Should Cops Be Allowed to Kill for Throwing Stones?

[Archer77]

Makes sense.  Looked like he might have been either on drugs or crazy.

I don't know the details but he may have had something like schizophrenia. This would explain his erratic behavior.  I'm not a huge fan of government spending but in the cases of people with mental disorders I'm willing to pay to keep them off the streets. It's safer for them and us.  

[polychronopolous]

when they killed him, he was out of rocks.  He had walked a few feet, crossed a street, walked the length of a storefront and hand empty hands up.

This bullshit about "he was throwing rocks" justtified the shoot initially, but the cirumstances had changed and they were no longer justified to fire.  They just did it because they had already started, and there was too much ego/testosterone to turn that shit off once they realized they just had an unarmed fleeing dude.  

They wanted to waste his ass, period.  They didn't turn off their deadly force when the "threat of a rock" had passed by a few seconds.  Plenty of time to start shooting, not start a 2nd shoot.

Look at the leap you have to take to justify this piece of shit being able to keep his life.

So far this is what we know about him and the incident.

1. Meth use (we all have heard stories about those types. They are typically known as the most dangerous of all drug users)
2. Mental issues
3. History of threatening people with a firearm in his past.
4. Current history of attacking a police officer with deadly force.
5. His hands moving dangerously close to his own midsection when the police took him out.
6. It's a split second decision once he starts moving his hands around.

How you can go to bat for a scumbag like this and all those facts being known is beyond me.

[OzmO]

Any person who has assaulted a cop and is resisting arrest is a threat.  They shouldn't have to try and wrestle with someone like that and risk having the perp take their gun during a struggle.  

The question is, is that person at the time of the shooting a deadly threat.

If he didn't have a rock in his hand then absolutely NO

If he did have a rock in his hand it then is arguable in court.

There were 3 cops.  Cops wrestle perps down all the time.  They are trained to do that.

[blacken700]

Look at the leap you have to take to justify this piece of shit being able to keep his life.

So far this is what we know about him and the incident.

1. Meth use (we all have heard stories about those types. They are typically known as the most dangerous of all drug users)
2. Mental issues
3. History of threatening people with a firearm in his past.
4. Current history of attacking a police officer with deadly force.
5. His hands moving dangerously close to his own midsection when the police took him out.
6. It's a split second decision once he starts moving his hands around.

How you can go to bat for a scumbag like this and all those facts being known is beyond me.

because they live in some kind of fantasy land

[Dos Equis]

I don't know the details but he may have had something like schizophrenia. This would explain his erratic behavior.  I'm not a huge fan of government spending but in the cases of people with mental disorders I'm willing to pay to keep them off the streets. It's safer for them and us.  

I agree, although we already have county and state hospitals and I believe there are taxpayer funded mental health facilities.  The real problem is getting patients in the door.  I doubt people with mental problems routinely check themselves into a psyche ward.

[blacken700]

The question is, is that person at the time of the shooting a deadly threat.

If he didn't have a rock in his hand then absolutely NO

If he did have a rock in his hand it then is arguable in court.

There were 3 cops.  Cops wrestle perps down all the time.  They are trained to do that.

again watch the video,and watch it close, watch where his hands go just before they shoot him

[Dos Equis]

The question is, is that person at the time of the shooting a deadly threat.

If he didn't have a rock in his hand then absolutely NO

If he did have a rock in his hand it then is arguable in court.

There were 3 cops.  Cops wrestle perps down all the time.  They are trained to do that.

An unarmed person is a threat to take an officer's gun and can cover about 20 feet in about 2 seconds.

I agree cops wrestle perps down all time.  I don't think they wrestle perps down who have assaulted them with a weapon. 

It's hard to say with certainty, but it looks like the officers did exactly what they were trained to do, especially if they ordered the guy to stop, get on the ground, etc. 

It would be a different story if the guy did not assault the cops beforehand.  That changes everything.

[blacken700]

An unarmed person is a threat to take an officer's gun and can cover about 20 feet in about 2 seconds.

I agree cops wrestle perps down all time.  I don't think they wrestle perps down who have assaulted them with a weapon. 

It's hard to say with certainty, but it looks like the officers did exactly what they were trained to do, especially if they ordered the guy to stop, get on the ground, etc. 

It would be a different story if the guy did not assault the cops beforehand.  That changes everything.

this case will go nowhere,did you see the family is suing for 20 million  now that's a lot of apple picking

[240 is Back]

i'm not going to bat for the scumbag.  I would prefer he get life in prison for the rock, or better, capped while holding up the rock.

it's the shooting the guy when hands are empty that irks me.

[OzmO]

again watch the video,and watch it close, watch where his hands go just before they shoot him

Until a gun is pulled, its a wrongful death.

[240 is Back]

Until a gun is pulled, its a wrongful death.

"but he didn't prove he didn't have a gun, therefore they can shoot him".

Dude, the people arguing it... they want the guy guy dead, and they'd excuse a lot of behavior in order to see it.  They see police shooting as execution as okay, if the person is bad.  I see police using deadly force only as allowable when life in immanent danger... as so most sensible people.

[OzmO]

An unarmed person is a threat to take an officer's gun and can cover about 20 feet in about 2 seconds.

I agree cops wrestle perps down all time.  I don't think they wrestle perps down who have assaulted them with a weapon.  

It's hard to say with certainty, but it looks like the officers did exactly what they were trained to do, especially if they ordered the guy to stop, get on the ground, etc.  

It would be a different story if the guy did not assault the cops beforehand.  That changes everything.

And it takes a 1/10 of second to pull the trigger of the guns they already had out and aimed.  Also was he charging the cops?  NO. 

The weapon he assaulted the cops with was on the ground about 20 yards away.

That's the question, is that what they are are trained to do in that particular situation?  Just like the Ferguson case.  Is there enough evidence to show they acted outside of the training/procedure in these instances?

[blacken700]

officers are trained to shoot before a threat is fully realized, to not wait until the last minute because the last minute may be too late.

[OzmO]

officers are trained to shoot before a threat is fully realized, to not wait until the last minute because the last minute may be too late.

They are not waiting until the last instance.

He may have or may have not been reaching into his pocket.  Either way until a threat is visible there isnt a justification for  the use of deadly force.

So here's what we have of your argument so far:

1.  "The police knew his history"  You haven't shown where those police officers knew his history at the time of the incident.  until you do your argument = FAIL

2.  "Officers are trained to shoot before a threat is fully realized"  Are officers trained to shoot before the threat is realized at all?  argument = FAIL


Just so you know....  I might rethink my opinion if the Police involved knew this guys history.  It still would depend on other issues.

[blacken700]

They are not waiting until the last instance.

He may have or may have not been reaching into his pocket.  Either way until a threat is visible there isnt a justification for  the use of deadly force.

So here's what we have of your argument so far:

1.  "The police knew his history"  You haven't shown where those police officers knew his history at the time of the incident.  until you do your argument = FAIL

2.  "Officers are trained to shoot before a threat is fully realized"  Are officers trained to shoot before the threat is realized at all?  argument = FAIL

sorry but you don't have a clue,you just keep on living in your MR. ROGERS NEIBORHOOD and let the police deal with the trash

[OzmO]

sorry but you don't have a clue,you just keep on living in your MR. ROGERS NEIBORHOOD and let the police deal with the trash

Yeah, i will keep living in Mr. Rogers Neiborhood of FACTS and you keep living in fantasy land using things that aren't true to argue your points.

   Dumbass.

[blacken700]

Yeah, i will keep living in Mr. Rogers Neiborhood of FACTS and you keep living in fantasy land using things that aren't true to argue your points.

   Dumbass.

lol when this case is over and the police are back on the job than I guess we'll know who's facts are right,MR. ROGERS  

[Dos Equis]

Until a gun is pulled, its a wrongful death.

Really?  So a cop cannot use deadly force if someone has a knife?  Or a bat?  Or softball sized rock? 

Good thing that isn't how use of force guidelines work.  Would result a lot more injured and dead cops. 

[Dos Equis]

And it takes a 1/10 of second to pull the trigger of the guns they already had out and aimed.  Also was he charging the cops?  NO. 

The weapon he assaulted the cops with was on the ground about 20 yards away.

That's the question, is that what they are are trained to do in that particular situation?  Just like the Ferguson case.  Is there enough evidence to show they acted outside of the training/procedure in these instances?

Looks like they did what they were trained to do, but there is no audio of what they said to the guy. 

[OzmO]

lol when this case is over and the police are back on the job than I guess we'll know who's facts are right,MR. ROGERS  

Regardless of the outcome of the case, your argument at this time that the police on site knew of his history will be based on ZERO facts which will show how stupid you are.

But you got one thing going for you in that when you look like fool you can always post up a meme to distract from that sobering fact you have to face.

[OzmO]

Really?  So a cop cannot use deadly force if someone has a knife?  Or a bat?  Or softball sized rock? 

Good thing that isn't how use of force guidelines work.  Would result a lot more injured and dead cops. 

Nah, just saying if it was a gun.  If it was a knife, i would side with the police. 

Softball sized rock in his pocket?  He might just be glad to you, Beach.

[Dos Equis]

this case will go nowhere,did you see the family is suing for 20 million  now that's a lot of apple picking

Did not see that.  I cannot say whether it will go anywhere because there are still a lot of unanswered questions, but based solely on the clip I don't have a problem with what the cops did, assuming the guy had been throwing softball sized rocks.  

[Dos Equis]

Nah, just saying if it was a gun.  If it was a knife, i would side with the police. 

Softball sized rock in his pocket?  He might just be glad to you, Beach.

Didn't have to be in his pocket.  It's hard to tell, but it looked like he had something in his hands when he turned back towards the officers right before the second round of shots. 

[OzmO]

Looks like they did what they were trained to do, but there is no audio of what they said to the guy. 

I'd like to see the exact procedure in writing.

It just doesn't seem logical in that instance that they would be trained to assume they are in deadly danger.  Had this been a knife or gun or bat, sure.  Softball sized rock sitting on the ground 20 yards away?  NO.

Softball sized rock in his hand in the act of throwing?  Maybe.  Just about anyone could and would dodge that.  

[polychronopolous]

Until a gun is pulled, its a wrongful death.

If it was a knife, i would side with the police.