Cop Shoots guy whittling

Murder one.

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?

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.

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

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.

america, hell ya!!! :eek:

Wicklowrider wrote: »

Manic Moran - you are commenting on incidentals. Please take a sec and read the Quotes above. These the posts I replied to. I am not proposing shooting weapons out of hands, nor proposing officers fail to use deadly force. I am addressing one specific point. The above quoted are stating as fact that American Police forces only discharge weapons with deadly intent. There is no ambiguity in their posts, they are clear and emphatic. My contention is that these people wrong - American Police would seem as likely to discharge weapons with a non lethal result as any other professional police. Also, if you read the article about the female cop, her Police Dept comment in support of minimum force and non lethal intervention. Should anyone want to research this further, google provides lots of examples of non lethal intervention by police. Seizing on minor details while ignoring the point is only dragging this out. Put simply:
Do american police officers ALWAYS discharge their weapons with lethal intent? The answer to that is obvious, or at least it is to me.

All police forces train their officers to shoot for the torso. The use of a firearm is considered the use of deadly force. This means that if an officer is going to use it they are making the decision that deadly force is necessary. Where police departments differ is their policy of when deadly force is necessary. In any case the officer discharging their firearm has made the decision that the person they have fired at is most likely going to die and this action is necessary despite that.

Police aren't trained as marksmem. They are trained to hit the centre of the body because this is the easiest target. Trained marksmen (snipers) will generally shoot for the head as this is an easier shot for them and will disable the target faster.

Highly Salami wrote: »

whats whittling?

http://tinyurl.com/33hrn7n