Police Shoot Man 46 Times in 5 Seconds

[Awdax]

Guys seriously, think about it, not everyone just thinks so logically when they are in tough situations with a lot of pressure. I'm sure looking back, those cops could probably think of 100 different ways they could have done things, and at least half of them probably would have left the guy alive. But a guy is coming at you with a knife, obviously dangerous, yelling profanities at the police and threatening them, and then someone fires. So more people fire because jesus the guy who fired knew what he was doing and they are freaked as hell, they aren't battle-hardened rambo soldiers who can stand down loving bears with a toothpick. They are just ordinary citizens who know how to use a gun and with a little more restraint. I would bet ALL of my money that if ANYONE else in this thread had  been put in that same situation, they would have done the same. They don't just breed cops to shoot citizens, they are meant to enforce the law and they do a damn good job. So good of a job that you can sit at your computer in your big house and fat around with your loving cheetos and hot pockets and complain about how stuffty cops are.

You and Jetlok seem to be the only ones that understand this.

Cops have to think on their feet all the time and make a split-second decision. A lot of them acknowledge that they could have done something a bit different, but that's the tough part about the job.

[Ad Bot]

[RedGajin]

You and Jetlok seem to be the only ones that understand this.

Cops have to think on their feet all the time and make a split-second decision. A lot of them acknowledge that they could have done something a bit different, but that's the tough part about the job.

Exactly, its like that guy that was eating another guys face and they had to shoot him. I mean sure they could have tried to tase him and take him down and put him in handcuffs and it could have worked and he would be all happy in a straight jacket right now. But holy forget he was eating someones face, I would have shot him as much as I could because I would be scared out of my mind and he looks dangerous as forget. Its common sense.

[TheChaosCarrier]

it's like my post was missed or something.

You're arguing over why the cops shot the man.

He had a knife, a deadly, close-range combat weapon.
According to the rules of engagement, which sometimes differ by state, police officers are required to unholster their sidearms and be combat ready whenever the pursued suspect reveals a weapon.

The next step in protocol for said officer(s) is to shout commands to said suspect(s) in order to verbally force them to drop/put down the weapon and surrender.

However, there is a limited time for this. If after a certain period of time passes and the suspect has not put down his weapon, or has attempted to use the weapon within that time, the officers can engage with deadly force.

This is how it works, people. This is not a matter or police brutality, this is a matter of a suspect not cooperating, with a weapon, and being put down by law enforcement.

On the matter of tasers and mace, yes, they have been used to neutralize suspects with close-up weapons, however, not every police officer carries a taser or a can of mace. These 5 or 6 officers could've easily been unequipped for that and just carrying the standard issue sidearm and other standard gear.

As for batons, that should just immediately be out of the question. No police officer would pursue an armed suspect with a night stick, that is stupid. You might as well ask to be stabbed.

In conclusion, no, this is not police brutality.
Any argument to say otherwise is invalid because cops do this every day and it is standard issue protocol.

The simple answer: the suspect refused to cooperate and was put down by the quickest means available, as required by law. Law enforcement agencies make these protocols to reduce officer casualties as much as possible.


As for the amount of shots, that is meaningless. There are 5 or 6 officers all armed with standard issue sidearms, probably glocks, so most likely a 15 or 12 shot magazine, all pointing at the same guy.
It is also part of protocol that when one officer opens fire with valid reason, all accompanying officers must follow suit. Of course 46 shots would go out in 5 seconds.

[e-maxx]

but they have a right to shoot people


durr

uh

what?

[Qwepir]

You're arguing over why the cops shot the man.

He had a knife, a deadly, close-range combat weapon.
According to the rules of engagement, which sometimes differ by state, police officers are required to unholster their sidearms and be combat ready whenever the pursued suspect reveals a weapon.

The next step in protocol for said officer(s) is to shout commands to said suspect(s) in order to verbally force them to drop/put down the weapon and surrender.

However, there is a limited time for this. If after a certain period of time passes and the suspect has not put down his weapon, or has attempted to use the weapon within that time, the officers can engage with deadly force.

This is how it works, people. This is not a matter or police brutality, this is a matter of a suspect not cooperating, with a weapon, and being put down by law enforcement.

On the matter of tasers and mace, yes, they have been used to neutralize suspects with close-up weapons, however, not every police officer carries a taser or a can of mace. These 5 or 6 officers could've easily been unequipped for that and just carrying the standard issue sidearm and other standard gear.

As for batons, that should just immediately be out of the question. No police officer would pursue an armed suspect with a night stick, that is stupid. You might as well ask to be stabbed.

In conclusion, no, this is not police brutality.
Any argument to say otherwise is invalid because cops do this every day and it is standard issue protocol.

The simple answer: the suspect refused to cooperate and was put down by the quickest means available, as required by law. Law enforcement agencies make these protocols to reduce officer casualties as much as possible.


As for the amount of shots, that is meaningless. There are 5 or 6 officers all armed with standard issue sidearms, probably glocks, so most likely a 15 or 12 shot magazine, all pointing at the same guy.
It is also part of protocol that when one officer opens fire with valid reason, all accompanying officers must follow suit. Of course 46 shots would go out in 5 seconds.

i'm quoting this because it's the only thing that made sense so far

[TheChaosCarrier]

i've watched enough cop shows and Supernatural to understand this.

[SeventhSandwich]

I don't see why they could of just used bean bag rounds.

I don't see why the criminal couldn't have just put his knife down.

1 option risks 6 police officer's lives and the other option leaves everyone alive if the criminal follows the rules.

[Jerkface]

Always aim for the legs.  What the forget.

[SlayerZ99]

Always aim for the legs.  What the forget.

Wouldnt comply and was holding a weapon then he decided to move with the weapon, with previous accusations on him too.
Cops had all the right to shoot him.

What state was this in?

[Harm94]

I don't see why the criminal couldn't have just put his knife down.

1 option risks 6 police officer's lives and the other option leaves everyone alive if the criminal follows the rules.

Because people are stupid and think they can win every fight. There was survey done in my county given to kids who have had a gang history. Anyway there was question about underwhich circumstances would they fight. Many said they would fight a even if then they had a gun. Anyway from what I heard the guy didn't charge the cops and the officers didn't want to chance it. It could have ended in differently in many ways, but thats what happened. So many what ifs.

[chaseyqurt]

Always aim for the legs.  What the forget.

Yeah that makes sense in your video games but that's not how real life works. A gun is an officer's last resort, if you are shooting someone as a police officer you are eliminating the threat, you are not disabling, you are not warning, you are using deadly force. Not only does shooting someone in the legs not guarantee threat elimination but, it is much harder to hit someone's legs opposed to the center mass. NOT ONLY THAT but, even if you shoot someone in the legs it isn't guaranteed that their wound won't be non-fatal. If you hit an artery and there's no ambulance on scene the wound is likely to be fatal.

The actions of the police officers are a tad bit excessive but justifiable. If the man in the video had a knife and was moving towards an officer with it, his intention was to kill the officer. The officers are supposed to respond accordingly.

[Harm94]

I forgot to mention the totally of circumstances that police use to determine what force to use. Too long to explain. Anyway Internal affairs will come in and see the chase themselves and determine excessive force was used or not.

[RedGajin]

If the guy had been shot only once and killed no one would care, but suddenly it becomes a big deal when he gets shot MORE then once because people are stupid and just looking for something else to complain about.

[Harm94]

If the guy had been shot only once and killed no one would care, but suddenly it becomes a big deal when he gets shot MORE then once because people are stupid and just looking for something else to complain about.

you mean the arm chair hot pocket eating hippies that look for a reason to bash cops, the gangster wannabe kids, and anyone who else looking for a reason to complain.

[Jacob/Lee]

I don't see why they could of just used bean bag rounds.

You can't make bean bag rounds for handguns, only shotguns. Police officers tend to not lug around obvious, intimidating shotguns everywhere they go.