In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.
Ax or bar whatever I am not impressed. I'v e seen an old biker guy disarm an off duty Army soldier who was holding a knife once. If he can do it what do we pay the police for?
This just shows lack of respect for life. Maybe the guy could not afford his med who knows.
Clearly justified in my opinion. The police officer didn't shoot until the guy took a couple hop steps towards the officer like he was going to go Babe Ruth on him. Criminal was clearly a idiot to wave that around when he had officers with guns pointed at him.
quote:Originally posted by Waco Waltz
Ax or bar whatever I am not impressed. I'v e seen an old biker guy disarm an off duty Army soldier who was holding a knife once. If he can do it what do we pay the police for?
This just shows lack of respect for life. Maybe the guy could not afford his med who knows.
Yes they might have been able to disarm him.... Or maybe the guy was so stung out on angel dust the guy would have took every thing the LEOs could give him, laugh, and then beheaded the LEOs with his ice ax...
Hell, shot in the face by tazer, and the guy just acted like a nat was buzzing him, and still went to kill one of the cops with an ice ax (here's your sign), then was shot 10 times before falling (here's your sign)..... The LEOs did the right thing so they could go home to their families... Any thing short of what they did, would have meant death or serious injury to one or both the LEOs... I feel truly sorry for anyone that can't see that...
A LEOs job is to serve and protect the public.... Not be stupid and fight and die for the public. NOT JUST MY OPINION, FACTS.... Get over your prejudices against LEOs, some day they my save your life, as pathetic as your life may be
So your saying that the LEOs should let this nut case kill or seriously injury one or both of them just because the guy can't afford his meds????????? Woooooow that's a real intelligent thing to say there, Bubba. Wish I was as smart as you, Bubba.... SHEEP DIP. HERE'S YOU SIGN BUBBA
Stop being a child. My name is not bubba. I grew up in S. Cal so don't confuse me with someone's who's corn fed. If you don't like my opinions don't read them.
It's generally accepted that the mentally ill should be cut a little more slack then us normal folks. I guess you missed that concept.
Shooting was justifiable I stated that. Did you miss it? Others have pointed out other ways the guy could have been taken in. I don't think it's too much to ask that police consider all options before going with deadly force.
Now Bubba would be the first to disagree with that!
quote:Originally posted by remingtonoaks
quote:Originally posted by Waco Waltz
Ax or bar whatever I am not impressed. I'v e seen an old biker guy disarm an off duty Army soldier who was holding a knife once. If he can do it what do we pay the police for?
This just shows lack of respect for life. Maybe the guy could not afford his med who knows.
Yes they might have been able to disarm him.... Or maybe the guy was so stung out on angel dust the guy would have took every thing the LEOs could give him, laugh, and then beheaded the LEOs with his ice ax...
Hell, shot in the face by tazer, and the guy just acted like a nat was buzzing him, and still went to kill one of the cops with an ice ax (here's your sign), then was shot 10 times before falling (here's your sign)..... The LEOs did the right thing so they could go home to their families... Any thing short of what they did, would have meant death or serious injury to one or both the LEOs... I feel truly sorry for anyone that can't see that...
A LEOs job is to serve and protect the public.... Not be stupid and fight and die for the public. NOT JUST MY OPINION, FACTS.... Get over your prejudices against LEOs, some day they my save your life, as pathetic as your life may be
So your saying that the LEOs should let this nut case kill or seriously injury one or both of them just because the guy can't afford his meds????????? Woooooow that's a real intelligent thing to say there, Bubba. Wish I was as smart as you, Bubba.... SHEEP DIP. HERE'S YOU SIGN BUBBA
quote:You dont use metal pipes against metal pipes. You clearly dont know anything about the escalation of force taught in police academys. The way to win in an altercation like this is to use a level of force that exceeds that of you adversary.
Two or three against one isn't an escalation of force?
The escalation of force was appropriate for the situation.
The officers tried to use the taser first, which is considered a less-lethal weapon, before going to the firearm.
Looking at the dog, it doesn't look like a protection trained dog. It may have been a tracking dog. Some dogs are trained as both but some dogs just have a soft disposition that will never do well at protection. A protection trained dog would have been straining at the lead from the start of the situation, in most cases.
The officer may have just brought out the dog hoping he would diffuse the situation. That axe/weapon would have likely killed the dog as well.
If you use a potentially deadly weapon to threaten the police, they are likely to respond with potentially deadly weapons as well. The use of a firearm isn't always fatal, so it is a potentially deadly weapon as well. That's why tasers are considered to be less-lethal weapons. You could die from one but it is less likely fatal than a firearm.
You shoot to stop the threat. Once the threat is neutralized, you should attempt to provide first aid. Many police departments issue glove pouches to their officers. If not most of the cars have gloves in them. Some departments even have chemical suits in their cars. The proper response would have been to protect yourself with any safety equipment available and then administer first aid.
First aid could be as simple as attempting to stop the bleeding and treat to prevent shock. He was fired at about 10 times but we do not know how many of those shots were hits. Even if the person shot (I won't call him a victim) is likely to die from his wounds, that doesn't mean you don't attempt to treat them.
As far as the injury to an innocent bystander, because the police were using potentially lethal force to defend themselves or effect an arrest, it is unlikely that they would be charged criminally for the injury to bystanders, as long as the judgment they used was considered to be reasonable, but that does not mean that their department will not be writing a large check to someone for their injury in a civil lawsuit.
It might look good on the video for the officers to "render first aid."
In fact there is not much an officer can do for multiple torso GSWs.
Stop the bleeding? You can apply direct pressure, or in the worst case use a tourniquet.
The bleeding is internal so applying direct pressure would be of little use.
Can't tourniquet the chest or stomach.
quote:Originally posted by allen griggs
It might look good on the video for the officers to "render first aid."
In fact there is not much an officer can do for multiple torso GSWs.
Stop the bleeding? You can apply direct pressure, or in the worst case use a tourniquet.
The bleeding is internal so applying direct pressure would be of little use.
Can't tourniquet the chest or stomach.
What the pt. needs is emergency surgery.
I'm not a Doctor, but I'd guess that's a pretty accurate assessment. It should be done for appearances if nothing else.
Reminds me of a story I read, can't remember who it was though. Anyway, story goes some detectives shoot a robbery or burglary suspect. One of the detectives does CPR on the guy and ends up looking like a hero. In fact, the detective later tells fellow officers he wanted his heart to keep pumping to make sure he bleed out.
quote:Complaining about no streetside first aid being rendered for multiple GSW's to the torso?
That shows serious naivety.
BROTHER! We have bags of that here on Gunbroker!
Looks like a good shooting to me.
There are some things you just should not do, and this guy did some of them!
Some of you haters and Ida Dunns need to mentally put yourselves in the same situation. Of course, you are not police, so you wouldn't be trying to stop a criminal for damaging someone else's property, but what if a deranged man were coming at you and your family with an ice ax?
Are you going to talk to him? Run? Engage him with your hands? Deploy your TASER? Use OC spray?
Tell me, Armchair Experts, when a crazy person comes at you with an ax, how will you respond?
Me? I am going to hope I don't run out of ammo before he gets close enough to use the ax!
Overkill in a deadly force encounter? There is no such thing!
By initiating contact with the man at such a close distance the police officers raised the effectiveness of his hand held weapon to a level equal to their own and removed many of their non lethal responses from consideration. That was the mistake I saw in what the officers did. They could have used the cars parked there as cover while affording them more time to talk to the man as the adrenaline worked out of his system. They could have withdrawn as they talked to him and maintained a buffer zone and all the while they would have preserved their ability to shoot if they absolutely had to.
Once the man was within arms reach of the officer and started moving in his direction with a weapon I can understand the other officer firing. The mistake was approaching that close, that soon.
Ida Dunn, Ida Dunn, Ida Dunn, Ida Dunn...............[xx(]
quote:Originally posted by skicat
By initiating contact with the man at such a close distance the police officers raised the effectiveness of his hand held weapon to a level equal to their own and removed many of their non lethal responses from consideration. That was the mistake I saw in what the officers did. They could have used the cars parked there as cover while affording them more time to talk to the man as the adrenaline worked out of his system. They could have withdrawn as they talked to him and maintained a buffer zone and all the while they would have preserved their ability to shoot if they absolutely had to.
Once the man was within arms reach of the officer and started moving in his direction with a weapon I can understand the other officer firing. The mistake was approaching that close, that soon.
quote:Originally posted by UNIVERSITY50
Ida Dunn, Ida Dunn, Ida Dunn, Ida Dunn...............[xx(]
quote:Originally posted by skicat
By initiating contact with the man at such a close distance the police officers raised the effectiveness of his hand held weapon to a level equal to their own and removed many of their non lethal responses from consideration. That was the mistake I saw in what the officers did. They could have used the cars parked there as cover while affording them more time to talk to the man as the adrenaline worked out of his system. They could have withdrawn as they talked to him and maintained a buffer zone and all the while they would have preserved their ability to shoot if they absolutely had to.
Once the man was within arms reach of the officer and started moving in his direction with a weapon I can understand the other officer firing. The mistake was approaching that close, that soon.
Just because you do not agree does not make my post an Ida Dunn. If you are unable to articulate a logical refutation then OK I will know to make allowances for you in the future.
Look at the position of the officer who fired the tazer. If the tazer is not successful then he is left exposed, at hand to hand range holding an ineffective weapon, with less resource than the man he is attempting to control. He has also left himself only one direction to retreat in. My question is does that make good sense for any reason?
quote:Originally posted by allen griggs
It might look good on the video for the officers to "render first aid."
In fact there is not much an officer can do for multiple torso GSWs.
Stop the bleeding? You can apply direct pressure, or in the worst case use a tourniquet.
The bleeding is internal so applying direct pressure would be of little use.
Can't tourniquet the chest or stomach.
What the pt. needs is emergency surgery.
Respectfully, I disagree with you ... he should just be buried!
quote:Originally posted by skicat
quote:Originally posted by UNIVERSITY50
Ida Dunn, Ida Dunn, Ida Dunn, Ida Dunn...............[xx(]
quote:Originally posted by skicat
By initiating contact with the man at such a close distance the police officers raised the effectiveness of his hand held weapon to a level equal to their own and removed many of their non lethal responses from consideration. That was the mistake I saw in what the officers did. They could have used the cars parked there as cover while affording them more time to talk to the man as the adrenaline worked out of his system. They could have withdrawn as they talked to him and maintained a buffer zone and all the while they would have preserved their ability to shoot if they absolutely had to.
Once the man was within arms reach of the officer and started moving in his direction with a weapon I can understand the other officer firing. The mistake was approaching that close, that soon.
Just because you do not agree does not make my post an Ida Dunn. If you are unable to articulate a logical refutation then OK I will know to make allowances for you in the future.
Look at the position of the officer who fired the tazer. If the tazer is not successful then he is left exposed, at hand to hand range holding an ineffective weapon, with less resource than the man he is attempting to control. He has also left himself only one direction to retreat in. My question is does that make good sense for any reason?
You raise a valid point in a civil manner.
The 'never dare criticize a cop' posters here seem to go near-apoplectic if someone dares to question a police action or the circumstance that leads to it.
LT, from behind your desk how do you Critique this incident. What Info did responding Officers have? One problem I see is the Officer did not drop the taser and immediately going to his next level of protection. The approach seem appropriate with people running out of the building and Officers blocking the suspect from going back into the building. Once the suspect turned and lunged at the Officer with a weapon the story was over. The suspect made that decision, does not matter if he is off meds, on meds, on drugs, coming down from drugs, his action invoked the response. It may have been a while since you been on the street or been a first responding Officer, since I do not know how your Dept. works. Around here a LT. or Capt. would not be at this seen until it was well over with and the mess was being cleaned up. It is to late for IDA DUNNS, It is what it is, and not going to change. The Officer probably did not want to drop his Traser since he figured he would get yelled at by the LT or Capt if it broke. Just like training to drop your mags. or brass, throw that damn thing down, it is no go at this point, and go to your next level.
PS: If the Suspect would have "respected authority" he would be alive today. And we would not have two Officers having to live with the Suspect decision.
[/quote]You raise a valid point in a civil manner.
The 'never dare criticize a cop' posters here seem to go near-apoplectic if someone dares to question a police action or the circumstance that leads to it.
quote:Originally posted by UNIVERSITY50
LT, from behind your desk how do you Critique this incident. What Info did responding Officers have? One problem I see is the Officer did not drop the taser and immediately going to his next level of protection. The approach seem appropriate with people running out of the building and Officers blocking the suspect from going back into the building. Once the suspect turned and lunged at the Officer with a weapon the story was over. The suspect made that decision, does not matter if he is off meds, on meds, on drugs, coming down from drugs, his action invoked the response. It may have been a while since you been on the street or been a first responding Officer, since I do not know how your Dept. works. Around here a LT. or Capt. would not be at this seen until it was well over with and the mess was being cleaned up. It is to late for IDA DUNNS, It is what it is, and not going to change. The Officer probably did not want to drop his Traser since he figured he would get yelled at by the LT or Capt if it broke. Just like training to drop your mags. or brass, throw that damn thing down, it is no go at this point, and go to your next level.
PS: If the Suspect would have "respected authority" he would be alive today. And we would not have two Officers having to live with the Suspect decision.
You raise a valid point in a civil manner.
The 'never dare criticize a cop' posters here seem to go near-apoplectic if someone dares to question a police action or the circumstance that leads to it.
Wonder if they act that way on the job too?
Then ol'....
[img][/img]
[/quote]
[/quote]I did not critique the shooting. I critiqued those of you who seem overly sensitive to anyone raising questions about the incident.
As to your inferences about my rank and being behind a desk (to minimize any comment I may make, of course), well, lets just say that I have plenty of first-hand experience in a number of capacities to back up any assessments that I make and I'd stack them up against anything you could possibly have, any day.
"As to your inferences about my rank and being behind a desk (to minimize any comment I may make, of course)"
Well, it was meant from a Supervisor point of view, But if you are that sensitive, I will let it go at that.
quote:Originally posted by skicat
Does anyone know for certain that being tazed in the face doesn't mess with vision?
I'd suggest checking that out with the perp. [?]
I'm sure that he would have reported any negative side effects to his vision from his tazing experience? [8] [B)]
I'd hazzard to suggest that the bullets had a more dramatic effect. [:(]
quote:Originally posted by skicat
Look at the position of the officer who fired the tazer. If the tazer is not successful then he is left exposed, at hand to hand range holding an ineffective weapon, with less resource than the man he is attempting to control.Two points you're not considering...
The specific distance varies based upon what model you're using, but the TASER's maximum effective range is limited. That officer you see using it is maintaining somewhere close to the maximum distance possible, especially considering that his viable target area was so small.
The cop who used the TASER was not exposed. This tool is only used against someone armed with an impact or edged weapon if accompanied by a covering officer with a firearm - for reasons all too obvious here.
How life turns out for people is heavily dependent upon the choices they make. This guy chose to go after a someone with a weapon despite a gun pointed at him and being ordered to drop it. It worked out badly for him. No surprise.
Sad to see a man die like that; he sure asked for it raising an AXE in an aggressive manner towards an armed police officer telling you to put it down.
The guy had a more than lethal weapon out and made a lunge for the cop...I guess the cop should have tried to have shot the ax or whatever out of the guys hand, duh.
A really cool trick shot would have been for the cop to have just shot the guys thumb...then he would have dropped his weapon and the poor misunderstood fella that came from a bad home, drunkard for a Dad, molested as a child, etc etc...would be on the mend instead of dead.
Anyone REMEMBER how long it takes for a knife (weapon) wielding maniac to close a distance of 20' to attack someone?
Anyone REMEMBER that 99.9% of humans CANNOT unholster their gun and fire at someone lunging at them with a weapon from 20', your ONLY chance to shoot is to have your weapon OUT when the lunge begins?
This scumbag was closer than 20'...and got what he deserved....GOOD men went home that night safe and unhurt.
Use lethal force to STOP a threat, aint the movies, people dont go down with a single shot the majority of times...and thats not even allowing for those doped up, geez, some need to get a grip & life...[;)]
Nunn
quote:Tell me, Armchair Experts, when a crazy person comes at you with an ax, how will you respond?
Well...I dont ever 2nd guess cops in a shooting situation since I wasnt there...because I know how adrenilin wires you up when bullets fly, it aint the same reading about it.
...And...I dont have a wo_ _d y for cops...even though I was arrested several times in my younger days, and treated none to kind...but then I deserved every bit of how I was treated too, Id have treated me FAR worse.
"How" am I going to respond to someone attacking me or mine?
"Fair" would never remotely enter into it!!!!!!!!
Im going to be doing some fancy footwork to keep some distance between him and me while I do my best to shoot him 8 times with my 45 to KILL them DEAD...and it might just piss me off enough that Ill pop in another mag amd shoot him 8 more times just to make SURE Ive stopped him & he doesnt get up,...damn the scumbag, damn the PC crowd & damn the Court...Id rather KNOW Ive stopped him (read KILLED him) & be alive....[^]
Reminds me of a story I read, can't remember who it was though. Anyway, story goes some detectives shoot a robbery or burglary suspect. One of the detectives does CPR on the guy and ends up looking like a hero. In fact, the detective later tells fellow officers he wanted his heart to keep pumping to make sure he bleed out.
That was in one of Joseph Wambaugh's books. "Choirboys", mebbe?
quote:The 'never dare criticize a cop' posters here seem to go near-apoplectic if someone dares to question a police action or the circumstance that leads to it.
Wonder if they act that way on the job too?
This seems like a small thing to most, but it's huge to me.
I intensely dislike when cops use phrases like "He refused to obey my command." I don't want to be commanded by a cop or anyone else, especially if I have done nothing illegal. In this country you're presumed innocent and that's the way I expect to be treated.
If it is not readily obvious that I have commited a crime, I don't want to be talked down to as though I am outranked by the cop. Treat me with respect and that is what you'll get in return, but treat me as though you think I should bow to your authority and presto chango, I slip into pri## mode.
quote:Originally posted by Txs
quote:Originally posted by skicat
Look at the position of the officer who fired the tazer. If the tazer is not successful then he is left exposed, at hand to hand range holding an ineffective weapon, with less resource than the man he is attempting to control.Two points you're not considering...Thanks for replying with thought. I still think it was a poor tactical choice and could be used in future training exercises as an example of what not to do.
The specific distance varies based upon what model you're using, but the TASER's maximum effective range is limited. That officer you see using it is maintaining somewhere close to the maximum distance possible, especially considering that his viable target area was so small.This is the officers choice to deploy a close range weapon with limited chance of success, placing himself within striking distance of someone obviously upset and holding a weapon.
The cop who used the TASER was not exposed. If he was not exposed then the second officer had no reason to shoot.This tool is only used against someone armed with an impact or edged weapon if accompanied by a covering officer with a firearm - for reasons all too obvious here. This is what I mean. The choice was made by the officers to lead with a taser shot to the face, a tactic which if unsuccessful would do little to calm down or defuse the situation. The fall back position was opening fire.
How life turns out for people is heavily dependent upon the choices they make. This guy chose to go after a someone with a weapon despite a gun pointed at him and being ordered to drop it. It worked out badly for him. No surprise.
Not trying to pick too much of a bone with you. I am just relating the way I was trained.
First aid should be attempted after the threat is diminished. If EMT's were called to the scene, should they just walk away without making an assessment and treating if possible. The police should make an assessment and attempt first aid.
What if that person lying on the ground was your child or that of a close friend. The job of the police is stop the threat and then protect their prisoner from further harm.
As mentioned above, if nothing else it serves to show that they are professional and care about the public at large and can also minimize the damages from a lawsuit. That saves all of us tax money.
If that were a family member of yours and you saw the police standing around while he was laying on the ground bleeding out, I guarantee you would have something to say about it. You would probably want to sue. And you may get a sympathetic judge or jury because the police did not attempt first aid.
I can understand that the involved officers already have a lot on their minds, having just had to use deadly force, but the other officers who were not directly involved could have taken over for them, allowing them to collect their thoughts while they made a basic assessment of the person shot.
If that makes me naive, I guess I can live with that.
I wrote out a whole lot more but then I deleted it. Maybe I should learn from lt496 and not comment about these type of things.
If you did nothing illegal or are not suspected of such, why would a Police Officer be giving you "commands"? Driver License, Reg., and proof of insurance?? is that a Command? Or when it moves up to, sir please stay in your car, or keep your hands on the wheel until asked to remove them. You see it progress as fast as they want it to. Just like the suspect in the shooting, if he would have listen to the Officers he would be in handcuffs, not a mortuary.
I do not like "Giving Commands" becuase that means they have just taken our contact one step higher then needed. Most people I come in contact with can carry on a normal conversation without it ever Escalating in to Commands.[:)]
quote:Originally posted by Wyatt Earp
quote:The 'never dare criticize a cop' posters here seem to go near-apoplectic if someone dares to question a police action or the circumstance that leads to it.
Wonder if they act that way on the job too?
This seems like a small thing to most, but it's huge to me.
I intensely dislike when cops use phrases like "He refused to obey my command." I don't want to be commanded by a cop or anyone else, especially if I have done nothing illegal. In this country you're presumed innocent and that's the way I expect to be treated.
If it is not readily obvious that I have commited a crime, I don't want to be talked down to as though I am outranked by the cop. Treat me with respect and that is what you'll get in return, but treat me as though you think I should bow to your authority and presto chango, I slip into pri## mode.
quote:Originally posted by Colonel Plink
quote:Originally posted by bhale187
Reminds me of a story I read, can't remember who it was though. Anyway, story goes some detectives shoot a robbery or burglary suspect. One of the detectives does CPR on the guy and ends up looking like a hero. In fact, the detective later tells fellow officers he wanted his heart to keep pumping to make sure he bleed out.
That was in one of Joseph Wambaugh's books. "Choirboys", mebbe?
Wasn't guy breaking windows in the store?Wasn't he threatening ?Was he asked to put down the Crow Bar?....Didn't he see the police with weapons drawn?.....fools die every day! This guy was a fool.I bet if this action happened in China,it would have been different.....Bang! Your dead,end of story...[}:)]
quote:Originally posted by bhale187
A few points of clarification based on my perspective of the video.
It was a TAZER to the face, not pepper spray. If you look close you can see the wires hanging from his face leading back to the officer's hand, and you can watch the guy pull the wires off of his face.
It was an axe, not a pipe the suspect was holding. You can see that at the 39sec mark.
The suspect turns towards the officer and raises that axe a second before the second officer begins shooting the suspect.
The suspect was still standing as the second volley of shots began, and was falling as the volley ended.
Hindsight is 20/20, and monday morning quarterbacking is always easy....Things could have gone different and better. Once the officers got that close to him, and he made an overtly threatening motion towards the officer all other options went out the window.
I thought it looked like a conduit bender. Hard to see with the resolution & angle.
quote:If you did nothing illegal or are not suspected of such, why would a Police Officer be giving you "commands"?
My experience is that some cops have a need to take command at the grocery store picking up a loaf of bread for their wife. They think fear is a good substitute for respect. I suspect I'm not alone in thinking that.
quote:Driver License, Reg., and proof of insurance?? is that a Command?
No, that is a reasonable request.
quote:Or when it moves up to, sir please stay in your car, or keep your hands on the wheel until asked to remove them. You see it progress as fast as they want it to. Just like the suspect in the shooting, if he would have listen to the Officers he would be in handcuffs, not a mortuary.
This is not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about the cop trying to explain why he tased a guy when the guy had done nothing more that failing to snap to attention the instant a cop handed out a command.
Most of us walk around in our daily lives knowing we've done nothing wrong and our default reaction to being given a command by a cop is "Hey, drop the tough guy act, I've done nothing that warrants being commanded to do this or that. You have a question, fine, ask it, but don't be asking me to obey your commands if I'm not suspected of a crime."
I think the LE profession has become too militaristic, and has adopted an us vs them mentality. I know one local cop here is a local laughingstock as he stands around a local C-store at night staring down every customer who enters the store as though everyone is suspected of being drunk until proven otherwise. My daughter-in-law won't even go in that store if his car is parked there. He commands fear, not respect.
quote:I intensely dislike when cops use phrases like "He refused to obey my command." I don't want to be commanded by a cop or anyone else, especially if I have done nothing illegal. In this country you're presumed innocent and that's the way I expect to be treated.
Sometimes a polite request is all that is necessary; sometimes a command is warranted, like it or not.
Comments
This just shows lack of respect for life. Maybe the guy could not afford his med who knows.
Ax or bar whatever I am not impressed. I'v e seen an old biker guy disarm an off duty Army soldier who was holding a knife once. If he can do it what do we pay the police for?
This just shows lack of respect for life. Maybe the guy could not afford his med who knows.
Yes they might have been able to disarm him.... Or maybe the guy was so stung out on angel dust the guy would have took every thing the LEOs could give him, laugh, and then beheaded the LEOs with his ice ax...
Hell, shot in the face by tazer, and the guy just acted like a nat was buzzing him, and still went to kill one of the cops with an ice ax (here's your sign), then was shot 10 times before falling (here's your sign)..... The LEOs did the right thing so they could go home to their families... Any thing short of what they did, would have meant death or serious injury to one or both the LEOs... I feel truly sorry for anyone that can't see that...
A LEOs job is to serve and protect the public.... Not be stupid and fight and die for the public. NOT JUST MY OPINION, FACTS.... Get over your prejudices against LEOs, some day they my save your life, as pathetic as your life may be
So your saying that the LEOs should let this nut case kill or seriously injury one or both of them just because the guy can't afford his meds????????? Woooooow that's a real intelligent thing to say there, Bubba. Wish I was as smart as you, Bubba.... SHEEP DIP. HERE'S YOU SIGN BUBBA
It's generally accepted that the mentally ill should be cut a little more slack then us normal folks. I guess you missed that concept.
Shooting was justifiable I stated that. Did you miss it? Others have pointed out other ways the guy could have been taken in. I don't think it's too much to ask that police consider all options before going with deadly force.
Now Bubba would be the first to disagree with that!
quote:Originally posted by remingtonoaks
quote:Originally posted by Waco Waltz
Ax or bar whatever I am not impressed. I'v e seen an old biker guy disarm an off duty Army soldier who was holding a knife once. If he can do it what do we pay the police for?
This just shows lack of respect for life. Maybe the guy could not afford his med who knows.
Yes they might have been able to disarm him.... Or maybe the guy was so stung out on angel dust the guy would have took every thing the LEOs could give him, laugh, and then beheaded the LEOs with his ice ax...
Hell, shot in the face by tazer, and the guy just acted like a nat was buzzing him, and still went to kill one of the cops with an ice ax (here's your sign), then was shot 10 times before falling (here's your sign)..... The LEOs did the right thing so they could go home to their families... Any thing short of what they did, would have meant death or serious injury to one or both the LEOs... I feel truly sorry for anyone that can't see that...
A LEOs job is to serve and protect the public.... Not be stupid and fight and die for the public. NOT JUST MY OPINION, FACTS.... Get over your prejudices against LEOs, some day they my save your life, as pathetic as your life may be
So your saying that the LEOs should let this nut case kill or seriously injury one or both of them just because the guy can't afford his meds????????? Woooooow that's a real intelligent thing to say there, Bubba. Wish I was as smart as you, Bubba.... SHEEP DIP. HERE'S YOU SIGN BUBBA
Two or three against one isn't an escalation of force?
The officers tried to use the taser first, which is considered a less-lethal weapon, before going to the firearm.
Looking at the dog, it doesn't look like a protection trained dog. It may have been a tracking dog. Some dogs are trained as both but some dogs just have a soft disposition that will never do well at protection. A protection trained dog would have been straining at the lead from the start of the situation, in most cases.
The officer may have just brought out the dog hoping he would diffuse the situation. That axe/weapon would have likely killed the dog as well.
If you use a potentially deadly weapon to threaten the police, they are likely to respond with potentially deadly weapons as well. The use of a firearm isn't always fatal, so it is a potentially deadly weapon as well. That's why tasers are considered to be less-lethal weapons. You could die from one but it is less likely fatal than a firearm.
You shoot to stop the threat. Once the threat is neutralized, you should attempt to provide first aid. Many police departments issue glove pouches to their officers. If not most of the cars have gloves in them. Some departments even have chemical suits in their cars. The proper response would have been to protect yourself with any safety equipment available and then administer first aid.
First aid could be as simple as attempting to stop the bleeding and treat to prevent shock. He was fired at about 10 times but we do not know how many of those shots were hits. Even if the person shot (I won't call him a victim) is likely to die from his wounds, that doesn't mean you don't attempt to treat them.
As far as the injury to an innocent bystander, because the police were using potentially lethal force to defend themselves or effect an arrest, it is unlikely that they would be charged criminally for the injury to bystanders, as long as the judgment they used was considered to be reasonable, but that does not mean that their department will not be writing a large check to someone for their injury in a civil lawsuit.
Does anyone know for certain that being tazed in the face doesn't mess with vision?
The only effect it would have on vision would be if the barb went in to an eyeball or if the barb somehow struck a nerve assosiated with vision.
In fact there is not much an officer can do for multiple torso GSWs.
Stop the bleeding? You can apply direct pressure, or in the worst case use a tourniquet.
The bleeding is internal so applying direct pressure would be of little use.
Can't tourniquet the chest or stomach.
What the pt. needs is emergency surgery.
It might look good on the video for the officers to "render first aid."
In fact there is not much an officer can do for multiple torso GSWs.
Stop the bleeding? You can apply direct pressure, or in the worst case use a tourniquet.
The bleeding is internal so applying direct pressure would be of little use.
Can't tourniquet the chest or stomach.
What the pt. needs is emergency surgery.
I'm not a Doctor, but I'd guess that's a pretty accurate assessment. It should be done for appearances if nothing else.
Reminds me of a story I read, can't remember who it was though. Anyway, story goes some detectives shoot a robbery or burglary suspect. One of the detectives does CPR on the guy and ends up looking like a hero. In fact, the detective later tells fellow officers he wanted his heart to keep pumping to make sure he bleed out.
That shows serious naivety.
That shows serious naivety.
BROTHER! We have bags of that here on Gunbroker!
Looks like a good shooting to me.
There are some things you just should not do, and this guy did some of them!
Some of you haters and Ida Dunns need to mentally put yourselves in the same situation. Of course, you are not police, so you wouldn't be trying to stop a criminal for damaging someone else's property, but what if a deranged man were coming at you and your family with an ice ax?
Are you going to talk to him? Run? Engage him with your hands? Deploy your TASER? Use OC spray?
Tell me, Armchair Experts, when a crazy person comes at you with an ax, how will you respond?
Me? I am going to hope I don't run out of ammo before he gets close enough to use the ax!
Overkill in a deadly force encounter? There is no such thing!
Once the man was within arms reach of the officer and started moving in his direction with a weapon I can understand the other officer firing. The mistake was approaching that close, that soon.
quote:Originally posted by skicat
By initiating contact with the man at such a close distance the police officers raised the effectiveness of his hand held weapon to a level equal to their own and removed many of their non lethal responses from consideration. That was the mistake I saw in what the officers did. They could have used the cars parked there as cover while affording them more time to talk to the man as the adrenaline worked out of his system. They could have withdrawn as they talked to him and maintained a buffer zone and all the while they would have preserved their ability to shoot if they absolutely had to.
Once the man was within arms reach of the officer and started moving in his direction with a weapon I can understand the other officer firing. The mistake was approaching that close, that soon.
Ida Dunn, Ida Dunn, Ida Dunn, Ida Dunn...............[xx(]
quote:Originally posted by skicat
By initiating contact with the man at such a close distance the police officers raised the effectiveness of his hand held weapon to a level equal to their own and removed many of their non lethal responses from consideration. That was the mistake I saw in what the officers did. They could have used the cars parked there as cover while affording them more time to talk to the man as the adrenaline worked out of his system. They could have withdrawn as they talked to him and maintained a buffer zone and all the while they would have preserved their ability to shoot if they absolutely had to.
Once the man was within arms reach of the officer and started moving in his direction with a weapon I can understand the other officer firing. The mistake was approaching that close, that soon.
Just because you do not agree does not make my post an Ida Dunn. If you are unable to articulate a logical refutation then OK I will know to make allowances for you in the future.
Look at the position of the officer who fired the tazer. If the tazer is not successful then he is left exposed, at hand to hand range holding an ineffective weapon, with less resource than the man he is attempting to control. He has also left himself only one direction to retreat in. My question is does that make good sense for any reason?
It might look good on the video for the officers to "render first aid."
In fact there is not much an officer can do for multiple torso GSWs.
Stop the bleeding? You can apply direct pressure, or in the worst case use a tourniquet.
The bleeding is internal so applying direct pressure would be of little use.
Can't tourniquet the chest or stomach.
What the pt. needs is emergency surgery.
Respectfully, I disagree with you ... he should just be buried!
quote:Originally posted by UNIVERSITY50
Ida Dunn, Ida Dunn, Ida Dunn, Ida Dunn...............[xx(]
quote:Originally posted by skicat
By initiating contact with the man at such a close distance the police officers raised the effectiveness of his hand held weapon to a level equal to their own and removed many of their non lethal responses from consideration. That was the mistake I saw in what the officers did. They could have used the cars parked there as cover while affording them more time to talk to the man as the adrenaline worked out of his system. They could have withdrawn as they talked to him and maintained a buffer zone and all the while they would have preserved their ability to shoot if they absolutely had to.
Once the man was within arms reach of the officer and started moving in his direction with a weapon I can understand the other officer firing. The mistake was approaching that close, that soon.
Just because you do not agree does not make my post an Ida Dunn. If you are unable to articulate a logical refutation then OK I will know to make allowances for you in the future.
Look at the position of the officer who fired the tazer. If the tazer is not successful then he is left exposed, at hand to hand range holding an ineffective weapon, with less resource than the man he is attempting to control. He has also left himself only one direction to retreat in. My question is does that make good sense for any reason?
You raise a valid point in a civil manner.
The 'never dare criticize a cop' posters here seem to go near-apoplectic if someone dares to question a police action or the circumstance that leads to it.
Wonder if they act that way on the job too?
The ol'....
[img][/img]
Morons...
Media now says it was a crow bar...
PS: If the Suspect would have "respected authority" he would be alive today. And we would not have two Officers having to live with the Suspect decision.
[/quote]You raise a valid point in a civil manner.
The 'never dare criticize a cop' posters here seem to go near-apoplectic if someone dares to question a police action or the circumstance that leads to it.
Wonder if they act that way on the job too?
Then ol'....
[img][/img]
[/quote]
Way too much shooting. Lucky an innocent bystander was not killed. Glad they didn't have their full auto AR15's with them.
Morons...
Fix it for you[}:)]
LT, from behind your desk how do you Critique this incident. What Info did responding Officers have? One problem I see is the Officer did not drop the taser and immediately going to his next level of protection. The approach seem appropriate with people running out of the building and Officers blocking the suspect from going back into the building. Once the suspect turned and lunged at the Officer with a weapon the story was over. The suspect made that decision, does not matter if he is off meds, on meds, on drugs, coming down from drugs, his action invoked the response. It may have been a while since you been on the street or been a first responding Officer, since I do not know how your Dept. works. Around here a LT. or Capt. would not be at this seen until it was well over with and the mess was being cleaned up. It is to late for IDA DUNNS, It is what it is, and not going to change. The Officer probably did not want to drop his Traser since he figured he would get yelled at by the LT or Capt if it broke. Just like training to drop your mags. or brass, throw that damn thing down, it is no go at this point, and go to your next level.
PS: If the Suspect would have "respected authority" he would be alive today. And we would not have two Officers having to live with the Suspect decision.
You raise a valid point in a civil manner.
The 'never dare criticize a cop' posters here seem to go near-apoplectic if someone dares to question a police action or the circumstance that leads to it.
Wonder if they act that way on the job too?
Then ol'....
[img][/img]
[/quote]
[/quote]I did not critique the shooting. I critiqued those of you who seem overly sensitive to anyone raising questions about the incident.
As to your inferences about my rank and being behind a desk (to minimize any comment I may make, of course), well, lets just say that I have plenty of first-hand experience in a number of capacities to back up any assessments that I make and I'd stack them up against anything you could possibly have, any day.
That said, this isn't about that, now is it?
Well, it was meant from a Supervisor point of view, But if you are that sensitive, I will let it go at that.
Does anyone know for certain that being tazed in the face doesn't mess with vision?
I'd suggest checking that out with the perp. [?]
I'm sure that he would have reported any negative side effects to his vision from his tazing experience? [8] [B)]
I'd hazzard to suggest that the bullets had a more dramatic effect. [:(]
Look at the position of the officer who fired the tazer. If the tazer is not successful then he is left exposed, at hand to hand range holding an ineffective weapon, with less resource than the man he is attempting to control.Two points you're not considering...
The specific distance varies based upon what model you're using, but the TASER's maximum effective range is limited. That officer you see using it is maintaining somewhere close to the maximum distance possible, especially considering that his viable target area was so small.
The cop who used the TASER was not exposed. This tool is only used against someone armed with an impact or edged weapon if accompanied by a covering officer with a firearm - for reasons all too obvious here.
How life turns out for people is heavily dependent upon the choices they make. This guy chose to go after a someone with a weapon despite a gun pointed at him and being ordered to drop it. It worked out badly for him. No surprise.
He will not do that again.
A really cool trick shot would have been for the cop to have just shot the guys thumb...then he would have dropped his weapon and the poor misunderstood fella that came from a bad home, drunkard for a Dad, molested as a child, etc etc...would be on the mend instead of dead.
Anyone REMEMBER how long it takes for a knife (weapon) wielding maniac to close a distance of 20' to attack someone?
Anyone REMEMBER that 99.9% of humans CANNOT unholster their gun and fire at someone lunging at them with a weapon from 20', your ONLY chance to shoot is to have your weapon OUT when the lunge begins?
This scumbag was closer than 20'...and got what he deserved....GOOD men went home that night safe and unhurt.
Use lethal force to STOP a threat, aint the movies, people dont go down with a single shot the majority of times...and thats not even allowing for those doped up, geez, some need to get a grip & life...[;)]
quote:Tell me, Armchair Experts, when a crazy person comes at you with an ax, how will you respond?
Well...I dont ever 2nd guess cops in a shooting situation since I wasnt there...because I know how adrenilin wires you up when bullets fly, it aint the same reading about it.
...And...I dont have a wo_ _d y for cops...even though I was arrested several times in my younger days, and treated none to kind...but then I deserved every bit of how I was treated too, Id have treated me FAR worse.
"How" am I going to respond to someone attacking me or mine?
"Fair" would never remotely enter into it!!!!!!!!
Im going to be doing some fancy footwork to keep some distance between him and me while I do my best to shoot him 8 times with my 45 to KILL them DEAD...and it might just piss me off enough that Ill pop in another mag amd shoot him 8 more times just to make SURE Ive stopped him & he doesnt get up,...damn the scumbag, damn the PC crowd & damn the Court...Id rather KNOW Ive stopped him (read KILLED him) & be alive....[^]
Reminds me of a story I read, can't remember who it was though. Anyway, story goes some detectives shoot a robbery or burglary suspect. One of the detectives does CPR on the guy and ends up looking like a hero. In fact, the detective later tells fellow officers he wanted his heart to keep pumping to make sure he bleed out.
That was in one of Joseph Wambaugh's books. "Choirboys", mebbe?
Wonder if they act that way on the job too?
This seems like a small thing to most, but it's huge to me.
I intensely dislike when cops use phrases like "He refused to obey my command." I don't want to be commanded by a cop or anyone else, especially if I have done nothing illegal. In this country you're presumed innocent and that's the way I expect to be treated.
If it is not readily obvious that I have commited a crime, I don't want to be talked down to as though I am outranked by the cop. Treat me with respect and that is what you'll get in return, but treat me as though you think I should bow to your authority and presto chango, I slip into pri## mode.
quote:Originally posted by skicat
Look at the position of the officer who fired the tazer. If the tazer is not successful then he is left exposed, at hand to hand range holding an ineffective weapon, with less resource than the man he is attempting to control.Two points you're not considering...Thanks for replying with thought. I still think it was a poor tactical choice and could be used in future training exercises as an example of what not to do.
The specific distance varies based upon what model you're using, but the TASER's maximum effective range is limited. That officer you see using it is maintaining somewhere close to the maximum distance possible, especially considering that his viable target area was so small.This is the officers choice to deploy a close range weapon with limited chance of success, placing himself within striking distance of someone obviously upset and holding a weapon.
The cop who used the TASER was not exposed. If he was not exposed then the second officer had no reason to shoot.This tool is only used against someone armed with an impact or edged weapon if accompanied by a covering officer with a firearm - for reasons all too obvious here. This is what I mean. The choice was made by the officers to lead with a taser shot to the face, a tactic which if unsuccessful would do little to calm down or defuse the situation. The fall back position was opening fire.
How life turns out for people is heavily dependent upon the choices they make. This guy chose to go after a someone with a weapon despite a gun pointed at him and being ordered to drop it. It worked out badly for him. No surprise.
Not trying to pick too much of a bone with you. I am just relating the way I was trained.
First aid should be attempted after the threat is diminished. If EMT's were called to the scene, should they just walk away without making an assessment and treating if possible. The police should make an assessment and attempt first aid.
What if that person lying on the ground was your child or that of a close friend. The job of the police is stop the threat and then protect their prisoner from further harm.
As mentioned above, if nothing else it serves to show that they are professional and care about the public at large and can also minimize the damages from a lawsuit. That saves all of us tax money.
If that were a family member of yours and you saw the police standing around while he was laying on the ground bleeding out, I guarantee you would have something to say about it. You would probably want to sue. And you may get a sympathetic judge or jury because the police did not attempt first aid.
I can understand that the involved officers already have a lot on their minds, having just had to use deadly force, but the other officers who were not directly involved could have taken over for them, allowing them to collect their thoughts while they made a basic assessment of the person shot.
If that makes me naive, I guess I can live with that.
I wrote out a whole lot more but then I deleted it. Maybe I should learn from lt496 and not comment about these type of things.
I do not like "Giving Commands" becuase that means they have just taken our contact one step higher then needed. Most people I come in contact with can carry on a normal conversation without it ever Escalating in to Commands.[:)]
quote:Originally posted by Wyatt Earp
quote:The 'never dare criticize a cop' posters here seem to go near-apoplectic if someone dares to question a police action or the circumstance that leads to it.
Wonder if they act that way on the job too?
This seems like a small thing to most, but it's huge to me.
I intensely dislike when cops use phrases like "He refused to obey my command." I don't want to be commanded by a cop or anyone else, especially if I have done nothing illegal. In this country you're presumed innocent and that's the way I expect to be treated.
If it is not readily obvious that I have commited a crime, I don't want to be talked down to as though I am outranked by the cop. Treat me with respect and that is what you'll get in return, but treat me as though you think I should bow to your authority and presto chango, I slip into pri## mode.
A. There is no such thing as a "good" shooting.
B. If you get into a fight, altercation or a shoot out the first thing the police will do when they get there is second guess you and anylyze you.
C. Plenty of cops have been in the same situations and no one had to die.
That's all.
quote:Originally posted by bhale187
Reminds me of a story I read, can't remember who it was though. Anyway, story goes some detectives shoot a robbery or burglary suspect. One of the detectives does CPR on the guy and ends up looking like a hero. In fact, the detective later tells fellow officers he wanted his heart to keep pumping to make sure he bleed out.
That was in one of Joseph Wambaugh's books. "Choirboys", mebbe?
Choirboys, thanks, that's the one
A few points of clarification based on my perspective of the video.
It was a TAZER to the face, not pepper spray. If you look close you can see the wires hanging from his face leading back to the officer's hand, and you can watch the guy pull the wires off of his face.
It was an axe, not a pipe the suspect was holding. You can see that at the 39sec mark.
The suspect turns towards the officer and raises that axe a second before the second officer begins shooting the suspect.
The suspect was still standing as the second volley of shots began, and was falling as the volley ended.
Hindsight is 20/20, and monday morning quarterbacking is always easy....Things could have gone different and better. Once the officers got that close to him, and he made an overtly threatening motion towards the officer all other options went out the window.
I thought it looked like a conduit bender. Hard to see with the resolution & angle.
My experience is that some cops have a need to take command at the grocery store picking up a loaf of bread for their wife. They think fear is a good substitute for respect. I suspect I'm not alone in thinking that.
quote:Driver License, Reg., and proof of insurance?? is that a Command?
No, that is a reasonable request.
quote:Or when it moves up to, sir please stay in your car, or keep your hands on the wheel until asked to remove them. You see it progress as fast as they want it to. Just like the suspect in the shooting, if he would have listen to the Officers he would be in handcuffs, not a mortuary.
This is not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about the cop trying to explain why he tased a guy when the guy had done nothing more that failing to snap to attention the instant a cop handed out a command.
Most of us walk around in our daily lives knowing we've done nothing wrong and our default reaction to being given a command by a cop is "Hey, drop the tough guy act, I've done nothing that warrants being commanded to do this or that. You have a question, fine, ask it, but don't be asking me to obey your commands if I'm not suspected of a crime."
I think the LE profession has become too militaristic, and has adopted an us vs them mentality. I know one local cop here is a local laughingstock as he stands around a local C-store at night staring down every customer who enters the store as though everyone is suspected of being drunk until proven otherwise. My daughter-in-law won't even go in that store if his car is parked there. He commands fear, not respect.
Sometimes a polite request is all that is necessary; sometimes a command is warranted, like it or not.