Police Shoot to Death Man Swinging Crowbar

Off Topic
101

1260×1602 219 KB

[quote]roybot wrote:

[quote]niksamaras wrote:

[quote]borrek wrote:

[quote]Dijon wrote:
So they would rather shoot to kill rather than incapacitate?[/quote]

There is no other way to shoot. You shoot to kill. Period. Anyone who thinks that shooting to incapacitate is even a possibility has watched way too many hollywood action flicks.[/quote]

Why? A shot in his fucking knee from 3 meters away is too fucking hard? No. Just the cop who shot was an asshole, first because when he started shooting the guy had just stopped moving, so he wasn’t a threat. Sure, even pretending to swing whatever he aws holding, but he just did it to threaten.

[/quote]

That’s not what happened. The axe guy was edging towards the cop, in a sort of boxer’s shuffle, at which point the cop opened fire. [/quote]

To reinforce Roybot’s point I’ve compiled this handy little illustration of frames. Consider this all takes place within 3 seconds and you can clearly see the guy has gone from walking away after being tazered to turning around, grabbing his pickaxe (or whatever it is) with both hands and leaning it back ina swinging motion while moving forward on the cop in the background forcing that cop to retreat (as can be seen in the final frame).

102

[quote]Stern wrote:

[quote]roybot wrote:

[quote]niksamaras wrote:

[quote]borrek wrote:

[quote]Dijon wrote:
So they would rather shoot to kill rather than incapacitate?[/quote]

There is no other way to shoot. You shoot to kill. Period. Anyone who thinks that shooting to incapacitate is even a possibility has watched way too many hollywood action flicks.[/quote]

Why? A shot in his fucking knee from 3 meters away is too fucking hard? No. Just the cop who shot was an asshole, first because when he started shooting the guy had just stopped moving, so he wasn’t a threat. Sure, even pretending to swing whatever he aws holding, but he just did it to threaten.

[/quote]

That’s not what happened. The axe guy was edging towards the cop, in a sort of boxer’s shuffle, at which point the cop opened fire. [/quote]

To reinforce Roybot’s point I’ve compiled this handy little illustration of frames. Consider this all takes place within 3 seconds and you can clearly see the guy has gone from walking away after being tazered to turning around, grabbing his pickaxe (or whatever it is) with both hands and leaning it back ina swinging motion while moving forward on the cop in the background forcing that cop to retreat (as can be seen in the final frame).

[/quote]

Dude…look at who you guys are arguing with. His post history alone will make your head hurt.

OF COURSE he saw something different.

103

[quote]Professor X wrote:

Dude…look at who you guys are arguing with. His post history alone will make your head hurt.

OF COURSE he saw something different.[/quote]

Lol, ok I’ll take your word for it! :wink:

104

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]Stern wrote:

[quote]roybot wrote:

[quote]niksamaras wrote:

[quote]borrek wrote:

[quote]Dijon wrote:
So they would rather shoot to kill rather than incapacitate?[/quote]

There is no other way to shoot. You shoot to kill. Period. Anyone who thinks that shooting to incapacitate is even a possibility has watched way too many hollywood action flicks.[/quote]

Why? A shot in his fucking knee from 3 meters away is too fucking hard? No. Just the cop who shot was an asshole, first because when he started shooting the guy had just stopped moving, so he wasn’t a threat. Sure, even pretending to swing whatever he aws holding, but he just did it to threaten.

[/quote]

That’s not what happened. The axe guy was edging towards the cop, in a sort of boxer’s shuffle, at which point the cop opened fire. [/quote]

To reinforce Roybot’s point I’ve compiled this handy little illustration of frames. Consider this all takes place within 3 seconds and you can clearly see the guy has gone from walking away after being tazered to turning around, grabbing his pickaxe (or whatever it is) with both hands and leaning it back ina swinging motion while moving forward on the cop in the background forcing that cop to retreat (as can be seen in the final frame).

[/quote]

Dude…look at who you guys are arguing with. His post history alone will make your head hurt.

OF COURSE he saw something different.[/quote]

Yep. Your right…normally I look to see who I am responding to but his statement was so absurd that he got a knee jerk reaction from me…he is a 19 year old kid with no life experience but knows everything.

105

I still can’t figure out why that cop was holding a dog. The video is blurry, but it looks like they had weapons drawn before the guy walked out of the building, and there were enough cops to surround the man, so it’s hard to tell what they expected the dog to do. If they had a bull or an orangutan that would have made sense, but a 90 lb. dog?

106

[quote]andy1977 wrote:
I still can’t figure out why that cop was holding a dog. The video is blurry, but it looks like they had weapons drawn before the guy walked out of the building, and there were enough cops to surround the man, so it’s hard to tell what they expected the dog to do. If they had a bull or an orangutan that would have made sense, but a 90 lb. dog?[/quote]

If the BG dropped his weapon and took off, maybe they would have sic’d the dog on him so they could make the arrest?

107

[quote]grettiron wrote:

[quote]andy1977 wrote:
I still can’t figure out why that cop was holding a dog. The video is blurry, but it looks like they had weapons drawn before the guy walked out of the building, and there were enough cops to surround the man, so it’s hard to tell what they expected the dog to do. If they had a bull or an orangutan that would have made sense, but a 90 lb. dog?[/quote]

If the BG dropped his weapon and took off, maybe they would have sic’d the dog on him so they could make the arrest?[/quote]

K9 might have just been in the area and ended up being one of the first on scene. Those dogs scare the shit out of people too, so it could have been used for intimidation.

108

[quote]Stern wrote:

[quote]roybot wrote:

[quote]niksamaras wrote:

[quote]borrek wrote:

[quote]Dijon wrote:
So they would rather shoot to kill rather than incapacitate?[/quote]

There is no other way to shoot. You shoot to kill. Period. Anyone who thinks that shooting to incapacitate is even a possibility has watched way too many hollywood action flicks.[/quote]

Why? A shot in his fucking knee from 3 meters away is too fucking hard? No. Just the cop who shot was an asshole, first because when he started shooting the guy had just stopped moving, so he wasn’t a threat. Sure, even pretending to swing whatever he aws holding, but he just did it to threaten.

[/quote]

That’s not what happened. The axe guy was edging towards the cop, in a sort of boxer’s shuffle, at which point the cop opened fire. [/quote]

To reinforce Roybot’s point I’ve compiled this handy little illustration of frames. Consider this all takes place within 3 seconds and you can clearly see the guy has gone from walking away after being tazered to turning around, grabbing his pickaxe (or whatever it is) with both hands and leaning it back ina swinging motion while moving forward on the cop in the background forcing that cop to retreat (as can be seen in the final frame).

[/quote]

Stern, you are now officially T-Nation’s go-to expert witness for threads with a vid in the OP. Your time is no longer your own.

109

[quote]niksamaras wrote:

[quote]borrek wrote:

[quote]Dijon wrote:
So they would rather shoot to kill rather than incapacitate?[/quote]

There is no other way to shoot. You shoot to kill. Period. Anyone who thinks that shooting to incapacitate is even a possibility has watched way too many hollywood action flicks.[/quote]

Why? A shot in his fucking knee from 3 meters away is too fucking hard? [/quote]
Yes it would have been.

The rest of your post was just as dumb.

111

[quote]Dijon wrote:

[quote]borrek wrote:
They certainly aren’t irrelevant. Trained means you have gone beyond pointing a gun and pulling the trigger, and have learned how to actually use a gun in a tactical situation. If you have trained, and not just plinked, then you should know better than this crap you’re talking. Trained means you know that you’d be lucky to put both rounds of a double-tap within a 4" group consistently - on a non-moving target without being under stress.
[/quote]

It is completely irrelevant because it doesn’t affect my point. I’m not talking about your training, my lack of training, police training, protocols, whatever. All I did was point out something that you said, in general, without context, that it is IMPOSSIBLE to incapacitate. No comment on the specific situation, no extrapolation of some hidden meaning or any implications. And this is something that happens whenever I comment on someone’s logic and nothing else. They just don’t see that its the ONLY thing that I’m talking about.[/quote]

Dijon, you sound like one of these armchair experts who can take all the time he wants to critique the actions that the cop had to decide in a SPLIT SECOND.

The fact that they gave this guy a chance with tazer shows that they DID try to incapacitate. After that point, they are out to protect their own lives. This creep gave up his rights by choosing to not comply.

Sure, they could train even more to have “other options” but that costs money. And if cops would stop being sued (from people with your mentality) maybe it COULD be a possibility.

Personally, I’m not going to lose sleep over someone getting killed for attacking a cop.

112

[quote]Stern wrote:
It’s quite clear that the cops should really be chewin less donuts and playing more Counter Strike. Amirite??![/quote]

If that were they case the cop would’ve ran around the corner of the building and got instant head shot, which would’ve made the video a hell of a lot better.

113

[quote]MytchBucanan wrote:

[quote]Dijon wrote:

[quote]borrek wrote:
They certainly aren’t irrelevant. Trained means you have gone beyond pointing a gun and pulling the trigger, and have learned how to actually use a gun in a tactical situation. If you have trained, and not just plinked, then you should know better than this crap you’re talking. Trained means you know that you’d be lucky to put both rounds of a double-tap within a 4" group consistently - on a non-moving target without being under stress.
[/quote]

It is completely irrelevant because it doesn’t affect my point. I’m not talking about your training, my lack of training, police training, protocols, whatever. All I did was point out something that you said, in general, without context, that it is IMPOSSIBLE to incapacitate. No comment on the specific situation, no extrapolation of some hidden meaning or any implications. And this is something that happens whenever I comment on someone’s logic and nothing else. They just don’t see that its the ONLY thing that I’m talking about.[/quote]

Dijon, you sound like one of these armchair experts who can take all the time he wants to critique the actions that the cop had to decide in a SPLIT SECOND.

The fact that they gave this guy a chance with tazer shows that they DID try to incapacitate. After that point, they are out to protect their own lives. This creep gave up his rights by choosing to not comply.

Sure, they could train even more to have “other options” but that costs money. And if cops would stop being sued (from people with your mentality) maybe it COULD be a possibility.

Personally, I’m not going to lose sleep over someone getting killed for attacking a cop.
[/quote]

Dude, no amount of money or training would make the knee of a mobile person a viable, high percentage target for close quarter pistol shooting.

It’s not about the level of training, it’s about the realities of shooting and the body’s response to stress.

Also even if you don’t lose any sleep about this shooting I’d wager that cop will, justified though it was.

Your heart’s in the right place though, no offence meant.

114

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]niksamaras wrote:

[quote]borrek wrote:

[quote]Dijon wrote:
So they would rather shoot to kill rather than incapacitate?[/quote]

There is no other way to shoot. You shoot to kill. Period. Anyone who thinks that shooting to incapacitate is even a possibility has watched way too many hollywood action flicks.[/quote]

Why? A shot in his fucking knee from 3 meters away is too fucking hard? No. Just the cop who shot was an asshole, first because when he started shooting the guy had just stopped moving, so he wasn’t a threat. Sure, even pretending to swing whatever he aws holding, but he just did it to threaten.

Secondly, because from 3 fucking meters away, a shot in the guy’s fucking knee would have put him out of danger in half a second. This guy didn’t hold a gun to justify this shit, he just a hold metal object, pretending to starting going against a cop who was 4 meters away. Really poor judgement from the cop. [/quote]

This is why Canada and Australia beckon you.

Not Canada please.

115

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]niksamaras wrote:

[quote]borrek wrote:

[quote]Dijon wrote:
So they would rather shoot to kill rather than incapacitate?[/quote]

There is no other way to shoot. You shoot to kill. Period. Anyone who thinks that shooting to incapacitate is even a possibility has watched way too many hollywood action flicks.[/quote]

Why? A shot in his fucking knee from 3 meters away is too fucking hard? No. Just the cop who shot was an asshole, first because when he started shooting the guy had just stopped moving, so he wasn’t a threat. Sure, even pretending to swing whatever he aws holding, but he just did it to threaten.

Secondly, because from 3 fucking meters away, a shot in the guy’s fucking knee would have put him out of danger in half a second. This guy didn’t hold a gun to justify this shit, he just a hold metal object, pretending to starting going against a cop who was 4 meters away. Really poor judgement from the cop. [/quote]

This is why Canada and Australia beckon you.

Don’t give him any ideas. We’re FULL.

116

[quote]therajraj wrote:
I can’t fault the cop for opening fire.

However I would think a well trained police officer would have a better grasp of the situation. Did he really need to unload 5 shots point blank to the chest?

I counted 10 shots total[/quote]

We really need a thread about wound/terminal ballistics/wounding and “stopping” mechanisms via firearms and knives and such (plus the psychological stuff maybe, but I’m not as familiar with that as with the actual physical aspect) in the combat forum or wherever so you guys can learn about how the whole thing actually works and why shootings happen the way they do. If I can find the time, I’ll make it and post up some research on the topic and so on…

117

Check this out that is why the cop shoots so much. I find it really interesting that they say a mortally wounded individual has 1-2 minutes to keep on going before they even fall down.

This is a great site it bases what people see on tv on what happens in reality.

118

[quote]Cephalic_Carnage wrote:

[quote]therajraj wrote:
I can’t fault the cop for opening fire.

However I would think a well trained police officer would have a better grasp of the situation. Did he really need to unload 5 shots point blank to the chest?

I counted 10 shots total[/quote]

We really need a thread about wound/terminal ballistics/wounding and “stopping” mechanisms via firearms and knives and such (plus the psychological stuff maybe, but I’m not as familiar with that as with the actual physical aspect) in the combat forum or wherever so you guys can learn about how the whole thing actually works and why shootings happen the way they do. If I can find the time, I’ll make it and post up some research on the topic and so on…
[/quote]

I think that is a really good idea.

However, I believe that most people are so irrationally certain of their opinions regarding this type of thing that no amount of facts/science would have any impact.

By all means start the thread though. Would be a good discussion. I would say that the psychological side is at least as important as the hard physiology, imo.

I have studied/trained a bit on that (psychological) side and would be happy to contribute.

119

Use of force continuum for dummies. Take suspect’s level of aggression and escalate one level higher to end the threat. Shithead raises a fireman’s axe at a police officer, shithead dies. What was everyone arguing about again?

120 
Wow, this thread has had some of the most dumbshit posts I've seen in a long time (maybe that's just because I've been spending less time looking in on the T-Nation forums). This is why people hate cops, because people are idiots and have no clue how and why police do their job. This video is amazing because it shows (clearly enough) a perfectly legitimate police use of deadly force. Suspect has deadly weapon> police order submission> suspect refuses> police attempt nonlethal submission> ineffective> suspect displays intent (and the corresponding act) to use deadly weapon> police escalate force and enact lethal submission. 
It is perfectly by the book. It's already been said, but people who are whining "Ooh ouchies, couldn't that policeman have only shot him 2 or 3 times instead of maybe a dozen times, how rude." need to pull their heads out. The suspect is not crumpling to the ground completely incapacitated from the first few shots, he is probably just surprised by the noise, but far from incapacitated. It would be easier if the cop could freeze time and see where his shots landed, and then ask the offender "Hey man, looks like I shot you in the stomach, how would you feel about putting that weapon down and turning your life around and volunteering at soup kitchens and writing limp dick letters to Dear Abbey." From the video it DOES NOT appear to me that the cop doing the shooting got scared or was acting in any way irrational. He appears to be very calm and in control of his emotions and the situation in general (also I applaud him for controlling his dog, which looks more like a Belgian Malinois than a shepherd). 
The only mistake I see is the officers proximity, which is really just a result of them trying so hard to employ non-lethal force (which unfortunately often is short ranged). The same people who think the cops are idiots for being so close are also shitting on them for eventually killing the offender. They were so close because they were trying their damnedest not to kill him... It was great work on all accounts.