Brewha
  • Brewha
  • Herf-A-Holic Topic Starter
11 years ago
Great video on this one. A 19 year old kid goes nut busting up a car dealer ship – Mental issues? Drunk?

Anyway the police arrive, three of them, and unable to subdue the 5’-7”, 165 pound teenager put four bullets in him.

Seems a bit excessive…..

http://www.star-telegram.com/news/local/community/arlington/article30508932.html 
wheelrite
11 years ago
yep...

wheel,
danmdevries
11 years ago
I dunno man, play stupid games, win stupid prizes.
gummy jones
11 years ago
if any of you guys make it to the riot pick me up a pair of size 12 nikes

im freaking stuck at work
TMCTLT
11 years ago
@ first glance this does seem excessive however I will reserve judgement until the investigation plays out. It seems he was given proper opportunity in which to Surrender...
rfenst
11 years ago

@ first glance this does seem excessive however I will reserve judgement until the investigation plays out. It seems he was given proper opportunity in which to Surrender...

TMCTLT wrote:



agreed. But, simply not surrendering or fleeing in and of themselves are not reasons for the use of lethal force. Let's wait for the whole story...
Speyside
11 years ago
TMCTLT
11 years ago
TMCTLT wrote:
@ first glance this does seem excessive however I will reserve judgement until the investigation plays out. It seems he was given proper opportunity in which to Surrender...


agreed. But, simply not surrendering or fleeing in and of themselves are not reasons for the use of lethal force. Let's wait for the whole story...

And perhaps your message would be better suited for those who riot before allowing the whole story to unfold

Gee I thought I covered that 🤦
tamapatom
11 years ago
What car dealership? Driving through the plate glass window could have been defensible as justifiable insanity depending on which dealer fleeced you. Unfortunately, turns out this was a capital offense.
sd72
11 years ago
#thintheherd
#wgaf
#stupidhurts
Burner02
11 years ago
Believe someone else was shot last night for opening fire on police officers.
Abrignac
11 years ago

What car dealership? Driving through the plate glass window could have been defensible as justifiable insanity depending on which dealer fleeced you. Unfortunately, turns out this was a capital offense.

tamapatom wrote:




Based on what? From what I've read the officer hasn't yet been questioned.

This may or may not have been a clean shooting. According to news reports the officer who shot the suspect was still in the field training stage. In a standard officer training program the officer would have first undergone physiological screening to see if he was a suitable candidate. If he passes that screening he would then have attended an academy. One block of training in such an academy he would have been extensive training related to stopping, searching and detaining a suspect. He would have also been extensively trained about what to do if a suspect charges an officer and attempts to disarm him.

News reports state that an altercation occurred. It's possible the suspect attempted to disarm the officer. Officers undergo very rigorous training about how to react if that occurs. Assuming that's what happened in this case (just an assumption), the the officer would have been trained to secure his weapon and create distance, draw his weapon and order the suspect to the ground. If the suspect charged the officer would have been trained to shoot the suspect until the suspect was unable to charge any further which would explain multiple gunshot wounds.

Such a scenario is considered a deadly force encounter because if the suspect is successful in disarming the officer, the suspect may very well shoot the officer with his own firearm.

At this point very little information has been released so we really don't know what happened.
tamapatom
11 years ago
I hope the facts in this case settle this matter rather than becoming another case tried in the media based on everyones opinion who was not there or privy to the facts.

Not that it matters but still curious what dealership it was............haven't seen that in the news.
Brewha
  • Brewha
  • Herf-A-Holic Topic Starter
11 years ago
The question a would ask is, even if the crazy kid charged the cop, tried to take his gun, etc., why was he not wounded? Shot in the knee?

I'm trying to figure how four shots in the body is self defense when the kid was unarmed. It does not appear they were trying to take him alive.

A little clarification is needed here; at what point is lethal force proper?
teedubbya
11 years ago
If someone charges me and I decide to fire I'm not shooting to wound. It's not the movies. You pull the trigger to kill.
TMCTLT
11 years ago

If someone charges me and I decide to fire I'm not shooting to wound. It's not the movies. You pull the trigger to kill.

teedubbya wrote:





This 🍺
wheelrite
11 years ago

If someone charges me and I decide to fire I'm not shooting to wound. It's not the movies. You pull the trigger to kill.

teedubbya wrote:



ha ha ha !!

You saw that line in a Jean Claude Eastwood movie, dint ya ?
you are a minivan driving wimp,,,

but we all still like you,,

wheel,,
Abrignac
11 years ago

The question a would ask is, even if the crazy kid charged the cop, tried to take his gun, etc., why was he not wounded? Shot in the knee?

I'm trying to figure how four shots in the body is self defense when the kid was unarmed. It does not appear they were trying to take him alive.

A little clarification is needed here; at what point is lethal force proper?

Brewha 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."
TMCTLT
11 years ago

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."

Abrignac wrote:





A VERY well thought out and respectful reply Anthony =d>
DrafterX
11 years ago
I heard when he was asked to come out he said, "Yeah, I'll speak with your mama outside." 😟
Users browsing this topic