jacketch
Member
My take on this one is that they shot him because he had been using his cell phone while he was driving. Sounds justifiable to me!
Cops shoot guy walking away in the back after pointing a cell phone at them.
- Thread starter WonderNine
- Start date
- Status
bobdobalina
Member
Bad situation.
I normally don't post, just lurk.
But after seeing the three videos I have to side with the Cops on this one. The first two videos look real bad for the Cops. But watch the third video. The officer on the right does not begin shooting until he sees his partner duck. Clearly he thinks he is defending his partner from something. Imagine seeing a friend or loved one go down out of the corner of your eye after some crackhead points something in his or her direction, this is how this officer must have felt. He sees the perp turn and point something and his partner goes down, his instinct is to protect his partner and neutralize the threat FIRST, and ask questions later. How does he know in the space of like 1 second that the perp didn't turn back around to reload, pull out another gun, etc.
After the cop on the right starts shooting, the one on the left begins shooting too. I imagine what is going through his mind is that something definitely is wrong because my fellow cop is shooting, I'd better assist.
I normally don't post, just lurk.
But after seeing the three videos I have to side with the Cops on this one. The first two videos look real bad for the Cops. But watch the third video. The officer on the right does not begin shooting until he sees his partner duck. Clearly he thinks he is defending his partner from something. Imagine seeing a friend or loved one go down out of the corner of your eye after some crackhead points something in his or her direction, this is how this officer must have felt. He sees the perp turn and point something and his partner goes down, his instinct is to protect his partner and neutralize the threat FIRST, and ask questions later. How does he know in the space of like 1 second that the perp didn't turn back around to reload, pull out another gun, etc.
After the cop on the right starts shooting, the one on the left begins shooting too. I imagine what is going through his mind is that something definitely is wrong because my fellow cop is shooting, I'd better assist.
280PLUS
Member
some people just don't understand...
the police are hopped up from dealing with this guy, plus theyre scared and justifiably so.
add a perp acting stupid and it leads to just what happened here.
looks like a gun to me, looks like he's pointing, ready to fire,
i didnt watch the video but i say if the cops fired a little late, they must have thought for sure it was a gun and didnt want a guy who would threaten with a gun to get away.
works for me...
note for you all, comply with the police in a courteous manner and you stand little chance of the wind whistling through your body
perp got noone to blame but himself...
the police are hopped up from dealing with this guy, plus theyre scared and justifiably so.
add a perp acting stupid and it leads to just what happened here.
looks like a gun to me, looks like he's pointing, ready to fire,
i didnt watch the video but i say if the cops fired a little late, they must have thought for sure it was a gun and didnt want a guy who would threaten with a gun to get away.
works for me...
note for you all, comply with the police in a courteous manner and you stand little chance of the wind whistling through your body
perp got noone to blame but himself...
P95Carry
Moderator Emeritus
Many points of view here .... covering about all aspects ..... I would say that the assessment of the ''justified'' nature of the homicide could carry on ad infinitum!
I will tho just add one thing ........ it behoves ANYONE who is apprehended to do everything possible to avoid such an incident. This means .... CO-OPERATE ......... hands open and empty .... legs spread ........ even go to ground. if the guy was high on something then that was his bad ... the fact that he did not sensibly comply was his bad ...... beyond that there is much that can be called ''unfortunate''.
There are cases where people have brandished even plastic toy guns and been shot up ... simply cos they did not take things seriously if challenged. The average cop is as much in fear of death or injury as any of us ... and despite training .... will still be as he feels it ''in extremis'' ....
I'm not actually taking sides . no point ... too contentious. Only making a few of my own points.
I will tho just add one thing ........ it behoves ANYONE who is apprehended to do everything possible to avoid such an incident. This means .... CO-OPERATE ......... hands open and empty .... legs spread ........ even go to ground. if the guy was high on something then that was his bad ... the fact that he did not sensibly comply was his bad ...... beyond that there is much that can be called ''unfortunate''.
There are cases where people have brandished even plastic toy guns and been shot up ... simply cos they did not take things seriously if challenged. The average cop is as much in fear of death or injury as any of us ... and despite training .... will still be as he feels it ''in extremis'' ....
I'm not actually taking sides . no point ... too contentious. Only making a few of my own points.
If the suspect in question has the means, opportunity, and intent to cause grievous bodily harm or death to myself or another and I believe there is no lesser means of force appropriate at the time then I may shoot him. Yes, even in the back.
If the suspect in question is fleeing, but still meets the above criteria then I may shoot. Again, yes, even in the back.
I would have to believe and be able to articulate the above.
---
Assuming for a minute that a non LEO was caught on tape in an identical situation:
I this instance a non LEO would clearly be justified in shooting, up until the BG began to flee. After that a non LEO may be justified, but faces a much more difficult time successfully articulating why you did not just let the BG go. You do not, after all, have the same job description as LEOs tasked with apprehending BGs.
---
I bet that if we DID NOT know the gun was a phone, and posted the video and pictures as a thread entitled "ID the BG's pistol" that quite a few folks would post their opinion on the matter, and that next to none of them, if any, would include something along the lines of "that's a cell phone" in their guesses. But I could be wrong. Now imagine your one of the cops.
If the suspect in question is fleeing, but still meets the above criteria then I may shoot. Again, yes, even in the back.
I would have to believe and be able to articulate the above.
---
Assuming for a minute that a non LEO was caught on tape in an identical situation:
I this instance a non LEO would clearly be justified in shooting, up until the BG began to flee. After that a non LEO may be justified, but faces a much more difficult time successfully articulating why you did not just let the BG go. You do not, after all, have the same job description as LEOs tasked with apprehending BGs.
---
I bet that if we DID NOT know the gun was a phone, and posted the video and pictures as a thread entitled "ID the BG's pistol" that quite a few folks would post their opinion on the matter, and that next to none of them, if any, would include something along the lines of "that's a cell phone" in their guesses. But I could be wrong. Now imagine your one of the cops.
CR_OPSO,
I understand the "apprehending hte fleeing felon" bit as part of a police officer's job description. I wasn't there, I can't make the same judgment calls under the same conditions as they did, but the use of deadly force to apprehend an individual - even a fleeing felon - should be the last choice, right?
Family eating one evening in their back yard (it's a nice day). Wile E. Cokehead runs into the yard, whips out his cell-phone and starts waving it around like a pistol.
Joe Citizen draws down on Wile E. Cokehead and tells him to drop what's in his hand.
Wile E. Cokehead, seeing that things aren't going his way decides to walk away - unfortunately sort of in the direction that Joe Citizen's wife is.
Joe Citizen empties his pistol into Wile E. Cokehead's back.
Is the shooting justified? Or should Joe Citizen have found another way of handling the situation?
Haven't watched the videos so I'm not sure exactly how this situation went down, but I've seen two seperate arguments justifying the cops' shoot.
1. He had a cell that he was brandishing as if it were a gun. Cops felt threatened, so they shot.
2. He was running away and they had to shoot him to apprehend him.
Argument 1 makes perfect sense to me, but there are quite a few people here who have watched the video who claim that they didn't shoot while they were in immediate preceived danger. Then argument 2 seems to apply, except every description I've heard seemed to imply that he was walking away (not running, but walking) at the time the shots were fired, thus showing that the officers might have had a bit more time to deal with the situation using less-lethal methods where "less-lethal" describes just about anything not including a volley of handgun fire.
Perceived defense of a parter ... hmmm ... I could see that, I guess. I'll have to watch the videos.
Like I said, I'll lose no sleep over this shoot. The guy was begging to be shot when he called the cops out (so to speak) by pointing his phone at the cops like a gun.
I understand the "apprehending hte fleeing felon" bit as part of a police officer's job description. I wasn't there, I can't make the same judgment calls under the same conditions as they did, but the use of deadly force to apprehend an individual - even a fleeing felon - should be the last choice, right?
How about this:
Family eating one evening in their back yard (it's a nice day). Wile E. Cokehead runs into the yard, whips out his cell-phone and starts waving it around like a pistol.
Joe Citizen draws down on Wile E. Cokehead and tells him to drop what's in his hand.
Wile E. Cokehead, seeing that things aren't going his way decides to walk away - unfortunately sort of in the direction that Joe Citizen's wife is.
Joe Citizen empties his pistol into Wile E. Cokehead's back.
Is the shooting justified? Or should Joe Citizen have found another way of handling the situation?
Haven't watched the videos so I'm not sure exactly how this situation went down, but I've seen two seperate arguments justifying the cops' shoot.
1. He had a cell that he was brandishing as if it were a gun. Cops felt threatened, so they shot.
2. He was running away and they had to shoot him to apprehend him.
Argument 1 makes perfect sense to me, but there are quite a few people here who have watched the video who claim that they didn't shoot while they were in immediate preceived danger. Then argument 2 seems to apply, except every description I've heard seemed to imply that he was walking away (not running, but walking) at the time the shots were fired, thus showing that the officers might have had a bit more time to deal with the situation using less-lethal methods where "less-lethal" describes just about anything not including a volley of handgun fire.
Perceived defense of a parter ... hmmm ... I could see that, I guess. I'll have to watch the videos.
Like I said, I'll lose no sleep over this shoot. The guy was begging to be shot when he called the cops out (so to speak) by pointing his phone at the cops like a gun.
The White Flyer
Member
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2003
- Messages
- 18
Let it be known that after watching this video, I am selling all of my pistols that look exactly like a cell phone. I think this was a bad shooting. The suspect's back was turned, non-lethal force could have been used (bean-bag shotgun?), and why wasn't he pumped full of lead when they first noticed the cell phone and believed they were in danger? Oh well, another civil rights lawsuit coming down the pike...
Last edited by a moderator:
IIRC, in WA, LEO's can use lethal force to stop a fleeing felon.
I have a .wmv file that is too big to upload, that shows the disassembly, assembly, loading and firing of a 32 ACP gun that is housed in a cell phone. Each barrel is fired by pushing a button on the keypad. I'm sure a brief web search can produce a hot link to said video.
This perp presented his "cellphone" in a manner consistant with the use of a known firearm. If he had done that to me, I would have blown his noggin back over his freshly abandoned car.
Decision time... Are you going to let a perp who has established himself as a threat flee into an area (that appears to me on the videos) that is poorly lit, cluttered with obstacles, and populated by who??? Or are you going to make the call to stop him before a hostage situation, or an "at large" situation develops?
I don't have much respect for LEO's at large; too much jack booting, too frequently. However, this event looks like a pretty good call on the officers part. The perp was trying to evade capture. If he had been capped while on his knees, attempting to submit, I'd scream for LEO blood. But that wasn't the case was it?
I have a .wmv file that is too big to upload, that shows the disassembly, assembly, loading and firing of a 32 ACP gun that is housed in a cell phone. Each barrel is fired by pushing a button on the keypad. I'm sure a brief web search can produce a hot link to said video.
This perp presented his "cellphone" in a manner consistant with the use of a known firearm. If he had done that to me, I would have blown his noggin back over his freshly abandoned car.
Decision time... Are you going to let a perp who has established himself as a threat flee into an area (that appears to me on the videos) that is poorly lit, cluttered with obstacles, and populated by who??? Or are you going to make the call to stop him before a hostage situation, or an "at large" situation develops?
I don't have much respect for LEO's at large; too much jack booting, too frequently. However, this event looks like a pretty good call on the officers part. The perp was trying to evade capture. If he had been capped while on his knees, attempting to submit, I'd scream for LEO blood. But that wasn't the case was it?
TheeBadOne
Member
LINK TO CELL PHONE GUN IN USE
Link to "cell phone gun" in use.
http://www.calibrepress.com/newsline/warningart/cellphon.mpg
Link to "cell phone gun" in use.
http://www.calibrepress.com/newsline/warningart/cellphon.mpg
NIGHTWATCH
Member
Im so tired of hearing about people being shot by police who "thought maybe" they had a gun. 
The perp looked like scum, he did struggle at first, and yes, he played cops & robbers with a phone under the light. BUT, THE GUY WAS WALKING AWAY AND THESE COPS HAD THE CHANCE TO BEAT HIM DOWN.
WAIT! He coulda turned around and made a call!!! SHOOT HIM DOWN LIKE AN ANIMAL! FORGET THE FACT THAT HE IS PROBABLY SCARED TO DEATH AND FOR GOOD REASON, THEY SHOT HIM! :banghead:
TAKE AWAY THEIR GUNS, THEIR BADGES AND THROW THE COPS IN JAIL. WHY SHOULD ANYONE CARE ABOUT THEIR LIVES IF THEY HOLD LITTLE REGARD FOR THE LIVES OF OTHERS.
The perp looked like scum, he did struggle at first, and yes, he played cops & robbers with a phone under the light. BUT, THE GUY WAS WALKING AWAY AND THESE COPS HAD THE CHANCE TO BEAT HIM DOWN. WAIT! He coulda turned around and made a call!!! SHOOT HIM DOWN LIKE AN ANIMAL! FORGET THE FACT THAT HE IS PROBABLY SCARED TO DEATH AND FOR GOOD REASON, THEY SHOT HIM! :banghead:
TAKE AWAY THEIR GUNS, THEIR BADGES AND THROW THE COPS IN JAIL. WHY SHOULD ANYONE CARE ABOUT THEIR LIVES IF THEY HOLD LITTLE REGARD FOR THE LIVES OF OTHERS.
Penforhire
Member
The declared goodness/badness of the shoot depends mostly on the location it happened. I don't miss that guy in the least. One less BG on the streets. But having said that I personally think it was a bad shoot. I've seen plenty of videos of threatened cops who restrain themselves admirably. I think these guys either had bad training or forgot it in the heat of the moment.
And yes, I do hold law enforcement to a different standard than joe public. It may indeed have been suicidal but I don't think the police should be allowed pre-emptive lethal violence. You shouldn't be arrested for a crime not yet committed and you shouldn't be killed because you didn't comply with officers or tried to escape. Most common drunks are not in their right mind and might try to escape. Of course the officer in such cases may not feel threatened by the perp. But threat assessment should not be a grey area. The officer might think it is a gun but he shouldn't shoot until he KNOWS it is a gun.
And yes, I do hold law enforcement to a different standard than joe public. It may indeed have been suicidal but I don't think the police should be allowed pre-emptive lethal violence. You shouldn't be arrested for a crime not yet committed and you shouldn't be killed because you didn't comply with officers or tried to escape. Most common drunks are not in their right mind and might try to escape. Of course the officer in such cases may not feel threatened by the perp. But threat assessment should not be a grey area. The officer might think it is a gun but he shouldn't shoot until he KNOWS it is a gun.
CZ-100
Member
The guy was shot 8-10 times... what was he shot with? Cal weapon?
DontShootMe
Member
Stopping power...
Proof that handgun stopping power is an oxymoron.
Energy Transfer? Yeah right. He didnt even FLINCH.
One shot stop? Umm, sure.
but... by reading other threads, it seems LEO's have some accuracy issues, so maybe the MISSED until the last shot when the guy dropped? Somehow I doubt that.
Proof that handgun stopping power is an oxymoron.
Energy Transfer? Yeah right. He didnt even FLINCH.
One shot stop? Umm, sure.
but... by reading other threads, it seems LEO's have some accuracy issues, so maybe the MISSED until the last shot when the guy dropped? Somehow I doubt that.
Bad Shoot
This is clearly a bad shoot and those SOB's should rot in jail for their actions. I would place them in the General Population too and see what happens when the word gets out that they were cops! Speaking based on my 9 years of law enforcement I can say that they were not justified when they finally decided to shoot.
As a police officer you must realize that you are usually going to have a slight disadvantage when facing a suspect. For those of you saying that it was a good shoot then just pray that it never happens to your son, brother etc.
The young man's actions were undoubtedly foolhardy but the police cannot shoot you for failing to comply! You must be posing a risk of serious injury or death to a person to warrant deadly force in most cases and this is not one of them.
Makes me sick to see this crap
This is clearly a bad shoot and those SOB's should rot in jail for their actions. I would place them in the General Population too and see what happens when the word gets out that they were cops! Speaking based on my 9 years of law enforcement I can say that they were not justified when they finally decided to shoot.
As a police officer you must realize that you are usually going to have a slight disadvantage when facing a suspect. For those of you saying that it was a good shoot then just pray that it never happens to your son, brother etc.
The young man's actions were undoubtedly foolhardy but the police cannot shoot you for failing to comply! You must be posing a risk of serious injury or death to a person to warrant deadly force in most cases and this is not one of them.
Makes me sick to see this crap
Baba Louie
Member
- Joined
- Dec 26, 2002
- Messages
- 3,831
Goodness.
Quite the video clip.
Suicide by COP.
Pure and simple.
High speed car chase?
Ignore LE commands?
Exit vehicle attempting to exit scene?
Brandish an object in (any) that kind of fashion?
Dead man walking.
Gene Pool thinning.
What a Maroon.
It took me longer to type the first three lines than those officers
had to recognize, act/react.
Hard job.
Stupid Clientele.
Adios
Quite the video clip.
Suicide by COP.
Pure and simple.
High speed car chase?
Ignore LE commands?
Exit vehicle attempting to exit scene?
Brandish an object in (any) that kind of fashion?
Dead man walking.
Gene Pool thinning.
What a Maroon.
It took me longer to type the first three lines than those officers
had to recognize, act/react.
Hard job.
Stupid Clientele.
Adios
TheeBadOne
Member
gudel
Member
the guy was not pointing a gun at any of the cops, instead he WALKED away. the cop on the left would have been able to clearly identify a phone or a gun, since in front of that store is well lit (if not, you wont be able to see them).
this is MURDER. cop on the right side behind this guy fired multiple times! come on guys, there are three of you, and one bad guy. and you can't at least beat this guy down?
isn't that true back in the old days (in the 1800's) sheriffs don't shoot unarmed people in the back? i guess we have generation of cowards now.
you cops want to be respected and viewed favorable by your citizens? how about cleaning up the ???????s from your force, that's a start. doctors have board that can suspend a doc's license for a screw up job, that's why people are favorable to doctors than cops.
i hope they sue the hell out of that PD and fire those un-officers.
this is MURDER. cop on the right side behind this guy fired multiple times! come on guys, there are three of you, and one bad guy. and you can't at least beat this guy down?
isn't that true back in the old days (in the 1800's) sheriffs don't shoot unarmed people in the back? i guess we have generation of cowards now.
you cops want to be respected and viewed favorable by your citizens? how about cleaning up the ???????s from your force, that's a start. doctors have board that can suspend a doc's license for a screw up job, that's why people are favorable to doctors than cops.
i hope they sue the hell out of that PD and fire those un-officers.
Blackcloud6
Member
- Joined
- Dec 24, 2002
- Messages
- 608
Well, I only have one thing to say. In my CCW class the retired police officer who was teaching told us students this: "Remember, the action that takes you a split second to decide to take will be gone over by "experts" and lawyers in detail for years."
This thread proves he is right.
This thread proves he is right.
Okay, watched the video.
Cop on the left fires first - two shots while the perp is walking slowly away presenting no active threat of either harming someone or escaping. Time the shots and watch them in different cameras.
In his place, I may have made the same decision, but it really doesn't look good.
The fatal shots (made by the cop on the right) looked good - the guy appeared to be attacking cop left.
Cop on the left fires first - two shots while the perp is walking slowly away presenting no active threat of either harming someone or escaping. Time the shots and watch them in different cameras.
In his place, I may have made the same decision, but it really doesn't look good.
The fatal shots (made by the cop on the right) looked good - the guy appeared to be attacking cop left.
Murder because of multiple shots? I think not.
J Miller
Member
I looked at all the still pics.
I watched ALL THREE video clips.
I read the "opinion" of the officer reguarding the shoot.
I am not now, nor have I ever been an LEO of any kind. I am not friends with, nor an enemy of any LEO.
Looking at these clips and pics as if I were a juror in a trial, these are my observations.
The subject: Was agitated and combative, but NOT agressive to the officers. All three of the video clips showed he did not attack either of the officers, he was attempting to get away from them.
From the video cameras on the police cars I could see the object in the subjects hand was not a gun. If I could see it, surly the officers at the scene could.
The subject apeared to me to be on drugs of some kind making his reactions to the officers beligerant. He pushed away from officer R, and the raising of the hand at officer L was a get away from me motion. Not a threat of harm.
The officers: Both were angry and pumped on adrenalin. They had the opertunity to physically put the subject down, but let him slip from their grasp.
Even after being shot in the back by officer R he attempted to flee, never having attacked either of the officers.
Officer R and L fired repeatedly at the subject, from the rear, as he attempted to flee. Officer L running up behind the subject and in effect executing him with shots to the spine or head.
My conclusion. The subject was guilty of running from the police, of resisting arrest, and possibly assulting an officer. But he was not guilty of attacking either officer. He never used his cell phone as a weapon. And in all three video clips, from all three angles it was clear to me he was attempting to excape, not attack.
Both officers had oppertunites to subdue the subject, there was at least one other unit on the scene besides theirs, and another arrived within seconds after the shooting. More than enough backup to take down one unarmed man.
The subject was shot and killed for no legitamate reason other than the officers emotional state. In this case neither officer had a just reason to fire. From my perspective he was killed because the officers were so angry at his resistance to their authority, they lost control of themselves.
I stated earlier I was looking at this case as if I were a juror in a trial. Because of this evidence, I would have to find both officers guilty of murder.
It was in my opinion a VERY bad shoot. But who am I to judge? Just a citizen who may someday be sitting on a jury. Just a person who can sit and watch a video clip of a shooting and see the emotions. Thats who.
There has been a rash of police shootings of people with objects in their hands in the last several years. In every case the LEO's claimed they percieved a threat. This is becoming a pat cop-out for murder. And unfortunatly the citizens in this country have no recourse. I stated above that I am neither friend nor foe of LEO's, but in my opinion as a citizen, many police departments are allowing their officers to run on the ragged edge of mayhem.
Then when someone makes a move that is "percieved" as a threat, these emotions take hold, common sence and training go out the window, and they are killed.
I wish I knew what to do to bring this to a stop. Shootings are all to frequently necessary. But not this one.
I watched ALL THREE video clips.
I read the "opinion" of the officer reguarding the shoot.
I am not now, nor have I ever been an LEO of any kind. I am not friends with, nor an enemy of any LEO.
Looking at these clips and pics as if I were a juror in a trial, these are my observations.
The subject: Was agitated and combative, but NOT agressive to the officers. All three of the video clips showed he did not attack either of the officers, he was attempting to get away from them.
From the video cameras on the police cars I could see the object in the subjects hand was not a gun. If I could see it, surly the officers at the scene could.
The subject apeared to me to be on drugs of some kind making his reactions to the officers beligerant. He pushed away from officer R, and the raising of the hand at officer L was a get away from me motion. Not a threat of harm.
The officers: Both were angry and pumped on adrenalin. They had the opertunity to physically put the subject down, but let him slip from their grasp.
Even after being shot in the back by officer R he attempted to flee, never having attacked either of the officers.
Officer R and L fired repeatedly at the subject, from the rear, as he attempted to flee. Officer L running up behind the subject and in effect executing him with shots to the spine or head.
My conclusion. The subject was guilty of running from the police, of resisting arrest, and possibly assulting an officer. But he was not guilty of attacking either officer. He never used his cell phone as a weapon. And in all three video clips, from all three angles it was clear to me he was attempting to excape, not attack.
Both officers had oppertunites to subdue the subject, there was at least one other unit on the scene besides theirs, and another arrived within seconds after the shooting. More than enough backup to take down one unarmed man.
The subject was shot and killed for no legitamate reason other than the officers emotional state. In this case neither officer had a just reason to fire. From my perspective he was killed because the officers were so angry at his resistance to their authority, they lost control of themselves.
I stated earlier I was looking at this case as if I were a juror in a trial. Because of this evidence, I would have to find both officers guilty of murder.
It was in my opinion a VERY bad shoot. But who am I to judge? Just a citizen who may someday be sitting on a jury. Just a person who can sit and watch a video clip of a shooting and see the emotions. Thats who.
There has been a rash of police shootings of people with objects in their hands in the last several years. In every case the LEO's claimed they percieved a threat. This is becoming a pat cop-out for murder. And unfortunatly the citizens in this country have no recourse. I stated above that I am neither friend nor foe of LEO's, but in my opinion as a citizen, many police departments are allowing their officers to run on the ragged edge of mayhem.
Then when someone makes a move that is "percieved" as a threat, these emotions take hold, common sence and training go out the window, and they are killed.
I wish I knew what to do to bring this to a stop. Shootings are all to frequently necessary. But not this one.
TheeBadOne
Member
cordex,
In your senario (changing "it's a nice day" to "the lighting is the same as in the video") - if Joe thinks it's a gun and the perp is heading toward his wife, then he'd be okay to shoot IMO (at least in Louisiana) - but he'd definitely have some explaining to do and would need witness stmts (wife says she thought she was in danger).
Again - I haven't seen the video, so I'm not sure when the officers first fired or what they saw that made them shoot - so it's really not possible for me to make a call on it.
I also believe had this been a real gun (even if it was jammed/misfired), this thread wouldn't exist (regardless of where the cops bullets struck) - so (again IMO) IF they REALLY thought it was a gun, it's justified. Even if I saw the video, I doubt I could tell you what they were thinking....
CR
In your senario (changing "it's a nice day" to "the lighting is the same as in the video") - if Joe thinks it's a gun and the perp is heading toward his wife, then he'd be okay to shoot IMO (at least in Louisiana) - but he'd definitely have some explaining to do and would need witness stmts (wife says she thought she was in danger).
Again - I haven't seen the video, so I'm not sure when the officers first fired or what they saw that made them shoot - so it's really not possible for me to make a call on it.
I also believe had this been a real gun (even if it was jammed/misfired), this thread wouldn't exist (regardless of where the cops bullets struck) - so (again IMO) IF they REALLY thought it was a gun, it's justified. Even if I saw the video, I doubt I could tell you what they were thinking....
CR
voilsb
Member
thanks a bunch. like I said, I can't view the video on this computer, so I wasn't sure if I was getting the whole picture.
- Status