with some non-lethal options. Admittedly, a baton isn't going to be the weapon of choice, necessarily, but shouldn't he have also been carrying a taser?
 
Don Rearic said:
Yeah, it's always that way, isn't it? Of course, if you applaud the officer, then that's OK, but you're still being the judge with limited information, see how it works?
Click to expand...

Check my posts...I never applauded the cop, but given the nature of their job...I hold off on judgment until the investigation is complete.
 
bomber_man_jj said:
Im siding with Don... He has more posts.
Hahaha
That being said all the police around here(Holmes county Ohio) are great.
Click to expand...

He definitely wins the posting number competition.

There are plenty of cop haters in the world....Until they actually need one.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top