|
||||||||
Another black man shot dead in USA by police officer |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#251 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Santa Barbara, California
Posts: 2,678
|
Quote:
This is a moderated forum. The decision of what is and what isn't 'open to debate' is a matter for the board moderators....not you.
Quote:
Doesn't support your argument. It discusses alternatives to the use of lethal weapons, not how to use your lethal firearms like that guy you saw in the movies.This guy very much should have used some other alternative other than shooting the guy. Shooting him in the leg would not have been the appropriate response either. |
|
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#252 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 8,502
|
Quote:
The problem here was not how he aimed, the problem was that he was using lethal force in a situation that did not at all merit it. An unarmed man that was wanted for a non-violent offense was fleeing with his back turned. Nothing about it made it a life or death situation for anyone, except for inexcusable judgement by the police officer who decided to murder him.
Of course this guy hasn't helped himself by falsifying his version of events and moving the taser to try and reinforce them, and might have been better to be truthful in his report and leave the taser where it fell. What will matter now is not what observers perceive from watching the video, but whether the officer's perception of danger is believed. I think that this may end up being a simple misconduct incident. |
|
|
|
|
|
#253 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 1,079
|
Quote:
I'm wondering if the officer's defence will now be that the scuffle for the taser had turned the arrest into a "violent" confrontation, and as such the shooting was justified under "fleeing felon" rules? You are really inviting trouble trying to grabbing the equipment or weapons of an arresting officer.
Of course this guy hasn't helped himself by falsifying his version of events and moving the taser to try and reinforce them, and might have been better to be truthful in his report and leave the taser where it fell. What will matter now is not what observers perceive from watching the video, but whether the officer's perception of danger is believed. I think that this may end up being a simple misconduct incident. Personally I can't see him going down for murder. |
|
|
|
|
|
#254 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Santa Barbara, California
Posts: 2,678
|
Quote:
I'm wondering if the officer's defence will now be that the scuffle for the taser had turned the arrest into a "violent" confrontation, and as such the shooting was justified under "fleeing felon" rules? You are really inviting trouble trying to grabbing the equipment or weapons of an arresting officer.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#255 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 2,167
|
Quote:
He's firing from around 5yds. If he cannot hit one of two legs or both from that distance then he's a public menace, not to mention a piss poor shot!
BIB i agree with. |
|
|
|
|
|
#256 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 8,502
|
Quote:
It's not a carte blanche to shoot any fleeing felon. They still need "probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a significant threat of death or serious bodily harm to the officer or others." The fact that he may have touched the guy's taser (while in the process of being tased by it) would in no way make him a significant threat of death or serious bodily harm later on, when he was running away and didn't even have the taser on him.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#257 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 21,517
|
Quote:
Why are you missing out the part where he tried to grab the taser, which then fell on the ground?
The victim can't have grabbed the taser, the killer shot him with it in the back before deciding to finish him off with the gun. What's our new version? He grabbed the taser shot himself in the back with it, fled and threatened the policeman...? I actually wouldn't find it surprising. |
|
|
|
|
|
#258 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 7,409
|
Quote:
British soldiers in Ireland were always taught to aim for the chest or the back. It is pretty standard behavior with what are perceived as second class citizens.
The RUC certainly weren't trained to do that. (Even if they felt they could behave with impunity at times). |
|
|
|
|
|
#259 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 8,502
|
Quote:
Soldiers are not police.
The RUC certainly weren't trained to do that. (Even if they felt they could behave with impunity at times). |
|
|
|
|
|
#260 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 21,517
|
Quote:
Not even sure why the taser was making an appearance before Walter Scott allegedly grabbed it, it was a cracked light! Who wouldn't try not to be tasered, if that is indeed what happened.
http://www.postandcourier.com/articl...PC16/150409558 Quote:
Slager went to the man’s Delaware Avenue home in September 2013 to investigate a burglary. When the resident opened the door for Slager, the burglary victim yelled that he wasn’t the suspect, the documents stated.
The man also insisted that he wasn’t the perpetrator, but he later told internal investigators that Slager threatened to use a Taser against him if he didn’t come outside. When the man followed the order and stepped outside, he said Slager “Tased (him) for no reason and ... slammed him and dragged him.” But another officer there said Slager had been forced to use the device during a struggle. The investigators exonerated Slager of wrongdoing. |
|
|
|
|
|
#261 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Bristol
Posts: 1,539
|
Quote:
Soldiers are not police.
The RUC certainly weren't trained to do that. (Even if they felt they could behave with impunity at times). |
|
|
|
|
|
#262 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 7,409
|
Quote:
Where on a target were the RUC trained to aim at?
The British army was not a police force and the RUC was not an army. It may not have seemed like it sometimes but the RUC was trained to police; not look upon half the population as enemy combatants. The British army in Northern Ireland were trained in combat. |
|
|
|
|
|
#263 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 8,502
|
Quote:
I was actually referring to the implication that the police force in Northern Ireland was an army trained to view certain parts of the population as 'second class citizens' rather than specific firearms training.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#264 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 15,280
|
If you shoot someone in the legs and he is carrying a gun, he could still turn and shoot you.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#265 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Kent
Posts: 16,077
|
Quote:
If you shoot someone in the legs and he is carrying a gun, he could still turn and shoot you.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#266 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 7,142
|
This isn't the movies. You aim at the torso because it's the biggest target that you're most likely to hit and take someone down. But it's all moot anyway because this guy should never have been shot.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#267 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Deep Within The Chain Of Evil
Posts: 51,280
|
Quote:
I was actually referring to the implication that the police force in Northern Ireland was an army trained to view certain parts of the population as 'second class citizens' rather than specific firearms training.
The British army was not a police force and the RUC was not an army. It may not have seemed like it sometimes but the RUC was trained to police; not look upon half the population as enemy combatants. The British army in Northern Ireland were trained in combat. Shooting at legs is the stuff of movies. |
|
|
|
|
|
#268 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Deep Within The Chain Of Evil
Posts: 51,280
|
Quote:
Because that's how you bring a person down very quickly without killing them......assuming you can shoot of course, and if he couldn't hit his legs from the distance he was firing then quite frankly he shouldn't have a gun.
They are Police Officers in a supposedly 'civilised' country......not front line infantry soldiers facing IS. You don't shoot people in the legs to stop them running away. |
|
|
|
|
|
#269 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 19,460
|
Quote:
Because that was the lie put out by the murderer to cover what he did?
The victim can't have grabbed the taser, the killer shot him with it in the back before deciding to finish him off with the gun. |
|
|
|
|
|
#270 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Deep Within The Chain Of Evil
Posts: 51,280
|
Quote:
If the person can be clearly seen in daylight, running away, then yes they are cold blooded murderers. . So if it is not clear daylight, it's okay to shoot people who are running away in the back. |
|
|
|
|
|
#271 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 1,079
|
Quote:
I see what you're doing here.
So if it is not clear daylight, it's okay to shoot people who are running away in the back. I bet that if you ask all Americans if the would shoot an intruder fleeing from their house, they would. They have guns and feel it's within their right to shoot someone on their property, combine that with adrenaline, fear etc and that's why they make that judgement call. It's likely this officer has done the same thing. An altercation with the taser, the guy has made off and in panic he has shot him. Had there been no struggle, no altercation and the guy just run you have a clear case of murder. In this case you have mitigating circumstances, albeit for us it's easy just to label it as, shot him in the back when running therefore must be murder. For me it's manslaughter and chuck a bit of perverting the course of justice in there for messing about with the scene. Of course I could be totally wrong and evidence could come out that he was a nazi supporter who vowed to kill a black man. |
|
|
|
|
|
#272 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 7,409
|
Quote:
The Army and Police are trained to aim for the body if they have grounds to shoot.
Shooting at legs is the stuff of movies. Stop responding to stuff that isn't there. |
|
|
|
|
|
#273 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 3,512
|
Anyone know why the black man ran away?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#274 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Deep Within The Chain Of Evil
Posts: 51,280
|
Quote:
I never suggested people shoot at legs.
Stop responding to stuff that isn't there. |
|
|
|
|
|
#275 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 7,409
|
Quote:
I see what you're doing here.
So if it is not clear daylight, it's okay to shoot people who are running away in the back. |
|
|
|
![]() |
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 03:53.



