Should Cops Be Allowed to Kill for Throwing Stones?

[Archer77]

you gotta know when to shoot... know when to hold em.... know when to walk away... know when to run

You gotta know when to stop making shit up and jumping to wild conclusions.

[240 is Back]

You gotta know when to stop making shit up and jumping to wild conclusions.

the entire nation is watching a video of a guy tossnig a rock, running, and getting mowed down by 4 cops.

Any conclusion of "they wasted an unarmed man" is not all that wild, ya know.

[Archer77]

the entire nation is watching a video of a guy tossnig a rock, running, and getting mowed down by 4 cops.

Any conclusion of "they wasted an unarmed man" is not all that wild, ya know.

I'm not talking about conclusions.  It's about you creating fanciful tales based on wild speculation.  You have a tendency toward allowing your imagination to run away unchecked. 

[240 is Back]

I'm not talking about conclusions.  It's about you creating fanciful tales based on wild speculation.  You have a tendency toward allowing your imagination to run away unchecked. 

it is police admin of justice which will to wild and crazy, once we give them the power to shoot someone who is no longer a threat.

don't you get that? 

i dont care about this idiot they wasted.  I care that ANY american is blind enough to say it's cool for police to press pause on a gun battle, then re-engage the now-unarmed idiot with the same deadly force.  that is the CORE of everything i argue here.  Once the threat isn't deadly - once you see him drop that fcking rock and run away winged - you turn off the mentality of "center mass bullets until he's on ground".

they didn't do that.  And once it's okay with 35 feet (something like that in this case?) then it's okay with 3 fcking miles, ya know?  that's what youre not seeing.  When deadly threat is gone, they need to 'turn off' the switch that says "waste this motherfccker".  They didn't do that.  see what I'm saying?

it was fine to cap him with rock overhead, he might have hurt them.  but unarmed, when they watched him drop the rock - you don't need bullets anymore.  They didn't have that off switch. 

[Skip8282]

Viral video of Pasco police shooting doesn’t count as evidence, police say

PASCO, Washington– Police in Pasco, Washington, say they don’t know who filmed the viral video that showed three officers fatally shooting an unarmed Mexican man last week, nor the device the person used, so they can’t use it as evidence.

“It’s not enough for us to take [it] from YouTube,” said Ken Lattin, a spokesperson for the Kennewick Police Department. “It has to be preserved forensically in order to be admitted as evidence.”

Lattin urged the person who shot the video to come forward.

Other footage may prove more useful. The three officers involved in the death of Antonio Zambrano-Montes were wearing microphones at the time, Lattin said, and there is dashcam video of the incident.

http://fusion.net/story/51683/police-say-they-cant-use-viral-video-of-pasco-shooting-as-evidence/

I think it unlikely they can't track that person down.  Also, they've put out a call asking for more videos.

[Skip8282]

it is police admin of justice which will to wild and crazy, once we give them the power to shoot someone who is no longer a threat.

don't you get that? 

i dont care about this idiot they wasted.  I care that ANY american is blind enough to say it's cool for police to press pause on a gun battle, then re-engage the now-unarmed idiot with the same deadly force.  that is the CORE of everything i argue here.  Once the threat isn't deadly - once you see him drop that fcking rock and run away winged - you turn off the mentality of "center mass bullets until he's on ground".

they didn't do that.  And once it's okay with 35 feet (something like that in this case?) then it's okay with 3 fcking miles, ya know?  that's what youre not seeing.  When deadly threat is gone, they need to 'turn off' the switch that says "waste this motherfccker".  They didn't do that.  see what I'm saying?

it was fine to cap him with rock overhead, he might have hurt them.  but unarmed, when they watched him drop the rock - you don't need bullets anymore.  They didn't have that off switch. 

So is there a standard?

[240 is Back]

So is there a standard?

Yes.  Absolutely.  Police have to halt the use of deadly force once they determine the deadly threat is no longer present.

let's say the dude had a gun, and they fired on him.  He DROPS THE GUN, in plain site of them, we're talking 5 feet from them.  Drops the gun.  Turns and runs.  They can NO LONGER shoot at him, because they can see he's no longer a deadly threat - he's just a wounded unarmed dude with 4-5 angry cops about five feet behind him lol.

They lacked ability to just knock his wounded ass down once he stopped running and held up empty hands.  He had no gun, no rock, just empty hands.  Four or five cops emptying their guns into a man 5-10 feet from them, with empty hands.  That's highly troubling. 

[polychronopolous]

Yes.  Absolutely.  Police have to halt the use of deadly force once they determine the deadly threat is no longer present.

let's say the dude had a gun, and they fired on him.  He DROPS THE GUN, in plain site of them, we're talking 5 feet from them.  Drops the gun.  Turns and runs.  They can NO LONGER shoot at him, because they can see he's no longer a deadly threat - he's just a wounded unarmed dude with 4-5 angry cops about five feet behind him lol.

They lacked ability to just knock his wounded ass down once he stopped running and held up empty hands.  He had no gun, no rock, just empty hands.  Four or five cops emptying their guns into a man 5-10 feet from them, with empty hands.  That's highly troubling. 

How could you possibly know he's unarmed?

[240 is Back]

How could you possibly know he's unarmed?

because we have video of this.   He has a rock in his hands, which he throws.  They taze and fire rounds.  He runs, and they're a few feet behind him.  They yell freeze, and he stops.  his hands are empty.

Yes, he's unarmed.  Period.  Tape shows it, cops knew it. 

Now, if you have some theory about "well, he COULD have pulled a bazooka from his shorts...", well that could apply to anyone at any time.  But his hands are empty from the moment he throws rocks until they shoot him dead.  He's unarmed.  Cops saw it, we see it on video too.

[polychronopolous]

because we have video of this.   He has a rock in his hands, which he throws.  They taze and fire rounds.  He runs, and they're a few feet behind him.  They yell freeze, and he stops.  his hands are empty.

Yes, he's unarmed.  Period.  Tape shows it, cops knew it.

Now, if you have some theory about "well, he COULD have pulled a bazooka from his shorts...", well that could apply to anyone at any time.  But his hands are empty from the moment he throws rocks until they shoot him dead.  He's unarmed.  Cops saw it, we see it on video too.

Proof?

[240 is Back]

Proof?

  They're in the camera shot.  they have guns and eyes trained on him.  They shoot him while his shiny empty hands are held up above waist level.

As far as proof goes lol, that's some of the greatest proof you'll ever get - digital video footage of 4 cops yelling at a man holding up empty hands in front of them, then wasting him.   

If you demand a higher standard of proof, I dont know what to say   This is as good as it gets - clear video of them wasting a man holding up empty hands.

[polychronopolous]

  They're in the camera shot.  they have guns and eyes trained on him.  They shoot him while his shiny empty hands are held up above waist level.

As far as proof goes lol, that's some of the greatest proof you'll ever get - digital video footage of 4 cops yelling at a man holding up empty hands in front of them, then wasting him.   

If you demand a higher standard of proof, I dont know what to say   This is as good as it gets - clear video of them wasting a man holding up empty hands.

You said they KNEW he was unarmed.

Proof?

[240 is Back]

You said they KNEW he was unarmed.

Proof?

they watched his hands become empty.  They saw no other weapon.

LOL @ imagine wasting someone, and telling the judge he can't prove you didn't now the bad guy was unarmed... despite video showing you staring at the guy from 5 feet away holding up empty hands.

his empty hand were in clear view.  that's an unarmed man.  They knew because they were staring at him, directly facing him. 

[blacken700]

You said they KNEW he was unarmed.

Proof?

didn't you know if your hands are empty you have no weapon lol

[polychronopolous]

they watched his hands become empty. They saw no other weapon.

LOL @ imagine wasting someone, and telling the judge he can't prove you didn't now the bad guy was unarmed... despite video showing you staring at the guy from 5 feet away holding up empty hands.

his empty hand were in clear view.  that's an unarmed man.  They knew because they were staring at him, directly facing him. 

We both know your are obviously being disingenuous.

How did the police KNOW he was unarmed?

Below is the definition to help you out with this question.

armed

adjective
1.
equipped with or carrying a weapon or weapons.

[polychronopolous]

didn't you know if your hands are empty you have no weapon lol

Let's kick back and enjoy watching Rob try to dance around that fact. 

[blacken700]

Let's kick back and enjoy watching Rob try to dance around that fact. 

we know he'll just make ip his own facts as he usually does lol

[Soul Crusher]

If O-fag threw rocks at the cops he would look like . . . . .

[240 is Back]

 

Sorry, not sure why we should even debate this one, dude.  his hands were empty and they shot him.

it's their job to decide when to use deadly force, it's their responsibility to look at hands before you, say, end a life.  

nothing to argue man, sorry.  

[blacken700]

 

Sorry, not sure why we should even debate this one, dude.  his hands were empty and they shot him.

it's their job to decide when to use deadly force, it's their responsibility to look at hands before you, say, end a life.  

nothing to argue man, sorry.  

he was reaching toward his body and not up as your lying eyes saw lol

[polychronopolous]

 

Sorry, not sure why we should even debate this one, dude.  his hands were empty and they shot him.

it's their job to decide when to use deadly force, it's their responsibility to look at hands before you, say, end a life.  

nothing to argue man, sorry.  

What is there to debate?

You said the police KNEW he was unarmed and you still have not proven it.

[Agnostic007]

So you think with 3-4 of them chasing him down, that they were truly afraid for their lives?  I'm hesitant, but want to give them the benefit of the doubt.

I forget exactly what my bro told me, but I think they play games with the 'shoot to wound' shit.  It was something along the lines of they shoot to injure or maim or neutralize, not kill.  But, they shoot at center body mass.  The fact that all the vital organs are at center body mass is just tough shit.  Typical 4 yr old stuff, IMO.



Straw:

Yes, good point.  If I shot and killed somebody for throwing rocks at me, would a jury put me away for life?

Ask your bro sometimes how hard it is to hit a moving target.. We are trained to shoot center mass for a couple reasons. One is if we are shooting the person, it's probably because they pose an immanent threat to us and we want to make them stop their behavior as soon as possible. Hitting in the center of the body has a good chance of doing that. Two is it is hard enough to hit a target that is perfectly still in an adrenaline rush situation so if you aim for the center of the target it increases your chance of hitting said target.

[Skip8282]

Yes.  Absolutely.  Police have to halt the use of deadly force once they determine the deadly threat is no longer present.

let's say the dude had a gun, and they fired on him.  He DROPS THE GUN, in plain site of them, we're talking 5 feet from them.  Drops the gun.  Turns and runs.  They can NO LONGER shoot at him, because they can see he's no longer a deadly threat - he's just a wounded unarmed dude with 4-5 angry cops about five feet behind him lol.

They lacked ability to just knock his wounded ass down once he stopped running and held up empty hands.  He had no gun, no rock, just empty hands.  Four or five cops emptying their guns into a man 5-10 feet from them, with empty hands.  That's highly troubling. 

I think ur gonna be right if it comes out that he had no rocks in his hand.  His hands did drop to his waist fairly quick though and that may have spooked the cop.  But if it turns out that only one cop shot, then we should question just how truly scared they were. 

[Skip8282]

Ask your bro sometimes how hard it is to hit a moving target.. We are trained to shoot center mass for a couple reasons. One is if we are shooting the person, it's probably because they pose an immanent threat to us and we want to make them stop their behavior as soon as possible. Hitting in the center of the body has a good chance of doing that. Two is it is hard enough to hit a target that is perfectly still in an adrenaline rush situation so if you aim for the center of the target it increases your chance of hitting said target.

Ok...not sure what that has to do with anything I said.

[Agnostic007]

Ok...not sure what that has to do with anything I said.

Maybe I misunderstood your post