Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Lounge' started by bluharley, Apr 14, 2015.
Well at least he didn't shoot him then there would be an outcry about police brutality. The guy was a danger to everyone in the area so the cop did the right thing in my book. Indiscriminately firing a rifle in a residential area is grounds for being taken out in my book.
The cop didn't "ram" the guy. He fraking ran him over. What this cop did is no less Attempted Murder than if he had walked up behind him and shot him in the back.
I've seen this clip on MANY sites and I just don't get the love this cop is getting.
Prove to me that that cop knew 100% who this guy was and then prove to me that this bad guy was immediately endangering someone else. Because that last part is one of the shoot/don't shoot criteria.
I can't get over this. That cop needs arrested. This is definitely one of the few bad cop incidents I agree with.
If this was from back in Feb., I imagine the police had a nice hefty lawsuit on their hands
Because he ran over the nutjob waving a gun around. Nevermind the collateral damage.
The guy was walking around with a rifle he stole from Walmart. I think the cop did exactly what he had to do.
I thought the dashboard cam cop was just gonna nick him him with his bumper when the other cruiser comes sailing into the shot.
I reckon he hit him a little too hard as he wasn't actually shooting at anybody at the time.
But hey, he could have just put the gun down.
Maybe his intend was suicide by cop....
The dashcam video doesn't show the actual impact with the suspect, directly, but it's pretty clear that the patrol car went at him from quite an angle, probably snagging him with the corner of his bumper, I'm guessing. He did not ram the guy. If he had, the guy would not have spent only two days in the hospital before being booked.
Furthermore, when a suspect waves a loaded weapon around in a menacing manner and then fires a shot in the air, he is a danger. It doesn't take much to reorient a weapon and actually hit someone with it. The guy was quite likely going for a suicide-by-cop outcome. Obviously he didn't get his wish.
Go back, read the article, and watch the entire video, with the sound on. Don't just watch the police car screaming towards the suspect and then navigate away from the site. You'll get a better idea of what happened.
1:55 mark shows the dash cam from the cruiser that hit him....
I watched this and was thinking I cant see anything wrong with this one - the officer seems to be following the guy, keeping tabs on him, so if this officer feels he needs to make a move at ANY point, hes justified. He's using due diligence, evaluating the situation and would be making a call with all the info at hand.
Than, I see another police car go flying around this officer like he's not even there (or doing his job) or on the last lap and he's racing towards the checkered flag. The part that bothered me is NOT that he hit the guy with his car, but that this yahoo decided that his fellow officer was doing such a piss poor job that he needed to take matters into his own hands, pass the other officer and hit the guy. IMHO one of the 2 officers need to be reprimanded ( and I know I dont know enough to say which - you guys in uniform can do that). Either the guy following under control was too cautious with a dangerous person and needs to learn how respond quicker or the other officer needs to be reprimanded for being that out of control when another officer appeared to have the situation in hand.
honestly.... I am getting tired of giving a rats ass about any idiots getting killed during felony incidents..... I really don't want a rampant police state, but I'm sick and tired of hearing how poor (insert name of dumbass here) got killed by the police. He'd never do anything like that (as lengthy arrest record for multiple violent crimes passes by on bottom of screen).... I still stand by a past statement I made, that if you're not a thug ass criminal, your chances of being killed by a cop go way down.
The truth has been spoken!
The as hat was shooting a gun. In the air doesn't matter bullets go up and wait for it ..... they go down and can kill someone. The officer could of shoot him but clipped him instead. He was doing his job. So they should of just let him keep running around town shooting a stolen rifle because you think its attempted murder for a cop to use force on a guy firing a weapon. Prove to you ??? What more do you need video with sound is not enough. Okay
Insert "Murder". Not that the guy didn’t deserve it but there ARE still laws which police ar supposed to follow. a badge does not make you immune to the laws ( in most areas)
And the law says that if the guy won't drop the gun that deadly force is authorized. A dismounted suspect with a rifle who shoots in the air and won't drop the weapon can also be shot. Clipping with the car was probably the better option, given the fact that his rifle outranged the officers' handguns.
This story would read differently if the cop had died like a jackass after he kamikaze style rammed into a block wall behind the suspect.
Lets get real here, that cop was playing loose with the law when he did that. How about if he'd missed the suspect with the car? What do you think the gunman would have done? Probably NOT have surrendered. My guess? He'd have shot officer LEEEERRRRROOOOOOY JEEEEEENNNNKIIIINS there right in the face while he was dazed after playing world's best living crash dummy.
Maybe I'm the crazy one here but I'm pretty sure there's no section in the police manual about accelerating and smashing into a perp before they've tried to talk him down. It was like watching an 8 year old play GTA and he's just excited to jump in a cop car and smash into someone on the sidewalk.
Leroy Jenkins--That's funny as hell!
As far as using a car and hitting the wall with it, perhaps the internal review of his tactics might have something to say about it. Nevertheless, using a car instead of a gun is not against the law. The law would cover the level of force used. A vehicle is deadly force, the same as is a firearm. It is one thing to question his tactics or possible lack of coordination, a la' Leroy Jenkins, but conflating the use of a vehicle vs. a firearm with the legality of his actions misses the point.
Deadly force is deadly force.
And as far as talking him down would have gone, you can't talk down a guy with a rifle in an open place. He could easily shoot you with it while you are trying to make him feel better about his disadvantaged upbringing. There is a lot that happened before that video shot. He probably ignored the responding units' commands for a long time before it ever came to the deadly for e option.
Well it had a happy ending.
I side with our resident LEOs on this one i think they are right well done.
The guy is walking down the street with a stolen rifle and discharges a round into the air. He sure seems to me to be threatening with deadly force.
If that guy had been doing something similar in my neighborhood i'd feel even more strongly that they did the right thing.
Granted I'm not a mall ninja, keyboard commando, or even an internet lawyer but i did just finish my first cup of coffee. It always amazes me how many people never watch the entire clip with the sound on before they weigh in.
Was the officer justified? YES he was! The weapon he used to stop the threat does not matter.
Except to the guy who runs the motor pool, he is probably a tad upset he has to restore the cruiser.
Maybe all LEO's should be certified and trained Psychiatrists with special training in "talking people down". That guy had already robbed a convenience store, stolen the rifle and set fire in a church. Then he fires the rifle in the air on dashcam. He was in a residential area, it looks like. The LEO stopped him and disarmed him. That's all that matters. The first LEO seemed to be following him. I'd rather see the guy run over by the LEO than see someone shot on dashcam video while the first LEO slowly follows and watches it happen.