Cop Shoots guy whittling

Slugs

Thought you guys might this interesting.

Video included:-
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=956_1292627716

LiveLeak wrote:

A dash cam video from the officer who shot and killed Native American woodcarver John T. Williams was released Friday, showing Williams ambling slowly across the street in a crosswalk before the officer opens fire.

Although most of the action takes place off-screen, Williams is seen walking across the street in front of the patrol car in the video, dated Aug. 30.

The patrol car starts to pull forward, then stops.

Officer Ian Burke can then be seen walking after Williams and shouting, "Hey, hey, hey! Put the knife down! Put the knife down!"

The officer walks off-screen and then five shots ring out in rapid succession, killing Williams.

Birk's badge was later pulled after a Seattle Police Department Review Board and Chief John Diaz reached a preliminary finding that Williams' shooting was not justified.

A judge ruled Thursday that the clip from officer Ian Birk's car could be released to the public after prosecutors had a chance to notify witnesses not to view the tape.

The tape's release comes after a public disclosure request from the Seattle Times.

An inquest into Williams' shooting death by Officer Ian Birk has been set to begin on Jan. 10. The facts of the case will be laid out in the open through the process.

Apparantly the victim was 9-10 feet away from the officer and was also known to be hard of hearing and often inebriated

Your thoughts?

Ross_Mahon

Only in America

Dyr

Slugs wrote: »

Apparantly the victim was 9-10 feet away from the officer and was also known to be hard of hearing and often inebriated

Your thoughts?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tueller_Drill

Donkey Oaty

Officer Ian Burke can then be seen walking after Williams and shouting...

...An inquest into Williams' shooting death by Officer Ian Birk has been set to begin on Jan. 10.

They got the wrong guy!

mikemac

Slugs wrote: »

and often inebriated

Drunken Indian, there's a stereotype right there

Slugs

Bambi wrote: »

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tueller_Drill

As far as anyone can tell, the victim made no agressive movement towards the officer, and rather than a warning shot or a disabling shot, the officer went for 5 fatal shots.

Poor Guy Whittling He will surely be missed.

Dyr

Slugs wrote: »

As far as anyone can tell, the victim made no agressive movement towards the officer, and rather than a warning shot or a disabling shot, the officer went for 5 fatal shots.

No american police force fires warning shots or disabling shots. You should probably read up on use of force policy.

Land of the free right there

What a police state, cops are round there like a swarm of flies...patting his back.

sonic85

"cowboys ted, theyre a bunch of cowboys"

gondorff

Guy Whittling R.I.P.

af_thefragile

"f*cking savages..."

Son Of A Vidic

American cops don't do 'reasonable' force.

Donkey Oaty

Deleted User wrote: »

Poor Guy Whittling He will surely be missed.

Let's have some respect for the deceased Native American.

His name was not "Guy Whittling".

It was "Whittles A Lot".

RIP "Used To Whittle A Lot".

Augmerson

****ing unreal. The chap is walking on, clearly minding his own business, with carving knife and piece of wood in his hand. If he had bad intentions and meant to do harm to someone, surely he would not be walking straight infront of a cop car? And by that I mean he would have atleast concealed the knife or something.

If the Cop was really that worried that this man would attack him, why didn't he shoot him in the leg first and disable him?

And then at the end, about 5 cop cars turning up, Jesus Christ.

So is the cop up for murder?

IvySlayer

I'm no police officer, but could he not of told the guy to drop his knife from the safety of his squad car?

Sugar Free

A bit of common sense from the officer would have went a long way there, whatever their standard procedures may be.

MagicSean

Augmerson wrote: »

****ing unreal. The chap is walking on, clearly minding his own business, with carving knife and piece of wood in his hand. If he had bad intentions and meant to do harm to someone, surely he would not be walking straight infront of a cop car? And by that I mean he would have atleast concealed the knife or something.

If the Cop was really that worried that this man would attack him, why didn't he shoot him in the leg first and disable him?

And then at the end, about 5 cop cars turning up, Jesus Christ.

Because it's not a movie?

LionelNashe

Typical, bringing a knife to a gunfight

wotzgoingon

I didnt know wot whittling was but i watched the video and heard the cop say he was carving a piece of wood. And it kind of clicked then and i then google searched it just to be sure.

But like if u see someone carving a bit of wood with a knife u dont go up and shoot them (well i wouldnt).
It would be different if he was running around and chasing people or running twards the cop then maybe he had a right to shoot him but id still say that is excessive force as well.
When did this happen??
Anyone know wot happened the cop he should be suspended if he shot someone for that he will obviously do it again without thinking.

Skerries

happened in August and his badge has been taken and it goes to trial in January
I know cops in America have a shoot first and ask questions later policy but he gave the victim **** all time to understand what was happening and he shouldn't have put himself so close to danger that he needed to react in such a violent manner

Lumen

There is no such thing as a "disabling shot". When you shoot, you shoot to kill because there is no practical alternative.

That's why tasers and other usually-non-lethal weapons have become so popular. They're supposed to be used in cases where you'd otherwise have to shoot (and therefore kill) someone; the victim should be grateful for not being dead.

Chucky the tree

Lumen wrote: »

There is no such thing as a "disabling shot". When you shoot, you shoot to kill because there is no practical alternative.

That's why tasers and other usually-non-lethal weapons have become so popular. They're supposed to be used in cases where you'd otherwise have to shoot (and therefore kill) someone; the victim should be grateful for not being dead.

Reading isn't your strong point is it?

Wicklowrider

k_mac wrote: »

Because it's not a movie?

Lumen wrote: »

There is no such thing as a "disabling shot". When you shoot, you shoot to kill because there is no practical alternative..

Bambi wrote: »

No american police force fires warning shots or disabling shots. You should probably read up on use of force policy.

You have to smile at people who post as if deadly force is something they encounter everyday on the way to their keyboards. Heres one example of why above posters are incorrect : http://www.youtube.com/watch?=ff4XuPtAOUk
There are many more if you google.

There are real life clips shown on TV regularly where similar shots are taken
without lethal consequences. These are real professionals where the guy who shot the Indian was a trigger happy gob****e. Reminds me of the "41" shots incident.

Bambi - are you seriously expecting us to believe you are familiar with the Use of Force Directives of EVERY US police force?

Lumen

Chucky the tree wrote: »

Reading isn't your strong point is it?

Making a point isn't yours.

Augmerson

k_mac wrote: »

Because it's not a movie?

I don't see your logic here, but for me, if I was a Police Officer and I was attempting to apprehend a man with a Knife who would not put it down but who was not actually charging me, why not shoot him in the leg? These people are trained to be excellent marksmen, shooting him in the leg would have brought him down and allowed the Cop to move in - now granted, it doesn't solve the problem, the man with the Knife will probably be very pissed now, but atleast he knows the Cop means business and atleast the Cop has avoided taking a life.

kowloon

Should have shot the knife out of his hand, and maybe the block of wood with a second shot. If the guy was still a danger after that the only choice would have been to shoot open his shoe laces causing him to trip over, rendering him harmless.

Yo Buddy. You still alive?

Augmerson wrote: »

And then at the end, about 5 cop cars turning up, Jesus Christ.

Not to mention the to Mountain bike cops.

That was a Cop coked off his noggin in my uneducated opinion. Or high on sh1t from pumping weights in the gym or something. Please let it be so

Midnight_EG

Lumen wrote: »

Making a point isn't yours.

Point being the victim is dead.


Your move.

Manic Moran

You have to smile at people who post as if deadly force is something they encounter everyday on the way to their keyboards. Heres one example of why above posters are incorrect : http://www.youtube.com/watch?=ff4XuPtAOUk
There are many more if you google.

There are real life clips shown on TV regularly where similar shots are taken
without lethal consequences.

I would be very curious if you can provide an example where such a shot was taken by a patrolman with a handgun on short notice, and not a designated marksman with a rifle and a bit of time to settle in and aim.

if I was a Police Officer and I was attempting to apprehend a man with a Knife who would not put it down but who was not actually charging me,

The clip is, unfortunately, useless to us. What the man is doing on the video is totally irrelevant to what happens offscreen, he may have actually acted in a manner the cop perceived as threatening. However, there do seem to be plenty of witnesses, so if the investigation showed it was an unjustified shooting, then so be it, that's the preliminary answer.

So is the cop up for murder?

No. An inquest is due to be started on 10JAN11, the results of that will determine if an indictment is to be heard, and if that says 'yes', then there will be a trial. It may not necessarily be for 'murder', it could be unjustifiable homicide or manslaughter.

NTM

Dyr

Wicklowrider wrote: »

You have to smile at people who post as if deadly force is something they encounter everyday on the way to their keyboards. Heres one example of why above posters are incorrect : http://www.youtube.com/watch?=ff4XuPtAOUk
There are many more if you google.

There are real life clips shown on TV regularly where similar shots are taken
without lethal consequences. These are real professionals where the guy who shot the Indian was a trigger happy gob****e. Reminds me of the "41" shots incident.

Bambi - are you seriously expecting us to believe you are familiar with the Use of Force Directives of EVERY US police force?

video won't load but i bet you its the one of the police sniper shooting the gun out the guys hand as he's sitting in the chair...it is is'nt it? Jesus wept.

Monty Burnz

Lumen wrote: »

There is no such thing as a "disabling shot". When you shoot, you shoot to kill because there is no practical alternative.

That's why tasers and other usually-non-lethal weapons have become so popular. They're supposed to be used in cases where you'd otherwise have to shoot (and therefore kill) someone; the victim should be grateful for not being dead.

And if you see how they are actually used by American cops, you'll know how far from the truth that is. It's now used by American police at the drop of the hat, rather than as a last-ditch alternative to shooting.

kincsem

Murder one.

Sanjuro

Lethal force should be used only as an absolute last resort. 'Put the knife down, put the knife down.... blam blam blam blam blam' is not last resort. American policemen are way too trigger-happy.

Lumen

Monty Burnz wrote: »

And if you see how they are actually used by American cops, you'll know how far from the truth that is. It's now used by American police at the drop of the hat, rather than as a last-ditch alternative to shooting.

Indeed. I am in no way attempting to defend either the shooting of drunk people with sticks or the tasering of arsey students, disabled people, OAPs and all the other cases documented on Youtube.

I joined this discussion at the point where it had diverged from the original issue (the rights or wrongs of this particular case, which is hardly worth debating) to the more general use of lethal and non-lethal force.

The reality as I understand it (from conversations with firearms trained officers) is that in the actual situations where you are required by circumstances to use a firearm (e.g. nutcase pointing a gun at you) you're ****ting bricks and pumped full of adrenalin, and you'd be hard pressed to hit the guy at all from 10 feet away when aiming for the centre of his torso, let alone get in a leg shot, arm shot or any other Dirty Harry style fantasies. Furthermore, most body parts big enough to hit have arteries running through them, and if you hit one of those the person is dead anyway. If you were somehow able to hit the person in the foot, hand or whatever, then if they're still carrying a loaded gun they're still a threat, so you've achieved very little.

With respect to shooting people who are not lethally threatening, the problem there is the use of the firearm, not the way in which it's used.

Wicklowrider

Manic Moran wrote: »

I would be very curious if you can provide an example where such a shot was taken by a patrolman with a handgun on short notice, and not a designated marksman with a rifle and a bit of time to settle in and aim.NTM

http://tinyurl.com/33ordbm

Off duty, first time shot in anger by female cop As I already mentioned, google will give you several examples.

BTW - I think you may have misunderstood my point.
My post was an answer to peole stating that American Police depts do not open fire without firing for lethal effect. This is not true..There are numerous recorded incidents where decisions were made to fire without lethal consequence. Prepared or not wasn't the point - use of force was.

Wicklowrider

Bambi wrote: »

video won't load but i bet you its the one of the police sniper shooting the gun out the guys hand as he's sitting in the chair...it is is'nt it? Jesus wept.

I haven't a clue what jesus did.
Are you going to answer my question?

Bambi - are you seriously expecting us to believe you are familiar with the Use of Force Directives of EVERY US police force?

Lumen

Wicklowrider wrote: »

http://tinyurl.com/33ordbm

Off duty, first time shot in anger by female cop As I already mentioned, google will give you several examples.

Did you read past the first post of that thread?

Sticky_Fingers

Corvus Maximus wrote: »

American cops don't do 'reasonable' force.

Not just American cops, remember it was just last week that a crippled man was pulled out of his chair and dragged down the street by the London riot police because they thought he was wheeling right for them. This guy will probably get away with it, one rule for us and another for them.

Wicklowrider

Lumen wrote: »

Did you read past the first post of that thread?

Yes I know a lot of people ( who were not there) dispute whether she did or didn't intend to shoot the gun out of his hand. there are numerous other discussions about that incident.

BUT - you are either missing or avoiding my point.

Did she kill him?
You are on record in this thread, along with others, saying that American Police forces don't discharge their weapons without intent to kill. In this case she could easily have killed the robber but chose not to.

.

Bruthal

Nut case id say, just itching to shoot someone. At least he saved the piece of wood from being carved.

Bruthal

Wicklowrider wrote: »

Yes I know a lot of people ( who were not there) dispute whether she did or didn't intend to shoot the gun out of his hand. there are numerous other discussions about that incident.

BUT - you are either missing or avoiding my point.

Did she kill him?
You are on record in this thread, along with others, saying that American Police forces don't discharge their weapons without intent to kill. In this case she could easily have killed the robber but chose not to.

.

Yes but its hardly a surprise for people to believe the cops there are trigger happy. There does not seem to be a shortage of trigger happy people there at all.

Holybejaysus

Augmerson wrote: »

I don't see your logic here, but for me, if I was a Police Officer and I was attempting to apprehend a man with a Knife who would not put it down but who was not actually charging me, why not shoot him in the leg? These people are trained to be excellent marksmen, shooting him in the leg would have brought him down and allowed the Cop to move in - now granted, it doesn't solve the problem, the man with the Knife will probably be very pissed now, but atleast he knows the Cop means business and atleast the Cop has avoided taking a life.

Have you ever even fired a weapon? Hitting a moving target is hard at the best of times, try doing it with adrenaline pumping through your veins. The officer obviously thought his life was in danger, and acted accordingly. There is no shooting to wound like you see in the movies, you aim for the largest mass-the upper torso. That's not necessarily shoot to kill, but shoot to incapacitate. (It goes without saying though, that there is a good chance the suspect will be killed.)

As for those who provide links of officers shooting weapons out of suspects hands, they would be fluke/opportunistic shots more so than anything. The sniper who shot the weapon out of the man's hand actually seriously injured the gunman when shrapnel from the destroyed weapon hit the suspect.

Officers are not trained to be excellent marksmen, they are merely trained to be proficient. To be an expert marksman takes years of full time practise, and tens of thousands of rounds.

So shooting him in the leg would have brought him down you say? Not so. Ever heard of John Carthy? He was shot in the legs by the ERU, and still kept coming with a loaded weapon. There are numerous examples of suspects receiving multiple gunshot wounds and still being able to return fire.

FWIW, I think it's very easy to be an armchair critic. Put yourself in the officers position for a second. A man with a knife ignores clear instructions to drop the weapon. This is interpreted as a hostile act in itself, as you are refusing to comply with defusing the situation. We don't know if he charged the officer or not, or became aggressive. It's not there on camera, so it's hard to judge.
But from some of the comments we have seen so far, you'd swear the officer actually went out to gun down a man in broad daylight on the street. :rolleyes: That's not to say that US police aren't occasionally trigger happy, but I don't think this incident is one of them.

Bruthal

Well he did not look very threatening walking across the road not bothering anyone, and maybe he did not clearly understand what the cop was roaring at him. You would think he was carrying a bazooka the way the cop was goin after him roaring.

We can`t see what happend in the end, but the beginning did not seem to show much of a threat to anyone.

Star Bingo

indian? could the cop not just ask "Hiyawhatta u doin there then? i'm the chief of this precinct get back to your tribe"

Lumen

Wicklowrider wrote: »

Yes I know a lot of people ( who were not there) dispute whether she did or didn't intend to shoot the gun out of his hand. there are numerous other discussions about that incident

...

You are on record in this thread, along with others, saying that American Police forces don't discharge their weapons without intent to kill. In this case she could easily have killed the robber but chose not to.

Well technically I think the standard intent is to stop not to kill (despite what I typed; I didn't realise AH constituted "on the record") , and I was making no specific point about Americans (the firearms officers I have spoken to about such things have been British) but if you shoot someone in such a way to stop them they usually die.

For the incident you quoted the criticism is either that (a) she intended to disable only his gun hand, in which case she was wrong to do so, or (b) she intended to properly disable/stop him, in which case he was lucky.

There is no "reasonable force" to be applied when shooting someone. If you don't understand that you don't understand guns.

The Highwayman

sonic85 wrote: »

"cowboys ted, theyre a bunch of cowboys"

this is not a thread for stupid jokes you ignorant fu"k wit :mad:

Star Bingo

indians.. scattered on dawn's highway, bleeding .. ghosts crown the young child's fragile, eggshell mind

The Highwayman

Star Bingo wrote: »

indians.. scattered on dawn's highway, bleeding .. ghosts crown the young child's fragile, eggshell mind

The Doors

Bruthal

Hardly a thread for short tempers and hot headed posts either, just the sort of temperament that cop probably has.