Cops point gun at man thinking he is sniper

Status
Not open for further replies.
:p I think he is a bit slow to have 5 GUNS pointed at him and to just keep aiming his "sniper rifle" at the police.
 
I can't say anything high road about that video.

I don't think the cameraman is too bright.
 
Wow, if you're filming a shootout it's reasonable to look like a sniper, but the moment the cops get involved you need to explain to them what's going on. It may even be a good idea to call them and let them know in advance.
 
Wow, if you're filming a shootout it's reasonable to look like a sniper

I initially had that impression too. However, I don't think it is correct. I think it is just a guy who goes around with a camcorder recording every day life, one of those artsy types, not a guy acting in a film production or filming actors.


So you have a guy minding his own business videotaping stuff...and cops start pointing rifles at him? Hello! I don't see any scopes on those guns, so it isn't like the cops are being unsafe but utilizing the scope to get a better look at what he is doing. They are just pointing rifles at him.

Why no attempt to communicate with him? Shouldn't they be telling either a real or a mistaken sniper 'put down the weapon!'

In the past, police misheavior has been caught on tape, Rodney King is just one of them. Such taping is sometimes the only way to show what really happened, sometimes the 'thin blue line' protects cops it shouldn't. How many gun confiscations in New Orleans went unvideotaped, and hence unnoticed by all but the person violated?

It seems very convenient to me for the cops to be able to claim that a recording device like a camcorder 'looked like a gun'. You all know if you use your gun in self defense, when the cops show up put it down and put your hands in the air. Are we supposed to do the same thing with cameras, especially as video cameras are one of the best weapons civilians have against bad police who overstep their authority.
 
There are a numeber of reason that police may have believed he had a rifle, from it being called in that way to their own observations.

I wouldn't second guess them too much. What would you have them do? What I'd have them do is point rifles at the potential threat while others responded to clear the situation. I bet that's exactly what was happening.

As to the videographer, poor form for realizing his activities where illiciting a first responder call-out and making no attempt to clarify things.
 
if you look at that video, the two cops on the pole were fricking FAR away. far enough away so that obviously they could not tell if he was holding a camcorder or... what kind of long gun looks like a camcorder? PS90? RPG?

in any case, what were the cops planning to do? if he made any "sudden move", were they going to start shooting at him from what looks like 300 yards away? would you take that shot, given that the likelihood of missing is extremely high and that you are in the middle of a city? and what kind of cover is a light pole, especially given that the "sniper" is staring straight at you?

it looks like to me that someone called in a "sniper". the cops responded by breaking out their nifty AR15s but the realized that they couldn't see squat. since they'd already broken out the guns and sent out the radio calls for backup, they'd feel pretty stupid if they just went back to their cars, sat down, and observed the "sniper" from the leather seats.

so instead they make a big display of looking like they've got the situation under control so that when the supervisor shows up to tell them that they can stand down (which im pretty sure they figured out pretty quickly) they'll look like they're hard at work doing their job.

this isn't a critque of the cops, just what I think they did to avoid embarassment. now here's my critique - why weren't any of the cops equipped with a pair of field glasses? you'd think that optical equipment would be standard in any cop car...
 
I agree with silverlance, that's pretty far for an iron sighted AR when there is likely other civilians in the neighboring units.

Many agencies don't even allow their trained snipers with scoped bolt actions to engage targets at more then 100-200 yards, I don't think the patrol officers ROE would allow them to use none scoped ARs at that range so close to other civilians.
 
Did you read that it was a shooting which left 1 dead and 5 wounded .. I don't think they were trying to "make a big display" ..
 
The guy running the video should have been calling 911 rather than his buddy...

The cops, though, weren't all that much smarter. Had the guy been a sniper, those 2 would have been dead. Exposing 90% of your body is not cover or concealment.

c2k
 
The cops, though, weren't all that much smarter. Had the guy been a sniper, those 2 would have been dead. Exposing 90% of your body is not cover or concealment.

Agreed, for a good sniper that would have been 2-3 easy shots, compared to the very very difficult shot from those patrol carbines.
 
"I'm no Carlos Hathcock but I wonder if I can put a round through that sniper's lens with irons from here. That IS a scope right? He's on the phone, maybe with the negotiator."
The kid running the camera was an idiot for staring down a barrel and thinking it's funny. The cops were idiots for exposing their bodies so much without the ability to return fire accurately (and had it been someone who knows how to use a rifle, there wouldn't be a chance to return fire).
 
would you take that shot, given that the likelihood of missing is extremely high and that you are in the middle of a city?

Maybe WE would not, but many Police have shown an alarming disregard for where their collective rounds will end up after shooting.
 
If the cops thought there was a remote possibility that the camera was a rifle two thing would have happened: 1. the cops would have gotten very small, and very flexible and very fast (like marsupials), 2. they would have shot back the camera sniper.

It went down like it always does:

1. Cops did not know what it was at first.
2. Cops realize it is not a threat but realize they have just pointed a firearm at someone, a felony, cops need to justify their actions.
3. Cops do not get to play with ARs a lot so do not miss opportunity to use ARs on people.

As silverlance said, it's a big display to justify their actions and their budget. Is they city going to let them keep their ARs if they never use them? Of course not. Use it or lose it.:)
 
Your very biased opinion and attitude are quite evident.

The police are in the middle of an incident. This idiot decides to try and film it. The police are covering what they believe could be a possible sniper. From that distance a person holding something up to his face could look like a person with a rifle, depending on how much is in view.

Exactly what "crime" did the police commit and get away with???
 
Video cameras don't typically look like guns though. Also, wouldn't a sniper generally make himself less conspicuous than the cameraman? None of it makes sense.

Were they perhaps aiming at a window below him or something where they thought the real sniper was?
 
Akodo said:
In the past, police misheavior has been caught on tape, Rodney King is just one of them. Such taping is sometimes the only way to show what really happened, sometimes the 'thin blue line' protects cops it shouldn't. How many gun confiscations in New Orleans went unvideotaped, and hence unnoticed by all but the person violated?

How exactly was the Rodney King incident "police misbehavior"?
 
were they going to start shooting at him from what looks like 300 yards away?
The camera man stated that the officers were "like 100 yards away"
Not that far for a gun deigned to have an effective target range of 550 meters
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top