St. Louis Police release cell phone video of Powell shooting (1 Viewer)

[Blind Tiger]

He threatened with deadly force and the cops responded with more powerful deadly force. Why would they respond to a threat of deadly force with a non-lethal weapon? Don't instigate and bring a knife to a gun fight.

 

[Fat Nick]

I would agree that a tazer is more logical, but it was a man with a weapon, and I do think shooting is justified...but I don't understand why you've got to unload a clip into the guy. I feel like in a situation with a knife, the first shot should be to the leg or to wound. Just turning the guy into a sieve seems like overkill.

Is there some police code that basically states that when you make the decision to shoot, you should shoot to kill?

Pretty much this. Using a firearm is using deadly force. You only use deadly force when necessary to counter potentially deadly force. In that situation there's no reason to "go for the leg," which is non-sense to anyone who has ever trained with a firearm. This isn't the movies, you don't aim to "clip" someone and try not to shoot them too much. If you've made the decision that using a firearm is necessary, you aim center mass.

Thanks. Makes sense, but I wasn't sure if this was the case in all situations. I get if someone has a gun, but I just wondered if there was a different take when someone has a knife and you would have time for multiple shots. It just seemed like one shot to the leg (or even ONE shot anywhere) might drop the guy and reduce the threat without killing him...but I get why the training is that way.

 

[[icon]]

I'm not sure why the cops wouldn't use their tasers. Can somone explain?

Because tasers only do so much. Go to youtube and search "taser" or "tasered" or whatever. Watch the ones where there is no effect.

Exactly. Tasers frequently do nothing... especially if the person is under the influence.

Did he actually have a knife? I'm watching on my phone and can't see.

If he did, I don't think you can blame the cops. In general, when the cops point guns at you and you walk towards them menacingly saying "Shoot me mother####er," well, I don't like your chances.

Exactly. This was suicide by cop. Period. EVERYONE in the world knows that if you have a weapon, and walk menacingly toward cops there is exactly ONE outcome to expect. Anyone arguing otherwise is a fool. Sorry.

And this rule seems to often apply to young black urban males.

The rule applies to anyone who has or gives the appearance of reaching for a weapon when being told not to by officers.

 

[GroveDiesel]

Different case:

http://ekstrabladet.dk/112/article4605104.ece

Not mentioned in this article but the police talked him down

May surprise you to find that there are tons of times that same scenario happens in the US too, they just don't make the news. But plenty of times non-lethal force is used when police are threatened.

http://www.courierpostonline.com/story/news/local/south-jersey/2014/06/23/camden-police-using-non-lethal-weapon/11253055/

http://patch.com/illinois/elmhurst/police-use-taser-to-take-down-man-with-a-knife#.U_X0qZWCOK0

The ugly underlying truth is that the root problem stems from a mental health system that has completely failed along with a general culture of disrespect for others and a culture in some areas where violence against police is accepted or encouraged.

The vast majority of conflicts between people and cops in the US end without someone being shot, but with so many of them happening, the odds of a tragic outcome eventually occurring rises. In many other countries where you don't have large populations of severely mentally ill on the streets and where people are generally more peaceable and respectful, you have much much fewer incidents of people challenging or threatening the police. The odds of an unfortunate outcome occurring are much lower when you simply don't even have the situation arising very often.

 

[jamny]

I would agree that a tazer is more logical, but it was a man with a weapon, and I do think shooting is justified...but I don't understand why you've got to unload a clip into the guy. I feel like in a situation with a knife, the first shot should be to the leg or to wound. Just turning the guy into a sieve seems like overkill.

Is there some police code that basically states that when you make the decision to shoot, you should shoot to kill?

Pretty much this. Using a firearm is using deadly force. You only use deadly force when necessary to counter potentially deadly force. In that situation there's no reason to "go for the leg," which is non-sense to anyone who has ever trained with a firearm. This isn't the movies, you don't aim to "clip" someone and try not to shoot them too much. If you've made the decision that using a firearm is necessary, you aim center mass.

Thanks. Makes sense, but I wasn't sure if this was the case in all situations. I get if someone has a gun, but I just wondered if there was a different take when someone has a knife and you would have time for multiple shots. It just seemed like one shot to the leg (or even ONE shot anywhere) might drop the guy and reduce the threat without killing him...but I get why the training is that way.

Agree. I have no issue with what they did in this case and only brought up "taking him out at the knees" as an option. It makes sense that if you decide to pull the trigger, you are doing it to kill. Training them another way might lead to more problems.

 

[[icon]]

Why is it cops in these things always fire like a dozen shots. Seriously? Maybe just two puts him down and he's no longer a threat? Why fill the guy with a million bullets?

I know you don't shoot much so it's understandable. People who aren't around guns form their perceptions from the movies where people hit them in the arm so they drop the gun... or in the knee so they stop advancing. Or.. they can kill at will with a chest shot that causes the bad guy to twist and collapse to the ground on the spot.

The reality is, that simply ISN'T reality.

Wound channels from standard 9mm and .40cal rounds carried by LEO are generally pretty small and unpredictable. Often something as simple as hitting a denim jacket at an angle will severely reduce/or eliminate the round's effectiveness. This isn't even to call into question the accuracy factor of firing on a moving target under duress (this was close enough that it's not really a factor, but it frequently is).

Now you'll see that guy was within 5-6' of that officer. If at ANY moment that guy leapt forward he'd be on top of the officer in a fraction of a second. There's simply not time to fire..wait and see if it did the trick....fire.... wait and see....etc.

When dealing with an underpowered handgun caliber round, and an aggressive armed subject within striking distance, it's very common for officers to fire 5-6 rounds (or more) until the guy is clearly no longer a threat. In this case, there happened to be two officers firing. Honestly, anyone who tells me you they squeeze the trigger until the mag was empty would be a liar. These officers want to go home to see their kids and wives as badly as you guys do.

It comes down to common sense... EVERYONE knows you don't aggressively come after cops with a weapon, or you will get shot. Period. This guy knew exactly what he was doing and got exactly what he was after. I feel bad for the officers who will now likely have the pyschological repercussions of having to watch a man die at their hand.

 

[timschochet]

I'm not sure why the cops wouldn't use their tasers. Can somone explain?

Because tasers only do so much. Go to youtube and search "taser" or "tasered" or whatever. Watch the ones where there is no effect.

Exactly. Tasers frequently do nothing... especially if the person is under the influence.

Did he actually have a knife? I'm watching on my phone and can't see.

If he did, I don't think you can blame the cops. In general, when the cops point guns at you and you walk towards them menacingly saying "Shoot me mother####er," well, I don't like your chances.

Exactly. This was suicide by cop. Period. EVERYONE in the world knows that if you have a weapon, and walk menacingly toward cops there is exactly ONE outcome to expect. Anyone arguing otherwise is a fool. Sorry.

And this rule seems to often apply to young black urban males.

The rule applies to anyone who has or gives the appearance of reaching for a weapon when being told not to by officers.

But young blacks are especially popular. They just seem to have a greater death wish than others.

 

[Limp Ditka]

Jeebus, Tim

 

[timschochet]

Jeebus, Tim

i don't deserve it, but thanks anyhow for the comparison .

 

[GroveDiesel]

An addendum to the Denmark stuff, I think it's also important to mention that racial tensions and complexities definitely increases the chances of bad outcomes as well. One benefit of being almost a totally homogenous, isolationist, xenophobic country is that you tend not to have problems stemming from race. Although just the little bit of non-white immigration they've had over the last decade has caused all sorts of problems already and quite a bit of panic.

 

[GroveDiesel]

I'm not sure why the cops wouldn't use their tasers. Can somone explain?

Because tasers only do so much. Go to youtube and search "taser" or "tasered" or whatever. Watch the ones where there is no effect.

Exactly. Tasers frequently do nothing... especially if the person is under the influence.

Did he actually have a knife? I'm watching on my phone and can't see.

If he did, I don't think you can blame the cops. In general, when the cops point guns at you and you walk towards them menacingly saying "Shoot me mother####er," well, I don't like your chances.

Exactly. This was suicide by cop. Period. EVERYONE in the world knows that if you have a weapon, and walk menacingly toward cops there is exactly ONE outcome to expect. Anyone arguing otherwise is a fool. Sorry.

And this rule seems to often apply to young black urban males.

The rule applies to anyone who has or gives the appearance of reaching for a weapon when being told not to by officers.

But young blacks are especially popular. They just seem to have a greater death wish than others.

You seem to be assigning general blame in one direction here. Do you have any reason to do so, or is it just because that's what your gut tells you?

 

[timschochet]

Good question Grove Diesel.

There's a lot of outrage over these incidents within the black community, as anyone can see. The outrage stems from the belief that cops are eager to shoot young blacks at the slightest hint of possible threat, no matter how unlikely, and then exaggerate the threat afterward or simply lie about it. And personally I find it amusing that some conservatives, here and elsewhere, are ALWAYS willing to accept the police's stories as 100% true without question- as witness Boots in the other thread.

And it seems funny to me that so many young blacks seem to have death wishes whenever there is a confrontation with police. If I didn't know any better, I'd think that the police create these stories out of whole cloth after the fact to cover up what probably happened- that they were far too over eager to use their guns in these situations. But surely that can't be it.

 

[sublimeone]

This is really unfortunate. I think the cops acted within reason but what's with the 2 shots fired after he goes down? The threat has been eliminated. Also, is it SOP to handcuff someone you just shot? Shouldn't the main concern be getting medical attention?

 

[[icon]]

But young blacks are especially popular. They just seem to have a greater death wish than others.

You seem to be assigning general blame in one direction here. Do you have any reason to do so, or is it just because that's what your gut tells you?

Flap/My FF team in TimLeeg is called Tim's White Guilt.

You do the math.

 

[mr roboto]

If any of you are really starting a sentence with 'Why didn't the cops just (insert some alternative plan of action)' then your beef is with the entire training protocol of the Law Enforcement community. This was pretty textbook.

There is a very interesting discussion to be had regarding escalation of force, when deadly force should be used, how an officer should determine if they are in danger (have to see a weapon vs. 'he was reaching for something and I thought it was a weapon'). But IMO this video leaves no doubt that the officers acted within their training.

Lol at having a 'non-lethal' weapon guy and a 'lethal' weapon guy at the ready.

 

[[icon]]

And it seems funny to me that so many young blacks seem to have death wishes whenever there is a confrontation with police. If I didn't know any better, I'd think that the police create these stories out of whole cloth after the fact to cover up what probably happened- that they were far too over eager to use their guns in these situations. But surely that can't be it.

What do you think about this statement in relation to THIS video, tim?

Here's my take:

• This guy stole two sodas he had no intention of drinking. Presumably to get the police to come to him.

• This guy placed the sodas down, and was clearly pacing in anticipation of the police arrival.

• He apparently told/showed someone the knife in the store based on the phone call.

• He was all but telegraphing he had a weapon based on his hand in his pocket while pacing

• He very clearly sized up the police and walked steadily toward them with an aggressive posture immediately upon arrival.

• He seems to have brandished the weapon/knife based on the multiple calls to "put it down".

• Weapons drawn did not slow his steady pace and aggressive posture toward the police.

What would YOU have done if this man was coming at you in this scenario? Give him a copy of your novel and hope he falls asleep? Offered to sit down and have a "best carbonated beverages" draft?

 

[randall146]

This shows why good law enforcement should welcome being videotaped. Based on the articles I read before clicking the video I expected to see the senseless execution of a guy who was no real threat. Watching the video I see cops in a very quickly developing situation trying to deal safely with a crazy guy who won't stop coming at them with a knife (to be fair, I don't see the knife, but I haven't seen anyone really questioning that he had one)

Cops are generally against mandatory videotaping in patrol cars, interrogations, etc, but they how good cops doing their job the right way far more often than bad cops doing wrong. Plus, either way the truth comes out so every (law abiding) person wins.

Wish the cops hadn't lied afterwards about the overhand knife hold though

 

[[icon]]

Wish the cops hadn't lied afterwards about the overhand knife hold though

Yeah that kinda sucks... three possible outcomes:

1) Cop was mentally shaken from having just had to kill someone and was confused

2) Cop somehow confused low grip with hand on top of knife as "overhand grip"

3) Cop exaggeratedly implied guy was coming at him Norman Bates style to try to ensure no repercussions given the already tense situation in STL.

Tough call... could be any 3, but I'm thinking 2 is the least likely.... more than likely some combination of 1 and 3. Wish that one blemish from an otherwise smoothly handled (albeit extremely unfortunate) situation.

 

[timschochet]

And it seems funny to me that so many young blacks seem to have death wishes whenever there is a confrontation with police. If I didn't know any better, I'd think that the police create these stories out of whole cloth after the fact to cover up what probably happened- that they were far too over eager to use their guns in these situations. But surely that can't be it.

What do you think about this statement in relation to THIS video, tim?

Here's my take:

• This guy stole two sodas he had no intention of drinking. Presumably to get the police to come to him.

• This guy placed the sodas down, and was clearly pacing in anticipation of the police arrival.

• He apparently told/showed someone the knife in the store based on the phone call.

• He was all but telegraphing he had a weapon based on his hand in his pocket while pacing

• He very clearly sized up the police and walked steadily toward them with an aggressive posture immediately upon arrival.

• He seems to have brandished the weapon/knife based on the multiple calls to "put it down".

• Weapons drawn did not slow his steady pace and aggressive posture toward the police.

What would YOU have done if this man was coming at you in this scenario? Give him a copy of your novel and hope he falls asleep? Offered to sit down and have a "best carbonated beverages" draft?

I think that would work, yeah. Pretty cheap shot, BTW.

I have no opinion about this video. If the guy had a weapon and was moving forward at policemen, he deserves to be shot down. Not at all sure that's what took place here. My comments were more general.

 

[randall146]

Wish the cops hadn't lied afterwards about the overhand knife hold though

Yeah that kinda sucks... three possible outcomes:

1) Cop was mentally shaken from having just had to kill someone and was confused

2) Cop somehow confused low grip with hand on top of knife as "overhand grip"

3) Cop exaggeratedly implied guy was coming at him Norman Bates style to try to ensure no repercussions given the already tense situation in STL.

Tough call... could be any 3, but I'm thinking 2 is the least likely.... more than likely some combination of 1 and 3. Wish that one blemish from an otherwise smoothly handled (albeit extremely unfortunate) situation.

4th possibility is any of 1, 2, and/or 3, plus Police Chief/spokesman misinterpreted or exxagerated in the press conference. I don't know that we've seen or heard the actual cops on scene's report, just the supervisor at the press conference.

 

[Sweet J]

Their were two shots that were CLEARLY fired after he was down on the ground, incapacitated. That alone is unacceptable. This is a horrifying action by the police. And I am amazed that people are not infuriated by it.

He wasn't in full charge. He wasn't running at them. They had plenty of space. This is so, so, wrong.

 

[randall146]

This is really unfortunate. I think the cops acted within reason but what's with the 2 shots fired after he goes down? The threat has been eliminated. Also, is it SOP to handcuff someone you just shot? Shouldn't the main concern be getting medical attention?

Totally fair questions but I think standard procedure is that, if you're going to use deadly force, use it until you know 100% that the guy is not a danger

 

[Sweet J]

This is really unfortunate. I think the cops acted within reason but what's with the 2 shots fired after he goes down? The threat has been eliminated. Also, is it SOP to handcuff someone you just shot? Shouldn't the main concern be getting medical attention?

Totally fair questions but I think standard procedure is that, if you're going to use deadly force, use it until you know 100% that the guy is not a danger

He wasn't a danger to them, Randal. They are supposed to be trained to deal with situations like this. When they show up, he wasn't an immediate threat to anyone other than them. (The police could SEE bystanders milling about not feeling threatened). And they are paid to deal with a little bit of threat.

 

[msommer]

An addendum to the Denmark stuff, I think it's also important to mention that racial tensions and complexities definitely increases the chances of bad outcomes as well. One benefit of being almost a totally homogenous, isolationist, xenophobic country is that you tend not to have problems stemming from race. Although just the little bit of non-white immigration they've had over the last decade has caused all sorts of problems already and quite a bit of panic.

very few riots though and few people killed by the police, so there is that

 

[[icon]]

This is really unfortunate. I think the cops acted within reason but what's with the 2 shots fired after he goes down? The threat has been eliminated. Also, is it SOP to handcuff someone you just shot? Shouldn't the main concern be getting medical attention?

Totally fair questions but I think standard procedure is that, if you're going to use deadly force, use it until you know 100% that the guy is not a danger

He wasn't a danger to them, Randal.

This is all I needed to read to discount your perception entirely. I'm sorry GB... love you as a poster, but you're nuts here :(

Cops show up to a scene about an armed robbery and an erratic suspect with a knife.. guy immediately hones in on them and aggressively stalks in on them? Cmon...

There will be exactly zero blowback from this on these cops. Textbook. Suicide by cop.

 

[[icon]]

He wasn't in full charge. He wasn't running at them. They had plenty of space. This is so, so, wrong.

Okay now I know he's trolling... jesus.

 

[timschochet]

Their were two shots that were CLEARLY fired after he was down on the ground, incapacitated. That alone is unacceptable. This is a horrifying action by the police. And I am amazed that people are not infuriated by it.

He wasn't in full charge. He wasn't running at them. They had plenty of space. This is so, so, wrong.

Why are you amazed? There are people here who will ALWAYS defend the police in these situations.

 

[Sweet J]

This is really unfortunate. I think the cops acted within reason but what's with the 2 shots fired after he goes down? The threat has been eliminated. Also, is it SOP to handcuff someone you just shot? Shouldn't the main concern be getting medical attention?

Totally fair questions but I think standard procedure is that, if you're going to use deadly force, use it until you know 100% that the guy is not a danger

He wasn't a danger to them, Randal.

This is all I needed to read to discount your perception entirely. I'm sorry GB... love you as a poster, but you're nuts here :(

Cops show up to a scene about an armed robbery and an erratic suspect with a knife.. guy immediately hones in on them and aggressively stalks in on them? Cmon...

There will be exactly zero blowback from this on these cops. Textbook. Suicide by cop.

Fair enough.

 

[randall146]

This is really unfortunate. I think the cops acted within reason but what's with the 2 shots fired after he goes down? The threat has been eliminated. Also, is it SOP to handcuff someone you just shot? Shouldn't the main concern be getting medical attention?

Totally fair questions but I think standard procedure is that, if you're going to use deadly force, use it until you know 100% that the guy is not a danger

He wasn't a danger to them, Randal. They are supposed to be trained to deal with situations like this. When they show up, he wasn't an immediate threat to anyone other than them. (The police could SEE bystanders milling about not feeling threatened). And they are paid to deal with a little bit of threat.

He WAS a danger to them. They are trained to deal with situations like this and I think they probably followed that training here. Bystanders weren't threatened because he wasn't coming at bystanders with a knife yelling "shoot me!" They are paid to deal with the threat and they did.

It's really sad that an obviously severly mentally ill man was shot and killed, but I don't think our hindsight now changes the fact that this went down in a couple seconds and a clearly deranged man with a knife, who the police had been called to deal with because he was scaring people, came at the police, refused to heed their commands to stop and drop his weapon, yelled at them to shoot him, and began quickly moving towards them.

If the cops hadn't shot when they did, what happens a half second later when the guy gets to one of the cops with a knife? Probably a cop gets badly injured and the guy is dead anyway.

 

[Sweet J]

He wasn't in full charge. He wasn't running at them. They had plenty of space. This is so, so, wrong.

Okay now I know he's trolling... jesus.

I'm really not. I really don't think this was a necessary shooting. But I'm willing to take some consideration to the fact that it escalated so effing quickly that the police didn't have time to think, just to react. I can see that point of view.

 

[Joe Summer]

Why is it cops in these things always fire like a dozen shots. Seriously? Maybe just two puts him down and he's no longer a threat? Why fill the guy with a million bullets?

Police are trained to keep firing until the suspect stops moving.If you only fire 2 shots and then wait to see what happens, that could give the suspect enough time to return fire.

 

[RUSF18]

I saw the article which stated that the video showed that in addition to the "overhand" grip thing being a lie, the cops lied about saying he was only 4 or 5 feet from them at the time they shot. I know the video is a distance away, but to me it doesn't look like he's any more than maybe 6 or 7 feet, just gauging that by everyone's height in the frame.

I think you'd have to be talking about 10 feet away, maybe even 15 feet, before I'd say the cops lied about the distance when accounting for heat of the moment/estimation/confusion in the aftermath.

 

[St. Louis Bob]

The cop should have shot the knife out of his hand. He had several seconds to do this. He should also had known the complete medical profile of the victim. Life in jail without parole IMO.

 

[fourd]

Good question Grove Diesel.

There's a lot of outrage over these incidents within the black community, as anyone can see. The outrage stems from the belief that cops are eager to shoot young blacks at the slightest hint of possible threat, no matter how unlikely, and then exaggerate the threat afterward or simply lie about it. And personally I find it amusing that some conservatives, here and elsewhere, are ALWAYS willing to accept the police's stories as 100% true without question- as witness Boots in the other thread.

And it seems funny to me that so many young blacks seem to have death wishes whenever there is a confrontation with police. If I didn't know any better, I'd think that the police create these stories out of whole cloth after the fact to cover up what probably happened- that they were far too over eager to use their guns in these situations. But surely that can't be it.

Tim, how many young African Americans are "gunned down" by police compared to the number that are murdered by other young African Americans? Of course we don't see the later covered 24 hours and I'm not sure I see the multipage threads on each of those occurrences. Where's the national media with the round the clock coverage of the 9 year old that was killed in Chicago yesterday? It wasn't in a confrontation with the police. Where is Eric Holder? Where is Al Sharpton?

 

[butcher boy]

The cop should have shot the knife out of his hand. He had several seconds to do this. He should also had known the complete medical profile of the victim. Life in jail without parole IMO.

This should be part of standard training along with spinning the gun on your finger before reholstering after firing.

 

[tommyGunZ]

Why isn't the policy to have one officer preparing non-lethal force (mace, taser, etc), and one ready to use lethal force if it proves necessary?

Blast him in the face with that high powered foam #### and it he's still got the knife and isn't stopping, other officer shoots him.

Because police are not, and should not, be obligated to protect the life of someone who is threatening them with deadly force.

And this rule seems to often apply to young black urban males.

I think it applies to anyone who walks towards cops brandishing a knife as they point firearms at you and tell you to drop it and get down. But if you think it's just racism, by all means, grab a knife, call 911, and have yourself a social experiment.

It certainly didn't apply to Clive Bundy's band of renegades.

 

[tommyGunZ]

Why isn't the policy to have one officer preparing non-lethal force (mace, taser, etc), and one ready to use lethal force if it proves necessary?

Blast him in the face with that high powered foam #### and it he's still got the knife and isn't stopping, other officer shoots him.

Because police are not, and should not, be obligated to protect the life of someone who is threatening them with deadly force.

Then we disagree. I think, morally, they are and should be obligated to do so until it becomes clear that deadly force is required. The main purpose of a police force should be to protect the citizens they are placed above. That includes the crazy ones, the poor ones, the homeless ones, everyone. Criminal justice systems exist for a reason, and that's because most societies prefer to have criminals punished by a court of law rather than gunned down for their crimes, Judge Dredd style. Maybe we need to decide whether we're going to fix the issue or just take away the pretence of a fair trial for all.

Cops are not superhero's in shootouts every week. They are scared ####less like any of us would be in these circumstances. Guy comes at you with a knife you shoot them if you have a gun. If you have a baseball bat you bash their head in not aim for their knee to save them. You sure as #### don't go in with mace.

If they are scared ####less and act as any of us amateurs would, then they should not be in law enforcement and trusted with a gun.

 

[St. Louis Bob]

The cop should have shot the knife out of his hand. He had several seconds to do this. He should also had known the complete medical profile of the victim. Life in jail without parole IMO.

This should be part of standard training along with spinning the gun on your finger before reholstering after firing.

Along with making snarky quips before discharging your weapon.

 

[Officer Pete Malloy]

Why is it cops in these things always fire like a dozen shots. Seriously? Maybe just two puts him down and he's no longer a threat? Why fill the guy with a million bullets?

I know you don't shoot much so it's understandable. People who aren't around guns form their perceptions from the movies where people hit them in the arm so they drop the gun... or in the knee so they stop advancing. Or.. they can kill at will with a chest shot that causes the bad guy to twist and collapse to the ground on the spot.

The reality is, that simply ISN'T reality.

Wound channels from standard 9mm and .40cal rounds carried by LEO are generally pretty small and unpredictable. Often something as simple as hitting a denim jacket at an angle will severely reduce/or eliminate the round's effectiveness. This isn't even to call into question the accuracy factor of firing on a moving target under duress (this was close enough that it's not really a factor, but it frequently is).

Now you'll see that guy was within 5-6' of that officer. If at ANY moment that guy leapt forward he'd be on top of the officer in a fraction of a second. There's simply not time to fire..wait and see if it did the trick....fire.... wait and see....etc.

When dealing with an underpowered handgun caliber round, and an aggressive armed subject within striking distance, it's very common for officers to fire 5-6 rounds (or more) until the guy is clearly no longer a threat. In this case, there happened to be two officers firing. Honestly, anyone who tells me you they squeeze the trigger until the mag was empty would be a liar. These officers want to go home to see their kids and wives as badly as you guys do.

It comes down to common sense... EVERYONE knows you don't aggressively come after cops with a weapon, or you will get shot. Period. This guy knew exactly what he was doing and got exactly what he was after. I feel bad for the officers who will now likely have the pyschological repercussions of having to watch a man die at their hand.

This is the only part I'm going to disagree with. If he suffers from some sort of mental illness then he didn't know what he was doing.

 

[Officer Pete Malloy]

The cop should have shot the knife out of his hand. He had several seconds to do this. He should also had known the complete medical profile of the victim. Life in jail without parole IMO.

After the shooting did either of the cops remark "I'm getting too old for this ####"?

 

[Guest]

The cop should have shot the knife out of his hand. He had several seconds to do this. He should also had known the complete medical profile of the victim. Life in jail without parole IMO.

Implanted microchips that could be scanned from a distance would solve this problem.

 

[St. Louis Bob]

The cop should have shot the knife out of his hand. He had several seconds to do this. He should also had known the complete medical profile of the victim. Life in jail without parole IMO.

After the shooting did either of the cops remark "I'm getting too old for this ####"?

Standard operating protocol.

 

[tommyGunZ]

If this is the standard for authorized use of deadly force, the streets in larger urban cities would be cleared of homeless people in a week.

This is really unfortunate. I think the cops acted within reason but what's with the 2 shots fired after he goes down? The threat has been eliminated. Also, is it SOP to handcuff someone you just shot? Shouldn't the main concern be getting medical attention?

Totally fair questions but I think standard procedure is that, if you're going to use deadly force, use it until you know 100% that the guy is not a danger

He wasn't a danger to them, Randal.

This is all I needed to read to discount your perception entirely. I'm sorry GB... love you as a poster, but you're nuts here :(

Cops show up to a scene about an armed robbery and an erratic suspect with a knife.. guy immediately hones in on them and aggressively stalks in on them? Cmon...

There will be exactly zero blowback from this on these cops. Textbook. Suicide by cop.

Fair enough.

Not really. That "armed robbery" was a mentally ill individual stealing sodas possibly brandishing a knife. Apparently the cops knew this when responding, so one would think they would be prepared to deal with some crazy talk before filling him with lead.

 

[randall146]

If they are scared ####less and act as any of us amateurs would, then they should not be in law enforcement and trusted with a gun.

If the standard was "not frightened when personally threatened with violent death" you'd have like 1000 people to staff your entire national police fire and military, and they'd all be sociopaths

 

[sublimeone]

This is really unfortunate. I think the cops acted within reason but what's with the 2 shots fired after he goes down? The threat has been eliminated. Also, is it SOP to handcuff someone you just shot? Shouldn't the main concern be getting medical attention?

Totally fair questions but I think standard procedure is that, if you're going to use deadly force, use it until you know 100% that the guy is not a danger

He wasn't a danger to them, Randal. They are supposed to be trained to deal with situations like this. When they show up, he wasn't an immediate threat to anyone other than them. (The police could SEE bystanders milling about not feeling threatened). And they are paid to deal with a little bit of threat.

He WAS a danger to them. They are trained to deal with situations like this and I think they probably followed that training here. Bystanders weren't threatened because he wasn't coming at bystanders with a knife yelling "shoot me!" They are paid to deal with the threat and they did.

It's really sad that an obviously severly mentally ill man was shot and killed, but I don't think our hindsight now changes the fact that this went down in a couple seconds and a clearly deranged man with a knife, who the police had been called to deal with because he was scaring people, came at the police, refused to heed their commands to stop and drop his weapon, yelled at them to shoot him, and began quickly moving towards them.

If the cops hadn't shot when they did, what happens a half second later when the guy gets to one of the cops with a knife? Probably a cop gets badly injured and the guy is dead anyway.

I have no problem with them shooting him. I think they were acting in their own defense and it was warranted here. But after you and your partner hit the guy multiple times, and he hits the ground, it seems wrong to continue shooting him and then roll his lifeless body over and handcuff him.

 

[butcher boy]

If this is the standard for authorized use of deadly force, the streets in larger urban cities would be cleared of homeless people in a week.

This is really unfortunate. I think the cops acted within reason but what's with the 2 shots fired after he goes down? The threat has been eliminated. Also, is it SOP to handcuff someone you just shot? Shouldn't the main concern be getting medical attention?

Totally fair questions but I think standard procedure is that, if you're going to use deadly force, use it until you know 100% that the guy is not a danger

He wasn't a danger to them, Randal.

This is all I needed to read to discount your perception entirely. I'm sorry GB... love you as a poster, but you're nuts here :(

Cops show up to a scene about an armed robbery and an erratic suspect with a knife.. guy immediately hones in on them and aggressively stalks in on them? Cmon...

There will be exactly zero blowback from this on these cops. Textbook. Suicide by cop.

Fair enough.

Not really. That "armed robbery" was a mentally ill individual stealing sodas possibly brandishing a knife. Apparently the cops knew this when responding, so one would think they would be prepared to deal with some crazy talk before filling him with lead.

How should they have dealt with him approaching them with a weapon and not stopping? Because that's what actually happened, not simply "crazy talk".

 

[Limp Ditka]

If this is the standard for authorized use of deadly force, the streets in larger urban cities would be cleared of homeless people in a week.

So now you're saying that all homeless people, in larger urban cities, are knife wielding, suicidal maniacs?

Have you no compassion for the plight of these people?

 

[Officer Pete Malloy]

The cop should have shot the knife out of his hand. He had several seconds to do this. He should also had known the complete medical profile of the victim. Life in jail without parole IMO.

After the shooting did either of the cops remark "I'm getting too old for this ####"?

Standard operating protocol.

An error occurredBook 'em, Danny

 

[belljr]

I disagree with many people on this board...

 

[Fat Nick]

The cop should have shot the knife out of his hand. He had several seconds to do this. He should also had known the complete medical profile of the victim. Life in jail without parole IMO.

Implanted microchips that could be scanned from a distance would solve this problem.

[Zombieapocalypse] "But I don't get it...I scanned that guy and he's returning 7 different patient profiles" [\Zombieapocalypse]