TrapdoorBilly
Member
Good shoot? Bad shoot?
As we currently know the facts, Good shoot.
Good or bad for NOPD?
Doesn't really matter.
As we currently know the facts, Good shoot.
Good or bad for NOPD?
Doesn't really matter.
New Orleans Police shoot, kill man
- Thread starter kage genin
- Start date
- Status
Camp David
member
rosco_the_dog said:
I am saddened by this episode and it marks kind of a turning point for me... I previously supported our law enforcement but this sort of thing gives me great pause...
I am reading from the latest Fox News account of this shooting (murder):
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,179947,00.html
Note highlighted parts below...
"...after allegedly lunging at police with a 3-inch blade..."
"...was caught on videotape that shows about a dozen officers surrounding him..."
"The officers are trained to treat knife attacks as deadly force and are not schooled in disarming suspects..."
"...three officers who fired nine rounds on Hayes..."
This is not law enforcement. This is absurd. It is also murder.
3 inch knife? Not trained to disarm? Nine shots?
Murder.
kage genin
Member
I can think of a number of points on the human body where a 3-inch blade stuck in would be lethal.Camp David said:
Officers arrive on scene to find others arrived at the same time. You expect them to do "rock paper scissors" to decide who stays and who leaves?
knife attacks ARE deadly... and the suspect was ultimately disarmed
So each firing officer shot three rounds. That sounds like "excessive force"... I mean the movies say that one shot is all it takes to kill a person instantly. One shot to the chest and they just look skywards and plop down dead, right?
I suppose the 'proper' thing for the officers to have done was again do "rock paper scissors" do decide who fires the single incapacitating shot to the leg?
Camp David
member
kage genin said:
No. Subdue the man, arrest him, and take him to jail, like law enforcement officers have been doing for generations. Not fatally shoot him nine times because of a pocket knife!
If a dozen alleged officers can't subdue a man with a pocket knife, we have proof positive that law enforcement is totally incompetent! That's what scares me! Why didn't they just use a hand-grenade on the man?????
There is time to honor law enforement. And there are times, like this, to scorn them. This is one of those times.
I am not defending the victim in this case. However, the victim of such imcompetent law enforcement is indeed society as a whole. These dozen alleged policement deserve neither our respect or commedation. They, in fact, deserve spit. They are a liability for society. It is not surprising that many of their brothers in arms in New Orleans abandoned their posts during Katrina...
If I was Chief of New Orleans Police I would fire such officers for gross dereliction of duty and utter incompetence.... there again, that may me solution for entire New Orleans police force as recent events have borne out!
Sorry... I strongly support local law enforcement... this is not it. Not by a long shot!
The "alleged officers"
did subdue him, in the manner they were taught, which is consistent with a manner taught to law enforcement officers across the country. Is your beef with these officers, or their training?Hand grenade? Nice attempt at reductio ad absurdum, but obviously not a serious or helpful suggestion. Each officer that fired his weapon (an average of three shots per officer, not exactly emptying the mag) was using his training on how to stop a lethal threat through the use of lethal force. Again, is your problem with the officers, or their training? If you say "both", please explain.
Spit? I imagine they'd rather you spit on them, than take a 3 inch knife in the femoral artery, or the jugular. Based on the information which has been reported, I support them in their actions. I reserve the right to change my opinion if other credible evidence arises, but as reported, these guys did their jobs in the way they were supposed to.
____________
-twency
Camp David
member
They killed him! Because they were scared of a pocketkife.. a small pocketknife!twency said:The "alleged officers"
That post is more that three inches...twency said:
A small pocket knife! Glad to hear we have cowards with a badge!
Rock45
Member
Let me get this straight...rather than send this POS straight to the crapper where he belongs, many of you would prefer that LE risk injury or worse so that we can house him, give him medical attention, and feed him until such time that we get the opportunity to pay him to sue the officers involved in the shooting that rendered him crippled for life.
I don't care how you spend your money, but let's be a little more discriminating how we spend mine, OK?
By the way,
Good Shoot, Keep up the Good Work!
Bryan
I don't care how you spend your money, but let's be a little more discriminating how we spend mine, OK?
By the way,
Good Shoot, Keep up the Good Work!
Bryan
Powderman
Member
Camp David said:They killed him! Because they were scared of a pocketkife.. a small pocketknife!
That post is more that three inches...
A small pocket knife! Glad to hear we have cowards with a badge!
I will refer you to two members of this board, just based on what I have read from their postings.
Hso and fjolnirsson, to be exact. Tell you what, here's a little scenario for you. As a matter of fact, you don't have to use these two--just head to any competent martial arts instructor--preferably one with a background in arnis.
You get about six of your best friends, in good physical shape.
Hand the instructor a magic marker.
You--and your friend's job--is to "disarm" the instructor--take the magic marker from him.
The instructor's job will be to "stab" you with the marker--mark each of you as many times as possible before he is disarmed.
When you are finished, count the marks left by the marker on each other.
Now imagine that each of those marks are slashes, avulsions and cuts from a Buck 110 folder, honed nice and sharp. By the way, the blade is 3 inches long.
Nuff said.
Camp David
member
Powderman said:
If not one of the twelve New Orleans law enforcement officers could shoot his handgun accurately enough to disable/disarm the subject without killing him, they shouldn't be issued a handgun at all... they were six feet away for God's sake!
And as far as your scenario... basic training in the Armed Forces has a similiar test which each recruit private, myself included, was trained to deal with. We did, without arms of any kind!
Disabling a subject is basic law enforcement 101.
Sorry... I've throught this through and the actions by the officers make no sense whatsoever! 9 shots? Three inch knife? Dead subject?
Where is the law enforcement and police protection in that?
WHAT'S NEXT: TEN ALLEGED POLICE GUN DOWN YOUNGSTER WITH RUBBER BAND? FIVE ALLEGED POLICE BLAST OLD LADY WITH CANE? TWO ALLEGED POLICE EMPTY THEIR CLIPS AT CAT STUCK IN TREE?
Proportional Response! A subject covered in detail in law enforcment training and a subject these New Orleans law enforcement cowards failed!
Last edited:
It's the size of the wager....
Place a 12 foot long 2X4 on the sidewalk and the overwhelming majority of people would have zero problem walking its length without hesitation. Ask them to walk that same distance on a 4" beam slung off the side of the top of a 40 story building (with no safety devices) and very few would even attempt it. Of those that did, a goodly portion wouldn't make it all the way across.
I can put holes in a paper target all day long at the distances talked about in this instance and the end result could easily be covered by the average man's thigh. Of course in those instances I'm not moving, the target's not moving, I'm not having to worry about an ever changing "know what is beyond your target" parameter, and I've never had to do so right after the target attempted to slice and dice me.
As far as the nine rounds... if I am ever confronted by a person with a knife, who has attempted to use it, is unresponsive to my verbal commands to cease, and seems to be unaffected by pepper spray...I'm thinking there is a good likelihood I'll be using up nine rounds all by myself.
migoi
Place a 12 foot long 2X4 on the sidewalk and the overwhelming majority of people would have zero problem walking its length without hesitation. Ask them to walk that same distance on a 4" beam slung off the side of the top of a 40 story building (with no safety devices) and very few would even attempt it. Of those that did, a goodly portion wouldn't make it all the way across.
I can put holes in a paper target all day long at the distances talked about in this instance and the end result could easily be covered by the average man's thigh. Of course in those instances I'm not moving, the target's not moving, I'm not having to worry about an ever changing "know what is beyond your target" parameter, and I've never had to do so right after the target attempted to slice and dice me.
As far as the nine rounds... if I am ever confronted by a person with a knife, who has attempted to use it, is unresponsive to my verbal commands to cease, and seems to be unaffected by pepper spray...I'm thinking there is a good likelihood I'll be using up nine rounds all by myself.
migoi
3" knife...Axe...22...25
Where do you draw the line between nuisance and life threatening. Alot of people say .22 is not a reliable caliber for incapacitation...so maybe we should make cops disarm a suspect rather than shoot if he has a small caliber handgun also.
I have my issues with misuse of authority, but this is not at all an example of that. A few officers made a rational decision that the situation could not be de-escalated and fired their weapons the way they were trained.
In a perfect world where cops are invulnerable to attack maybee they could have went to a billy club. Unfortunatley we do not live in that world.
If I were put in the position of a large man coming at me with a knife (even if I do have 12 friends backing me up) I am going to fire unless I and my friends can safely retreat. The cops don't have that option. They ended the threat.
Where do you draw the line between nuisance and life threatening. Alot of people say .22 is not a reliable caliber for incapacitation...so maybe we should make cops disarm a suspect rather than shoot if he has a small caliber handgun also.
I have my issues with misuse of authority, but this is not at all an example of that. A few officers made a rational decision that the situation could not be de-escalated and fired their weapons the way they were trained.
In a perfect world where cops are invulnerable to attack maybee they could have went to a billy club. Unfortunatley we do not live in that world.
If I were put in the position of a large man coming at me with a knife (even if I do have 12 friends backing me up) I am going to fire unless I and my friends can safely retreat. The cops don't have that option. They ended the threat.
Tequila_Sauer
Member
- Joined
- Nov 16, 2005
- Messages
- 196
I'm getting so sick of people who regard police officers as some kind of ninja with special forces training and zero emotion or feeling.
These guys are the same as you and I. They make rational decisions just like the rest of us. When they see a man with a knife and he isn't listening to reason, orders, or threats, they do the same thing everyone else would do. They think "Oh my God, am I going to have to shoot this man? I have a family, I can't jeopardize my life, what if he has a family too?"
I grew up with 3 guys who became LEOs. They're the same guys now that they were at 14 when we were eating tacos in the lunch cafeteria talking about Super Nintendo games. If they're ever in that situation, I would hope they go COM, NOT a target that is maybe 3 inches in diameter from 15 feet in a tense situation.
If I were in that situation, I would've done the same. Not to sound selfish, but I'm not risking my life so some scumbag who can't listen can keep his own. They're human first, officers second (or third or fourth).
These guys are the same as you and I. They make rational decisions just like the rest of us. When they see a man with a knife and he isn't listening to reason, orders, or threats, they do the same thing everyone else would do. They think "Oh my God, am I going to have to shoot this man? I have a family, I can't jeopardize my life, what if he has a family too?"
I grew up with 3 guys who became LEOs. They're the same guys now that they were at 14 when we were eating tacos in the lunch cafeteria talking about Super Nintendo games. If they're ever in that situation, I would hope they go COM, NOT a target that is maybe 3 inches in diameter from 15 feet in a tense situation.
If I were in that situation, I would've done the same. Not to sound selfish, but I'm not risking my life so some scumbag who can't listen can keep his own. They're human first, officers second (or third or fourth).
So, do I take it that your answer to my previous question about whether the fault lay with the officers or the training, is that the officers were at fault?
If so, I must disagree.
I believe if you ask 100 randomly chosen law enforcement instructors from around the country whether this was a case of meeting lethal force with lethal force, better than 99 of them will answer that this was indeed a proportional response. If you don't like policy, try to have it changed. Don't fault officers for carrying out their training.
(And by the way, it's not exactly the high road to call these guys cowards, "alleged officers", say you want to spit on them, etc. Are you just trying to be provocative?)
_____________
-twency
NineseveN
member
Camp David said:
So you're saying that the Army/Navy/Air Force or Marines trained you and every private in the fool proof way to disarm a knife-wielding attacker without getting harmed? Has anyone else in the service had this training?
BTW, if that man was threatening you or your family with that little 3" knife, would you shoot or would you try to disarm him with your bare hands and keep your gun on your hip?
Camp David
member
twency said:
More than most, I support law enforcement and LEOs... I was among their ranks in a limited capacity 20 years ago in another state... I have definitive feelings on proportional response... one of the things law enforcement officers are trained to do is protect citizens, even from themselves! Numerous examples of such other officers I was familiar with faced; one LEO, a deputy sheriff, even disarmed a drunk college student armed with a three-foot katana sword in a parking lot! The deputy didn't even pull his pistol from his holster but instead used a baton and his training! Another example I recall was a middle-aged guy outside a bar with a set of numchucks that resisted arrest: he was disarmed by two officers. No shot fired.
I regret if my condemnation of these New Orleans officers upsets you but, in my opinion, they deserve it. As I said, there have been numerous examples, over the last few months, of New Orleans Police being wholefully untrained and unfit to serve.
Other jurisdictions put heavy emphasis upon police training; which includes proportional response and physical disarming techniques. There is a reason for such training!
I respect the badge and respect all legitimate LEO's as they often have to face situations which invariably require split second decisions. Most react with honor to the profession. I just don't see that in this particular instance, as I have elaborated upon...
I think most here will admit a big difference between one-on-one encounters in the home setting and a crazy nut against a dozen-police in a public parking lot! C'mon.....NineseveN said:
Not much differnce..
in the two encounters if the proposed solution to the situation is for one person to shoot the bad guy in the leg from a distance of six feet. The homeowner simply waits until the bad guy is six feet away and the whamo blamo, problem solved.
Size of the wager.
migoi
in the two encounters if the proposed solution to the situation is for one person to shoot the bad guy in the leg from a distance of six feet. The homeowner simply waits until the bad guy is six feet away and the whamo blamo, problem solved.
Size of the wager.
migoi
CGofMP
Member
Powderman, you and I were mostly on the same page up till this point:
The public has the right and indeed I say the DUTY to Monday morning quarterback ALL actions of the police department. This is part of how we stay a republic. The danger of never second guessing the Police is that they will become an arm of the state accountable only to whoever is in power at the time. If that person or persons happen to have fascist or tyrnaical aims, well the police become nothing more than a politcal power arm of the state and NOT fellow citizens.
Who watches the watchers was the title of a book written before community policing was the vogue term. The truth of the matter is we all must. Cops are no better than the citizenry they are chosen from. That is to say they are civilians doing a job, they are us and they need to welcome the input and critique of their fellow citizens. Like any group there will be vocal fools who think that every cop action is wrong and that every shooting could have been handled differently. So be it. This is the price of having a tough job where power must be balanced with full accountability.
On the other hand we have [rule breaking word deleted before posting] of the kind that [name deleted before posting] is providing to us. The idea that a man threatening people with a knife should be given a pass - especially after allegedly lunging for an officer's chest with said knife is flat out insane. I was about to bring up the magic marker suggestion that another poster made only instead of a magic marker you use a thin piece of that rubbery styrofoam dipped in paint. Unlike a magic marker you have a lot more surface area than a 1/4 inch tip. Many knives have dual edges. Unless you are VERY well trained and luck is on your side you WILL get 'cut'. Bring along friends, I guarantee many of you will get marked. Now look at where you got marked, imagine that going down 1/2 or 3/4 inch.. any serious blood vessels below? Yea.. thought so. Not to mention, we dont pay cops to be hurt, we pay them to keep us from getting hurt. Sometimes that means they have to hutrt or kill the mean naughty bad guys. boo hoo.
9 rounds fired by 3 officers is not excessive if the rounds were pretty evenly spaced between shooters. Cops are taught to shoot until the threat is over (usually the suspect hitting the ground). Given the time it would take an officer to pop off three rounds per It is easy to see how they could have fired three rounds each very rapidly.
I will not start the 45 vs 9mm debate here but in one of the officer survival books (I think by by Remsburg) I remember seeing a morge photo of a suspect who did not respond to some ungodly number of rounds taken (like 26 or 32?!?) fired from 9mm caliber handguns. I think they finally cancelled his ticket with a 12 gague.
A 3 inch knife IS deadly force. It can legally and morally be met with deadly force in return. It was allegedly deployed and reportedly used to try to hurt or kill an officer. You do not have to stab to kill... while puncturing the heart with a 29 inch sword is gonna kill someone, there is a certain segment of folks skilled with knives that believe that SLICING is more likely to be effective (Matt Braun) as you can get plenty of deadly wounds on an opponent and cause him to bleed to death with any ONE of them.
If someone breaks into your home at night and advances on you with a paultry 3 inch blade, are you gonna grab the handgun by your bedside and do what needs doing or are you gonna asses the blade length, determine its 'only' a Buck Model 112 and then do your ninja moves?
Like any cop, if you have a brain in your head, you will likely determine that this is indeed a deadly situation, the suspect presents a clear and present credible deadly threat, intends on maiming or killing you, and you will take the shot. Oh and all of this has to happen within seconds.
Monday morning quarterbacking, while needed is not always gonna have the element of common sense from those who participate in it.
The public has the right and indeed I say the DUTY to Monday morning quarterback ALL actions of the police department. This is part of how we stay a republic. The danger of never second guessing the Police is that they will become an arm of the state accountable only to whoever is in power at the time. If that person or persons happen to have fascist or tyrnaical aims, well the police become nothing more than a politcal power arm of the state and NOT fellow citizens.
Who watches the watchers was the title of a book written before community policing was the vogue term. The truth of the matter is we all must. Cops are no better than the citizenry they are chosen from. That is to say they are civilians doing a job, they are us and they need to welcome the input and critique of their fellow citizens. Like any group there will be vocal fools who think that every cop action is wrong and that every shooting could have been handled differently. So be it. This is the price of having a tough job where power must be balanced with full accountability.
On the other hand we have [rule breaking word deleted before posting] of the kind that [name deleted before posting] is providing to us. The idea that a man threatening people with a knife should be given a pass - especially after allegedly lunging for an officer's chest with said knife is flat out insane. I was about to bring up the magic marker suggestion that another poster made only instead of a magic marker you use a thin piece of that rubbery styrofoam dipped in paint. Unlike a magic marker you have a lot more surface area than a 1/4 inch tip. Many knives have dual edges. Unless you are VERY well trained and luck is on your side you WILL get 'cut'. Bring along friends, I guarantee many of you will get marked. Now look at where you got marked, imagine that going down 1/2 or 3/4 inch.. any serious blood vessels below? Yea.. thought so. Not to mention, we dont pay cops to be hurt, we pay them to keep us from getting hurt. Sometimes that means they have to hutrt or kill the mean naughty bad guys. boo hoo.
9 rounds fired by 3 officers is not excessive if the rounds were pretty evenly spaced between shooters. Cops are taught to shoot until the threat is over (usually the suspect hitting the ground). Given the time it would take an officer to pop off three rounds per It is easy to see how they could have fired three rounds each very rapidly.
I will not start the 45 vs 9mm debate here but in one of the officer survival books (I think by by Remsburg) I remember seeing a morge photo of a suspect who did not respond to some ungodly number of rounds taken (like 26 or 32?!?) fired from 9mm caliber handguns. I think they finally cancelled his ticket with a 12 gague.
A 3 inch knife IS deadly force. It can legally and morally be met with deadly force in return. It was allegedly deployed and reportedly used to try to hurt or kill an officer. You do not have to stab to kill... while puncturing the heart with a 29 inch sword is gonna kill someone, there is a certain segment of folks skilled with knives that believe that SLICING is more likely to be effective (Matt Braun) as you can get plenty of deadly wounds on an opponent and cause him to bleed to death with any ONE of them.
If someone breaks into your home at night and advances on you with a paultry 3 inch blade, are you gonna grab the handgun by your bedside and do what needs doing or are you gonna asses the blade length, determine its 'only' a Buck Model 112 and then do your ninja moves?
Like any cop, if you have a brain in your head, you will likely determine that this is indeed a deadly situation, the suspect presents a clear and present credible deadly threat, intends on maiming or killing you, and you will take the shot. Oh and all of this has to happen within seconds.
Monday morning quarterbacking, while needed is not always gonna have the element of common sense from those who participate in it.
rosco_the_dog
Member
First off, I know LE is a tough, stressfull job. I applaud them for keeping the community safe.
The LEO escalated the situation by closing in on the guy until he had nowhere to go but forward, and what do you do with a guy with a knife comming toward you..?
I mentioned shooting at the guys leg, but after rethinking this scenario, that would have been a bad idea. Once that first leg shot was fired, it would have quickly triggered a hail of body shots by the others.
They mentioned pepper spray was used but it was ineffective. Does this mean he was temporarily blinded but still did not drop the knife, or he was immune to he pepper spray?
The LEO escalated the situation by closing in on the guy until he had nowhere to go but forward, and what do you do with a guy with a knife comming toward you..?
I mentioned shooting at the guys leg, but after rethinking this scenario, that would have been a bad idea. Once that first leg shot was fired, it would have quickly triggered a hail of body shots by the others.
They mentioned pepper spray was used but it was ineffective. Does this mean he was temporarily blinded but still did not drop the knife, or he was immune to he pepper spray?
Tequila_Sauer
Member
- Joined
- Nov 16, 2005
- Messages
- 196
I've always found pepper spray to be a strange method of "incapacitation." It just seems to do nothing other than piss the perp off, unless the perp wasn't intending to harm the LEO in the first place, in which case, maybe they shouldn't have been sprayed at all.
I've seen separate occasions where LEOs-in training had to get sprayed with that stuff and, after getting sprayed, they performed mock arrest operations just to make sure they could function properly. Even with the more potent spray, the majority of the officers sprayed had full functionality, they just look "inconvenienced" by the pain.
I've seen separate occasions where LEOs-in training had to get sprayed with that stuff and, after getting sprayed, they performed mock arrest operations just to make sure they could function properly. Even with the more potent spray, the majority of the officers sprayed had full functionality, they just look "inconvenienced" by the pain.
In Hawaii...
when you buy pepper spray you are required to be "trained" in it's use by the retailer. The training is very minimal and mainly consists of warning you about spraying into the wind, the ease with which the hand directing the stream can be deflected, and to not leave it in your car because the summer temperatures here can make it explode (making you want to drive with your head out your window for a while).
The person briefing me also threw in the fact that pepper spray is little more than a way to interrupt the aggressor's OODA Loop*. It should always be accompanied with some other defensive tactic (running away at high speed for instance) and can only be counted on to help you shift to an active rather than reactive role.
* to avoid the questions: Observe, Orient, Decide, Act. Lots of info out on the net and a very useful concept to keep in your brain pan.
migoi
when you buy pepper spray you are required to be "trained" in it's use by the retailer. The training is very minimal and mainly consists of warning you about spraying into the wind, the ease with which the hand directing the stream can be deflected, and to not leave it in your car because the summer temperatures here can make it explode (making you want to drive with your head out your window for a while).
The person briefing me also threw in the fact that pepper spray is little more than a way to interrupt the aggressor's OODA Loop*. It should always be accompanied with some other defensive tactic (running away at high speed for instance) and can only be counted on to help you shift to an active rather than reactive role.
* to avoid the questions: Observe, Orient, Decide, Act. Lots of info out on the net and a very useful concept to keep in your brain pan.
migoi
NineseveN
member
Camp David said:
You have twelve officers and a suspect with a weapon. The officers are armed with the handguns. You advocate that at least one of those officers get into harm’s way by physically trying to disarm the knife-wielder. Congratulations, you've just done three things:
1. You've just given the suspect a potential hostage if the disarm goes wrong or does not work, possibly an injured hostage at that.
2. You've just rendered one of the twelve officer's firearms obsolete. He either had to put it in his holster to approach the suspect (possibly giving the perp a weapon with which to escalate the situation and shoot people) or leave it in his car. So we're down to 11 officers, which is enough, right? They all have guns, right?
3. Wrong, putting the disarming officer into the potential kill-zone just rendered every single firearm in the hands of the police officers useless. If things go wrong, they cannot take a shot without possibly killing the officer you so bravely sent into the fray from behind your keyboard.
If the shoot played out like it did, the best case is that the perp gives up; the worst case is that the perp dies.
If the shoot goes your way, best case is the perp gives up or is disarmed without incident...worst case is at least one officer wounded, possibly dead, and the perp has a gun, maybe add a few more wounded or dead police officers and eventually a dead suspect. This is why officers are trained to answer deadly force with deadly force.
In the home, it's no different; you never, ever, ever physically confront an intruder who has a weapon unless you have zero options and no weapon. If you have a firearm, you command them to leave or lie down, then you shoot if they do not listen.
I was going to state my belief that the NOPD acted in a reasonable manner. A knife is deadly force and in the absence of a less-lethal means of stopping the individual (pepper spray having failed), use of deadly force was most likely the necessary response.
But since I don't have the qualifications to "Monday morning quarterback" the officers, I suppose I should just withhold any comment, whether in support or opposition of the officers.
But since I don't have the qualifications to "Monday morning quarterback" the officers, I suppose I should just withhold any comment, whether in support or opposition of the officers.
Err, umm, what?
The officers escalated the situation? They met force with force.
The guy had nowhere to go? GOOD!
That the guy had no other (life-preserving) alternative to getting on the ground without the knife in his hand means the officers were doing there job. Why should the police have given the guy someplace to retreat to? If he retreated he could have sought cover or concealment, he might have taken a hostage, or he could have gotten away entirely.
I absolutely agree with CGofMP's point that "watching the watchers" is necessary and right. I also think it's pretty clear to most reasonable people that the watchers did the right thing. And no, I'm not calling those I disagree with unreasonable. I'm attempting to apply the "Reasonable Person" (formerly Reasonable Man) standard found in many legal tests. I think the (hypothetical, theoretical, admittedly fictional) "Reasonable Person" would find the actions of the police justified.
_______
-twency
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
