People Call PD, then complain..


PDA






Lonestar49
September 10, 2007, 01:26 PM
...

I don't have a link, nor any paper of the story, but here is a short version from what I remember seeing on the local LA County Calif, TV news:

A semi, elderly, black Grandmother, called the local PD for help, as her young, aprox 23 yr old daughter was on drugs, and threatening her, and her baby, the young daughter had in her arms with a box cutter.

2 officers arrived at the seen, went into the upstairs apt, and found that the young mother with child, had barricaded herself and the baby in her bedroom.

The 2 officers quickly got inside her room, and tried to talk her down, and to secure the baby's welfare, that the grandmother/mother of the young girl, called for their help.

High on drugs, she warned them not to approach, or she would cut up the Baby, and the 2 officers made the quick decision to try and physically restrain her from doing that. She cut the baby, as she warned and cut both officers arms, then one of the officers decided that the baby was in peril, and took out his handgun and shot the young mother once, killing her.

The Baby was taken to the hospital, as well as both officers, as the baby needed 40 stitches, one officer required 30 stitches, and the other some 20 stitches, IIRC.

All this on the nightly News, showing the distressed Grandmother, yelling:

"They killed my baby, they killed my baby.." Along with, when she calmed down, during another interview, she said: "Yes, I called the PD because my daughter was up/high on drugs, threatening me and the Baby with a knife.."

"But they did not have to kill my baby, they're just all gun-happy.."


Where does it end..? :rolleyes:


LS


*Personally, I think the 2 officers are nothing short of Hero's, and their efforts, wounds, along with the Baby's, reflect this, and their, the one officers, quick decision to end it, unfortunately, thru one shot, that killed the deranged mother of the child, but saving the Baby, and themselves.

*And I think the Grandmother, is nothing short of CarpetBagger, knowing that her 15 mins of fame, via News TV, that thru her actions, then her daughters actions, is nothing short of appealing to any Lawyer, for a free ride to the Bank..

Not a word of thanks, nor mention of the fact, that the real BABY, was not killed, but saved, less 40 stitches, along with the officers cuts requiring 30 for one, 20 for the other.

If you enjoyed reading about "People Call PD, then complain.." here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Officers'Wife
September 10, 2007, 01:35 PM
Hi Lonestar,

*Personally, I think the 2 officers are nothing short of Hero's, and their efforts, wounds, along with the Baby's, reflect this, and their, the one officers, quick decision to end it, unfortunately, thru one shot, that killed the deranged mother of the child, but saving the Baby, and themselves.

I'll second that.

Selena

Silvanus
September 10, 2007, 01:36 PM
I agree with you. The only important thing in that situation was the child, not the "high on drugs" mother. The child and both officers still live, so I'd say they did a good job.

Pretty good shot placement BTW ;)

Invalid
September 10, 2007, 02:35 PM
DON'T DO DRUGS IF YOU CAN'T HANDLE IT YOU CLOWNS

Cause a scene, cut a baby, get capped. Seems to make sense. There was a robbery at a Whataburger close to my house recently that ended with the 20-something robber catching four in the head after pointing a gun at the police. It turned out to be an airsoft gun, and throngs of people complained about police brutality in their decision to shoot.

I'm a pretty liberal guy, but pointing any kind of weapon at a cop, especially when you're held at gunpoint after committing armed robbery, will usually land you a quick and one-way trip to meet your maker. I don't have a clever anecdote for that- threaten cop, get shot. Basic rules, right?

Bazooka Joe71
September 10, 2007, 02:43 PM
*Personally, I think the 2 officers are nothing short of Hero's, and their efforts, wounds, along with the Baby's, reflect this, and their, the one officers, quick decision to end it, unfortunately, thru one shot, that killed the deranged mother of the child, but saving the Baby, and themselves.

A 3rd right here.

Only I wished they had killed her quicker. Poor baby...40 freaking stitches:(

Hoppy590
September 10, 2007, 02:45 PM
definatly could have ended better.

didnt need to shoot the woman. if your close enough to get cut im sure your close enough to land a solid right hook. some times brute force is whats called for

Officers'Wife
September 10, 2007, 03:37 PM
Hi Hoppy,

Item 1. I didn't see in the article where the officer cut was the officer that shot.

Item 2. The officers didn't set the ground rules the woman did. Asking anybody to meet an armed threat with hand to hand is at best unreasonable, at worst criminal.

Item last. Their mission was to protect the baby. They did so despite an armed aggressor that was intent on harming that baby. I must give the officers their due, had it been my two year old the woman wouldn't have lived long enough to make the first cut.

Selena

Acera
September 10, 2007, 03:39 PM
It's a shame that all the innocents got cut, now for the drug tests to see if they caught anything from the mother or her child. I pray that AIDS, Hepatitis or some other disease in not in either of the officers future. There are many ways their lives are risked in situations like this. Hoppy590 too bad you can't land the right hook to the Grandmother.

Sniper X
September 10, 2007, 03:47 PM
You see that kinda thing all the time if you ever watch COPS. The victem calls COPS, the police arrive, take the situation under control, then the wife/gf/mom/whatever complains about the person THEY called the cops on getting arrested! I can't beleive the mentality of ignorant Americans as depicted on COPS. I especially just loathe it when a black/hispanic woman calls the cops on her son then gets on their cases dropping the race card when they take her son into custody..for beating her and stealing from her...nice!

Hoppy590
September 10, 2007, 03:53 PM
Hi Hoppy,

Item 1. I didn't see in the article where the officer cut was the officer that shot.

Item 2. The officers didn't set the ground rules the woman did. Asking anybody to meet an armed threat with hand to hand is at best unreasonable, at worst criminal.

Item last. Their mission was to protect the baby. They did so despite an armed aggressor that was intent on harming that baby. I must give the officers their due, had it been my two year old the woman wouldn't have lived long enough to make the first cut.

Selena

both officers got cut.

ground rules or not. anytime some one dies, theres atleast one thing that could have been done better.

obviously you are an officers wife, and obviously you care that your husband makes it home at night. and i do too. but in the end, its to protect and serve the community. all members. those in thier right mind and those not.

Asking anybody to meet an armed threat with hand to hand is at best unreasonable, at worst criminal.

there are plenty of examples of unarmed cops dealing with knives or using thier baton to deal with it

being an armed threat should not warrent being shot on site. i understand the officers approach. he wanted to get that baby to safety ASAP. and maybe in this situation it was the best approach. but it should not be blindly accepted that if you have a knife. or even if you cut a cop for making a reach should you be shot. theres too many ways this could have ended better

* hoppy waits patiently for 10,000 angry replys about police making it home at night. and how we should always blindly obey the police at all times. ( the latter coming from a bunch of people who will also have "from my cold dead hands!" and the like in thier sigs)

elrod
September 10, 2007, 04:01 PM
It's a catch-22 for the cops. Damned if you have to hurt somebody ("he was such a good child, they didn't have to ________ him"), or be damned for not taking more severe action. The giverment dosen't have enough money to get me to police for them, and I only have the highest admiration for those who do. :banghead:

strat81
September 10, 2007, 04:05 PM
didnt need to shoot the woman. if your close enough to get cut im sure your close enough to land a solid right hook. some times brute force is whats called for

You have more guts than me if you plan on getting close enough (twice) to someone with an edged weapon. Blades are serious stuff at h2h distance, I sure wouldn't want to take one across the neck or wrist.

seeker_two
September 10, 2007, 04:08 PM
Personally, I think the 2 officers are nothing short of Hero's,

+3, 4, 5, or whatever number we're on now.

Probably should have shot Grandma, too. That way, the baby would be safe from following in "Mom's" footsteps.... :fire:

Officers'Wife
September 10, 2007, 04:09 PM
Hi Hoppy,

To ease your mind my husband is an O3 in the US Army not an LEO. However, last year when he was in Iraq I made it quite clear to him that should someone threaten him with a knife he should empty the magazine and to hell with the Geneva Convention.

That said, in the little part of Indiana that I grew up one of the farmers used more than his share of migrant labor. I have seen knife wounds from working in the hospital there. I've also witnessed hand to hand training with knives both by the ROTC at the college I attended and here at Fort Campbell. Trust me on this, a knife IS a deadly weapon in the hands of someone intent on doing harm.

I have given my attitude to police excesses on other threads and need not repeat them here. However, asking anyone to answer a threat from a deadly weapon with anything less than another deadly weapon is silly. It ranks up there with the theory of a "fair fight" in the ludicrous dictionary.

I will state this as simply as possible, I expect LEOs to obey the laws they have sworn to uphold. I do not expect them to put their lives or the lives of others in unnecessary danger to fulfill some twisted ideal of "fairness."

Selena

W.E.G.
September 10, 2007, 04:10 PM
theres too many ways this could have ended better


I agree.

They should have shot her before she cut the baby.

Mccallum
September 10, 2007, 04:16 PM
Last I checked Self defense/defense of another standard was met for me as a private citizen. The drugged up lady was going to do harm and had started to harm the young child therefore one to the head is the only option in the situation!

Geronimo45
September 10, 2007, 04:16 PM
being an armed threat should not warrent being shot on site.
The threat existed. No shots were fired at that time. After blood was drawn, the threat was verified as lethal. Action will typically beat reaction... so it was a given that she could kill the baby before the cops could lay a solid hit on her.

If the woman had the baby in her arms at the time of her attack on the cops, you have a very limited striking area.

elrod
September 10, 2007, 04:21 PM
Hoppy590

there are plenty of examples of unarmed cops dealing with knives or using their baton to deal with it

That's correct, there are also accounts of people killing bears with a pocket knife.
Not the appropriate weapon, IMHO. Even with the use of deadly force, both officers and an innocent party sustained severe injuries, yet you think they should have used a stick???:eek::confused::eek:

kungfuhippie
September 10, 2007, 04:31 PM
hoppy 590,
It is tragic that this woman decided to take drugs, and threaten her baby's well being (as well as the well being of others) with a knife. She created the circumstances that resulted in her death. The cops did not use excessive force. They used appropriate force to stop her from harming the baby more. I hope cops are never dumb enough to get into a knife fight when a baby's life is on the line. Shooting her stopped the threat to the child.

Muzzy_B
September 10, 2007, 04:32 PM
Unfortunate situation for all parties involved. A baby that will never know its mother nor understand what led her to such foolishness, police officers scarred both physically and mentally, a woman dead, and a mother lamenting.

Hindsight is always 20-20. I'll step out on a limb and say that none of us were present at the time, so none of us know every detail that led to the officer's decision to use deadly force to save at least one life. I'm sure the decision was not made lightly, as he'll live with it for the rest of his life and undoubtedly spend many sessions in therapy while he works to regain emotionally stability. Bring in the trial lawyers when the mother throws a civil suit against him, and his situation gets even worse.

in the end, its to protect and serve the community. all members. those in thier right mind and those not

You are correct Hoppy, it is an officer's duty to perform all of the above duties. However, in life, there exisits a hierarchy of needs. At the time, the mother "in her right mind or not" was acting outside of the law and had to be reigned in. Babies are fragile, defenseless individuals. What happens if the officer engages the suspect in non lethal hand to hand combat to subdue her, the situation escalates, and the baby gets crushed in the process? Or, perhaps the baby and one or both officers are mortally wounded by the knife? That's just two of the countless scenarios that could have unfolded if given the time and circumstance. The officer had to weigh the decision and acted in favor of the greater good. Good shoot.

camslam
September 10, 2007, 04:53 PM
Here is the link and full story on the incident and should clear up several misconceptions. It looks like the cops tasered her before shooting and still had to use lethal force. Sad the mom died, but this poor 4 year old never had a chance at a decent life. Pathetic.

http://cbs2.com/local/local_story_252174137.html

Sep 9, 2007 2:39 pm US/Pacific

Cop Shoots, Kills Box Cutter-Wielding Mother
(CBS) HAWTHORNE, Calif. A Hawthorne police officer and a four-year-old girl both required more than 30 stitches for cuts inflicted by the girl's mother as she cut both with a box-cutter, which prompted officers to shoot and kill the woman on Sunday, police say.

"My baby, my baby," wailed Mertis Curry, the dead woman's mother, as police investigated the scene.

The older woman told local news crews that she had begged police not to shoot Elaine Coleman, 21, as her daughter remained locked in a bedroom, holding the four-year-old, threatening suicide and brandishing the razor-sharp cutter.

"They really didn't have to do that, but I know they're gun happy," Curry said.

However, deputies said the police officers opened fire when Coleman slashed the little girl and a police officer. Coleman was waving a box-cutter and unaffected by a Taser gun.

Los Angeles County sheriff's deputies are investigating the shooting of the woman by the unnamed Hawthorne officer, who was sent to a house in the 14400 block of Lemoli Avenue around 12:50 a.m. today to break up a fight between Coleman and her mother, said Deputy Oscar Butao.

When officers arrived, they were told that Coleman had locked herself in the upstairs bedroom and yelled that she was going to commit suicide, Butao said.

Two officers entered the bedroom and saw Coleman holding her 4-year-old daughter hostage with a box-cutter knife. The officers told her to drop the knife and release the girl, but she refused, Butao said.

The Hawthorne officers first used a Taser stun-gun, which did not affect the woman, the deputy said.

As the police officers attempted to restrain Coleman, she slashed her daughter and both officers several times, Butao said.

In order to stop Coleman, one of the officers fired two shots, the
deputy said. She was pronounced dead at the scene.

"They just didn't have to kill my daughter," Curry said. "I begged them not to kill my baby but they did it anyway."

strat81
September 10, 2007, 04:55 PM
officers first used a Taser stun-gun, which did not affect the woman

Speculation... PCP?

WuzYoungOnceToo
September 10, 2007, 04:58 PM
hoppy waits patiently for 10,000 angry replys about police making it home at night. and how we should always blindly obey the police at all times. ( the latter coming from a bunch of people who will also have "from my cold dead hands!" and the like in thier sigs)
So...instead of waiting for someone else to make an asinine, simple-minded comment you've decide to pre-emptively issue your own.

McCall911
September 10, 2007, 05:00 PM
I also think it was a justifiable shooting in this sad, sad situation. Obviously the physical route had been tried and didn't work.

Bazooka Joe71
September 10, 2007, 05:01 PM
In hoppy's defense, he hadn't seen the whole story, I'd imagine he'll change his tune now.

As others have posted about the mental rehibilitaion the cop will have to endure, I don't agree...That cop should see himself has a hero and nothing less. He tried to reason with the crazy junky, couldn't, and did what he had to do to save the innocent child.

Granted, I've never killed anyone so I have no idea what its like. If I was in his shoes, I wouldn't feel sorry for anything.

Flak_Jakett
September 10, 2007, 05:02 PM
there are plenty of examples of unarmed cops dealing with knives or using thier baton to deal with it

Happy: I guarantee you those officers dealt with knives unarmed and with batons, because they for some reason couldn't use their guns. If they could have used their guns they would have.

I hate seeing stories like this. I've seen several lately. They all had to do with mentally disturbed teens or teens high on drugs. They are unfortunate events, but the police being called to the scene are left with no choice but to use deadly force.

The Viking
September 10, 2007, 05:04 PM
Speculation... PCP?
Wouldn't any stimulant give the user the same resistance? Besides, I thought Tasers were supposed to work even on people who are high on stimulants...

.cheese.
September 10, 2007, 05:12 PM
At first I was going to say they should have tasered her first, but then I saw that they did do that.

She had a knife, dangerous enough to potentially kill somebody, and demonstrated a willingness to use it.

I would have liked to have seen them use pepper spray even though it would have hit the baby (so long as we can rule out that doing such wouldn't potentially kill the baby or cause significant harm other than temporary pain).... however considering the circumstances I doubt that would have worked either.

but ultimately as much as I don't like the outcome of this story at all, I can see that it was a really bad situation with very little potential for a happy outcome.

Moral of the story seems to be "don't do drugs"

sad... so very sad.

Zoogster
September 10, 2007, 05:27 PM
People involving the system upset with the result?
Happens all the time in domestic situations. Spouse/parent calls police because they want the police to give them some additional authority in thier family issues, and then the police or the law does not end up working out as the person intended. They then complain about how the system deals with thier family issues.
In many places the local authorities encourage this relationship because it gives them authority above and beyond what would otherwise be viable or legal. A parent for example working with probation gives the law what is essentialy an inside witness against criminal individuals. They make the parent or spouse believe they have the best interest of the individual in mind, but in reality thier prime concern is holding the individual accountable for anything possible. So they encourage pressing charges in any and all situations, and are going to try to gain a foothold in any household they can.

I have known familes with children who have had similar problems to eachother, and usualy the one that got the law involved earlier turned out worse.
I know one who had a son that was a little bit of a pothead, missed school on occasion and had parents that tried to work with him, eventualy he got a decent job and moved out and has been successful last I heard.
Another with a kid who had a violent temper and would punch holes in a wall or door on occasion, who was very successful in school and a star athlete who had parents work with him and he eventualy went on to college and has done well.
Another family with the same type of kid called the police and was encouraged to get him on probation to give the parents additional leverage in situations. This got him a record, and caused him to go from a kid with an occasional problem, that did well otherwise and had good people in thier life, to one making friends in juvenile detention facilities and surrounded by gang members and other criminals within the system. Now they have grown to be a real problem and there is not much hope for them anymore.

So in general involving the system in family affairs is a stupid solution. If you need police in a marriage for example to keep the peace, then what you really need is to move on in life.
With children it is more of a judgement call because you cannot just move on. However in all cases once the law is involved the quality of life for all involved will go downhill.
If you think making someone under your roof a felon, or even just having them get probation for a misdemeanor is not going to effect your privacy and lower your quality of life then you are wrong. Someone in a household with such a person has almost the same level of scrutiny and infringement as the person actualy in trouble.

The system however encourages it because it gives more freedom to law enforcement in general. Any household with even a single individual on some sort of probation/parole etc no longer requires a warrant or the same level of legal restraint to deal with. So the more households the better in the eyes of the law.
Just like everything it is also a career and a "business" in that it employs more and more people who promote its use. Just as lawyers promote the use of lawsuits, many peace officers (police, probation, parole, corrections, etc) promote the use of the correctional system.

Police are for dangerous situations, this particular case seems to qualify. Once one calls in the system however thier say in matters no longer counts. She involved police with her daughter, what happens after that point is not in her control. The system is not an entity that cares for the people involved, it is a big machine and oils its own wheels. Invite it into your home at your own peril. I say anyone that would require you to invite it into your home should no longer be in your home.

I am reminded of a recent case not long ago of some hmong kid that fired a shot into the ceiling when the parents said he could not use the car. They called the police who snuck in and shot him dead as he was armed and dangerous. That event was memorable because of the amount of shots fired to put him down, it was a lot. The parents in that case were all upset that the police did not deal with thier precious kid the way they wanted when they called the police on a 'man with a gun', who has shown a willingness to use it. The police care mainly about going home that night, and are not going to take the precautions a love one might feel could be taken first. That amount of risk is not acceptable to them.

torpid
September 10, 2007, 05:30 PM
definatly could have ended better.

didnt need to shoot the woman. if your close enough to get cut im sure your close enough to land a solid right hook. some times brute force is whats called for

It's a shame you weren't there to handle it better.

CountGlockula
September 10, 2007, 05:38 PM
One less crack head single mom out on the streets.

Yes, that's not very high road, but there are just folks out there that just want to injure or kill innocent lives. Glad those Hawthorne cops did their sworn duty.

Officers'Wife
September 10, 2007, 05:41 PM
Hi Zoog,

And people call me cynical! Unfortunately I have to agree.

When we hire guardians to protect us who will protect us from the guardians?

Selena

CountGlockula
September 10, 2007, 05:54 PM
Great commentary Zoog: I quoted it so many can read it.

Zoogster -
People involving the system upset with the result?
Happens all the time in domestic situations. Spouse/parent calls police because they want the police to give them some additional authority in thier family issues, and then the police or the law does not end up working out as the person intended. They then complain about how the system deals with thier family issues.
In many places the local authorities encourage this relationship because it gives them authority above and beyond what would otherwise be viable or legal. A parent for example working with probation gives the law what is essentialy an inside witness against criminal individuals. They make the parent or spouse believe they have the best interest of the individual in mind, but in reality thier prime concern is holding the individual accountable for anything possible. So they encourage pressing charges in any and all situations, and are going to try to gain a foothold in any household they can.

I have known familes with children who have had similar problems to eachother, and usualy the one that got the law involved earlier turned out worse.
I know one who had a son that was a little bit of a pothead, missed school on occasion and had parents that tried to work with him, eventualy he got a decent job and moved out and has been successful last I heard.
Another with a kid who had a violent temper and would punch holes in a wall or door on occasion, who was very successful in school and a star athlete who had parents work with him and he eventualy went on to college and has done well.
Another family with the same type of kid called the police and was encouraged to get him on probation to give the parents additional leverage in situations. This got him a record, and caused him to go from a kid with an occasional problem, that did well otherwise and had good people in thier life, to one making friends in juvenile detention facilities and surrounded by gang members and other criminals within the system. Now they have grown to be a real problem and there is not much hope for them anymore.

So in general involving the system in family affairs is a stupid solution. If you need police in a marriage for example to keep the peace, then what you really need is to move on in life.
With children it is more of a judgement call because you cannot just move on. However in all cases once the law is involved the quality of life for all involved will go downhill.
If you think making someone under your roof a felon, or even just having them get probation for a misdemeanor is not going to effect your privacy and lower your quality of life then you are wrong. Someone in a household with such a person has almost the same level of scrutiny and infringement as the person actualy in trouble.

The system however encourages it because it gives more freedom to law enforcement in general. Any household with even a single individual on some sort of probation/parole etc no longer requires a warrant or the same level of legal restraint to deal with. So the more households the better in the eyes of the law.
Just like everything it is also a career and a "business" in that it employs more and more people who promote its use. Just as lawyers promote the use of lawsuits, many peace officers (police, probation, parole, corrections, etc) promote the use of the correctional system.

Police are for dangerous situations, this particular case seems to qualify. Once one calls in the system however thier say in matters no longer counts. She involved police with her daughter, what happens after that point is not in her control. The system is not an entity that cares for the people involved, it is a big machine and oils its own wheels. Invite it into your home at your own peril. I say anyone that would require you to invite it into your home should no longer be in your home.

I am reminded of a recent case not long ago of some hmong kid that fired a shot into the ceiling when the parents said he could not use the car. They called the police who snuck in and shot him dead as he was armed and dangerous. That event was memorable because of the amount of shots fired to put him down, it was a lot. The parents in that case were all upset that the police did not deal with thier precious kid the way they wanted when they called the police on a 'man with a gun', who has shown a willingness to use it. The police care mainly about going home that night, and are not going to take the precautions a love one might feel could be taken first. That amount of risk is not acceptable to them.

Ohio Rifleman
September 10, 2007, 06:18 PM
She threatened to kill a baby, harmed the child and harmed the cops. She paid for her actions with her life. Sad, but it had to be done to protect the child. If they hadn't shot her, it would likely have turned out worse. That child would probably be dead, and so, likely, would be the mom. Sometimes you have to pick the choice that sucks the least.

The Unknown User
September 10, 2007, 07:25 PM
I think the police officers handled the situation correctly. It's unfortunate that police officers come under such a great deal of scrutiny for performing their duties.

Checkman
September 10, 2007, 07:44 PM
I'm a cop. It will be seven years in October.I've experienced my share of fights, using tasers, being pepper sprayed by other officers (incidentally) then having to wrestle with suspects, pointing my handgun and shotgun at suspects, having knives and firearms pointed at me, and so on.

The standard rule is anyone within 21 feet of you with an edged weapon is a very real and deadly threat. That woman not only had an edged weapon within 21 feet of the officers, but was holding a hostage who she had just cut. That situation was way beyond fighting a Saturday night drunk at the local watering hole. Which in itself is pretty dammed dangerous.

In my opinion they actually placed the baby in greaterdanger by using their tasers. But they did that because of folks like Hoppy. Those officers acted to save a life. That woman had escalated the situation to that point. It's called the Use of Force Continium.

You have to see a victim of a edged weapon attack to believe it. The carnage is unreal. Don't believe me? Alexander the Great, the Romans, the Persians, the Islamic Calphites and the Mongols did not have firearms and they killed millions with swords, spears, arrows and knives.

Dammed if you, dammed if you don't. Grandma will try to sue. Hopefully she won't get anything, but she propbaly will get that kid. Wow. Look at the great job she did with her daughter.:banghead:

Hoppy are you an instigator or perhaps are unaware of how fast somebody with a knife can attack? If she had killed that child those officers would really be getting roasted right now.

Tharg
September 10, 2007, 08:14 PM
No its good that they come under scrutiny. If they didn't, then one has to remember that they ARE human too... (even if for some reason people don't remember that they are even w/ the scrutiny) unchecked power sucks for those that don't have it :) Most cops i've met have been pretty damn good people. And even those will say ya there is that (insert explicative here) every now and again...

Hell, cops did better than me, if that had been my kid, i don't own a taser... (dot dot dot)

Have to agree with Zoog... people also forget that the cops are doing their JOB... aka.. just like accounting or computer work or janitorial ect... the difference being they could get killed/injured for doing it... how many of you would feel sorry for the spreadsheet if the accountant mangled it... hehe not apples and apples i know... but thats the whole (theoretical) point :)

MechAg94
September 10, 2007, 08:17 PM
being an armed threat should not warrent being shot on site. i understand the officers approach. he wanted to get that baby to safety ASAP. and maybe in this situation it was the best approach. but it should not be blindly accepted that if you have a knife. or even if you cut a cop for making a reach should you be shot. theres too many ways this could have ended better

What a rediculous statement. The first sentence alone should cause you to voluntarily put on the dunce hat and go sit in the corner. :D I sincerely hope that was just a poor choice of words. A real armed threat to my life can and will be met with deadly force and the law supports me in that. I can only assume you think "armed threat" is some nebulous term that means something less than what I think it means.

Gunnerpalace
September 10, 2007, 08:36 PM
Officers did what was right, and now hoppy, my father is a LEO he just told me that in training they showed him a film of a knife fighter who can kill you within 10 to 20 FEET and not throwing it either just a charge. a person on drugs with a knife is the biggest threat you can possibly have, if I was the officer I might have shot sooner.

john1911
September 10, 2007, 09:01 PM
Granny is seeing $$$$ now. She thinks she should get paid by the city.

Hoppy590
September 10, 2007, 09:19 PM
ok everyone

they already made the dumb move of getting to close. what im saying. is they were already close. instead of grabing the baby they should have justs knocked her in the face.

yesit'sloaded
September 10, 2007, 09:22 PM
I see stuff like this all the time where I live. It usually is followed by a news report in which the criminals relatives say "my baby didn't do no wrong and didn't hurt nobody" as video tape shows the criminal shooting it out with police, breaking into a store, and their long arrest record. This should also be noted to those who want to carry a taser instead of a gun. Non lethal weapons are just that, non lethal, and it should be noted that a knife is a very deadly weapon. The officers waited until they were hurt before they shot, that is the only thing I would do differently.

tinygnat219
September 10, 2007, 09:30 PM
It is situations like this where I think it's safe to say that cops HATE domestic calls.

1911Tuner
September 10, 2007, 09:38 PM
didnt need to shoot the woman. if your close enough to get cut im sure your close enough to land a solid right hook. some times brute force is whats called for

Yeah. Well...If ya ever face a wired-up hophead with a blade, lemme know how that works for ya. It didn't work well for me, and I've got the scars to prove it...and I was pretty well accomplished in boxing at the time, having fought in organized amateur competition for over three years. 65 stitches before I was able to "win" the fight.

cassandrasdaddy
September 10, 2007, 09:50 PM
hoppy? fight much? ever fight someone who was high? real life is very different than the movies and even more different than ones imagination

Noxx
September 10, 2007, 10:03 PM
So...instead of waiting for someone else to make an asinine, simple-minded comment you've decide to pre-emptively issue your own.

Attack the idea, not the poster... that's not appropriate for this forum.

IMHO The police in this instance did the best they could. Those who are familiar with my posting record know I'm no fan of the P.D. in general, but in this case, I don't see how one could ask for much more.

The officers used the less-than-lethal force available to them, willingly put themselves in harms way ( and were harmed for their trouble) in order to resolve the threat to the child without taking a life. When those steps failed they employed deadly force.

Nobody wants an encounter to end that way, but it really is about a textbook example of how to do it if you have to do it. They tried everything, then made the decision between the life of an innocent and the life of an aggressor.

Hoppy590
September 10, 2007, 10:03 PM
ok anyone else got something to say while its still piss on hoppy time? anything at all. insults about my mother? question of my manhood? at this point i really dont care.

i try to say reachign for the knife/baby was a bad idea. and would been better off trying to take the person down. yall piss on me

i try to explain. more pissing

i even suggest that because some one died, it was not the best that could ahve came out of it, little optimistic, maybe idealistic thinking. the yellow stream continues

Doggy Daddy
September 10, 2007, 10:07 PM
Whoa! Easy there, Hoppy!

I thought you said you were ready for the "10,000 angry replys about police making it home at night. and how we should always blindly obey the police at all times. ( the latter coming from a bunch of people who will also have "from my cold dead hands!" and the like in thier sigs)"

:D

Hoppy590
September 10, 2007, 10:17 PM
im not worked up. i just accept that iv apearently lost respect in this thread, and wont attempt to argue my points anymore. thats all.

Officers'Wife
September 10, 2007, 10:29 PM
Hi Hoppy,

I have not "lost respect" for you or your posts. I just believe you are very very wrong in this instance. Disagreement is not disrespect that I'm aware of.

Now, let me see if I have your point right...

You are not happy with the loss of life- neither am I but I don't really see the officers in question had any other choice.

You believe the officers should have continued with brute force even though their earlier attempts had not only fail but resulted in injury to themselves and the hostage. I believe such an act would have eventually resulted in the death of the infant.

I really am at a loss to what else the officers could have done to subdue the suspect without putting the child in even greater risk. A risk I believe was unacceptable after the first attempt at brute strength. Since I'm here to learn other veiwpoints what was the alternative that wouldn't have created that greater risk I feel justified the shooting?

Selena

The Wiry Irishman
September 10, 2007, 10:45 PM
When I first read this, my first thought was "Wow, that was excessive." Then I had a quick think, read again, and changed my mind. The little kid needed 40 stitches. That's a rough evening an interesting story for an adult, but on a child, especially one that small, that's potentially life-threatening. Once that wound opened up on the child, the officers didn't have time to screw around wrestling with her, every minute would count, and to their credit, they must have tried anyway since they were cut. At that point they only option they had to save the life of the child was to use maximum possible force on the mother. It still sucks that it had to turn out that way, but I don't think there was any wrongdoing on the part of the surviving parties.

camslam
September 10, 2007, 10:50 PM
Hoppy: I'm not trying to pile on, but let's be realistic.

they already made the dumb move of getting to close. what im saying. is they were already close. instead of grabing the baby they should have justs knocked her in the face.

It was a bedroom, how much distance could they keep? I mean come on. Also if you are interested I am happy to send you some photos of a cop that got involved with an edged weapon and it was not pretty at all. I'm not squeamish about much, but these photos made me shudder.

On a sidenote, you already know, if you are going to make controversial statements, you better be ready for the heat. I would say most of it in this case is warranted. But as with most things in life, we move on. I'm just glad you have the cajones to say what you think, I respect that.

LightningJoe
September 10, 2007, 10:53 PM
Hand vs knife? No
Ordinary night stick vs knife? No
Pepper spray on dopehead? No

The cops gave her more of chance than she could have expected. If it had been a man with the knife and the baby, he wouldn't have gotten half a second. They actually tried to disarm her. Dumb, maybe, but a vestige of gallantry.


Anyway, pull a weapon on the cops, expect to get shot. 2+2=4. Duh.

phonesysphonesys
September 10, 2007, 11:19 PM
Officer'sWife

You are my kind of woman. I agree with you on trying to fight someone who has an edged weapon. It can get nasty. I would have fired sooner.
God speed and keep your husband safe. Tell em thanks.

Semper Fi

WuzYoungOnceToo
September 11, 2007, 08:31 AM
ok anyone else got something to say while its still piss on hoppy time? anything at all. insults about my mother? question of my manhood? at this point i really dont care.
All of the responses to you have been directed exclusively at your topical arguments. Don't assume that your need to resort to childish nonsense is shared by others.

i try to say reachign for the knife/baby was a bad idea. and would been better off trying to take the person down. yall piss on me
If that's actually what you'd said then the responses would likely have been different.

i try to explain. more pissing

i even suggest that because some one died, it was not the best that could ahve came out of it
Except that's not at all what you said. You suggested that the outcome would have been better had the LEOs in question made different choices (even though you then inconsistently go on to admit, "maybe in this situation it was the best approach"). What you continue to fail to grasp is that the situation ended the way it did due to the choices made by the mother.

You then insisted on making a stupid comment about the nature of the people who you expected to receive replies from, even before the replies came. And you wonder why you're taking heat.

ilbob
September 11, 2007, 08:47 AM
After the fact you can always come up with something the cops could have or should have done better. But the bottom line is they did not have hours or days to think it over before having to do something. They had at most a few seconds. Being as they have no super powers, they did what they could with what they had available to them at that instant.

One might argue that they made a mistake in being too aggressive as to how they handled the situation in the first place, and I might agree with that, but I wasn't there, and they were. People who are police officers tend to be aggressive by nature, and that is unlikely to change, and I am not sure it should.

All kinds of bad things happen to you when you drug yourself up. Most of them are your own fault, not the people that get sent to try and salvage something out of a bad situation you created.

romma
September 11, 2007, 08:57 AM
The cop should have used his super duper training skills and shot the knife out of her hand hitting only the knife and not the hand of the person holding it... :rolleyes:

1911Tuner
September 11, 2007, 09:17 AM
All kinds of bad things happen to you when you drug yourself up. Most of them are your own fault, not the people that get sent to try and salvage something out of a bad situation you created.

And that...right there...is the bottom line. People who work at their own undoing...and very often work hard at it...should expect an undoing at any moment instead of being surprised and even outraged by it.

Life is sometimes hard. Life is usually harder when you're stupid. Don't be stupid.

pax
September 11, 2007, 10:06 AM
I will state this as simply as possible, I expect LEOs to obey the laws they have sworn to uphold. I do not expect them to put their lives or the lives of others in unnecessary danger to fulfill some twisted ideal of "fairness."


That is a quote worth repeating.

pax

cnorman18
September 11, 2007, 10:40 AM
It's easy to sit in one's armchair and pass judgment on what these officers "should have" done. It's quite another when you are faced with a deranged woman and a badly slashed child, are badly slashed yourself, and have literally seconds to react in order to prevent further violence.

Truly, even from the comfort of my armchair, I can find no grounds for criticism of these officers. Should they have attempted to use nonlethal force? Yes; and they did. Should they have waited until actual violence, as opposed to the threat of violence, occurred? That is questionable advice--but they did that, too.

This was, about as clearly as can be imagined, a "judgment call", and no one but the officers involved was in a position to make that call. If I had been in that room, I would not have had that right: it was not my job to deal with the threat, but theirs.

As Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes observed, "Detached reflection cannot be demanded in the presence of an upraised knife." that is particularly true in this case. With an enraged junkie with a knife standing over a child who may bleed out in seconds, one does not have the luxury of sitting down to think and plan. One must act, and NOW. Analyses given after the fact are irrelevant and, frankly, a bit precious.

Hoppy, I saw no comments about your mother, and nothing remotely resembling urine. I saw reasoned disagreement and nothing more, though sometimes emphatically stated. You said that you expected as much, and more, in your original post. Why complain when you get it? As my father told me more than once, "If you go looking for trouble, don't whine when you find some."

MakAttak
September 11, 2007, 10:42 AM
Life is sometimes hard. Life is usually harder when you're stupid. Don't be stupid.

1911Tuner- that sums it up perfectly, I hope you don't mind if I borrow that for my sig... :)

1911Tuner
September 11, 2007, 10:51 AM
Have at it, Mak. I borrowed it myself...from somewhere...

ilbob
September 11, 2007, 11:08 AM
something else to consider.

the cops were called because the person making the call (perhaps correctly) decided that force might well be necessary. thats by and large what cops are there to do - apply force.

if she had wanted someone to come and pray for her daughter she should have called a priest. you cannot expect people whose training is oriented toward the use of force in almost every situation to not use it when a desperate situation occurs.

Elza
September 11, 2007, 11:12 AM
I harbor no great love for cops. However, I fail to see how anyone could criticize or question the officers in this instance. I think they showed great restraint and judgment in a really bad situation. As stated by others, I would have been inclined to shoot sooner than they did!

Dravur
September 11, 2007, 11:24 AM
the officers were close enough for her to cut them and she was carving away at the baby. The officer shot to stop her from making a woodcarving out of the kid. Sounds like a good shoot and hopefully the kid will have a better life now. Probably need to keep the kid away from granny as well. Does not look like she can raise a kid.

hcddog
September 11, 2007, 12:04 PM
Don't bring a knife to a gunfight...

Don't bring a knife to a knifefight, either.

anygunanywhere
September 11, 2007, 12:35 PM
Cops - "Give us the baby and drop the knife!"

Drugged Out Woman - "No!"

Cops - Bang Bang

Drugged Out Woman - Sound of Drugged Out Body hitting floor.

End of problem.

Anygun

Noxx
September 11, 2007, 12:39 PM
How about someone closes this thread before it gets anymore uncouth?

Larry Ashcraft
September 11, 2007, 12:43 PM
This thread has devolved into second guessing and namecalling.

Enough.

If you enjoyed reading about "People Call PD, then complain.." here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!