Cops Shoot Man With Metal Bar 10 times Killing Him [Archive]

Awoke

24th January 2012, 09:12 AM

Bullshit solid. Fucking justified my ass.

I had a guy break a beer bottle over my wrist and open a main vein, then he came at me with the broken end of the bottle. Did I kill him? No. Did I send him flying across the dance floor with a hard kick, and then stomp on his head until he was unconcious? Yes.

I did that all on my own, with no canine, no pepper spray, no tazer, no gun, no friends to help, and I was outweighed.

I like you man, but it makes me sick to see you constantly defend these tyrannical NWO pig murderers. It makes me so fucking sick that I can't even begin to tell you how disappointed I am with the bullshit you post, glorifying and justifying these acts of brutal oppression and murder.

A REAL cop from the old days would have tackled him at the waist and his buddies would have cuffed him. Anything else is unacceptable.

mick silver

24th January 2012, 09:18 AM

i am with you awoke . a f army of cops and they shot the man . dam i too have had to fight to win but never killed a man to win . i have taken gun from a man pointing the m f at me and i didnt kill him i know i could of and never been charged . i seen men die it not something thats pretty

big country

24th January 2012, 09:24 AM

You guys will use anything you can to hate on cops. There are tons of videos where they abuse their power. This isn't one of them. I agree with everything solid said here. Every shooting isn't an abuse on power or an attack on the little guys...

Guy comes at me with a weapon? Yeah, I'm shooting him too. Doesn't matter if I was a cop (I'm not) or a civilian. I'm protecting myself when someone comes at me. Don't want to die? Don't attack me with a weapon.
Awoke, Just because you were in a sitation where shooting would be justified and you didn't...doesn't mean you shouldn't have or that this situation would have turned out the same way.
Sure you can be "macho" and tackle the guy, kick him, etc. I want to be alive. I don't care about being macho.

mick silver

24th January 2012, 09:26 AM

and that what wrong with this country ............. life is cheap

Awoke

24th January 2012, 09:29 AM

Then you are just as much of a POS as the rest of these NWO pigs that kill needlessly.

big country

24th January 2012, 09:32 AM

so protecting myself is killing needlessly? Interesting.

Spectrism

24th January 2012, 09:35 AM

That cop was looking for an excuse to make his little gun go pop=pop=pop. If it were an uzzi, he would have put 30 rounds in the guy without a further thought. In this case, each shot required a trigger pull. One shot might have been survivable. The cop put 10 in the guy's chest for good measure. If you cannot see that as a broken switch, then you deserve to run into an abuser like that. The assailant could have easily been taken down by a non-lethal shot. The intent was to kill. That was an execution.

Those who think the cop was justified- I have one wish for you.... may you stand with that cop and his 10 rounds while 10 zombies come at you.... and you watch the cop waste all 10 rounds in the chest of a zombie... and they all keep coming for lunch.

Awoke

24th January 2012, 09:41 AM

You know what? Fuck this. Gloves are off.

I can't sit by and let you people perpetrate the evil grasp of the NWO. Allowing you guys to defend this type of action without setting things straight is no different than if I were to sit by and allow people to bash Christianity based on the actions of luciferian infiltrators.

I will not let you guys post here and try to fool lurkers into thinking that this is OK, because it IS NOT. If you guys are going to sit there and tell me that those four pigs (with dog) could not subdue that skinney white guy, you're fucked in the head. Not only that, but by defending this abhorrent use of force, you are trumpeteering for the jack-boot NWO, like whorish cheerleaders.

FOUR OF THEM.

As if. He might have been lucky enough to get one swing in on one of the cops, but there is absolutely no way in hell he would have had time to kill one of them. They could have had that idiot pinned down and cuffed up in moments. The real truth is that they are cowards and bullies.

I have never bothered to post this before, but I know a guy who I went to school with who has become a cop. I asked him some direct questions about the type of training they do (Martial arts, conditioning, etc) and probed. He told me under no uncertain terms that if a situation gets physical, they are trained to grab their gun and use it.
No fighting. Just shooting. These are Ontario police. Told to shoot, instead of wrestle. Gutless Pigs.

They are not teaching police how to be police anymore. They are teaching them how to collect revenue and kill people. Get it through your heads.

If you were attacked by a guy waving a pipe and you shot him, that is your right to self defense in a situation where you honestly believed your life was in danger.

These "Officers of the peace" do not fit that criteria.

undgrd

24th January 2012, 09:41 AM

Police aren't trained for non lethal shooting. They shoot center mass just like everyone else.

I'm sorry but I'm with Solid on this one. 5 shots might have been excessive, but I really can't tell. The second round of 5 seems completely unjustified. You really can't tell what the guy is doing because he's behind the car in this video when he falls.

solid

24th January 2012, 09:42 AM

Awoke,

The cop had to shoot. There was no time for anything else. The guy was about to clobber his partner. That cop, was covering another officer. To put into your situation...with the beer bottle. What if the guy instead of coming at you with the bottle, was about to jab your best friend in the neck. Would you cover your buddy? Of course you would. Any one of us would.

Imagine if that cop didn't shoot. Say the guy clobbers the other cop with the pipe, and that cop ends up in the hospital, brain damage, or dies. The cop that froze, or didn't shoot, would be the biggest coward on the planet for not backing up his partner.

Folks, do not go hands on with a crazy guy with a deadly weapon in his hands. Even expert MMA guys wouldn't do that. If you have a gun, and the guy is threatening you, or your friend, or loved one, shoot the guy. It's no time to be macho.

Awoke

24th January 2012, 09:44 AM

None of that story I posted was about "being macho". It is about controlled used of force.

EDIT to add that I totally disagree with you about there not being time to do anything else. If these cops were training properly, on non-lethal submissions like they used to, they would have closed in like a pack of wolves and that guy wouldn't have had time to swing the pipe the first time.

That is not what they train for. First thing they did was point their side arm. Next thing they did was shoot.

NOOB

24th January 2012, 09:47 AM

big country

24th January 2012, 09:48 AM

Isn't the guy swinging the pipe just as guilty for escilating this as the cops?

Hatha Sunahara

24th January 2012, 09:49 AM

The NWO is training the population to be docile and obedient. This is what happens when you are not docile and obedient. Are we learning our lessons here?

Fascism is getting things done by force. We're going to see things like this over and over again for as long as we have a fascist yoke over us. The future is a jackboot stepping on your face--or watching your fellow humans being executed in public until you learn your lesson---Conform and Obey. It could mean your life.

Hatha

Awoke

24th January 2012, 09:50 AM

You're right Big Country, and therefore he should have been forcibly arrested and faced due process of law.

chad

24th January 2012, 09:51 AM

it's only going to get worse. fuck, they're giving them TANKS where i live. they just bought something that looks like this (they had it on display this fall):

http://militantlibertarian.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/Robber-in-a-Tank.jpg

nowhere wisconsin, and the police need tanks? for what?

big country

24th January 2012, 09:56 AM

solid

24th January 2012, 09:57 AM

I think being a coward is surrounding a guy with 4 guys and a dog, pepper spray, tasers and batons and the best you can do is shoot him 10 times.

They tried talking the guy down. That was the first thing they did, which was good. They then tried pepper spray, which was the next thing to do. To peacefully arrest the guy. The guy went to swing his pipe at the cop.

There was NO time to tackle this guy at that point. Either shoot him, or a cop takes a pipe to the head.

BTW, this was suicide by cop, imo. The guy committed suicide.

solid

24th January 2012, 10:05 AM

Ok, I'm really trying to figure out you point of view here.

When would a police officer be justified in shooting someone? When the odds are even? Only if they criminal had a gun and started using it first? Not trying to be an ass here, I just really want to understand when you think a cop should be allowed to use his gun?

I'm curious about folks responses to these questions too.

IMO, the cop is justified if me, as a normal honest working American, had the right to shoot the guy. I just put myself in the cop's shoes. In this case, if anyone swings a metal pipe at my buddy, I would shoot and have no regrets about it.

EE_

24th January 2012, 10:06 AM

suicide by cop, case closed!

Awoke

24th January 2012, 10:09 AM

Don't lie to justify this murder.

He never swung the pipe. He pulled it back into a swing position, threateningly (after being pepper sprayed), but he never swung it.

All they had to do was let go of the dog leash and tackle him while he was distracted by the sheppard.

You are not going to be able to defend this. It's murder.

Big Country - to answer your question: If the cops feels his life is directly threatened and there are no other alternatives. I would say that four grown men with a dog and pepper spray woudl be an alternative.

Awoke

24th January 2012, 10:11 AM

and since when did pepper spraying a guy in the face become the definition of "Peacefully arresting" someone?

OMG.

http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/GUARDIAN/Pix/pictures/2011/11/23/1322055599134/police-officer-pepper-spr-007.jpg

solid

24th January 2012, 10:15 AM

Don't lie to justify this murder.

He never swung the pipe. He pulled it back into a swing position, threateningly, but he never swung it.

All they had to do was let go of the dog leash and tackle him while he was distracted by the sheppard..

I'm not lying, you can swing a pipe very quickly. The cop with the pepper spray, was close enough to get hit with the pipe in a fraction of a second. That cop, I think, was close thinking the pepper spray may work and give him an opportunity to possibly tackle the guy if he was diverted enough.

I don't think unleashing a dog is a good idea against an angry guy with a pipe. The guy definitely would have used the pipe against the dog. Have you seen how these dogs attack? It's not fair for the dog, the pipe may have killed the dog. I wouldn't unleash my dog (if I had one) on the guy.

undgrd

24th January 2012, 10:15 AM

___

Awoke

24th January 2012, 10:16 AM

The guy definitely would have used the pipe against the dog. Have you seen how these dogs attack? It's not fair for the dog, the pipe may have killed the dog. I wouldn't unleash my dog (if I had one) on the guy.

Oh, the poor dog.

Edit to add: WWGoDD?

EE_

24th January 2012, 10:16 AM

zap

24th January 2012, 10:17 AM

I didn't watch the video, But things with cops seemed to change in the 80's, Cops used to be human,they would actually be half normal, I think most are scared now, I guess they should be and I am sure they are trained that way too.

All I know is if you get a command from a cop you better comply, right or wrong they are holding the cards, yep it may not be fair or right, but we all now thats to bad, life ain't fair or right, so you can either comply and live another day or defy them and die, your choice.

solid

24th January 2012, 10:22 AM

Come on man, the cops gave him plenty of opportunity to disarm. He charged a cop with a deadly weapon and forfeited his life.
I would have shot him more then once too. A one stop shot is for the movies...not in real life!

The really interesting thing to think about, for anyone of us who has a CCW, if you pull your gun. You are committed at that point. If the guy attacks you, you better shoot, and be justified for it. If you don't, then you are wrestling with a guy who can get control of your gun and use it against you. Or taking a pipe to the head, in this case.

You don't pull your gun out to bluff. You have to be 100% ready to pull that trigger.

Awoke

24th January 2012, 10:24 AM

Not a chance. Four on one, there is no need to discharge a firearm. None.

Zap can see the cnage in their conduct from how it was in the 80's. They are trained killers. I am not going to bother pulling up all the millions of links to other stories of elderly and retarded people being murdered by the cops in the past, because I am tired of repeating myself, but keep it simple people:

YOU ARE NOT THE POLICE. If you are attacked and feel your life is in danger, act accordingly.

All of you are picturing yourselves in this position, and acting alone. You are not imagining being in that position with four friends, pepper spray, tazers and a dog. Keep it fucking real people.

Now, let me pose this: Suppose that video was the opposite. Suppose a lone police officer walked out of the resturant, and four civilians surrounded him with a menacing looking dog, and yelled at him, then pepper sprayed him. Suppose he pulled his cain (or whatever) back into a defensive position, and suppose the civilians shot him 10 times.

I wonder how that story would read in the paper.

solid

24th January 2012, 10:29 AM

Now, let me pose this: Suppose that video was the opposite. Suppose a lone police officer walked out of the resturant, and four civilians surrounded him with a menacing looking dog, and yelled at him, then pepper sprayed him. Suppose he pulled his cain (or whatever) back into a defensive position, and suppose the civilians shot him 10 times.

I wonder how that story would read in the paper.

You meant offensive, attacking position...not defensive I presume. OK, say a cop mentally snaps and for the sake of this example, uses his baton (like a wooden pipe), to threaten innocent people in a fast food join. He also trashes the place with his baton.

The 4 civilians can obviously see this cop mentally snapped and is a threat to the people around him. The cop then goes to swing at a civilian. Yes, the civilians would be justified in shooting the cop.

EE_

24th January 2012, 10:29 AM

The really interesting thing to think about, for anyone of us who has a CCW, if you pull your gun. You are committed at that point. If the guy attacks you, you better shoot, and be justified for it. If you don't, then you are wrestling with a guy who can get control of your gun and use it against you. Or taking a pipe to the head, in this case.

You don't pull your gun out to bluff. You have to be 100% ready to pull that trigger.

Absolutely ready! What is ths CCW thing you speak of...we don't have those in AZ. :)

BrewTech

24th January 2012, 10:31 AM

I'm not lying, you can swing a pipe very quickly. The cop with the pepper spray, was close enough to get hit with the pipe in a fraction of a second. That cop, I think, was close thinking the pepper spray may work and give him an opportunity to possibly tackle the guy if he was diverted enough.

I don't think unleashing a dog is a good idea against an angry guy with a pipe. The guy definitely would have used the pipe against the dog. Have you seen how these dogs attack? It's not fair for the dog, the pipe may have killed the dog. I wouldn't unleash my dog (if I had one) on the guy.

Then what the fuck is the dog for? Seriously?? I can't think of another reason to have a dog there.

Or maybe it's "bring your pet to work" day?

solid

24th January 2012, 10:36 AM

Then what the fuck is the dog for? Seriously?? I can't think of another reason to have a dog there.

Or maybe it's "bring your pet to work" day?

I can't think of any reason for the dog to be there either. My best guess, would be that the canine unit happened to be close to the call and responded. That type of call, any available unit responds.

The dogs are mostly use to search houses for burglars. Or for doing neighborhood searches for suspects that got away, such as robberies. They are very good at locating people that are hiding.

solid

24th January 2012, 10:39 AM

Absolutely ready! What is ths CCW thing you speak of...we don't have those in AZ. :)

:) Man, my state sucks. I just hope I don't end up taking a pipe to the head from some crazy guy before I can get out of here...

BrewTech

24th January 2012, 10:39 AM

The dogs are mostly use to search houses for burglars. Or for doing neighborhood searches for suspects that got away, such as robberies. They are very good at locating people that are hiding.

But never trained to attack an aggressive human subject?

http://www.worldwidecanine.com/gohere/DogPics/dualdogtraining.JPG

Awoke

24th January 2012, 10:42 AM

You meant offensive, attacking position...not defensive I presume. OK, say a cop mentally snaps and for the sake of this example, uses his baton (like a wooden pipe), to threaten innocent people in a fast food join. He also trashes the place with his baton.

The 4 civilians can obviously see this cop mentally snapped and is a threat to the people around him. The cop then goes to swing at a civilian. Yes, the civilians would be justified in shooting the cop.

You're making a lot of assumptions.
You're assuming that the guy was mentally snapped and was a threat to everyone around him.
You're assuming that he was threatening the innocent people inside the fast food joint.
You're assuming he was trashing the place.

We don't know. For all we know, maybe something set him off? Maybe someone just finished beating up his mother in the bathroom?
Either way, I am not taking a position to justify the actions of the guy. I am taking a stance against this blantant abuse of force and murder.

No matter what any of you pro-NWO-cop members say, there is no excuse on God's green earth why FOUR TRAINED "Officers of the Law" (I wish there was a dripping with sarcasm font) couldn't take this guy down without using their guns. No excuse.

solid

24th January 2012, 10:44 AM

But never trained to attack an aggressive human subject?

Not to my knowledge, but I could be wrong. The dog in that pic is doing a take down move, he's trained to grab an arm and pull the guy to the ground so the officer's can tackle him. I've never seen anything where they would use a dog on an armed suspect, or suspect with a deadly weapon.

They have a whole set of commands they must use before releasing the dogs. They have to let the suspect know the dogs are coming, and the dogs will bite them...this is for two reasons. To give the suspect the opportunity to peaceful come out, and to cover the officer's if the suspect gets hurt from the dogs. The dogs are very well trained, and usually suspects only have very minor scraps and such. No real injuries.

dys

24th January 2012, 10:47 AM

The guy had a metal bar. He was pepper sprayed, then turned and went to swing at the officer that sprayed him. The officer covering the officer, fired 5 shots.

This was a justified shooting. A metal bar is a deadly weapon. If a man comes at you with a metal bar, you have the right to shoot the man. That guy was a fraction of a second away from killing the officer.

What makes this overkill, is after the first 5 shots the suspect was down. The officer fired 5 more, after the man was not a threat anymore. Those second 5 shots were not justified at all, since the threat was stopped.

Buddy you just turned a corner. Now you are not only carrying water for the cops, you are defending a cold blooded murderer. Shame on you.

dys

solid

24th January 2012, 10:49 AM

You're making a lot of assumptions.
You're assuming that the guy was mentally snapped and was a threat to everyone around him. .

I'm basing my statements on facts. It was known this guy smashed the windows of the restaurant, then went inside....with a metal pipe, and there were innocent people inside.

That's enough, in my book, to be clear the guy was a threat to people. You don't smash windows like that if you are mentally stable at that moment. Would you defend this guy if he smashed the windows of your own home?

dys

24th January 2012, 10:52 AM

Murder is a lot like pornography. You know it when you see it.
And that was murder.

dys

EE_

24th January 2012, 10:52 AM

You're making a lot of assumptions.
You're assuming that the guy was mentally snapped and was a threat to everyone around him.
You're assuming that he was threatening the innocent people inside the fast food joint.
You're assuming he was trashing the place.

We don't know. For all we know, maybe something set him off? Maybe someone just finished beating up his mother in the bathroom?
Either way, I am not taking a position to justify the actions of the guy. I am taking a stance against this blantant abuse of force and murder.

No matter what any of you pro-NWO-cop members say, there is no excuse on God's green earth why FOUR TRAINED "Officers of the Law" (I wish there was a dripping with sarcasm font) couldn't take this guy down without using their guns. No excuse.

You could make a case as to why tasers weren't used, but the the cop had his firearm drawn and the perp did not comply.
Believe me, I'd be right with you to yell PIG! if I saw it that way.
I bet I could swing that pick the guy was holding in someones head in a New York second!

BrewTech

24th January 2012, 10:54 AM

Not to my knowledge, but I could be wrong. The dog in that pic is doing a take down move, he's trained to grab an arm and pull the guy to the ground so the officer's can tackle him. I've never seen anything where they would use a dog on an armed suspect, or suspect with a deadly weapon.

They have a whole set of commands they must use before releasing the dogs. They have to let the suspect know the dogs are coming, and the dogs will bite them...this is for two reasons. To give the suspect the opportunity to peaceful come out, and to cover the officer's if the suspect gets hurt from the dogs. The dogs are very well trained, and usually suspects only have very minor scraps and such. No real injuries.

So the bottom line here is that the life of a police dog is more important than the life of a human? Here I am thinking that a police dog is simply another tool human police officers use in the carrying-out of their duties - guess they are held in much higher regard than that.

It's very telling when cops aren't willing to sacrifice the well-being of a frickin' dog in order to preserve the life of one of their fellow humans, even if it is very possible to do so.

But, I guess when your police and military is taking its cues and training from the chosen ones, the mentality of those doing the training tends to rub off on the students.

solid

24th January 2012, 10:58 AM

So the bottom line here is that the life of a police dog is more important than the life of a human?

Good question. Personally, I think the dog's life could be worth more than some of the turds out there. Harsh thing to say, but think about it this way.

Say it was your dog. Say some crazy guy with a pipe is chasing your dog around trying to kill your dog. Would you shoot the guy to save your dog?

dys

24th January 2012, 11:00 AM

You could make a case as to why tasers weren't used, but the the cop had his firearm drawn and the perp did not comply.
Believe me, I'd be right with you to yell PIG! if I saw it that way.
I bet I could swing that pick the guy was holding in someones head in a New York second!

Not the way he was holding it. As a matter of fact, he was totally incapacitated when he was shot. I would rather be barehanded in a fight than have to hold that thing the way he was holding it. The threat level that the guy represented when he was shot was 0.

dys

solid

24th January 2012, 11:03 AM

Not the way he was holding it. As a matter of fact, he was totally incapacitated when he was shot. I would rather be barehanded in a fight than have to hold that thing the way he was holding it. The threat level that the guy represented when he was shot was 0.

dys

Did you even watch the video? The guy was paper sprayed, then turned and started raising the pipe to hit the officer. It all happened in a split second. Watch the video again. I still think it was a suicide by cop incident.

Nobody who wants to live attacks cops like that with their guns drawn.

EE_

24th January 2012, 11:04 AM

So the bottom line here is that the life of a police dog is more important than the life of a human? Here I am thinking that a police dog is simply another tool human police officers use in the carrying-out of their duties - guess they are held in much higher regard than that.

It's very telling when cops aren't willing to sacrifice the well-being of a frickin' dog in order to preserve the life of one of their fellow humans, even if it is very possible to do so.

But, I guess when your police and military is taking its cues and training from the chosen ones, the mentality of those doing the training tends to rub off on the students.

There's not too many "so called" fellow humans I'd needlessly sacrifice my dog for. Sorry :(
And yes, a police dog is considered more important then the life of a mear citizen, a cops life is more important then both, and a Jew's life is more important then every non-Jew's life. Hope this clears things up a bit? :)

mick silver

24th January 2012, 11:05 AM

if this is justice i dont want any . thank you . hell people have been trained to walk by people and kill them with there hand . so they cops have no training and they work

EE_

24th January 2012, 11:07 AM

JJ.G0ldD0t

24th January 2012, 11:10 AM

The 4 civilians can obviously see this cop mentally snapped and is a threat to the people around him. The cop then goes to swing at a civilian. Yes, the civilians would be justified in shooting the cop.

and be arrested by officers arriving on the scene post incident?

EE_

24th January 2012, 11:15 AM

and be arrested by officers arriving on the scene post incident?

You're supposed to run away before they arrive...sheesh?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_W_u4UTvk9w

DMac

24th January 2012, 11:15 AM

The second burst of 5 rounds was wholly unnecessary - it was to ensure the 'perp' was dead so he couldn't sue should he have lived through the first 5 shots.

Second, while surrounded by PO-PO it is advisable to not bring a weapon into striking posture - he most certainly did raise that ax/pick/pole to strike.

While I agree with Hatha's opinion that this is about desensitizing us (generally) to police on civilian violence, the first cop could make the claim that it was within reason. Personally, no I don't think it was necessary to shoot the man dead (I fully support the shoot to maim idea if you're a cop), but I understand.

EE_

24th January 2012, 11:21 AM

DMac

24th January 2012, 11:28 AM

What if the guy was charging your wife or child with a deadly weapon and you already had your pistol drawn on him?
Would you be thinking maim?

I would certainly not be thinking maim. I specifically wrote "if you're a cop" - the meaning is much more explicit as I wrote. Do I need to add "on duty and responding to a call"? A man protecting his family is a very different scene than what we witnessed in the video.

*edit to add - as in the clip, 4 cops, 1 guy. "Put down the pipe" - "No. Grrr!!" bang, shot in the knee. "Put down the pipe." etc.

EE_

24th January 2012, 11:32 AM

I would certainly not be thinking maim. I specifically wrote "if you're a cop" - the meaning is much more explicit as I wrote. Do I need to add "on duty and responding to a call"? A man protecting his family is a very different scene than what we witnessed in the video.

*edit to add - as in the clip, 4 cops, 1 guy. "Put down the pipe" - "No. Grrr!!" bang, shot in the knee. "Put down the pipe." etc.

That makes it much clearer...seeing how the other cop is considered "family" of the cops. So justified?

mick silver

24th January 2012, 11:34 AM

ive seen old people get mad before maybe next time a cop will shot them

Awoke

24th January 2012, 11:36 AM

So in the interest of laying my cards out, I didn't do any reading regarding the incident. So if it is fact that he was smashing windows and wreaking havoc, so be it.

None of that justifies these four trained officers to use their firearms.

They are pathetic excuses for "police officers" if four of them can't bumruch that toothpick and manhandle him into cuffs.
However I maintain, they are trained to KILL, not trained to restrain. This was murder.

DMac

24th January 2012, 11:40 AM

That makes it much clearer...seeing how the other cop is considered "family" of the cops. So justified?

Man and wife = family

Co-workers tasked with protecting the peace are not the same.

Are you being difficult on purpose?

solid

24th January 2012, 11:42 AM

*edit to add - as in the clip, 4 cops, 1 guy. "Put down the pipe" - "No. Grrr!!" bang, shot in the knee. "Put down the pipe." etc.

I could see how in theory, this seems like a good idea. However, what if the bullet ricochets off of the kneecap and hits the guy in the head, killing him instantly? Firearms are deadly force, that's it. They 'should' be used in situations where deadly force is needed, and are trained for center mass.

What's interesting, to me at least, is that we are discussing a situation where we know the outcome. At the time, when the officer pulled the trigger right up to that point...the outcome was unknown. You can bet, every cop in that situation is asking a lot of 'what if' questions.

What if they just followed the guy until he calmed down?
What if they used the dogs?
Was it necessary to pull a firearm on the guy?
What if he didn't shoot, would the guy have hit the officer?
What if they just didn't even show up, would the guy have calmed down and left, or would have have hit a child with the pipe?
What could they have done differently?

These situations suck. These discussions really make me think, personally, because I've been in them before. Thankfully, nobody attacked me, or even moved to attack when I had a gun on them. I've pointed a gun at a lot of people. Those people put down their weapons, and the situation was resolved peacefully. But, what if they didn't and attacked me?

When you pull that gun, you are committed. You have to shoot if they go to attack you. You just hope they don't. 99.9% of the time, they don't. Then, you ask yourself, did I really have to pull a gun on that guy? Maybe, maybe not. What would have happened,if I didn't?

Tumbleweed

24th January 2012, 11:44 AM

I went back and watced that video several times and I agree with Awoke. Shooting that guy and defending it as justified is bullshit. Those cops were chickenshit cowards and the one that shot the guy was just itching to put a notch on his gun. SOB's

Veni, vidi...evigilavi!

24th January 2012, 11:49 AM

1st of all, I can't believe this many posts so far, but I guess it's a good thing; that means we have to discuss what's right (it also signifies what you see in America today- a division of thinking IMO). I believe prior to the late 70's we would not be having this discussion, why? Because it comes down to what should be done per police procedures. Back then procedure was to try less lethal tactics of defusing an attacker(morally better), whereas now is more of a defuse asap to prevent even the slightest injury of an officer i.e. deadly force (most effcient)

>>So, could this guy have been taken down in a non-lethal way even with a crow bar? DEFINATELY, even a warning shot would of made him think twice about holding it any longer in his hands(I personally didnt think he was going to swing, he was frustrated and wanted to ward off the mace cop), and if that didn't work, then release the dogs, if that didnt work... club him, if that didn't work...then SHOOT (he was out numbered, if it was only him vs your dog or your wife then obviously you quickly skip to the last step)....there PERIOD!!!!!!!!

DMac

24th January 2012, 11:52 AM

Stupidity clearly killed this man.

EE_

24th January 2012, 11:53 AM

Man and wife = family

Co-workers tasked with protecting the peace are not the same.

Are you being difficult on purpose?

I'm not trying to spar with you...not my style. I've had friends I consider family and I consider my dogs as family...if someone goes to attack any of them with a deadly weapon, I'd shoot them dead. No Rambo bullshit, just fact.

This world is cracking up in a big way, people are killing their families and their own children. Threats are taken much more seriously today. I do think cops consider their co-worker cops as family...shit, no one else like them.

Awoke

24th January 2012, 11:56 AM

I could see how in theory, this seems like a good idea. However, what if the bullet ricochets off of the kneecap and hits the guy in the head, killing him instantly?

...

What if they just followed the guy until he calmed down?
What if they used the dogs?
Was it necessary to pull a firearm on the guy?
What if he didn't shoot, would the guy have hit the officer?
What if they just didn't even show up, would the guy have calmed down and left, or would have have hit a child with the pipe?

What if? What if? What if?

They shot at him on a more horizontal plane than a shot at the kneecap would have been.

You're firing hypotheticals. What if they got 5 passthrough shots at stomach level and hit your 5 year old daughter in the head?

Spare the distractions and call a spade a spade.

MURDERERS.

solid

24th January 2012, 12:01 PM

What if? What if? What if?.

You are damn right, what if. We wouldn't be having this argument if the cop didn't pull the trigger. If he didn't, and crazy pipe guy killed a cop, you'd be happy about I'm sure. I'm sure you'd find some reason to justify killing a cop.

iOWNme

24th January 2012, 12:21 PM

I could see how in theory, this seems like a good idea. However, what if the bullet ricochets off of the kneecap and hits the guy in the head, killing him instantly? Firearms are deadly force, that's it. They 'should' be used in situations where deadly force is needed, and are trained for center mass.

I have had multiple Kops pull their weapons on me for traffic stops. Should i have taken their gesture as a direct threat to my life, and thus reacted in said manner?

Believe me when i tell you, that i already know what the answer is.

The difference between me and a Kop is i know what i will have to deal with after i shoot one of 'them'. The political, physical and mental circus i will have to go through, is enough to make any civilized man think twice before shooting a Kop.

Yet, when the tables are turned, they know they have unlimited backup, unlimited support from the Police, unlimited funds to defend them, etc.

You KNOW that is true, so it is hard to compare apples to pizza.

Veni, vidi...evigilavi!

24th January 2012, 12:22 PM

Stupidity clearly killed this man.
Someone blinded by anger at the time doesn't necessarily mean stupidity, it was not long ago that you could protray your frustrations w/out being shot, maybe the guy did not expect immediate shooting, I truly believe his intentions were not to swing. But now we're conditioned to take everything as it is, just like R.Paul was not allowed to return thru the detector at that airport, but submit to a pat down instead whether you approve or not, you are CONDITIONED to their preference.

You are damn right, what if. We wouldn't be having this argument if the cop didn't pull the trigger. If he didn't, and crazy pipe guy killed a cop, you'd be happy about I'm sure. I'm sure you'd find some reason to justify killing a cop.
Police are required to keep a safe distance from subject until threat is in custody or eliminated, there was plenty of space & time to react if the subject indeed were to charge at him (which he didn't) he only taunted, and was taken down with excessive force from at least 8ft away from nearest officer. I don't hate police, I have 1 retired uncle and 1 cousin in N.Texas in the force, but I do believe we live in a Police state much more lethal than before.

dys

24th January 2012, 12:38 PM

You are damn right, what if. We wouldn't be having this argument if the cop didn't pull the trigger. If he didn't, and crazy pipe guy killed a cop, you'd be happy about I'm sure. I'm sure you'd find some reason to justify killing a cop.

Do you really lack discretion and wisdom to such an extent to believe that situation could have ended in the way that you describe? Look at his posture. Look at his size. Look at how slowly he was moving. Look at the many alternatives to pumping him full of lead. What's that saying- when the only weapon you have is a hammer all of the problems start to look like nails.

dys

solid

24th January 2012, 12:43 PM

Do you really lack discretion and wisdom to such an extent to believe that situation could have ended in the way that you describe? Look at his posture. Look at his size.

Size doesn't matter when a person has a deadly weapon, in hand, and moves to attack.

Bottom line, that cop went home to his family at the end of the day. The other guy committed suicide. Dys, I think you need to be in these type of situations to truly understand them.

dys

24th January 2012, 12:49 PM

Size doesn't matter when a person has a deadly weapon, in hand, and moves to attack.

Bottom line, that cop went home to his family at the end of the day. The other guy committed suicide. Dys, I think you need to be in these type of situations to truly understand them.

So as long as this criminal scumbag goes home to his family, coldblooded murder is justified. I think I understand. Thank goodness he fired that 6th slug, otherwise the incapicated suspect would have likely gotten up and overpowered 4 cops and a police dog.

dys

Awoke

24th January 2012, 12:57 PM

You are damn right, what if. We wouldn't be having this argument if the cop didn't pull the trigger. If he didn't, and crazy pipe guy killed a cop, you'd be happy about I'm sure. I'm sure you'd find some reason to justify killing a cop.

You have got me all wrong. I don't advocate murder. I would never cheerlead the death of a person, whether in a uniform or not.

It wouldn't have made me happy to see a cop get killed in that situation at all. But you're so desperate to defend these murderers that you are pulling hypotheticals into the equation and trying to complicate things.

Fact is fact: The police are (or used to be and should be) trained in non-lethal submission, they had the guy outnumbered, they could have taken him easily, and they chose to murder him.

You predictably jump up to defend this as always.
Let me remind you Solid: You're not a cop, and you owe them no allegiance. Just because you wore the ill-fitting uniform in the past doens't mean you have to defend the actions of murderers who wear a similair uniform.

Awoke

24th January 2012, 12:58 PM

LOL at how suddenly a pipe is a deadly weapon but firearms aren't. Convenient.

The sky is blue, Solid.

solid

24th January 2012, 12:58 PM

So as long as this criminal scumbag goes home to his family, coldblooded murder is justified. I think I understand.

I think this situation escalated to the point were someone was going to die. Either a cop, with a pipe to the head, the crazy guy, or both.

It's what I call a lose-lose situation. Now, who created this situation? Apparently, you think it's OK for someone to go crazy damaging property with a weapon, and endangering others.

I ask you dys, what about this crazy guy? Do you think cops should get involved? Funny, nobody around to help the folks in the car. I guess, since they didn't get hurt, it's OK. What if one of them did get hurt though?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SUnDp76337Q

midnight rambler

24th January 2012, 12:58 PM

Bottom line, that cop went home to his family at the end of the day.

Ultimately that's ALL that *really* matters...right? That the *authority* of the state is not diminished or 'disrespected'?

Funny how no one wonders, "How did we get here?"

Veni, vidi...evigilavi!

24th January 2012, 12:59 PM

I'm invisible again...oh btw, the last 5 shots were to make sure he didn't have a chance to later testify in a court of (NWO) law.

solid

24th January 2012, 01:01 PM

Let me remind you Solid: You're not a cop, and you owe them no allegiance. Just because you wore the ill-fitting uniform in the past doens't mean you have to defend the actions of murderers who wear a similair uniform.

No, I don't have any allegiance. I do, however, support self defense. For cops, for you, for all of our loved ones...and I think people need to take personal responsibility for their actions.

If anyone comes at me with a deadly weapon, or my friends, I'm not giving them control over the outcome. I will take control, not take any chances, and shoot to defend my right to live.

You think the crazy guy with the weapon should be in control of the situation. This is the crux of our disagreement.

solid

24th January 2012, 01:03 PM

I'm invisible again...oh btw, the last 5 shots were to make sure he didn't have a chance to later testify in a court of (NWO) law.

I agree with you Veni, you are not invisible. I don't understand the last 5 shots either, they seemed unnecessary.

Spectrism

24th January 2012, 01:04 PM

"crazy pipe guy".... I saw a guy who might have been a little bold and cocky carrying a cane.... and ready to swat a cop who was closing in on him.

We don't know much else about the guy. Drugs? Mental issue?

He was surrounded by enough cops to take down a giant. Did they think he was going to go kung fu all over them?

For you near-sighted fellows, let me expand your vision down the road a little bit. Let's consider a modern totalitarian state. How about Iraq? Ruled with an iron fist, it was easy to disappear there. Then a foreign invader comes in with another iron fist. Facing them down with a pipe or cane would be foolhardy. So, what does a modern state do when oppressed by an iron fist? Booby traps, car bombs, ambushes, infiltration, sabotage. That is our future. We will be seeing these things happen in Amerika. And the response will be more iron fist.

Awoke

24th January 2012, 01:08 PM

No, I don't have any allegiance. I do, however, support self defense.

No, you repeatedly support blatant acts of police brutality and murder. All the effing time.

If anyone comes at me with a deadly weapon, or my friends, I'm not giving them control over the outcome. I will take control, not take any chances, and shoot to defend my right to live.

Agreed.

You think the crazy guy with the weapon should be in control of the situation. This is the crux of our disagreement.

Man, what are you smoking? The FOUR OFFICERS should have been IN CONTROL of the situation. 10 rounds to the chest is not control of anything.

dys

24th January 2012, 01:09 PM

I think this situation escalated to the point were someone was going to die. Either a cop, with a pipe to the head, the crazy guy, or both.

It's what I call a lose-lose situation. Now, who created this situation? Apparently, you think it's OK for someone to go crazy damaging property with a weapon, and endangering others.

I ask you dys, what about this crazy guy? Do you think cops should get involved? Funny, nobody around to help the folks in the car. I guess, since they didn't get hurt, it's OK. What if one of them did get hurt though?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SUnDp76337Q

False dichotomy. No one had to die. I don't even think anyone had to get hurt...at worst the dog could have bitten the guy and that would have ended it. See, here is the problem: trigger happy cowboys itching for any excuse to kill. Guys with small dicks don't buy corvettes anymore, they become cops.

dys

edit to add: that black guy in the vid was 100x more dangerous than the guy in the orginal vid, yet you didn't see the person in the blue car running him over. I wonder why not. (not a cop)

solid

24th January 2012, 01:13 PM

The FOUR OFFICERS should have been IN CONTROL of the situation. 10 rounds to the chest is not control of anything.

Yeah, it should have been just 5 rounds to the chest. The first 5 stopped the threat and control was restored, the last 5 though seemed to be unjustified.

Awoke

24th January 2012, 01:15 PM

solid

24th January 2012, 01:16 PM

Guys with small dicks don't buy corvettes anymore, they become cops.

Great, now we've spiraled down to penis size comments about cops. For the record, my penis size is fine and had nothing to do with any reason for becoming a cop at the time.

solid

24th January 2012, 01:17 PM

I am glad you're not a cop solid. You'd be out there shooting retarded geriatrics with your buddies and high-fiving each other before driving home drunk. No doubt.

Thankfully I never had to pull the trigger. We pointed guns at people every night on patrol, there was so much crime.

I really think you are not being realistic, about life, Awoke. There's a lot of bad guys out there. Someone has to deal with them, so hopefully good citizens don't have to.

EE_

24th January 2012, 01:21 PM

dys

24th January 2012, 01:25 PM

midnight rambler

24th January 2012, 01:26 PM

We pointed guns at people (READ: assaulted people) every night on patrolYet no one asks, "How did we get here?!?!?!"

Have cops ever wondered why people have utter contempt for them?? Could it possibly be, just maybe, that it's because they "point guns at people" (just a soft way of saying 'assault with a deadly weapon') ROUTINELY, as a matter of course??

solid

24th January 2012, 01:32 PM

How many crimes did you commit, Solid?
How many carjacking? How many kidnappings? How many extortion attempts?

Keep in mind that without a victim that suffered a net tangible loss in the form of bodily injury or financial harm, there is no crime.

dys

You know, these types of accusations really get old. This just proves to me, some of you actually have no clue about the realities of being a cop. I'll admit, I didn't either before experiencing it.

I can honestly say, I fought crime and I'm proud of a lot of things I've done in that short time. Some of the things, no, I'm not proud of.

A cop is a lot like being a garbage man. People just want their garbage, gone. People also just don't want to deal with the true scum in society either, they just want it gone, or not seen.

dys

24th January 2012, 01:36 PM

Spectrism

24th January 2012, 01:38 PM

So solid was a cop??? That splains it. Tunnel vision. One way. The non-cops are ALL bad guys. The threats worth preventing are those against the cops and any amount of force is acceptable to that end.

Solid said:

Bottom line, that cop went home to his family at the end of the day. The other guy committed suicide.

That there is a fine way to justify murder. Hope it makes you and your ilk feel better about your crimes. You took the blame right off the trigger puller and put it on the single, outnumbered, poorly armed and partially disabled guy, while those with weapons drawn did nothing to defuse the situation. They stood there like a death trap ready to spring at the slightest excuse.

I was trained in the use of deadly force and I find this whole conversation disgusting. How is it that I being from the military have more respect for life than you who walked among civilians and non-combatants? How clinical and cold the cops are!

Payback will get ugly. Just watch. Once they fully open pandora's box (and it may already be open) the offended animals will declare open season on the cops that rubbed them wrong. They may think they tied up lose ends by putting 10 slugs in this guy, but I bet he has a couple friends waiting in the shadows for the right time. Multiply that by the hundreds of "customers" these cops "service". It will get ugly. It will be like black Friday at Walmarts opening.

solid

24th January 2012, 01:41 PM

Right, because people that drive 5mph over the speed limit are the true scum of this world. So dishonorable and so dangerous that they need to pay thousands of dollars for the transgression (don't forget to include the insurance junta surcharge in your calculations).

If you think this ^^ is what being a cop is about, you just proved my point. People have no clue. I don't see any reason to discuss this with you any further. No offense, Dys. You keep your illusions.

solid

24th January 2012, 01:42 PM

That there is a fine way to justify murder. Hope it makes you and your ilk feel better about your crimes..

I was justifying self defense. That, is not a crime.

dys

24th January 2012, 01:44 PM

If you think this ^^ is what being a cop is about, you just proved my point. People have no clue. I don't see any reason to discuss this with you any further. No offense, Dys. You keep your illusions.

OK, let's go with what we know. You admitted to arresting an innocent man that was carrying a firearm and you (and I quote) "took his freedom." So you admitted to carjacking, kidnapping, false imprisonment, and if there was a fine accessed (and let's face it, there probably was), extortion. What is your excuse for these crimes?

dys

solid

24th January 2012, 01:46 PM

OK, let's go with what we know. You admitted to arresting an innocent man that was carrying a firearm and you (and I quote) "took his freedom." So you admitted to carjacking, kidnapping, false imprisonment, and if there was a fine accessed (and let's face it, there probably was), extortion. What is your excuse for these crimes?

dys

Sounds to me you don't want to discuss what we know...but would rather go with what you can make up out of thin air.

EE_

24th January 2012, 01:46 PM

Looking at the vid again, I guess it was a pipe bender the perp was wielding.

http://www.levydev.com/bwf/images/emt-35.jpg

midnight rambler

24th January 2012, 01:48 PM

I was justifying self defense. That, is not a crime.

It is NOT 'self-defense' when one actively seeks out and PERPETUATES violence 'for a living'.

These days 'keeping the peace' is the FURTHEST thing from the minds of 'LEOs' - it's as if keeping the peace is an alien concept they've never been exposed to.

dys

24th January 2012, 01:49 PM

Sounds to me you don't want to discuss what we know...but would rather go with what you can make up out of thin air.

No you are out and out lieing. Do you not remember our discussion on GIM1? You admitted that you arrested an innocent man for carrying a firearm. Do you now deny this? Try me, Solid, and I'll go back and spend the next 50 hours finding that thread, I don't care how long it takes.

dys

big country

24th January 2012, 01:51 PM

Zero rounds were called for. Any competent group of four officers could have brought that guy under control.

I am glad you're not a cop solid. You'd be out there shooting retarded geriatrics with your buddies and high-fiving each other before driving home drunk. No doubt.

Awoke, If you don't chill it you're going to be getting a vacation. (not a threat...just pointing it out). This (quoted) was totally uncalled for.

Why when someone disagrees with you, you starting attacking? I was called a "POS" in post #14, I was also called a "Pro-NWO-cop member" in post #45. Let me tell you that neither are true.
You guys are blinded by your hate. You cannot see both sides of the arguement. All you see is police shooting = murder. Your mind is made up, discussing it with you further will just induce more name calling and probably bans. If you were here to truely learn you would leave your preconcieved notions at the door and open your mind to other points of view and discussions. Let me know if you want to discuss this further in a rational sense. If you're going to keep throwing out hypotheticals and accusations then I'm done here. I'm not going to stoop that low. This isn't just directed at you awoke but everyone...on both sides.
If we all agreed here it would be pretty boring. No reason to get your blood pressure up during a discussion where the ultimate goal is to learn and see all points of view.

solid

24th January 2012, 01:52 PM

No you are out and out lieing. Do you not remember our discussion on GIM1? You admitted that you arrested an innocent man for carrying a firearm. Do you now deny this? Try me, Solid, and I'll go back and spend the next 50 hours finding that thread, I don't care how long it takes.

dys

I arrested a man carrying an illegal firearm. You claim he was innocent. He was not innocent according to the law. The law I swore to uphold.

I do vaguely remember that thread. You accused me of being a car jacker, kidnapper, and a bunch of other nonsense. Look how you are wording your posts...that's why I say you are making things up, not going by the facts.

Spectrism

24th January 2012, 01:52 PM

I was justifying self defense. That, is not a crime.

Self-defense.... nice one. There was plenty of room to back off from this guy. There was no intention among those murderers to do anything but clean the streets of this obvious deadbeat. There was no room at the hospital but they had a slab at the morgue waiting. Officer Braveman protected his fellow threatened officer and made sure he did his duty. Good time was had by all.

Let me point out a simple observation. Once that perp cocked his arm back ready to swing, the shooter decided to kill him. Not to stop the potential attack... and it was POTENTIAL. But to kill the guy. There was no single shot to see that the perp was stopped. Even the second shot, one could see that the lone guy was done. No.... we had to see officer Bravemen poke 8 more slugs into the guy.

And you find this acceptable?

The argument that cops are only trained in use of deadly force is another SICK and DEMENTED twist of an excuse. Just because you are trained in the use of deadly force, that does not mean that every encounter must be an exercise of deadly force. Cops will get returned to them what they have dished out. I will not be stopping to help cops. There was a day when I would... but in the future, I will mind my own business.

Spectrism

24th January 2012, 01:54 PM

I arrested a man carrying an illegal firearm. You claim he was innocent. He was not innocent according to the law. The law I swore to uphold.

I do vaguely remember that thread. You accused me of being a car jacker, kidnapper, and a bunch of other nonsense. Look how you are wording your posts...that's why I say you are making things up, not going by the facts.

What makes a firearm ILLEGAL? What state did you work in? I will show you that you violated your oath of office.

solid

24th January 2012, 01:56 PM

Let me point out a simple observation. Once that perp cocked his arm back ready to swing, the shooter decided to kill him. Not to stop the potential attack... and it was POTENTIAL. .

Spec, he cocked his arm and moved to attack. There's no time in that situation. Fraction of seconds count. He could have killed the other cop in less than one second. If the cop had hesitated, the situation would be a lot different. You'd have two dead people.

solid

24th January 2012, 01:58 PM

What makes a firearm ILLEGAL? What state did you work in? I will show you that you violated your oath of office.

Man, that was an old thread. I can't remember which situation that was. I think it was the one guy I asked to search on a hunch, he complied with my searching his vehicle, and I found a stolen firearm. A firearm that was in the system listed as stolen.

midnight rambler

24th January 2012, 02:01 PM

He was not innocent according to the law. The law I swore to uphold.

I'm thinking what you fail to appreciate is that these days what cops are trained/taught at 'the academy' is nothing more than pumping them so full of bullshit their eyes are all brown. The times I try to engage cops in conversation about what 'the law' actually is they're lost and generally avoid going there. Pretty pathetic. In the last 10 years I'v only had ONE substantial conversation with a cop (a black Texas DPS Trooper) who was genuinely interested in comprehending 'the law' beyond the brainwashing he had received.

dys

24th January 2012, 02:01 PM

I arrested a man carrying an illegal firearm. You claim he was innocent. He was not innocent according to the law. The law I swore to uphold.

I do vaguely remember that thread. You accused me of being a car jacker, kidnapper, and a bunch of other nonsense. Look how you are wording your posts...that's why I say you are making things up, not going by the facts.

The law you swore to uphold? You mean this law: ...the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

How were you upholding the law when you kidnapped a man exercising his 2nd amendment rights?

dys

dys

24th January 2012, 02:03 PM

Man, that was an old thread. I can't remember which situation that was. I think it was the one guy I asked to search on a hunch, he complied with my searching his vehicle, and I found a stolen firearm. A firearm that was in the system listed as stolen.

I don't remember it being a stolen firearm.

dys

solid

24th January 2012, 02:09 PM

I don't remember it being a stolen firearm.

dys

Do you remember the details of the situation? There was a lot of them, I can't remember which one we discussed. Was it the guy who took off running, leaving a loaded assault rifle on the seat of his car?

dys

24th January 2012, 02:10 PM

solid

24th January 2012, 02:12 PM

The law you swore to uphold? You mean this law: [B] ...the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Who's interpretation of that law should I uphold? My own opinions of it, your opinions, or what the state decides with every little BS gun law out there?

dys

24th January 2012, 02:15 PM

Who's interpretation of that law should I uphold? My own opinions of it, your opinions, or what the state decides with every little BS gun law out there?

Now we get to the crux of the issue. How can you possibly interpret 'shall not be infringed' to mean anything other than 'shall not be infringed'?
This is not a matter of opinion and it's not subjective. 'Shall not be infringed' means exactly what it says. What else you got?

dys

gunDriller

24th January 2012, 02:18 PM

today at the gym a guy who turned out to be a retired cop made a comment about my stretching exercises.

then i was talking to his wife in the lobby. i made a comment about abuse of power by police, occurring more often since 9-11.

she got defensive, insisting that it's always justified. (maybe she likes being groped by the TSA ? LA lawyer Gloria Alread said in interview that she enjoyed the TSA groping.)

it's a faint comfort. but, having witnessed too many such abuses to conclude that it's rare behavior, i have come to a conclusion. someday there will be a cop-killer trial - and the cop-killer will go free, because there will be enough people on the jury who have been abused by cops.

for example - it relates to the niece of my mail-woman. her niece had her car stolen in Santa Rosa California. the car was recovered, and it went into storage, where the bill was $45 a day - a sweetheart deal between Santa Rosa & the tow-company. the 19 year old niece didn't have the money. she thought she could work a few weeks and then pay the bill.

instead, the cops sold the car. she showed up with the money and it was GONE. stolen TWICE.

so at age 19, that young lady got a premature education in Cop Morality. i'm not saying all cops are like that, just that the honest ones in some towns are chicken to call bullshit on their co-workers.

some day, that young lady - or someone like her - will be called to serve on a jury. her experience with the Santa Rosa cops will influence her judgment.

i appreciate the education from youse guys. it makes me realize the wisdom in dealing with 'security situations' yourself, quietly, & not involving the cops.

so, THANKS. seriously, you guys might have saved my life.

DMac

24th January 2012, 02:21 PM

I lol'ed at "assault rifle"

:)

solid

24th January 2012, 02:21 PM

What else you got?

dys

Where I was sworn, certain automatic assault rifles are illegal. I was sworn to uphold the laws that are defined by society, not make them up, or disregard those laws. That's what I was sworn to do. Therefore, I upheld my oath. Now, let's say I didn't in that case. The 'spirit' of the law, say I did not infringe on that guy's right to drive around with a load assault rifle on his driver's seat. Say, I let him go. Then, he goes and shoots someone. The blame, falls upon me. The victims families can sue me and win. I didn't uphold the law as written and should be enforced. I was a 'bad' cop.

midnight rambler

24th January 2012, 02:26 PM

I was sworn to uphold the laws that are defined by society, not make them up, or disregard those laws. That's what I was sworn to do."Simply performing my sworn duty/just following orders" did not absolve the Nazis on trial at Nuremberg. And as I previously posted, most cops are totally clueless uncaring egocentric know-it-all knuckleheads when it comes to what 'the law' *really* is. (hint: all law is the protection of property rights, all else is policy and policy requires consent)

solid

24th January 2012, 02:30 PM

"Simply performing my sworn duty" did not absolve the Nazis on trial at Nuremberg.

That's a good point, to be taken into each individual situation. I can think of only once, where this statement applied to me. I was written up for insubordination...not following orders.

DMac

24th January 2012, 02:31 PM

What's the difference between an assault rifle and a non-assault rifle?

Scariness factor?

dys

24th January 2012, 02:32 PM

Where I was sworn, certain automatic assault rifles are illegal. I was sworn to uphold the laws that are defined by society, not make them up, or disregard those laws. That's what I was sworn to do. Therefore, I upheld my oath. Now, let's say I didn't in that case. The 'spirit' of the law, say I did not infringe on that guy's right to drive around with a load assault rifle on his driver's seat. Say, I let him go. Then, he goes and shoots someone. The blame, falls upon me. The victims families can sue me and win. I didn't uphold the law as written and should be enforced. I was a 'bad' cop.

Only problem is, automatic assault rifles are NOT illegal. Shall not be infringed. Shall not be infringed. Shall not be infringed. Shall not be infringed. Shall not be infringed.
The law that you swore to uphold. Shall not be infringed. Shall not be infringed.
You carjacked an innocent man, then you kidnapped him, had his car towed (extortion), then you falsely imprisoned him. And that isn't even the worst part. The worst part is that you have the gall to defend your criminal actions and to say that you would do it again. Shame.

dys

JDRock

24th January 2012, 02:40 PM

Isn't the guy swinging the pipe just as guilty for escilating this as the cops?
yes hes guilty of assault! with a weapon that has a 3' range! 4 kops?? really they lose their man-card...oh, and 5 shots isnt excessive, its murder. the OTHER 5 shots is just standard sociopathic police academy -hollywood bullshit.

iOWNme

24th January 2012, 02:53 PM

Solid Im not picking on you but i want you to honestly admit to this entire forum that if i had a gun, and a cop was coming at me with a pipe, that i would be justified in the killing and no charges from the State would acrue.

In other words, do you think i am justified in killing a Kop if he is coming at me with a pipe and i have a gun?

Do you think the State would agree with you?

Please dont give me some long diatribe about how when you were a Kop....BLAH BLAH BLAH. I just want an honest answer from you without the rhetoric. Turn the tables, and tell me if you find Justice.

solid

24th January 2012, 03:18 PM

Solid Im not picking on you but i want you to honestly admit to this entire forum that if i had a gun, and a cop was coming at me with a pipe, that i would be justified in the killing and no charges from the State would acrue.

LOL, half this forum is picking on me. It's all good though, it's a good discussion.

To answer your question, if the circumstances were that the cop was assaulting you with a pipe, intending to harm or possibly kill you, yes it would be justified. Everyone has the right to defend their lives.

Cops aren't above the law, or they shouldn't be. The problem, is that the system assumes, and can automatically side with cops, from the start. You would be assumed guilty of a crime, when in fact, you did not commit a crime. However in the case of pure self-defense, your innocence would ie should...be recognized.

There was a case where a cop snapped and shot a guy during a game of darts, in a pub. The story is here somewhere on this forum. If a bystander intervened, and shot the cop, I'm sure on all levels in our justice system that would been a justified shooting.

Spectrism

24th January 2012, 03:41 PM

Do you remember the details of the situation? There was a lot of them, I can't remember which one we discussed. Was it the guy who took off running, leaving a loaded assault rifle on the seat of his car?

How do you know it wasn't a peace rifle? When I am accosted by cops carrying weapons, I suppose they are all assault cops, otherwise they would not have weapons to threaten me. I am not allowed to open carry a weapon because they consider that assault!

Who's interpretation of that law should I uphold? My own opinions of it, your opinions, or what the state decides with every little BS gun law out there?

I asked what state you were in. I will show you what you swore to protect. You surely seem to have forgotten your own oath!

Where I was sworn, certain automatic assault rifles are illegal. I was sworn to uphold the laws that are defined by society, not make them up, or disregard those laws. That's what I was sworn to do. Therefore, I upheld my oath. Now, let's say I didn't in that case. The 'spirit' of the law, say I did not infringe on that guy's right to drive around with a load assault rifle on his driver's seat. Say, I let him go. Then, he goes and shoots someone. The blame, falls upon me. The victims families can sue me and win. I didn't uphold the law as written and should be enforced. I was a 'bad' cop.

Clearly you never wrestled with the contradictions between the laws. One told you one thing and another required an exact opposite response. You did NOT uphold your oath- that oath you don't even remember!

LOL, half this forum is picking on me. It's all good though, it's a good discussion.

How can you spend any time at a place like this and be so ignorant!?!?!

To answer your question, if the circumstances were that the cop was assaulting you with a pipe, intending to harm or possibly kill you, yes it would be justified. Everyone has the right to defend their lives.

Easy answer but it is a sidestep of the issue. What if the cop is assaulting someone and that person has an escape route and they can run away, but stand their ground and shoot the cop? In the case of this thread, those cops were not boxed in.

Cops aren't above the law, or they shouldn't be. The problem, is that the system assumes, and can automatically side with cops, from the start. You would be assumed guilty of a crime, when in fact, you did not commit a crime. However in the case of pure self-defense, your innocence would ie should...be recognized.

I see cops put themselves above the law every day. They have the nerve to ticket "speeders" on the highway and travel faster in non-emergency situations than any speeder I ever see.

There was a case where a cop snapped and shot a guy during a game of darts, in a pub. The story is here somewhere on this forum. If a bystander intervened, and shot the cop, I'm sure on all levels in our justice system that would been a justified shooting.

The assault cop in the bar figured there were no other weapons there so he was king of the animals. Since might makes right, when the animals overrun the assault cops or blow them away with IEDs, the bad guys will become right.

solid

24th January 2012, 04:29 PM

Spectrism,

I'll add you to my growing list of folks here who have no idea what law enforcement is like.

Some of you guys live in a different world, I'll say that.

solid

24th January 2012, 04:32 PM

You carjacked an innocent man, then you kidnapped him, had his car towed (extortion), then you falsely imprisoned him. And that isn't even the worst part. The worst part is that you have the gall to defend your criminal actions and to say that you would do it again. Shame.

That guy was a turd. Getting him off the streets made that community safer. Shame on you for supporting guys like that. They give guns, and our rights to carry them, a bad name.

There's a lot of guys out there harming innocent folks. Getting them off the street, is a good thing.

willie pete

24th January 2012, 04:38 PM

I don't see where the suspect swung the crow bar at the cops....like I said before, cops have a license to kill, and MOST like to use it....it's my opinion that lot's and lot's of cops just like to hurt people

zap

24th January 2012, 05:22 PM

Spectrism

24th January 2012, 06:16 PM

Spectrism,

I'll add you to my growing list of folks here who have no idea what law enforcement is like.

Some of you guys live in a different world, I'll say that.

You use words without understanding them. What laws did you enforce? You cannot even tell me what state you worked in and what oath you took. I suspect you spent far more time enforcing statutes and policies, than laws.

Yeah, you get to work with the dregs of society... the real white & black trash. But then everybody is a suspect for being trash. And soon, you begin to feel so superior that all must bow to you or be snuffed. Yeah... I have a pretty good idea what it means to be a cop.

solid

24th January 2012, 06:22 PM

Yeah, you get to work with the dregs of society... the real white & black trash. But then everybody is a suspect for being trash. And soon, you begin to feel so superior that all must bow to you or be snuffed. Yeah... I have a pretty good idea what it means to be a cop.

Not superior, no. Desensitized, yes. Other than that, you are pretty close to understanding.

mick silver

24th January 2012, 07:07 PM

So solid was a cop??? That splains it. Tunnel vision. One way. The non-cops are ALL bad guys. The threats worth preventing are those against the cops and any amount of force is acceptable to that end.

Solid said:

That there is a fine way to justify murder. Hope it makes you and your ilk feel better about your crimes. You took the blame right off the trigger puller and put it on the single, outnumbered, poorly armed and partially disabled guy, while those with weapons drawn did nothing to defuse the situation. They stood there like a death trap ready to spring at the slightest excuse.

I was trained in the use of deadly force and I find this whole conversation disgusting. How is it that I being from the military have more respect for life than you who walked among civilians and non-combatants? How clinical and cold the cops are!

Payback will get ugly. Just watch. Once they fully open pandora's box (and it may already be open) the offended animals will declare open season on the cops that rubbed them wrong. They may think they tied up lose ends by putting 10 slugs in this guy, but I bet he has a couple friends waiting in the shadows for the right time. Multiply that by the hundreds of "customers" these cops "service". It will get ugly. It will be like black Friday at Walmarts opening.

i too was trained for the use of deadly force and i also care more for life then most cops . solid i can control people witout shoting them . i have done this . nuts dont scare me you do say the cops have the right 4 cops 1 nut any i am sure there were 20 more cops in the back watching or waiting to kill thee guy

solid

24th January 2012, 08:04 PM

i too was trained for the use of deadly force and i also care more for life then most cops . solid i can control people witout shoting them . i have done this . nuts dont scare me you do say the cops have the right 4 cops 1 nut any i am sure there were 20 more cops in the back watching or waiting to kill thee guy

Well, I'm glad, some folks had my back. .

What a racket, that whole experience. What a world we live in. I never once, wanted to hurt anyone.

Not one of you, can judge, unless you've walked in my shoes. Sitting on the sidelines, watching, and judging is an easy thing to do. We all do it. It's easy to do, over the internet, indeed.

God bless.

old steel

24th January 2012, 08:20 PM

Young man obviously was not right in the head probably played one to many fantasy video games but he never injured anyone. That is no reason to shoot him down like a rabid dog in the street and terminate with extreme prejudice.

So sad, he obviously thought he had no one to talk to.

k-os

24th January 2012, 09:09 PM

I think it was suicide by cop. Just a gut feeling. Sad, but true . . . you know, it's not a bad way out for some people . . . maybe his life insurance goes to his wife this way, where in an actual suicide it wouldn't.

Ten rounds was way overboard, for sure! Probably, like someone said in this thread, the cop had to finish him to negate the red tape later on.

They should have released the dog on him, but they didn't. Nobody knows how they will react in a situation until they are in it. NOBODY. I don't care what you think you would do . . . the only true answer is to face the situation yourself. Maybe the dude holding the dog was too pumped up by adrenaline to think clearly? Maybe the officer that was about to be swung at was the shooter's best friend or brother?

Judge not, lest ye be judged.

iOWNme

25th January 2012, 06:58 AM

Not one of you, can judge, unless you've walked in my shoes. Sitting on the sidelines, watching, and judging is an easy thing to do. We all do it. It's easy to do, over the internet, indeed.

When you 'became' a Cop did Reality change? When you 'became' a Cop did Truth change? Did Right and Wrong change?

PLEASE tell me how i just dont quite understand the subversion of Reality, Truth and Right and Wrong, once 'becoming' a Cop.

You see, i dont need to walk in your shoes to grasp Reality, Truth and Right and Wrong. These are MORAL ABSOLUTES and they do not change depending on what costume you are wearing. They do not change with the majority's whim. Right is Right and Wrong is Wrong, REGARDLESS of what you thought your job was.

Or are you going to side with the no moral absolute crowd?

Its one or the other solid. Choose your side.

solid

25th January 2012, 07:07 AM

You see, i dont need to walk in your shoes to grasp Reality, Truth and Right and Wrong. These are MORAL ABSOLUTES and they do not change depending on what costume you are wearing. They do not change with the majority's whim. Right is Right and Wrong is Wrong, REGARDLESS of what you thought your job was.

It would nice if reality was this clear. It's not. I have a question for you, Sui. Does the end justify the means?

iOWNme

25th January 2012, 07:13 AM

It would nice if reality was this clear. It's not. I have a question for you, Sui. Does the end justify the means?

NO IT DOESNT. Because i have morals.

You choose not to live in reality, dont you?

The 'End justifies the means' is a Communist ideology. The idea that if i injure a man out of anger, that would be immoral. But if i injure a man for the goodness of mankind, that would be moral. The idea that there are no moral absolutes. A DEAD SOUL'S thinking process......

You tell me, does the end justify the means? Because i could just argue that i will have to kill a bunch of Cops to make sure none of the 'bad seeds' get out and hurt innocent people.

JDRock

25th January 2012, 07:13 AM

dys

25th January 2012, 07:14 AM

It would nice if reality was this clear. It's not. I have a question for you, Sui. Does the end justify the means?

I know you asked sui juris, but I would like to respond to this one. The end does not justify the means. The bad guys love the subjective morality play. Greater good, end justifies the means, lesser of 2 evils, et al...these are esoteric abstractions used in order to justify things like theft, coercion, and as we can see from this thread, even murder. It all boils down to this: it's ok for us but it's not ok for you. We are above the law. You couldn't possibly understand because you are too stupid or you never had to deal with the 'heavy lies the crown' style pressure...blah, blah, blah.
Sui juris said it well- right is right and wrong is wrong. Murder is wrong. Always.

dys

gunDriller

25th January 2012, 07:15 AM

i think the main thing the cops lack in these situations is patience.

they have to ACT NOW. fix the situation NOW.

if they would just sit back and watch the guy with the crow-bar, he would just walk around with the crow-bar. why not leave one cop - with a gun, pepper spray, taser, and a K-9 ... that ought to be enough protection - and let the other cops go deal with other stuff ?

too many times - especially since 9-11 - American cops have had a "one size fits all" solution - lethal force, excessive force. then they go around looking for a 'problem' - and of course there are many - people are distressed.

so they become like a walking gun, looking for someone to shoot, or to tase. gradually, over time, liberalizing their definition of who it is OK to shoot & beat the crap out of.

and they do it for the same reason Jon Corzine raided customer accounts at MF Global - they know they can get away with it.

undgrd

25th January 2012, 07:15 AM

Moral Ambiguity exists in this world because there are not always moral absolutes.

What if I find it morally wrong to charge more for an item I can obtain elsewhere? Most on this site would agree that the seller has a right to ask the price their asking and the buyer has a right to agree to pay or not. Some find it morally wrong to overcharge for an item. Some say it's the mark of a good business person.

DMac

25th January 2012, 07:20 AM

NO IT DOESNT. Because i have morals.

You choose not to live in reality, dont you?

The 'End justifies the means' is a Communist ideology. The idea that if i injure a man out of anger, that would be immoral. But if i injure a man for the goodness of mankind, that would be moral. The idea that there are no moral absolutes. A DEAD SOUL'S thinking process......

You tell me, does the end justify the means? Because i could just argue that i will have to kill a bunch of Cops to make sure none of the 'bad seeds' get out and hurt innocent people.

"The 'End justifies the means' is a Communist ideology."

Spot on. The "ends justify means" argument is what was/is used by Communism, Nazism, Zionism.

Camus was famously against this idea, even while being a socialist. (paraphrasing, Camus on Stalinism) "What happens if the revolution fails? A lot of dead innocents and no change."

Solid, it is time you start inspecting and seriously questioning some of your personal philosophies and ethics.

I think you should read Camus. Start with The Stranger, I think you might like it.

solid

25th January 2012, 07:22 AM

I know you asked sui juris, but I would like to respond to this one. The end does not justify the means.

Sui juris said it well- right is right and wrong is wrong. Murder is wrong. Always.

Idealism has it's place. Our country was founded, our freedom we took, because the end justified the means. Nowadays, everyone sits around watching american idol while our country goes down the shitter.

Nobody does a damn thing, because it may break their moral code. In life, there's so much grey area, we must constantly challenge ourselves to grow, and learn.

If the 'end', in one small part of our world, is a better place. Such as getting murderer's and rapist's off the street, you pay me to do that...with your taxes, so you can watch your game on Sunday. Why the hell do you care how I do that? If I can bend, and find those grey areas of the law, and get some of those bastards. Nobody else seems to care enough to challenge themselves to do that. You aren't out there doing that....who is?

chad

25th January 2012, 07:28 AM

i think you have hit on something. there was a guy near here about 2 years that had holed up in his house and was going to kill himself. they could have just surrounded his house with 2 or 3 guys and waited him out. instead, they sent a whole squad of people storming in to the house and shot him. not sure how that was supposed to save his life, but ti sure got the situation over quick.

undgrd

25th January 2012, 07:28 AM

If the 'end', in one small part of our world, is a better place. Such as getting murderer's and rapist's off the street, you pay me to do that...with your taxes, so you can watch your game on Sunday. Why the hell do you care how I do that? If I can bend, and find those grey areas of the law, and get some of those bastards. Nobody else seems to care enough to challenge themselves to do that. You aren't out there doing that....who is?

Oh boy. Sorry solid.

I have your back on shooting that guy in the video the first time. The second barrage of bullets was uncalled for and I backed you on that.

That statement above is what leads to secret police, secret courts, or no trial by jury. Sorry but I can't back this statement at all. If the law will protect the rights of the guilty, it will certainly protect the rights of the innocent. I can't back you on that.

JDRock

25th January 2012, 07:28 AM

BrewTech

25th January 2012, 07:30 AM

Idealism has it's place. Our country was founded, our freedom we took, because the end justified the means. Nowadays, everyone sits around watching american idol while our country goes down the shitter.

Nobody does a damn thing, because it may break their moral code. In life, there's so much grey area, we must constantly challenge ourselves to grow, and learn.

If the 'end', in one small part of our world, is a better place. Such as getting murderer's and rapist's off the street, you pay me to do that...with your taxes, so you can watch your game on Sunday. Why the hell do you care how I do that? If I can bend, and find those grey areas of the law, and get some of those bastards. Nobody else seems to care enough to challenge themselves to do that. You aren't out there doing that....who is?

I would like to see cops dealing with the murderers, rapists, armed thieves, etc. If all their time was taken up doing that, I wouldn't have to live in fear of whether I was going to be their next victim.

solid

25th January 2012, 07:32 AM

BrewTech

25th January 2012, 07:35 AM

How does that situation apply? The only justified reason for storming the house, imo, is if there's an innocent person inside at risk.

Suicide is "illegal", solid. They were defending the actual living human against aggression by his legal fiction. Unfortunately, upon killing the offender, they were forced to kill the innocent man as well.

solid

25th January 2012, 07:36 AM

solid, im glad to see your posting again...i dont begrudge your line of work, cops in my town are awsome! they encourage the population to arm themselves and resist crime THEMSELVES! they really do a thankless and great job, but i cant defend 5 shots much less 10.

It's refreshing to hear there's places where cops and citizens can work together to fight and resist crime.

If my views are a bit negative, it's only because of my own experience in areas that are no so great. The honest folks are too scared to do anything, the criminals run the streets, innocent people get caught in the crossfire...and the whole time I'm collecting a paycheck trying to do something about it.

BrewTech

25th January 2012, 07:44 AM

cops in my town are awsome! they encourage the population to arm themselves and resist crime THEMSELVES!

It seems those cops haven't received the proper training. They need to get it through their heads that anyone that isn't a cop is a potential (i.e. probable and immediate) threat, especially someone that is armed, and the foremost thing to keep in mind is that all threats need to be neutralized as quickly as possible, regardless of outcome. There is no difference between a traffic stop and a bank robbery, non-cops are dangerous and no chances should be taken.

dys

25th January 2012, 07:57 AM

Idealism has it's place. Our country was founded, our freedom we took, because the end justified the means. Nowadays, everyone sits around watching american idol while our country goes down the shitter.

Nobody does a damn thing, because it may break their moral code. In life, there's so much grey area, we must constantly challenge ourselves to grow, and learn.

If the 'end', in one small part of our world, is a better place. Such as getting murderer's and rapist's off the street, you pay me to do that...with your taxes, so you can watch your game on Sunday. Why the hell do you care how I do that? If I can bend, and find those grey areas of the law, and get some of those bastards. Nobody else seems to care enough to challenge themselves to do that. You aren't out there doing that....who is?

I don't want you on that wall, and I don't need you on that wall.
As far as caring about how you go about fighting crime, I care. I do like you, but I would never want you as a police officer nor would I want anyone that thinks that it's ok to murder, assault, kidnap, and steal from innocent people.

dys

JDRock

25th January 2012, 08:00 AM

It seems those cops haven't received the proper training. They need to get it through their heads that anyone that isn't a cop is a potential (i.e. probable and immediate) threat, especially someone that is armed, and the foremost thing to keep in mind is that all threats need to be neutralized as quickly as possible, regardless of outcome. There is no difference between a traffic stop and a bank robbery, non-cops are dangerous and no chances should be taken.
thats the big city for you...out here its just different...its not an us vs them mentality....but i think THE thing that sets the people aginst cops is enforcing stupid laws like pot! the "law" is stupid-oppressive and draconian, and the cops are placed in the position of "enforcing' these un popular "laws"....solution? REPEAL the laws...and for cops? STOP enforcing them.

solid

25th January 2012, 08:01 AM

That statement above is what leads to secret police, secret courts, or no trial by jury. Sorry but I can't back this statement at all. If the law will protect the rights of the guilty, it will certainly protect the rights of the innocent. I can't back you on that.

I should give an example of that statement. So, I will. Take drugs, for example. Where I was, there was so much drugs we usually didn't arrest folks for it. Which, I actually liked. My thoughts on a lot of drugs should be legal, so I often exercised the option of the 'spirit' of the law, and gave warnings, etc..

However, I used our drug laws to get some people off the street as well. One instance, we were called to a family that was being harrassed by a local turd in the neighborhood. He made threats to them, however they were too scared to do anything about it for fear of retaliation. We went and stopped the guy for some bullshit reason, found drugs on the guy, and took him in for it. We made it clear that if he's back causing problems, we'll just pick him up again. That's how you bend the laws, is it right to do that? I don't know...we all have opinions. But, that family was grateful for it. Does the end justify the means?

dys

25th January 2012, 08:11 AM

I should give an example of that statement. So, I will. Take drugs, for example. Where I was, there was so much drugs we usually didn't arrest folks for it. Which, I actually liked. My thoughts on a lot of drugs should be legal, so I often exercised the option of the 'spirit' of the law, and gave warnings, etc..

However, I used our drug laws to get some people off the street as well. One instance, we were called to a family that was being harrassed by a local turd in the neighborhood. He made threats to them, however they were too scared to do anything about it for fear of retaliation. We went and stopped the guy for some bullshit reason, found drugs on the guy, and took him in for it. We made it clear that if he's back causing problems, we'll just pick him up again. That's how you bend the laws, is it right to do that? I don't know...we all have opinions. But, that family was grateful for it. Does the end justify the means?

What would make you feel entitled to 'warn' someone for something that isn't illegal? Drugs aren't illegal, no corpus dilecti, no crime.

dys

solid

25th January 2012, 08:37 AM

What would make you feel entitled to 'warn' someone for something that isn't illegal? Drugs aren't illegal, no corpus dilecti, no crime.

dys

On the books, drugs are illegal. But, I agree, drugs themselves are not a crime. However, drugs are tied to crimes, and crimes are committed over drugs, such as murders, robberies, burglaries, etc. Drugs can be a vehicle for crimes. A warning is a cop just covering his ass, that's all. You use the current drug laws to throw the book at the people who are committing other crimes. I'm still wondering if you 'get' it yet, dys.

You leave the guy alone who may have drugs, but isn't causing any other crimes. If he's harming others, you use drugs to stop him.

dys

25th January 2012, 08:47 AM

On the books, drugs are illegal. But, I agree, drugs themselves are not a crime. However, drugs are tied to crimes, and crimes are committed over drugs, such as murders, robberies, burglaries, etc. Drugs can be a vehicle for crimes. A warning is a cop just covering his ass, that's all. You use the current drug laws to throw the book at the people who are committing other crimes. I'm still wondering if you 'get' it yet, dys.

You leave the guy alone who may have drugs, but isn't causing any other crimes. If he's harming others, you use drugs to stop him.

Oh, I get it, I just don't think that you (or pretty much any cop for that matter) is capable of the type of judgment you are describing. I don't trust your judgment, or that of any cop. I don't trust anyone's judgment that thinks it's ok to murder people.

dys

big country

25th January 2012, 08:59 AM

See how far this conversation has come once everyone stopped using insults, name calling, and false accusations? There is real discussion here now!
Clearly everyone still isn't on the same page, but it isn't an emotionally charge mudslinging fight anymore and everyone is learning and discussion their idea, opinions, morals, etc.
If everyone opens their mind to both sides, they usually discover the truth is sometimes between the ideal and the realistic.

solid

25th January 2012, 09:15 AM

Oh, I get it, I just don't think that you (or pretty much any cop for that matter) is capable of the type of judgment you are describing. I don't trust your judgment, or that of any cop.

I understand your lack of trust, I don't blame you.

One of the best analogies I've ever been taught, regarding law enforcement, was during a discussion on 'trust' and the community. More about the lack of trust. Our instructor told us, there's sheep and wolves in our society. The sheep, just want to be left alone, to live peaceful lives. The wolves live, to prey on the sheep. He said, your job, as a cop, is to be the sheepdog. To keep the wolves away from the sheep. He went further, and said, the sheep however, will see you as a threat too, you as a predator, as well. The sheep will always keep the sheepdog from getting close, they will never trust the sheepdog.

Son-of-Liberty

25th January 2012, 09:19 AM

Watching the video what I see is four pussies with bad training murdering a guy. The cop that pepper sprayed him could have jumped on him from behind when the guy turned away from him for about 2 seconds to look at his partner that was opposite him. The guy was wearing a hoody which would obstruct his peripheral vision and his head was completely turned away. Wouldn't even see it coming before the cop would be on him. After that they all could have piled on. The guy would never have a chance to even swing the pipe bender or whatever it was.

These cops didn't want to break a finger nail or engage in any physical activity so they kept dicking around with their tools until they felt it was justified to shoot.

I have an uncle that was a policeman in the 70's and 80's and he has told me stories of 20 minute brawls between cops and perps in the ditch beside the road. The criminals new the cops wouldn't shoot as long as they didn't have a weapon and the cops had the honor not to shoot even if it meant taking some blows to the face.

Things sure have changed. Now cops charge you with assault for pulling away from them, or covering your face so as not to take a direct blow from them.

solid

25th January 2012, 09:33 AM

I have an uncle that was a policeman in the 70's and 80's and he has told me stories of 20 minute brawls between cops and perps in the ditch beside the road. The criminals new the cops wouldn't shoot as long as they didn't have a weapon and the cops had the honor not to shoot even if it meant taking some blows to the face..

That was actually the mentality where I was. My training officer, first day sworn in, was telling me respect must be earned in this beat. There's a two way respect, if you are disrespected, you must take action. We had folks that would give us the middle finger, or yell threats at us...everytime, we stopped and approached them.

Our beat was separated from train tracks. He told me one time, he was alone making an arrest, and the perp started to fight right as he got one hand cuffed. The other end of the cuff, ended up on his wrist. They were hand cuffed together, slugging it out in the middle of the street...and back up couldn't get there because a train had blocked them.

I asked him, "so what happened?" He looked at me for about 5 seconds, hard, and said. "I kicked his fucking ass."

EE_

25th January 2012, 09:45 AM

Watching the video what I see is four pussies with bad training murdering a guy. The cop that pepper sprayed him could have jumped on him from behind when the guy turned away from him for about 2 seconds to look at his partner that was opposite him. The guy was wearing a hoody which would obstruct his peripheral vision and his head was completely turned away. Wouldn't even see it coming before the cop would be on him. After that they all could have piled on. The guy would never have a chance to even swing the pipe bender or whatever it was.

These cops didn't want to break a finger nail or engage in any physical activity so they kept dicking around with their tools until they felt it was justified to shoot.

I wish I could argue with you...but I can't.
This could have been handled much differently.
The second cop firing on him was totally unjustified imo. The first cop had him down with the first 4 or five shots.
I still stand by a decision of a suicide by cop.

Awoke

25th January 2012, 09:47 AM

Awoke, If you don't chill it you're going to be getting a vacation. (not a threat...just pointing it out).

I don't care about that.

Why when someone disagrees with you, you starting attacking? I was called a "POS" in post #14,

I was heated at the time. It has nothing to do with someone disagreeing with me: you justified and defended this murder.

I was also called a "Pro-NWO-cop member" in post #45.

A spade is a spade.

Let me tell you that neither are true.
You guys are blinded by your hate. You cannot see both sides of the arguement. All you see is police shooting = murder. Your mind is made up, discussing it with you further will just induce more name calling and probably bans. If you were here to truely learn you would leave your preconcieved notions at the door and open your mind to other points of view and discussions.

You obviously didn't watch the video I watched, because in the video I watched, they guy never swung anything and the cops shot him 10 times.

Let me know if you want to discuss this further in a rational sense.

If rational was prevailent, Solid and the Pig Defense Force would admit that this was a murder that was not necessary. That will never happen.

Having a rich and color history throughout my childhood and younger years, I have had a number of incidences which involved getting in physical tangles with police officers. One occasion I tripped three of them in the process of trying to escape a raided house party. Never hurt them, but put them on the ground. Thank GOD they didn't shoot me.

I have no doubts that solid would have shot me or that you would have either. In that case, I was just a drunk teenager that was trying to get away without getting a ticket.

So instead, they finally tackled me and boot-fucked me after I was cuffed. A number of witnesses saw it, and expressed that they were going to testify against the cops, and we all get let go without tickets. No one was shot.

But getting back to the incident in question, may stance in unwavering.

A single shot was overboard. Not a single round can be justified.

The truth is the truth, and the truth is that the pigs made no effort to diffuse the situation, and went straight into murder mode.

They should be fired, trialed and jailed.

Son-of-Liberty

25th January 2012, 10:01 AM

EE, I do agree that whatever mental state the guys mind was at he was asking to get shot. It is just the training that the cops get these days and the personalities of these guys. They are trained to use their tools to subdue perps and use lethal force when necessary but not trained to deescalate or to handle situations physically when the situation is right for that type of solution. The guy using the spray actually looked shocked, maybe even a little scared when it didn't work.

So instead of just tackling the guy knowing that a blunt weapon needs momentum to be dangerous ( or sucker punching him in the back of the head) they screwed around, pissed him off with the spray and then when he finally winds up to use the weapon they shoot him. They just handled the situation badly all around.

solid

25th January 2012, 10:06 AM

So instead of just tackling the guy knowing that a blunt weapon needs momentum to be dangerous ( or sucker punching him in the back of the head) they screwed around, pissed him off with the spray and then when he finally winds up to use the weapon they shoot him. They just handled the situation badly all around.

The problem, is that everything is recorded on video these days. It looks really bad when 4 cops tackle a guy, everyone screams abuse of force. So, cops try to reason with folks, and if someone has a deadly weapon out, arrest them at gunpoint. They try and diffuse the situation by trying to calm the person down. 99.9% of the time, people put down their weapons. These situations are resolved peacefully every day, but one goes wrong, like this incident.

I bet, if the cops tackled the guy, none of you would be happy with that outcome either. The discussion would be 4 mean cops beating up an innocent guy. Honestly. Think about that for a moment.

solid

25th January 2012, 10:07 AM

I have no doubts that solid would have shot me or that you would have either. In that case, I was just a drunk teenager that was trying to get away without getting a ticket..

This baiting comment, I will not dignify with a response!

Son-of-Liberty

25th January 2012, 10:14 AM

I don't think I would have an issue with this situation if they jumped the guy and he got beat up a little or if they released the dog on him. He did have a weapon (not necessarily deadly) he wouldn't drop it. Force is justified just not lethal. Now if the guy had a knife in his hand this would be a different situation because the knife does not require wind up and is much more likely to be lethal or cause serious harm. I would never suggest trying to tackle a guy holding a knife.

Normally when they release the dog it is on some poor unarmed guy that is running scarred and they let the dog chew on him for a bit.

Awoke

25th January 2012, 10:25 AM

This baiting comment, I will not dignify with a response!

Not at all. I am drawing a reasonable conclusion based on your incessant defence of police brutality and murder. Nothing more.

You make your own bed around here, and you're in bed with NWO pigs every time they brutalize someone.

solid

25th January 2012, 10:43 AM

Not at all. I am drawing a reasonable conclusion based on your incessant defence of police brutality and murder. Nothing more.

You make your own bed around here, and you're in bed with NWO pigs every time they brutalize someone.

You are drawing conclusions based upon emotion, hating cops. I'm basing my conclusions on facts, individually, that apply to situations in the thread being discussed.

You hate cops, we get it. Hopefully, you can set aside your delusions and discuss things without getting so heated.

Book

25th January 2012, 10:44 AM

Authorities say the incident began with the suspect breaking windows at Carl's Jr. in the 1200 block of Avenida Cesar Chavez just before 9:30 a.m. The suspect then walked inside, while workers and customers ran outside. Police arrived as the suspect was exiting the fast-food restaurant. After repeatedly telling the suspect to drop the weapon, the suspect was Tasered. Police said the Taser was ineffective, and the suspect swung the three-foot metal bar at officers twice. At least one officer opened fire on the suspect. The suspect was taken to a local hospital, where he was pronounced dead.I watched the video:

1) The thug clearly threatened the cops (and everyone else) with his weapon.

2) The cops acted properly.

http://www.blogcdn.com/blog.moviefone.com/media/2011/01/fallingdown-1295403054.jpg
Let's get back to serving Whammy Burgers now shall we?

::)

dys

25th January 2012, 10:46 AM

I watched the video:

1) The thug clearly threatened the cops (and everyone else) with his weapon.

2) The cops acted properly.

http://www.blogcdn.com/blog.moviefone.com/media/2011/01/fallingdown-1295403054.jpg
Let's get back to serving Whammy Burgers now shall we?

::)

Always the statist and always defending the criminals, by Book.

dys

willie pete

25th January 2012, 10:46 AM

remember what a chp cop said to me on another forum when I argued that I thought excessive force was used in this video http://youtu.be/9llvTQn8v-c ....."when we show up, we show up to win, not to play fair or by the rules" .....that just about says it all.....*oh and in this case, it was the WRONG guy the cop slammed into the wall resulting in Permanent brain damage and quadriplegia

dys

25th January 2012, 10:49 AM

You are drawing conclusions based upon emotion, hating cops. I'm basing my conclusions on facts, individually, that apply to situations in the thread being discussed.

You hate cops, we get it. Hopefully, you can set aside your delusions and discuss things without getting so heated.

That's a false label and that's a disinformation tactic. Speaking for myself, the thing that I hate specific to this thread are murderers. If those cops had acted differently and that guy was still alive, I would not be up in arms over this tragedy.

dys

mick silver

25th January 2012, 10:52 AM

you guys keep thinking your not in a police state . it here . it does not matter whats right are wrong it just get the job done . kill . i would bet a silver round if there was no picture taken the guy would of had 10 are more guns on his body

solid

25th January 2012, 10:52 AM

Speaking for myself, the thing that I hate specific to this thread are murderers. If those cops had acted differently

And what if the cop didn't shoot and the guy killed him with the pipe? You and Awoke would say 'that' murder would be justified. Don't give me any BS that hating cops doesn't factor into your argument.

You just choose which murderers you want to support.

dys

25th January 2012, 10:55 AM

And what if the cop didn't shoot and the guy killed him with the pipe? You and Awoke would say 'that' murder would be justified. Don't give me any BS that hating cops doesn't factor into your argument.

You just choose which murderers you want to support.

NO way. I would never justify any murder, even the murder of criminals (read: cops). Murder is never justified. Never ever never. But let's face it, in this case no cops were getting murdered. That guy was no threat at all.

dys

solid

25th January 2012, 10:58 AM

NO way. I would never justify any murder, even the murder of criminals (read: cops). Murder is never justified. Never ever never. But let's face it, in this case no cops were getting murdered. That guy was no threat at all.

dys

Give me a break. The guy bashed out the windows in the restaurant, then entered the restaurant with his weapon scaring folks out of there. Then, when the police tried to reason with him...he goes to attack.

How can you say he was no threat? That guy had to be dealt with.

Book

25th January 2012, 10:59 AM

http://laist.com/attachments/laist_lauren/Carls-Jr-shooting.jpg

http://sicksport.com/images/edelrid_snow_light_ice_axe.jpg

::) Yeah...some hooded thug breaking windows and swinging this around your kids while they are eating their Whammy Burger and you would just sit there politely explaining your theories about "excessive force". I would have shot that thug myself if he came anywhere near my table.

big country

25th January 2012, 11:03 AM

But getting back to the incident in question, may stance in unwavering.

Exactly my point. You have already made up your mind and do not want to learn further. I suggest you open your mind to discussion and learning instead of attacking those that do not agree with you.
You might think that this has nothing to do with me disagreeing with you, but you wouldn't be attacking me if I agreed.

I understand your point, you think these cops murdered this man. Some here disagree with that, me included. Make your points, repeatedly if necessary, and we make ours.
Name calling doesn't make your arguement stronger. If you remember anything from a debate class or whatever, it was likely pointed out to you that attacking your opponent is used when your points cannot stand on their own merit. Stop attacking, start articulating.

Awoke

25th January 2012, 11:06 AM

You're right when you say that I hate cops.

I hate them because of the way they conduct themselves, which is perfectly and precisely embodied in that video.

All other (countless) episodes of police brutality and outright murder set aside, those pigs murdered that guy.

You keep making conclusive statements as if you know everything about that perp and the situation. To me, it looked like he was mad about something, smashed the resturant up, and them walked out. For all YOU know, he was going to get in his car and go home. He made no aggresive or defensive moves until he was pepper sprayed. fact.

I'm not defending his actions either. I'm just saying that you are presuming fucking near everything you are saying. None of your statements are based on fact, other than that he destroyed the resturant and the cops shot him. Everything else is your "Worst-case-senerio" imaginative presumptions. I only counter it to show the other side of the coin.

All this blah blah blah, and you can't stick to the basics: They shot him instead of overpowering him.

Awoke

25th January 2012, 11:09 AM

But getting back to the incident in question, may stance in unwavering.

Exactly my point. You have already made up your mind and do not want to learn further.

What is to learn?

Did you see him attack the police?
No.
Did you see the police unleash the hound and then group tackle him?
No.
Did you see the police shoot him 10 times?
Yes.

What the fuck is there to learn? Seriously? Comply or die? Get real.

solid

25th January 2012, 11:12 AM

What is to learn?

Did you see him attack the police?
No.
Did you see the police unleash the hound and then group tackle him?
No.
Did you see the police shoot him 10 times?
Yes.

What the fuck is there to learn? Seriously? Comply or die? Get real.

We did see him attack the police. You just jumped on my back when I wanted to discuss 'what if' scenarios...now you ask one, and even question what there is to learn?

This situation, you can know for a FACT, is being discussed, picked apart, torn apart, second by second by the cops on that dept. They want to learn from it.

dys

25th January 2012, 11:14 AM

Give me a break. The guy bashed out the windows in the restaurant, then entered the restaurant with his weapon scaring folks out of there. Then, when the police tried to reason with him...he goes to attack.

How can you say he was no threat? That guy had to be dealt with.

Oh, they dealt with him allright. Ten slugs right to the heart when all they had to do was release the dog. I have a question for you: had they released the dog, assuming he would even have attempted it (and let's face it, he wouldn't have), was that guy capable of overpowering the police dog and overpowering the 4 cops?
BTW 'dealt with' is a term that gangbangers use. How appropo.

dys

Book

25th January 2012, 11:15 AM

http://cdn1.wn.com/pd/e7/3a/6593e9a6078eb92c946f2325bc5a_grande.jpg
"Shoot that crazy nigger Daddy!"

::) so simple even a kid understands

Awoke

25th January 2012, 11:18 AM

We did see him attack the police. You just jumped on my back when I wanted to discuss 'what if' scenarios...now you ask one

Pardon?

If I show you a video of someone trimming hedges, would you say that person is not trimming hedges?

So why is it if I show you a video of four policemen murdering a person, you tell me they are not murdering the person.

Also, I would like to know how can you show me a video of a guy who has not assaulted the police, and then tell me that he did assault the police.

Please explain.

and even question what there is to learn?

This situation, you can know for a FACT, is being discussed, picked apart, torn apart, second by second by the cops on that dept. They want to learn from it.

The only thing the cops are trying to learn from this is how they can continue to get away with this behaviour with impunity.

solid

25th January 2012, 11:19 AM

Oh, they dealt with him allright. Ten slugs right to the heart when all they had to do was release the dog. I have a question for you: had they released the dog, assuming he would even have attempted it (and let's face it, he wouldn't have), was that guy capable of overpowering the police dog and overpowering the 4 cops?
BTW 'dealt with' is a term that gangbangers use. How appropo.

dys

It is appropriate, police is a gang.

10 shots was too much, I don't understand the last 5 shots. That seemed excessive, the guy was already down. I don't think sending the police dog would have been a good idea. At that time, they were just talking to the guy. The situation, at that moment, was not violent. I just turned violent when they used the pepper spray. If they used the dog, it definitely would have turn violent.

This also shows my personal opinion against pepper spray. It tends to just anger people. In this case, it obviously made the situation worse.

solid

25th January 2012, 11:27 AM

Pardon?

If I show you a video of someone trimming hedges, would you say that person is not trimming hedges?

So why is it if I show you a video of four policemen murdering a person, you tell me they are not murdering the person.

Also, I would like to know how can you show me a video of a guy who has not assaulted the police, and then tell me that he did assault the police.

Please explain.
.

WTF are you talking about? This thread is about a video of a man, armed with a deadly pick, and he goes to swing it to attack a cop. The cop shoots in self-defense. This is very clear in the video.

Buddha

25th January 2012, 11:46 AM

Completely uncalled for. When asked about wrestling someone to the ground, solid said, "Even someone with MMA training wouldn't do that." We'll I have trained in MMA, boxing/muay thai, some wrestling, some BJJ. Taking someone like that down would be ZERO problem, don't even need the take down, rush in get the thai clinch a few knees the the head/elbows. Being that close negates the main point of the weapon, range. I've been mugged before, that's how it works. (look at previous posts) Especially with 3 of my buddies around with a fucking attack dog and tazers.

The shooting was completely unnecessary, the sustainment of human life should be of the utmost importance. We have here some asshole with a crow bar busting the window off of some poison factory. They shot him in the face with a fucking tazer, how is he gonna react? You shoot for the takedown as he's coming to you, drop a level or rush in close guard up on the side of the crowbar, being that close negates the effects, elbow, clinch, knees done. Guy is still alive.

This was not worth a human life. These pigs are too pussy to fight, they would rather kill.

Awoke

25th January 2012, 11:49 AM

Spec, he cocked his arm and moved to attack.

This thread is about a video of a man, armed with a deadly pick, and he goes to swing it to attack a cop. The cop shoots in self-defense. This is very clear in the video.

No, it is not.
In fact, if you watch the video, you can see clearly that after the cops spray him in the face, he turns toward the cop that sprayed him, cocked the weapon, and made a slight feinting motion with it, as if to say "Back off".

As much as you WISH that he "went to swing it", he never did. He got on the defense. Again, I am not defending his actions, but I will not let you base your entire cop-defense on lies. You are imbellishing the story to suit your defense.

He never assaulted the pig, and he never took a swing. What he did was no different than what your father did to you when he raised his backhand threateningly to remind you of consequences.

maybe the guy did not expect immediate shooting, I truly believe his intentions were not to swing.

Indeed, I feel the same.

You took the blame right off the trigger puller and put it on the single, outnumbered, poorly armed and partially disabled guy, while those with weapons drawn did nothing to defuse the situation. They stood there like a death trap ready to spring at the slightest excuse.

I was trained in the use of deadly force and I find this whole conversation disgusting. How is it that I being from the military have more respect for life than you who walked among civilians and non-combatants? How clinical and cold the cops are!

Let me point out a simple observation. Once that perp cocked his arm back ready to swing, the shooter decided to kill him. Not to stop the potential attack... and it was POTENTIAL. But to kill the guy.

Watching the video what I see is four pussies with bad training murdering a guy. The cop that pepper sprayed him could have jumped on him from behind when the guy turned away from him for about 2 seconds to look at his partner that was opposite him. The guy was wearing a hoody which would obstruct his peripheral vision and his head was completely turned away. Wouldn't even see it coming before the cop would be on him. After that they all could have piled on. The guy would never have a chance to even swing the pipe bender or whatever it was.

These cops didn't want to break a finger nail or engage in any physical activity so they kept dicking around with their tools until they felt it was justified to shoot.

Awoke

25th January 2012, 11:50 AM

Completely uncalled for.

The shooting was completely unnecessary

These pigs are too pussy to fight, they would rather kill.

All truths.

dys

25th January 2012, 11:53 AM

solid

25th January 2012, 12:09 PM

The shooting was completely unnecessary, the sustainment of human life should be of the utmost importance. .

The shooting could have been prevented, however it was necessary at that very second. Human life should be the most important.

Imo, the cops wanted to talk the guy down first. Buddha, a question, during your MMA training, do they include training to stop a guy with a weapon?

I don't know why some of you think an unarmed cop against an attacker with a deadly pick is a smart thing to do.

You should know folks, cops are not trained to go into fights where they have the disadvantage. They never go hands on, against a guy with a weapon. That's a disadvantage. The escalation of force policies are very clear. For example, going up against a guy my size, it would be hands on only. However, if the guy outweighed me say by 20lbs or so, I could go "1 up" on the list, which would be pepper spray, or a baton, to fend off an attack. If the guy had a weapon that could reasonably be deadly (such as a pick), my baton was not enough...I would need to escalate to a firearm.

Just so you all know.

dys

25th January 2012, 12:12 PM

The shooting could have been prevented, however it was necessary at that very second. Human life should be the most important.

Imo, the cops wanted to talk the guy down first. Buddha, a question, during your MMA training, do they include training to stop a guy with a weapon?

I don't know why some of you think an unarmed cop against an attacker with a deadly pick is a smart thing to do.

You should know folks, cops are not trained to go into fights where they have the disadvantage. They never go hands on, against a guy with a weapon. That's a disadvantage. The escalation of force policies are very clear. For example, going up against a guy my size, it would be hands on only. However, if the guy outweighed me say by 20lbs or so, I could go "1 up" on the list, which would be pepper spray, or a baton, to fend off an attack. If the guy had a weapon that could reasonably be deadly (such as a pick), my baton was not enough...I would need to escalate to a firearm.

Just so you all know.

There was no fight to be had. That dude wasn't looking for a fight at all. And even if he was, shoot him in the foot and he is all done- not unload an entire clip into him. Disgraceful.

dys

Book

25th January 2012, 12:18 PM

This thread is about a video of a man, armed with a deadly pick, and he goes to swing it to attack a cop. The cop shoots in self-defense. This is very clear in the video.

http://l.yimg.com/bt/api/res/1.2/7iFu6qgRz.waiTZE9u4bQg--/YXBwaWQ9eW5ld3M7cT04NTt3PTMxMA--/http://media.zenfs.com/en/blogs/thelookout/Screen-shot-2011-08-01-at-9.04.20-AM.png

"My innocent client was minding his own business breaking windows with an ICE AXE and chasing all the customers and employees out of that restaurant when the evil police appeared and demanded he stop."

::) they didn't even say "please stop" which is required by Miranda and the fifth amendment.

Buddha

25th January 2012, 12:19 PM

The shooting could have been prevented, however it was necessary at that very second. Human life should be the most important.

Imo, the cops wanted to talk the guy down first. Buddha, a question, during your MMA training, do they include training to stop a guy with a weapon?

I don't know why some of you think an unarmed cop against an attacker with a deadly pick is a smart thing to do.

You should know folks, cops are not trained to go into fights where they have the disadvantage.

No they have not, but common sense prevails. So it's "OH, he has a metal bar, there are four of us with attack dogs and tazers, better pull the glocks and shoot him10 times" Even though I have no training in fighting against people with weapons (that is mostly Krav Magna) I know that person is unskilled/trained, even with that "weapon" I spar with people that have hands/legs that are registered as deadly weapons, should I shoot them and say that I won? Keep in mind I don't have a badge.

Cops are trained not to go into situation where they have the disadvantage. Sounds about right. That's why they dont go into certain neighborhoods to fight real crimes but give tickets and act as revenue agents.

solid

25th January 2012, 12:24 PM

::) they didn't even say "please stop" which is required by Miranda and the fifth amendment.

LOL...Book, you are really cracking me up in this thread..

I don't ever recall ever saying to anyone...please don't stick your ice axe into my head, pretty please?

It was more like "motherf....drop the f...ing weapon..." Add in a lot more obscenities..

Book

25th January 2012, 12:24 PM

Keep in mind I don't have a badge.

http://www.huntingtonbeachca.gov/government/departments/PD/images/patrol_sambrn.jpg

Us taxpayers provide them with more than just a badge. We don't pay them to spend a lot of time wresting.

::) it ain't a sport

Awoke

25th January 2012, 12:26 PM

The shooting could have been prevented

But wasn't.

I don't know why some of you think an unarmed cop against an attacker with a deadly pick is a smart thing to do.

FOUR cops and a DOG. Fuck you're obstinate and delusional.

solid

25th January 2012, 12:27 PM

No they have not, but common sense prevails.. Common sense to me, means the first unarmed cop would take an ice axe to the head, while the remaining 3 subdued him. It's OK, only one lost cop, there's 3 left.

Oh wait, we have guns, why not use those?

Buddha

25th January 2012, 12:28 PM

http://www.huntingtonbeachca.gov/government/departments/PD/images/patrol_sambrn.jpg

Us taxpayers provide them with more than just a badge. We don't pay them to spend a lot of time wresting.

::) it ain't a sport

Don't need much time Book, a week would be enough. I can't even tell which way your being sarcastic with this.

Awoke

25th January 2012, 12:29 PM

Us taxpayers provide them with more than just a badge.

Hah. The NWO Cheerleading statist now takes the mainstream approach of using the tax system as justification for murder, when 99% of the people here abhor the tax system.

We don't pay them to spend a lot of time wresting.

::) it ain't a sport

You're happy to see your taxes pay them to murder.

EE_

25th January 2012, 12:29 PM

Looks like this thread is going marathon?
For the guys that think the cop should ave jumped him...
Let me ask some of you guys that have been trained in self defense and/or martial arts...if you had that pipe/pick type wepon in your hands and were jumped from behind...could you have made good use of it to really fuck the guy's shit up that jumped you?
Next, ask yourself would you be quick to jump a person (that has already proven to be enraged) that might be able to handle this weapon well?
Why would a cop take that risk? Remember the guy was already confirmed to be violent and enraged.
The jumping him scenario doesn't wash with me. Sorry

undgrd

25th January 2012, 12:29 PM

Honest question.

Is there ANY crime that can be committed that would justify deadly force be used BEFORE the perp kills someone?

Book

25th January 2012, 12:30 PM

LOL...Book, you are really cracking me up in this thread..

http://www.bprops.com/gallery2/d/704-2/fallingdown_burger2.jpg

Some of these bleeding heart guys in this thread seem to think it is ok for crazy thugs to interrupt our Whammy Burger meal.

::) idiots

solid

25th January 2012, 12:32 PM

Looks like this thread is going marthon?
For the guys that think the cop should ave jumped him...
Let me ask some of you guys that have been trained in self defense and/or martial arts...if you had that pipe/pick type wepon in your hands and were jumped from behind...could you have made good use of it to really fuck the guy's shit up that jumped you?
Next, ask yourself would you be quick to jump a person (that has already proven to be enraged) that might be able to handle this weapon well?
Why would a cop take that risk? Remember the guy was already confirmed to be violent and enraged.
The jumping him scenario doesn't wash with me. Sorry

Well said, and great questions.

Honestly, I've jumped on quite a few guys....unarmed guys. I would never go hands on with a guy who has a weapon in his hand. I wasn't trained for that. I was trained in the proper escalation of force. We had tools, we were trained to use. I'd use one of the tools. My two bits.

Awoke

25th January 2012, 12:32 PM

The jumping him scenario doesn't wash with me. Sorry

No need to apologise. You are obviously not cut out to be an officer of the peace, and therefore you wouldn't pursue that career.

undgrd

25th January 2012, 12:33 PM

No need to apologise. You are obviously not cut out to be an officer of the peace, and therefore you wouldn't pursue that career.

Now you're going to attack people's manliness?

Come ON

Awoke

25th January 2012, 12:34 PM

That's not an attack at all.

EE_

25th January 2012, 12:34 PM

Book, you are a sick bastid...and sometims pretty funny!

Buddha

25th January 2012, 12:34 PM

Looks like this thread is going marthon?
For the guys that think the cop should ave jumped him...
Let me ask some of you guys that have been trained in self defense and/or martial arts...if you had that pipe/pick type wepon in your hands and were jumped from behind...could you have made good use of it to really fuck the guy's shit up that jumped you?
Next, ask yourself would you be quick to jump a person (that has already proven to be enraged) that might be able to handle this weapon well?
Why would a cop take that risk? Remember the guy was already confirmed to be violent and enraged.
The jumping him scenario doesn't wash with me. Sorry

No, If I were jumped from behind with a crowbar in my hand it could have me at a disadvantage, one less arm to fight with.

Some one that can handle this weapon well?!, It's a fucking crowbar. Yes, years at sensei's house of crow, have taught some the art of the Crow (bar) give me a break.

Oh years working at the UPS warehouse, I'm deadly with this thing....

Give
Me
A
Fucking
Break

undgrd

25th January 2012, 12:35 PM

Well I've said what I have to say in this thread. I'm going to have to agree to disagree and move on.

solid

25th January 2012, 12:36 PM

Now you're going to attack people's manliness?

Come ON

I thought we already went through the attack on manliness stage in this thread. There was a penis size comment earlier. Let's not go backwards to that now.

Awoke

25th January 2012, 12:36 PM

Anyone who is trained in martial arts could use anything for a weapon. Even a spoon can be deadly. I guess we should ban spoons.

EE_

25th January 2012, 12:38 PM

No need to apologise. You are obviously not cut out to be an officer of the peace, and therefore you wouldn't pursue that career.

No I am not fit to be an enemy of the citizen...but let me tell you this...if you jump me while I have that type of weapon in my hands, I feel I could make pretty damn good use of it and you will find yourself on the ground with a major dent from the butt of the pipe in your forehead!

solid

25th January 2012, 12:38 PM

Anyone who is trained in martial arts could use anything for a weapon. Even a spoon can be deadly. I guess we should ban spoons.

Maybe pick axe guy was trained in martial arts.

Book

25th January 2012, 12:38 PM

What the fuck is there to learn?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MnWlTyZLQhQ

Nip this crazy thug behavior in the bud or we all wind up with the type of restaurant that Awoke apparently accepts.

::)

Awoke

25th January 2012, 12:40 PM

Maybe pick axe guy was trained in martial arts.

Maybe the four cops and the dog were too.

mick silver

25th January 2012, 12:40 PM

in before the lock

Awoke

25th January 2012, 12:41 PM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MnWlTyZLQhQ

Nip this crazy thug behavior in the bud or we all wind up with the type of restaurant that Awoke apparently accepts.

::)

Well Statist, since you mention it, if every person in that resturant was carrying as their 2A right proclaims, there would have never been an incident at that resturant.

Buddha

25th January 2012, 12:41 PM

No, If I were jumped from behind with a crowbar in my hand it could have me at a disadvantage, one less arm to fight with.

Some one that can handle this weapon well?!, It's a fucking crowbar. Yes, years at sensei's house of crow, have taught some the art of the Crow (bar) give me a break.

Oh years working at the UPS warehouse, I'm deadly with this thing....

Give
Me
A
Fucking
Break

SO now the guy was a high level black belt in crowbar wielding? A hight level of rationalation going on here. I'll be you cop defenders here have high level meat beating skills

EE_

25th January 2012, 12:42 PM

No, If I were jumped from behind with a crowbar in my hand it could have me at a disadvantage, one less arm to fight with.

Some one that can handle this weapon well?!, It's a fucking crowbar. Yes, years at sensei's house of crow, have taught some the art of the Crow (bar) give me a break.

Oh years working at the UPS warehouse, I'm deadly with this thing....

Give
Me
A
Fucking
Break

So you are saying you would be more comfortable bare handed against an attack then with with a weapon?
I'll take the pipe!

Awoke

25th January 2012, 12:43 PM

Buddha: Don't get sidetracked with maybes and what ifs.

They shot him when they could have easily subdued him.

solid

25th January 2012, 12:44 PM

So you are saying you would be more comfortable bare handed against an attack then with with a weapon?
I'll take the pipe!

It wasn't even a pipe, it was an ICE AXE. I have one of those, from my mountain climbing days. The pick is sharp, for piercing ice. It would not take much strength to puncture a person with it. They are dangerous.

Buddha

25th January 2012, 12:44 PM

So you are saying you would be more comfortable bare handed against an attack then with with a weapon?
I'll take the pipe!

Take it, I'll throw you down and break that fucking arm off

EE_

25th January 2012, 12:48 PM

Buddha: Don't get sidetracked with maybes and what ifs.

They shot him when they could have easily subdued him.

Yep, it should have been easy...the violent enraged man already shrugged off mace and a taser.
Wish you could have been there to end it properly!

EE_

25th January 2012, 12:49 PM

Take it, I'll throw you down and break that fucking arm off

I'd shoot your head off then with my good arm! lol

Book

25th January 2012, 12:50 PM

http://www.uwyo.edu/reslife-dining/_files/images/washakie1.jpg

http://www.bellaseranaples.com/graphics/Header_Images/Family_Dining_Naples.jpg

This is normal life. Decent people don't "allow" crazy thugs interrupting their meal. You shouldn't either.

::) read all the silly excuses defending the rude crazy thug with the ICE AXE in this thread...lol.

Awoke

25th January 2012, 12:51 PM

The guy had a metal bar.

Say the guy clobbers the other cop with the pipe

The guy went to swing his pipe at the cop.

if anyone swings a metal pipe at my buddy, I would shoot and have no regrets about it.

I'm not lying, you can swing a pipe very quickly.

I don't think unleashing a dog is a good idea against an angry guy with a pipe.

It's not fair for the dog, the pipe may have killed the dog.

Or taking a pipe to the head, in this case.

It wasn't even a pipe, it was an ICE AXE. I have one of those, from my mountain climbing days. The pick is sharp, for piercing ice.

It's not global warming: It's climate change.

solid

25th January 2012, 12:51 PM

Yep, it should have been easy...the violent enraged man already shrugged off mace and a taser.
Wish you could have been there to end it properly!

That would be great to catch on film. True professionalism by the police, like a comedy!

2126

Buddha

25th January 2012, 12:52 PM

I'd shoot your head off then with my good arm! lol
nah, metal bar and a gun? Your spirit would be in the next dimension before that

Buddha

25th January 2012, 12:54 PM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=21Jmwq73k44

k-os

25th January 2012, 12:56 PM

Well Statist, since you mention it, if every person in that resturant was carrying as their 2A right proclaims, there would have never been an incident at that resturant.

Question for you, Awoke, since you made this comment . . . Do you think it would have been OK if 4 patrons at the restaurant aimed at and shot the guy in the original video? Or do you mean that if everyone was carrying a firearm, people wouldn't behave like idiots?

Sorry, two questions. :-)

EE_

25th January 2012, 12:57 PM

nah, metal bar and a gun? Your spirit would be in the next dimension before that

The toughest guys I've ever come across never needed to tell anyone how bad they are.
What are you saying?

Awoke

25th January 2012, 12:57 PM

Yep, it should have been easy...the violent enraged man already shrugged off mace and a taser.
Wish you could have been there to end it properly!

They never tasered him. If they did, they would have been able to subdue him without breaking a nail.

But they save the tasers for children (http://gawker.com/5507125/10+year+old-problem-child-tasered-by-police) or the elderly (http://www.kxan.com/dpp/news/crime/Elderly_woman_shocked_with_taser) or the people in airports who can't speak english (http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/story/2007/10/14/bc-taser.html). Just the way Statist Book likes it.

Buddha

25th January 2012, 01:00 PM

The toughest guys I've ever come across never needed to tell anyone how bad they are.
What are you saying?

I'm saying that if you attacked me with an iron bar and a pistol, I would send you to the next dimension with mine (pistol). Do you not understand?

Edit: bull shit solid for thanking that post, you would have shot him 16 times before he even showed a weapon.

EE_

25th January 2012, 01:02 PM

I'm saying that if you attacked me with an iron bar and a pistol, I would send you to the next dimension with mine (pistol). Do you not understand?

Now you are being silly and a little strange?

solid

25th January 2012, 01:03 PM

Edit: bull shit solid for thanking that post, you would have shot him 16 times before he even showed a weapon.

Ha...I never once pulled the trigger when I was sworn. Nice try though.

BTW, EE wouldn't attack you, but if you attacked him....I'd be there to back him up.

Buddha

25th January 2012, 01:05 PM

Now you are being silly and a little strange?

You made it that way I have nothing against you but we can talk hypotheticals all day long

EE_

25th January 2012, 01:06 PM

You made it that way.

Save your breath dude, you might need it in a fire?

Awoke

25th January 2012, 01:09 PM

Question for you, Awoke, since you made this comment . . . Do you think it would have been OK if 4 patrons at the restaurant aimed at and shot the guy in the original video? Or do you mean that if everyone was carrying a firearm, people wouldn't behave like idiots?

Sorry, two questions. :-)

Well K, I believe that if everyone there was armed as they should be, and that guy walked in and started smashing the place up, and the patrons pulled out firearms, the guy would have stopped right away. Which is the answer to your second question.

As far as the first one, responsible gun owners will not shoot unless their lives are in immediate danger. (Cops are not responsible, as they demonstrate time and time again)

Now that being said, if the scene was mayhem and the guy was swinging the pipe-turned-pickaxe around with total abandon and the intent to kill, and a number of patrons shot him, so be it.

The thing to really understand, K, is that police are supposed to do their best to serve and protect. They are public servants (supposedly). So they are obligated to take risks in that job description that you and I are not obligated to take. Citizens (I feel dirty when I use that word, Palani! LOL) have the right to defend themselves, and the right to bear arms for that purpose. If a citizen is at risk and forced to defend themself, it is different than if a group of officers are at risk, because that risk is inherent to the career path they have chosen.

Not only are they supposed to serve and protect you, but they are also supposed to serve and protect that guy with the pipe-pickaxe-bender-deadly weapon. That is why they used to be trained in non-lethal submission tactics.

The risks are well known, and it has been proven a multitude of times that "certain types" of people are attracted to that lifestyle. In fact, that type of personality is usually inclined to either career criminalism or career NWO pig, and will typically migrate to one or the other. Not always, but usually.

But regardless of all that, in this case, instead of using other methods to subdue this guy, they just shot him.

Buddha

25th January 2012, 01:09 PM

Save your breath dude, you might need it in a fire?

nah, just to blow out your bullshit

Oh wait here come solid with guns drawn, please dont shoot me

solid

25th January 2012, 01:13 PM

Well K, I believe that if everyone there was armed as they should be, and that guy walked in and started smashing the place up, and the patrons pulled out firearms, the guy would have stopped right away. .

He would have stopped, then what? Would you just let him leave, even though he caused a lot of damage, made your daughter scared and crying, and upset your peaceful wammie burger meal?

Would you try to take him into custody, and if so, what if he attacked you with his ice axe? Would you want one of the other decent folks, there, with their gun out, to watch your back?

These questions are to make you THINK, about what you would do.