More out of control cops

I could watch a two hour or four hour video of the cops day, and the only thing that matters is 30 seconds when he goes felonious. I don't care if he's done 300 shifts in a row without committing a murder, when you shoot a man, in the back, running away from you, with no weapon anywhere, it only takes a few seconds to figure out "what's wrong with this picture?". Nothing in the prev minute, hour, day, week, month justifies shooting an unarmed man running away from you. Either you chase him and corral him, or you don't. It really is just that simple. What you DON'T get to do with a badge is murder someone in the back. EVER.

Capice?
 
timwinters said:
Personally I think the baby boomers (of which I am embarrassed to be a member) are the most pathetic selfish generation that this country has ever seen and that subsequent generations have been a step in the right direction from us.

We suck.

(The life out of everything we go near.)
Click to expand...

Boy, ain't it the truth?

We took this great country from our parents, the survivors of the Great Depression, the victors of World War II, the conquerors of the Moon -- and drove it straight into the ground like a railroad spike. :nonod:
 
Unit74 said:
Here is a tip...... Don't break the law and the cops will leave you alone. Been working fine for me for the past 40ish years, cept' for that time I was doin' 90 on the freeway on my bike. But I don't blame the cop for giving me a coupon to traffic court either. :no: I can take my lumps when I'm wrong.
Click to expand...


Bingo! We have a winner.

Is there not a forum on the planet that doesnt have a healthy cop-bashing population??

Maybe the guy deserved an ass-whipping, maybe he didnt. Yeah, the cops should probably used a tad more self restraint, but you guys, as usual, are quick to condemn the cops for anything you see or hear.
 
Unit74 said:
Here is a tip...... Don't break the law and the cops will leave you alone. Been working fine for me for the past 40ish years, cept' for that time I was doin' 90 on the freeway on my bike. But I don't blame the cop for giving me a coupon to traffic court either. :no: I can take my lumps when I'm wrong.
Click to expand...


Ok, but what if they would have taken you and beat you like the guy in the video. Just lucky it did not happen that way.

The guy laid down and gave up, the cops should have been the professional's they are and not act like a group of thugs. We hire police and expect them to have a bit of professionalism. This is the problem today, the police are not professional's they are just armed thugs. Step out of line and they will show you even if you have given up.

Oh the cop did not give you lumps, he gave you a ticket. There is a big difference.
 
Jay Honeck said:
Boy, ain't it the truth?

We took this great country from our parents, the survivors of the Great Depression, the victors of World War II, the conquerors of the Moon -- and drove it straight into the ground like a railroad spike. :nonod:
Click to expand...


No we took this country from the Native American Indian's and drove railroad spikes through it.
 
1600vw said:
No we took this country from the Native American Indian's and drove railroad spikes through it.
Click to expand...

I think everyone should pay reparations to everyone. :rolleyes:

Personally, I'm still pretty ticked off that my ancestors were driven from Germany. I wonder if I can get any payola from Angela Merkl's people? :lol:
 
47PILOT said:
There is a little something called "excessive force" that as we all know can be open to interpretation. When someone is actually "resisting arrest" there is justification for use of force. In that type of situation, the "level" of force used can be "creatively" justified.
When someone drops to the ground face down and puts his own hands behind his back, ANY use of force from that point on is excessive.

By the way. In my opinion this lack of integrity isn't exclusive to just law enforcement. Its across the board. You can find examples of this almost anywhere you look. This new generation of people is pathetic. We have lost all the values this country was built on.
Click to expand...
What do you think would happen in Mexico if you took a horse and got cought by the Mexican Police or resisted arrest and ran away. Is their something called excessive force in Mexico, or a lot of other countries.
 
I suggest all cops stop responding to calls. Just stay out of the way. Drink coffee, maybe an occasional doughnut :D (sorry poor joke). And let all the citizens fend for themself.

After a few weeks when "normal" people are getting tired of getting violated maybe they appreciate cops.

And while we are at it. Put all reporters and journalists with the criminals so they can see first hand what BS the report on. Maybe they will be tired of getting violated to after a while without cops.

If you can't do the time don't do the crime
 
Rotarywing said:
I suggest all cops stop responding to calls. Just stay out of the way. Drink coffee, maybe an occasional doughnut :D (sorry poor joke). And let all the citizens fend for themself.

After a few weeks when "normal" people are getting tired of getting violated maybe they appreciate cops.

And while we are at it. Put all reporters and journalists with the criminals so they can see first hand what BS the report on. Maybe they will be tired of getting violated to after a while without cops.

If you can't do the time don't do the crime
Click to expand...

Yup, it's okay to shoot someone in the back, yer right, everyone should just take a chill pill.


(that was sarcasm for the sarcasm impaired)
 
docmirror said:
Nothing in the prev minute, hour, day, week, month justifies shooting an unarmed man running away from you. Either you chase him and corral him, or you don't. It really is just that simple. What you DON'T get to do with a badge is murder someone in the back. EVER.

Capice?
Click to expand...
So you're saying it makes no difference what a person being chased has done? You really don't need to be armed to be a threat.

We have a local investigation going where three policemen shot an unarmed man in the back as he fled. Apparently it's on youtube, but I haven't watched it. Yet, those who have seen the video say that he clearly spun around, crouched, and brought his hands together pointing towards the policemen. I can only imagine what they must have been thinking in that second. Police were called because this man had been throwing rocks at people, and he continued to throw rocks at the police when they arrived, and refused to cooperate in any way.

The shooting set off a bunch of "protests," notably supposed "outrage" by a national Hispanic leader, because the man shot was Hispanic. He was a meth addict, under restraining order to stay away from his mother, his children, and the mother of his children. Business owners (according to the woman who owns the business in front of which he was shot) were relieved to have him gone. This was not noted in the news accounts, though. The business owner is my neighbor's aunt, and my neighbor told me.

A friend of mine who was downtown later that week talked to one of the "protesters." He had been brought from out of town and bragged that he would get paid for protesting, and he would get paid even more if he got himself jailed. Notably, this important fact was not in any news account, either. Nor were accounts of the people rallying in support of the police, which a friend married to a local police officer told me about.

It often isn't "really just that simple." If the police had refrained from shooting this man, and he had continued with his rock throwing and hurt a civilian, the shouting would start about how ineffective the police were.
 
Becky said:
So you're saying it makes no difference what a person being chased has done? You really don't need to be armed to be a threat.

We have a local investigation going where three policemen shot an unarmed man in the back as he fled. Apparently it's on youtube, but I haven't watched it. Yet, those who have seen the video say that he clearly spun around, crouched, and brought his hands together pointing towards the policemen. I can only imagine what they must have been thinking in that second. Police were called because this man had been throwing rocks at people, and he continued to throw rocks at the police when they arrived, and refused to cooperate in any way.

The shooting set off a bunch of "protests," notably supposed "outrage" by a national Hispanic leader, because the man shot was Hispanic. He was a meth addict, under restraining order to stay away from his mother, his children, and the mother of his children. Business owners (according to the woman who owns the business in front of which he was shot) were relieved to have him gone. This was not noted in the news accounts, though. The business owner is my neighbor's aunt, and my neighbor told me.

A friend of mine who was downtown later that week talked to one of the "protesters." He had been brought from out of town and bragged that he would get paid for protesting, and he would get paid even more if he got himself jailed. Notably, this important fact was not in any news account, either. Nor were accounts of the people rallying in support of the police, which a friend married to a local police officer told me about.

It often isn't "really just that simple." If the police had refrained from shooting this man, and he had continued with his rock throwing and hurt a civilian, the shouting would start about how ineffective the police were.
Click to expand...

I'm saying exactly what I'm saying, no more no less. If you want to make a point, go ahead and quote me, and then make your point. I will speak for myself.

In most, if not all jurisdictions, a cop can use their weapon in defense of their own life, or if they suspect another may be in danger. They CANNOT use lethal force unless their own life is in danger. Your scenario may be different, there may be other circumstance, I don't know and I don't care.

Now, I will post this one more time, just special for you. a cop CANNOT shoot an unarmed man, running away from them, in the back. Even if ten minutes before, the suspect committed a triple homicide, in full view of the cop in question. If the person is running away, is unarmed, and does not present an immediate threat to the cop, they cannot use lethal force. If there is any LEO forces out there in the country with any other policy, please let me know, and I'll stay far, far away from it.
 
docmirror said:
I'm saying exactly what I'm saying, no more no less. If you want to make a point, go ahead and quote me, and then make your point. I will speak for myself.

In most, if not all jurisdictions, a cop can use their weapon in defense of their own life, or if they suspect another may be in danger. They CANNOT use lethal force unless their own life is in danger. Your scenario may be different, there may be other circumstance, I don't know and I don't care.

Now, I will post this one more time, just special for you. a cop CANNOT shoot an unarmed man, running away from them, in the back. Even if ten minutes before, the suspect committed a triple homicide, in full view of the cop in question. If the person is running away, is unarmed, and does not present an immediate threat to the cop, they cannot use lethal force. If there is any LEO forces out there in the country with any other policy, please let me know, and I'll stay far, far away from it.
Click to expand...

In Florida, there are several exceptions to your position, which I put before but will now bold:

776.05 Law enforcement officers; use of force in making an arrest.—A law enforcement officer, or any person whom the officer has summoned or directed to assist him or her, need not retreat or desist from efforts to make a lawful arrest because of resistance or threatened resistance to the arrest. The officer is justified in the use of any force:
(1) Which he or she reasonably believes to be necessary to defend himself or herself or another from bodily harm while making the arrest;
(2) When necessarily committed in retaking felons who have escaped; or
(3) When necessarily committed in arresting felons fleeing from justice. However, this subsection shall not constitute a defense in any civil action for damages brought for the wrongful use of deadly force unless the use of deadly force was necessary to prevent the arrest from being defeated by such flight and, when feasible, some warning had been given, and:
(a) The officer reasonably believes that the fleeing felon poses a threat of death or serious physical harm to the officer or others; or
(b) The officer reasonably believes that the fleeing felon has committed a crime involving the infliction or threatened infliction of serious physical harm to another person.

Again, not saying it's right or proper or relevant to the case under discussion. Just that in at least one state an officer may have legal justification to use "any force" in cases not involving an immediate threat to himself or others.
 
JCranford said:
Bingo! We have a winner.

Is there not a forum on the planet that doesnt have a healthy cop-bashing population??

Maybe the guy deserved an ass-whipping, maybe he didnt. Yeah, the cops should probably used a tad more self restraint, but you guys, as usual, are quick to condemn the cops for anything you see or hear.
Click to expand...

That pathetic, old, worn out, lie is true only in the minds of weenies, and fraidy boys.

"If you're not doing anything WRONG, you have nothing to worry about??

Horse****.

As much as career bull**** artists wish it wasn't true, the road to destruction as a country is paved with people who think standing by and shutting up is the only legal way to live.
 
Jay Honeck said:
I think everyone should pay reparations to everyone. :rolleyes:

Personally, I'm still pretty ticked off that my ancestors were driven from Germany. I wonder if I can get any payola from Angela Merkl's people? :lol:
Click to expand...

If it bothers you that much you need to return back to Germany.

I'm still pretty ticked off my ancestors were driven from this land we live in today and we call United States of America.
 
brien23 said:
What do you think would happen in Mexico if you took a horse and got cought by the Mexican Police or resisted arrest and ran away. Is their something called excessive force in Mexico, or a lot of other countries.
Click to expand...

Not living in Mexico I wouldn't know but I guess the perception is that you'd get the living **** kicked out of ya. Problem is, this ain't Mexico.

-jeff
 
What we need are some new "less than lethal" weapons. My vote is for instant acting THC darts. Turn a violent leaning mob into a bunch of people with the munchies.

:)
 
jhausch said:
What we need are some new "less than lethal" weapons. My vote is for instant acting THC darts. Turn a violent leaning mob into a bunch of people with the munchies.



:)
Click to expand...


Sounds like that would promote criminal behavior :)
 
I will share a story that happened recently to me. I am about as mild and easy going as anyone and keep to myself. Last month we were finishing up a project in a hilly area and our cars could not get down the steep driveways. The general contractor's car broke down and he needed a jump so naturally I faced his car and jumped it. He leaves and I go check on my employees as normal. A few minutes later I hear a cop car siren and he a cop yelling for someone. I go up and he is ranting about my car being on the street. I told him I had I jump the builder's car and that I can't get my car down the driveway. He wants my license, registration and insurance. Now this town is extremely wealth with little to no crime. The youngish cop (around 30) came out firing with the attitude. So I give it to him and he keeps going on and on about how he can tow it and impound it. He asks how would I like to have to get a lawyer to fight it and I said I am one so it doesn't matter. at this point I told him I am not saying anything else. my brother was with me and since I didn't return quickly, he came over. Now he is a cop. As soon as he flashed his badge, and asked what the problem was, the cop changed his story. He claimed I was blocking traffic yet there was none since it recently snowed. They chatted for a few then he left us to continue working. Really an unnecessary display of force and revenue generation.
 
Now please keep in mind, I'm not saying cops don't have the right to defend themselves, they do... However, you don't become a cop under the assumption that it is a safe job. There is, or should be, a certain acceptance of the risk involved in putting on that uniform and doing your job. There is a chance every day that you could be injured or, God forbid, killed while doing your job. This isn't a secret, I think everyone knows this. It's why good police officers will always have my respect and gratitude.

The problem is, while trying to mitigate that risk, it's becoming more and more apparent that police training is emphasizing the safety of the officer over the safety of the public they're supposed to protect. How else do you explain police shooting and killing a mentally ill man for carrying a screwdriver when they were called to help get him to a hospital? A screwdriver...

Everything is a threat and those threats should be handled with deadly force. Police have killed over 300 people in the U.S. so far this year. And that's based on media reports because there is no official number. That's a scary number to me.

Side note: Apparently in South Carolina, it is not required to have two working taillights. So the cop had no justification for pulling the guy over in the first place. But thankfully (sarcasm) the courts have basically said that cops can pull you over if they think you're breaking the law, and they are under no requirements to actually know the law.

Sent from my Nexus 10 using Tapatalk
 
I see more stories in the news about bad moms than bad cops. Dumping handicapped kids in the woods, dumping babies in dumpsters.... Forget bad cops. Moms are the bigger threat. The crazy ******* are everywhere! They hide behind that apron and smile aura and hide their pure evil. Since we can't recognize the bad ones we need to get rid of the whole lot.

Sounds stupid, huh?
 
Stewartb said:
I see more stories in the news about bad moms than bad cops. Dumping handicapped kids in the woods, dumping babies in dumpsters.... Forget bad cops. Moms are the bigger threat. The crazy ******* are everywhere! They hide behind that apron and smile aura and hide their pure evil. Since we can't recognize the bad ones we need to get rid of the whole lot.

Sounds stupid, huh?
Click to expand...

Yes, that is a very stupid comparison.
 
Fredbob711 said:
Now please keep in mind, I'm not saying cops don't have the right to defend themselves, they do... However, you don't become a cop under the assumption that it is a safe job. There is, or should be, a certain acceptance of the risk involved in putting on that uniform and doing your job. There is a chance every day that you could be injured or, God forbid, killed while doing your job. This isn't a secret, I think everyone knows this. It's why good police officers will always have my respect and gratitude.

The problem is, while trying to mitigate that risk, it's becoming more and more apparent that police training is emphasizing the safety of the officer over the safety of the public they're supposed to protect. How else do you explain police shooting and killing a mentally ill man for carrying a screwdriver when they were called to help get him to a hospital? A screwdriver...

Everything is a threat and those threats should be handled with deadly force. Police have killed over 300 people in the U.S. so far this year. And that's based on media reports because there is no official number. That's a scary number to me.

Side note: Apparently in South Carolina, it is not required to have two working taillights. So the cop had no justification for pulling the guy over in the first place. But thankfully (sarcasm) the courts have basically said that cops can pull you over if they think you're breaking the law, and they are under no requirements to actually know the law.

Sent from my Nexus 10 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

The issues are quite complicated. I think that most of us can agree that assaulting a non-resisting person is wrong and assaulting a cuffed person is criminal. Shooting an unarmed person in the back? well, that's pretty much criminal too.

All that said, those events are all to common. LE frequently gets away with criminal acts and acts that should be criminal (property siezure is one glaring example). Once people are allowed to perform morally wrong acts while in a position of authority it's pretty tough to change that behavior or put limits on it. That's the situation we're dealing with when attempting to reign in LE.
 
FastEddieB said:
In Florida, there are several exceptions to your position, which I put before but will now bold:

776.05 Law enforcement officers; use of force in making an arrest.—A law enforcement officer, or any person whom the officer has summoned or directed to assist him or her, need not retreat or desist from efforts to make a lawful arrest because of resistance or threatened resistance to the arrest. The officer is justified in the use of any force:
(1) Which he or she reasonably believes to be necessary to defend himself or herself or another from bodily harm while making the arrest;
(2) When necessarily committed in retaking felons who have escaped; or
(3) When necessarily committed in arresting felons fleeing from justice. However, this subsection shall not constitute a defense in any civil action for damages brought for the wrongful use of deadly force unless the use of deadly force was necessary to prevent the arrest from being defeated by such flight and, when feasible, some warning had been given, and:
(a) The officer reasonably believes that the fleeing felon poses a threat of death or serious physical harm to the officer or others; or
(b) The officer reasonably believes that the fleeing felon has committed a crime involving the infliction or threatened infliction of serious physical harm to another person.

Again, not saying it's right or proper or relevant to the case under discussion. Just that in at least one state an officer may have legal justification to use "any force" in cases not involving an immediate threat to himself or others.
Click to expand...

OK, stay out of FL. Check. Note that these are fleeing felons escaping or fleeing justice. If the guy running just shot three others in view of the cop, is that a fleeing felon? I thought a felon was someone convicted of a felony?

Either way, I'm staying out of FL, even though I'm not a felon.
 
iRyan said:
I will share a story that happened recently to me. I am about as mild and easy going as anyone and keep to myself.
Click to expand...

I should share the story about when I got arrested abut 25 years ago as I was minding my own business and was simply trying to get a little nookie from my lovely bride. I guess tha cops had a problem with it because we just happened to be parked on the 50 yard-line of my hometown's high school football field at the time. It's a hilarious story but I'd likely never get nookie again if Chris found out that I told it here. It'd be a good story for Gaston's...that is if I didn't tell it last year.

FastEddieB said:
In Florida, there are several exceptions to your position, which I put before but will now bold:...
Click to expand...

Wow, yet another reason to stay out of Florida. Anytime a law uses the term "reasonably believes" when talking about cops it pretty much gives them carte blanche as long as they're not caught on tape.
 
Sometimes I believe it could be staged for a big payoff. Seems like the big ones have a camera around to film/Tape it and those who get the cops to overact to a crime get the big payoff $$$$. Suicide by cop is not new.
 
Last edited:
docmirror said:
OK, stay out of FL. Check. Note that these are fleeing felons escaping or fleeing justice. If the guy running just shot three others in view of the cop, is that a fleeing felon? I thought a felon was someone convicted of a felony?

Either way, I'm staying out of FL, even though I'm not a felon.
Click to expand...

Might want to check each of the other 49 and make a list of states to avoid.

Normally when these things come up, I find Texas even "worse" on some of this stuff.

But I think the idea is that if a rapist or serial murderer is fleeing, NOT using enough force to affect the arrest could have more dire consequences down the road. I think officers might feel some guilt if they allowed a subject like this to escape and he went on to rape or murder again.
 
There is no justification for the actions those deputies took... none. That was criminal behavior under any and all circumstances. Anyone that thinks different has the mindset of a criminal.

It shouldn't matter that they were wearing badges. That said, it looks like they will likely look to use their badges as shields. It seems to happen often. The interview with the Sheriff was just as disturbing as the beating itself.

It is up to juries to pass judgement for punishment, not law enforcement. They are not employed to dole out justice and punishment as they see fit.
 
I wonder how many interactions with law enforcement are recorded by cell phone or other device everyday? The way these things have proliferated my guess is there are thousands of videos shot everyday. I wonder why, if so many LEO's are out of control, we aren't flooded with videos of bad actors? I have friends and family who are leo's and do a good job and have never had so much as a complaint against them,they are the kind of people you want as leo's. They are, to a man, considering leaving their jobs because the climate today could ruin their lives for simply doing their jobs. So, what everyone should consider is, are we going about correcting the problem in a sensible way? I believe this is a needed conversation, but the vitriol against leo's is going to cost us good people leaving, and all we will have left are the bad actors. I believe we are nearer to anarchy than most. That will be a very bad day for everyone. Cooler heads need to prevail here.
 
In the old days, you shoot a man in the back and, well no ones interested in your lame story, doubly so if they are unarmed, go find you a nice tree branch and hang em' up.

And that's presuming the family doesn't kill you first.
 
Last edited:
docmirror said:
They CANNOT use lethal force unless their own life is in danger.
Click to expand...

Ummm WRONG. Ever hear of snipers? Their life is clearly not in danger. They CAN use lethal force.

Also, if the cops can articulate that the person fleeing is a violent criminal and poses a clear threat to the population based on previous action, they *could* use lethal force.

docmirror said:
Now, I will post this one more time, just special for you. a cop CANNOT shoot an unarmed man, running away from them, in the back. Even if ten minutes before, the suspect committed a triple homicide, in full view of the cop in question. If the person is running away, is unarmed, and does not present an immediate threat to the cop, they cannot use lethal force. If there is any LEO forces out there in the country with any other policy, please let me know, and I'll stay far, far away from it.
Click to expand...

Umm wrong again. Please stay away from, well, the United States
 
docmirror said:
OK, stay out of FL. Check. Note that these are fleeing felons escaping or fleeing justice. If the guy running just shot three others in view of the cop, is that a fleeing felon? I thought a felon was someone convicted of a felony?
Click to expand...


Wong yet AGAIN! A felon is someone who has committed a felony. Last I checked, triple homicide is a felony in most states
 
JCranford said:
Wong yet AGAIN! A felon is someone who has committed a felony. Last I checked, triple homicide is a felony in most states
Click to expand...

No a felon is someone who is convicted of a felony. Its not the cops job to be judge and jury. Its the cops job to arrest and take before a court. The cop does not have the right to judge. Even if he saw what happened. He must arrest and let the courts decide if it was indeed murder.

A cop is not judge and jury. A cop playing judge and jury is a dangerous person to everyone breathing.

Tony
 
Last edited:
JCranford said:
Bingo! We have a winner.

Is there not a forum on the planet that doesnt have a healthy cop-bashing population??
QUOTE]
Think about this for a second. This forum is mostly white, older, wealthier, and law abiding to a fault. And cops have a PR problem here, much of it based on personal experience. Wonder how the rest of the country feels about them? Police no longer have the Barney Fife default moral high ground. And will never have it again in this empire.
Click to expand...
 
ClimbnSink said:
Think about this for a second. This forum is mostly white, older, wealthier, and law abiding to a fault. And cops have a PR problem here, much of it based on personal experience. Wonder how the rest of the country feels about them? Police no longer have the Barney Fife default moral high ground. And will never have it again in this empire.
Click to expand...

This is a good point. I maintain that Michael Brown caused his own death in Ferguson. I'm generally not sympathetic to those that resist arrest.

But the actions of Michael Slager are so far past proper police procedure it's unreal. His image as a out of control killer isn't helped by this latest revelation:

South Carolina cop Michael Slager laughed about his “pumping” adrenaline shortly after he gunned down an unarmed black man, a new recording revealed.

The North Charleston patrolman talked to a senior cop about what to expect after he fired five rounds into Walter Scott’s back in the deadly April 4 shooting.

The senior officer suggested he jot down his thoughts once his adrenaline stopped pumping.

“It’s pumping,” Slager said with a laugh.

“Oh, yeah. Oh, yeah,” the other officer replied.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/nat...-laughing-walter-scott-kill-article-1.2182848
Click to expand...

Another officer that responded to the scene is now under scrutiny for claiming he performed CPR on Scott in an attempt to keep him alive. That has been proven false by the bystander's video. This second cop also made no mention of the fact Slager tampered with crime scene evidence by moving his Taser next to Scott's body to make it appear Scott had it in his possession.

Some posters in this thread have made comments that are just ridiculous. I don't care about other incidents, I don't want to hear strawman arguments, I'm not a supporter of criminals, and yeah, I want a police officer there when I need him.

That doesn't have anything to do with this cut-and-dried murder of a guy that ran from a cop because he was stupid. For those that have pretty much said Scott had it coming because he resisted arrest, I say your opinion is nonsense. If a person tries to grab an arresting officer's weapon, if he physically attacks the officer, then yeah, force is required.

Even then it's not carte blanche to pull his weapon and shoot. Too many times lately the cops have used their firearm as a first response, not last.

Someone mentioned the guy in Dallas that was shot by two officers in the hallway of his mom's house. She had called police because he had a history of mental illness and was having an 'episode'. The police had come before and subdued the man, then had him taken to Parkland for observation and treatment. This time the man had a four inch long screwdriver, but he was not acting in a threatening manner nor did he appear to be out of control in any way.

The cops entered the house, and as soon as they saw the screwdriver they began screaming at the man to drop it. Just seconds later both cops fired their weapons, striking the man five times. He was no closer than five feet to them at any time.

Were the cops in danger? Yeah, the guy could have lunged at them and maybe have caused an injury. But they were wearing body armor, and the screwdriver wasn't going to kill them. There should have been a full IA investigation, and at a minimum the cops should have been suspended and required to undergo training.

But nothing was done. The woman buried her son and that was the end of it. That's not right. Cops have a dangerous job. I get it. But that doesn't mean they get to draw their weapons and shoot at any sign of a threat.
 
3393RP said:
Were the cops in danger? Yeah, the guy could have lunged at them and maybe have caused an injury. But they were wearing body armor, and the screwdriver wasn't going to kill them.
Click to expand...

Soft body armor wont necessarily stop a screwdriver.

And, the statement about 'and the screwdriver wasn't going to kill them'. WTF? So youre saying a guy with a screwdriver gets a freebie on me, because 'it wont kill me'? You ever been stabbed by a screwdriver? Come on over. It wont kill you....maybe
 
JCranford said:
Soft body armor wont necessarily stop a screwdriver.

And, the statement about 'and the screwdriver wasn't going to kill them'. WTF? So youre saying a guy with a screwdriver gets a freebie on me, because 'it wont kill me'? You ever been stabbed by a screwdriver? Come on over. It wont kill you....maybe
Click to expand...

If you are in LE and this is how you truely interpret this persons statement, you may want to consider going back to security at Walmart
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top