Abrignac wrote:Too much TV for you.
Let's play what if.
I knee is a much smaller target than center of mass. What if the LEO misses. He/she shot at a downward trajectory. If the shot misses it will very likely ricochet off a hard surface such as concrete or asphalt and may strike an innocent person down range. Did that person deserve to die so the suspect can live?
When one is being charged, LEO's are taught to shoot until the threat stops. More accurately, we are taught, two shots to the body and one to the head. All this while bearing the responsibility for every shot that is fired.
There are many sound reason for that philosophy. Self-preservation is one thing to consider. In the scenario as I described in my original post, it would take the average person less than one second to cover that distance. Not a lot of time for a LEO to determine if the first shot will stop the individual charging him/her.
In fact, I would bet that even if the first round was fatal, it may take up to 30 seconds for the suspect to be incapacitated to the point that they are no longer a threat to the LEO. I know of a particular incident when a suspect took five fatal shots. He continued to fight LEO's for more than 3 minutes before he expired. Keep in mind that in most professional fights involving highly conditioned athletes the rounds only last 3 minutes.
I have to ask you this question. Do you believe the LEO should play it safe and risk being killed himself? I ask that because, Scott, you have told me that you are an engineer. As such, there is no doubt in my mind that you could not have figured this out yourself. Did you really need me to explain this? In fact, I recall you asking this same question when the Ferguson incident was a hot topic on this forum. IIRC, I gave you the same answer back then.
It reminds me of line in a popular movie, " I would rather you just said thank you and went on your way."
What I see on TV is people asking why the police keep killing black men – which is why I posted the question.
Yes Anthony, I am an Engineer. Industrial Mechanical by type, and started in the ‘80’s. And I did need you to explain it, again if necessary – You’re a Peace Officer. The trouble with engineers is they want exacting and succinct explanations. But most all folks explain things by example and allegory – not too precise. Let me illustrate; you quoted Col. Jessup from ‘A Few Good Men’, and I thought; that character was found to be criminal. And are you suggesting that the means and actions should not be questioned or explained? – No, I don’t think you meant that. Maybe you did.
Now to the matter at hand, I really don’t understand or have empathy for the rules of law enforcement, it is not my profession – and I think a lot of the Ferguson hubbub is from people really not understanding either. So someone askes “Why did the police kill the boy” and someone says “because police hate black people” and in the vacuum of information and understanding that ugly thought takes root.
I gather that the reality is this:
If you physically attack an Officer of the Law you will likely be killed in order to protect the officer and his weapon. The law deems this self-defense. The Officers legal duty to you only comes into play once you are subdued.This really sheds light on the Arlington incident. If you’ve seen the video, the kid as a crazy as a March hair. And it doesn’t take much imagination to figure he charged the police. But without this precept clearly in mind, one would easily ask why the police men didn’t just wrestle him to the ground.
To your credit, you did a good job illustrating the issue. I wish the media did a better job explain the harsh realities of law enforcement – we might just all benefit.
Now I will say "thank you" and be on my way.
