Shot In the Back

Thread Starter

Metalmann

Joined Dec 8, 2012
703


Quote from the first link::

"It is not a consequence of whether Michael Slager was right or wrong. Nor a matter of whether anyone “deserved” anything, or if anything was “justified”.


That statement is definitely wrong.
The shooting, was not justified in any way.


When people are too scared to use the real language, that's when Freedoms/Liberty escapes, never to return.
 

BR-549

Joined Sep 22, 2013
4,928
Metalmann,

You have mistaken the context of the quote.
The purpose of the quote is to dispel bias, while reporting the facts and not conjecture.

The reason it was said is because you can not get a story now a-days, without the reporters agenda.

We don't have reporting anymore......it's all campaigning.

In other words.....they were trying to report story without bias.
 

shortbus

Joined Sep 30, 2009
10,045
With the Charleston officials doing what should be done in these type of incidents, you don't/aren't seeing the same type of trouble as Ferguson. All local officials should learn from this.
 

killivolt

Joined Jan 10, 2010
835
It keeps happening. He thought he was using a stun gun.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/04/12/us/tulsa-police-shooting-video/

Edit: The Officer who accidentally shot him is 73. Granted they had the correct individual though; the suspect was arrested selling Meth and then later was trying to sell an illegal handgun to an undercover agent and then fled and gets shot by the 73 year old officer.

I just think "73" is a little old to be out fighting crime.
 
Last edited:

tcmtech

Joined Nov 4, 2013
2,867
The way I see things is if a law enforcement officer feels they had a reason to talk to you then stay put and talk.
It guaranteed that if you are in trouble for something running away is not going to help you when the law catches up. Now if you were just stupid and ran don't grab for anything that could be even remotely seen as a weapon especially anything the pursuing officer may be carrying. That will in most cases just give the officer just cause to use high levels of force including tasers and shooting you.

You got pulled over. So what? If were not doing anything wrong and have not been doing anything wrong you have no reasons to make yourself look like you were by running fighting and running some more.

Personally if I was the officer if you run I am automatically going to be suspicious that you have a very good reason which is likely to be something very wrong by the law books. If I catch you and you try to fight that is even more reason to suspect you are likely dangerous and or are extremely susceptible of having done something that will put you in jail or that you may be going to do something shortly that will put you in jail.

Can I risk you getting a way and hope that you were not on your way to kill someone or a group of people followed by killing your self? For me no thats a risk that I would not take give the action that lead up to things so far.
Simply put me letting you go is not an option due to the potential unknowns. At this point I will shoot you in the back as you try and escape and should those shots be lethal well you getting killed for being stupid will rest a whole lot easier on my conscious than had I let you go and you killed your wife and kids or some innocent people shortly after or worse you acquire firearms before any other law enforcement personnel can catch up to you and I end up with dead coworkers and possibly other people while they tried to apprehend you all because I let you go.

Sorry but if you ran and put up a fight as a rational person I can not risk you getting a way so I will have to shoot you if I can and deal with the repercussions later.

It's just logical.
 

#12

Joined Nov 30, 2010
18,224
Can I risk you getting a way and hope that you were not on your way to kill someone or a group of people followed by killing your self?
you getting killed for being stupid will rest a whole lot easier on my conscious than had I let you go and you killed your wife and kids or some innocent people shortly after or worse you acquire firearms before any other law enforcement personnel can catch up to you and I end up with dead coworkers and possibly other people while they tried to apprehend you all because I let you go.
This argument reminds me of, "OMG! I jumped in front of his car and he somehow managed to miss me! That's attempted murder of a Glorious Police Officer! Therefore he has no respect for anybody and could be flying airplanes into tall buildings any minute!!!!
 

#12

Joined Nov 30, 2010
18,224
I would much rather have you think, "Stupid punk is in a panic. I don't know if he's a mass murderer or has a broken tail light. He's unarmed, 20 feet away, and trying to leave me alone. If I have time to fire 8 bullets, I can surely put one in his thigh instead of 6 in his center of mass."
 

tcmtech

Joined Nov 4, 2013
2,867
If I have time to fire 8 bullets, I can surely put one in his thigh instead of 6 in his center of mass."
Unfortunately as I understand it they are trained to shoot at the center of mass not at the extremities. If you aim for a arm or leg you have a substantially greater chance to miss and then the bullet could go someplace it shouldn't and hit someone and then the law enforcement agency has a whole new boat of troubles to deal with.

Aiming for the center of mass has a statistically lower chances of an accidental miss so that's what they use.

Granted I would say 8 shots was being a bit trigger happy.
 

BR-549

Joined Sep 22, 2013
4,928
I would like to see what's in his report.

They won't release it and called in outside help very quickly.

Arrested and charged quickly.

He didn't appear aggressive until the end......that we can see.

There was no warrant on the victim.

Why did he flee and resist?

The whole thing is strange.
 

WBahn

Joined Mar 31, 2012
29,979
I would much rather have you think, "Stupid punk is in a panic. I don't know if he's a mass murderer or has a broken tail light. He's unarmed, 20 feet away, and trying to leave me alone. If I have time to fire 8 bullets, I can surely put one in his thigh instead of 6 in his center of mass."
If you are at the point where it is time to pull the trigger at all, then it had better be the point where the use of deadly force is warranted -- and it if is the point where the use of deadly force is warranted, then it is the point where you shoot to end the threat quickly and permanently.

The key, of course, is that if it is NOT the point at which the use of deadly force is warranted, then it is NOT the point at which the trigger should even be touched.
 

nsaspook

Joined Aug 27, 2009
13,086
Aiming to wound would just increase the number of police shootings, every questionable killing would be a 'wounding' gone bad. The people (via the Supremes) have decided it's better for a fleeing felon to escape unless the felon is an immediate and extreme danger. So far IMO nothing has shown this to be true.
 

wayneh

Joined Sep 9, 2010
17,496
I think his defense team would try to win public opinion ahead of a trial if they had something juicy to change everyone's minds, but I suspect they don't have anything. Except a video showing their client committing murder.
 

tcmtech

Joined Nov 4, 2013
2,867
Unfortunately none of us were there and likely none of us has been in the exact same position before.

I for one am apparently well known for being calm level headed and thoughtful under high stress conditions so for me I would have likely verbally warned the guy multiple times that resting arrest and running will get him shot.

Now my wife on the other hand on one of her good days probably would have shot him from the police car when he ran just so that she didn't have to go to the effort of chasing him. On a bad day she would have just shot him for whatever he was being pulled over for being thats her typical response to most things she does not like and the #1 reason I have never taught her how to load and fire a gun of any form. :oops:

As far as the rest of us we can only speculate on what happened and why. Personally I feel that the media over playing the race and rights cards and and those in charge are possibly hiding something about the whole incidence as well. :mad:
 

nsaspook

Joined Aug 27, 2009
13,086
Unfortunately none of us were there and likely none of us has been in the exact same position before.
Never been a civilian cop and wouldn't be one for any amount of money but I have been an MP with a .45 and the night-stick in a lawless country under martial law with the locals on a beat. The locals carried Thomson machine guns and were always waving that damn thing around at the slightest sign of trouble scaring the living crap out of us and the people in the town. Had a few times when we were sent out to find some joker who went over the hill with his honeyko that ended up in a fight to get him back. The first rule was that IF you every shot a local they had better be dead so we could pay off the family quickly and if you ever shot a GI, YOU were the one in trouble unless he also had a gun PERIOD. The penalty for what they did was not a death sentence so we had no right to kill someone just for fighting, kicking our behinds and running. I gladly took a few lumps to sleep at night.
 

#12

Joined Nov 30, 2010
18,224
end the threat quickly and permanently.
That's another catch phrase I hate. St. Petersburg Florida, maybe 6 or 8 years ago: The idiot had been cornered in his car. Three police cars had him blocked in. There was nowhere to go and he was unarmed. One police officer walker over to his car and, "only shot until I ended the threat". What threat? The threat that he would sit there, impotent and frustrated?

That cop was tried for negligent manslaughter but was found not guilty because he testified that he fully premeditated the killing. Intent is not negligence, therefore, not guilty.

Huh? o_O

Personally, I have never hit a man twice. Why? Because none of them got back up, therefore I didn't need to hit anybody twice. I was fully in control of, "the threat" with one punch. I was was not so frightened that I needed to empty my gun into the supine fool or call five cohorts to, "kick him to sleep". I wish people with badges used the same standards, but I'm probably just showing my lack of police training. :oops:
 
Last edited:

WBahn

Joined Mar 31, 2012
29,979
The fact that something can be abused don't change the validity of the something.

And consider that people could look at you and scream about you using excessive force because you always hit someone so hard (or at all) that they couldn't get back up. Was it REALLY justified to hit ALL of them SO hard? Just saying.
 

#12

Joined Nov 30, 2010
18,224
If you aim for a arm or leg you have a substantially greater chance to miss and then the bullet could go someplace it shouldn't.

Aiming for the center of mass has a statistically lower chances of an accidental miss so that's what they use.

Granted I would say 8 shots was being a bit trigger happy.
and I would say, "If you can't hit me in the butt from 20 feet with a full clip, you shouldn't be playing with guns." :p

or, "If you want a lower risk of bullets going where they shouldn't, don't keep firing until the clip is empty." :rolleyes:
 

#12

Joined Nov 30, 2010
18,224
The fact that something can be abused don't change the validity of the something.
People can, and will, abuse anything, given enough opportunity. I think that's the crux of the matter here.
Even if you are a British cop with no gun, you can still beat a man to death with your club, and that requires beating him long after he is unconscious. (I can't quote an incident, but I'll bet it has happened.) The, "few extra kicks for good measure" is only the beginning of a continuum that ends up with 36 bullets in a man that was reaching for his wallet. The imagined threat of a panicked punk killing his family and several police officers over a traffic ticket? I can't even describe how insane I think that is.
 

WBahn

Joined Mar 31, 2012
29,979
The imagined threat of a panicked punk killing his family and several police officers over a traffic ticket? I can't even describe how insane I think that is.
But to give the devil his due, no matter how insane such an imagined threat might be, similar and even more unimaginable threats have actually happened. Here in this town we've had police officers (plural) killed by someone that was pulled over for a simple traffic ticket.
 
Top