gixer1 Posted August 13, 2012 Report Share Posted August 13, 2012 Obviously if he wasn't an illegal imigrant he wouldn't have been here and therefor not got shot. Anyone who has had the mis fortune to deal with the American police will know just how good ours are. "And the prize for general sweeping statement of the month goes too........88b" :blink: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muddy Funker Posted August 13, 2012 Report Share Posted August 13, 2012 Yeah the English police would just put 6 rds in your head for sitting on a train minding your own business. Didn't think it long before that incident was dragged up, notice I say for the best part our police get it right. Anyway it's a completely different situtation, an extreme tactic for an extreme situation. He was I tent on doing harm, due to this he was fair game - maybe the next knife wielding idiot will tho k twice before he strolls through a tourist attraction full of families with a knife. How do you know his intent? You can guess but you can't ever know. A warning shot or even a "shot to the leg" may have zero immediate effect - therefore the officers need to ensure the threat is completely neutralised - this means using more rounds - it's as simple as that! The police ran along the road giving the man warning after warning - what else could they do? Why should they have to run in with batons and risk and officer being killed? And baton rounds are fine if you have preparation time I don't mention warning shots or shots to legs? You haven't argued against the use of taser or shield tactics, I don't think they should run in with batons and risk being killed either that's why I haven't suggested it. The tactics here were hopeless, they were set up in a way that could only ever end in the use of a firearm. Why not baton round? Why not shields? Why not taser? An answer of because they didn't have that equipment is unacceptable, they should have those options. You will find most persons who are in a position to use firearms on humans (soldiers/police) will put a couple of rounds at something even if hit the first time - this ensures it won't fire back! You can't compare soldiers to police the rules of engagement for want of a better word are totally different. Every use of force in the police has to be justified and that includes every bullet fired. No matter how quick it takes there will be a second shot assement before firing again. No armed officer will just fire two shots as a matter of course, it's not Ultimate Force here rules have to be followed. Stockwell was as extreme as a situation can be hence the response. If this guy had knifed a kid in the passing what would the opinions be then? If's and buts, if that bloke was going for someone i'm happy for him to be shot. I'm just playing devils advocate. The whole point of conflict management is that you're always assessing options, so many of these videos end up with someone being shot a ridiculous amount of times and why? Because all they have is a gun and no other options or tactics. Regards, Gixer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gixer1 Posted August 13, 2012 Report Share Posted August 13, 2012 1) The guess is enough - its a fair assumption that he didn't have a knife for peeling potato's 2) other people mentioned warning shots, and as said - the police used what was to hand at the immediate time - they must protect the innocent public first and foremost. 3) it is exactly the same for soldier and police - quite often they do the same job! these shots are not intended to slow someone down - - if they are at the stage of using firearms it would be shoot to kill - hence the torso shots, they cannot afford to take the chance. 4) the "if" and "but" is all the police have to go on - they MUST act on this as the guy was an obvious threat, no question at all! He was running through bloody time square with a knife waving around - what other signs do you want?? :blink: 5) the amount of shots is no accident - as I said previously - they are shooting to completely neutralize the threat, not just slow it down. I cannot believe people can argue the "poor guy" case here - he was running through time square with a knife waving it!!! When will we wake up and realise this was a person who was running through a place as public as it gets with a knife, how, naive do you really have to be to think he was just jogging after peeling a potato and he forgot to put the knife back in the drawer. :blink: Regards, Gixer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-kev- Posted August 13, 2012 Report Share Posted August 13, 2012 12 shots was he the terminator or do they need more shooting practice? Looks way over the top for a guy with a knife. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flynny Posted August 13, 2012 Report Share Posted August 13, 2012 Sorry guys but tough s£&* on him - he ran along an extremely busy place (you can see kids in the video) with a knife - I would say its a classic case of suicide by cop, now some family will try and make him out to be a saint and claim millions from the state... If you don't want shot - don't run around streets with knives waving them around! Wish we would take a harder line here instead of picking on the easy targets - police here won't challenge pikie theives or fly tippers but show them a guy eating his sandwich in slow moving traffic and they'll jump all over it! :blink: We need to get out procedures and priorities in order! Bang on mate Regards, Gixer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muddy Funker Posted August 13, 2012 Report Share Posted August 13, 2012 Have to work dammit, will repy properly tomorrow Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gixer1 Posted August 13, 2012 Report Share Posted August 13, 2012 Have to work dammit, will repy properly tomorrow Your not a criminal defence solicitor are you? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laird Lugton Posted August 13, 2012 Report Share Posted August 13, 2012 Over the top. 12 shots? How would British Police with no guns react? The guy could be your relative whose flipped mentally, he doesn't require shooting. I guess that's a perfect example of what happens when you have guns, they took the easy option. Full marks for the Canadian "take down", now that's proper policing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ordnance Posted August 13, 2012 Report Share Posted August 13, 2012 Over the top. 12 shots? How would British Police with no guns react? The guy could be your relative whose flipped mentally, he doesn't require shooting. I guess that's a perfect example of what happens when you have guns, they took the easy option. Full marks for the Canadian "take down", now that's proper policing. They would have called armed response. Then waited for them to arrive in the meantime he would quite possibly have stabbed a few people. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cant hit rabbits 123 Posted August 13, 2012 Report Share Posted August 13, 2012 We all know how hard hitting a stationary taregt can be, using telescopic sights on an accurate rifle, shooting from a rest of some sort and with time on our side to fire the shot. Shooting a sitting rabbit 6 times would most probably be label excesive. Now make the target move, make it unpredicatable, give it a bladed weapon and an iit ntent to harm. Swap the rifle for a pistol, shooting over open sights from a standing position while walking. Time is most certianly not on your side should the now dangerous and much closer target decide it will hurt you or someone else. There is a huge amount of adrenaline in your system.Between two shooters in this situation, it could be fairly easy to fire 6 rounds each. I for one cannot condemn them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tikka.223 Posted August 13, 2012 Report Share Posted August 13, 2012 They would have called armed response. Then waited for them to arrive in the meantime he would quite possibly have stabbed a few people. Or sent in the wheelie bin division. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cX5CPx4RKWw Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Olliesims Posted August 13, 2012 Author Report Share Posted August 13, 2012 In the first place he made it a hostile situation he was only questioned about smoking cannabis outside the military recruitment centre, he pulled the knife and turned it in to something more, yes I suppose they could of taken it better and tried to sort out the problem without firing a shot, but with the streets so busy and people stood around it could of ended with a on looker being injured, but say that the police could of shot a passer by, with the police being filmed by so many people they would of had to play it 100% by the book, it just shows you what the world is coming to, like seriously who carrys a 11 inch ikea blade anyway?!?! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ordnance Posted August 13, 2012 Report Share Posted August 13, 2012 The police should be equipped to handle such situations. And should only be allowed use wheelie bins as a last resort. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
happypig Posted August 13, 2012 Report Share Posted August 13, 2012 Police should have used the special hindsight gun to disarm him Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colliwobbles Posted August 13, 2012 Report Share Posted August 13, 2012 Interesting conversations. As a copper everyone is entitled I their opinion and I'm not going to get into a debate about some of the topics. Aside from arvs plenty of uk police are taser equipped now, including me and plenty of my colleagues in Devon and Cornwall. In the scale of use of force it is below baton and captor (or CS) and is just another item of PPE to be used where justified. As for warning shots, we are trained to aim and shoot at centre of mass, to put the subject down, you try to hit and arm or leg that's moving with a pistol, only happens in the movies I'm afraid. Speaking for Uk police every round has to be justified, if you can't justify it thats you in the brown smelly stuff! The yanks are trigger happy which might explain it! Just my tuppenyworth!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
m3vert Posted August 14, 2012 Report Share Posted August 14, 2012 My opinion is that taking someones life should always be a last resort. Now thats not to say in a situation where the Police are faced with a violent individual who is going to injure/maim or kill someone that they should deploy all non lethal options first! What I mean is surely when non lethal options are available and credible they must be used before deploying lethal options? My real concern is (and I admit I have not watched the video, for the reasons stated) that the Police in this circumstance choose to use lethal force in the form of handguns on this guy, in what I would imagine must have been a very busy location (having been in this location I can only imagine how many members of the public were present) . Therefore was the risk associated by firing a round not high that an innocent member of the public would be injured or killed by a stray Police bullet? Got to say I would not like to be the Police officer facing this situation, but if I was and I had to kill this guy I would want to be able to satisfy myself that I had no other option to do so. If I have a taser on my belt I would struggle to convince myself that lethal was the only option. As I say this is only my opinion and others are entitled to theirs, but remember when making comments about him having a knife and its his own fault etc, we have no idea of this mans mental health status at the time of this shooting. So surely if non lethal is an option it should have been considered? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mungler Posted August 14, 2012 Report Share Posted August 14, 2012 2 Alsatians would have made a more sensible ending Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
m3vert Posted August 14, 2012 Report Share Posted August 14, 2012 Fair point Mungler at the end of the day the police dog is a tool to be deployed the same as taser, baton etc! he might have managed to take on one dog but no way he would survive two!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muddy Funker Posted August 14, 2012 Report Share Posted August 14, 2012 Your not a criminal defence solicitor are you? They're most definately my enemy, I'm actually old bill too. I was just playing devils advocate as I said. I understand that American police generally deal with a higher level of threat day to day than we do, hence why they seem to over react sometimes. I'm trying not to generalise, but American cops always seem to draw sidearms for pretty much every situation, then when things go wrong the only option is to start blasting. As Mungler said what about dogs, yet another tactical option I hadn't thought about. I can't believe there wasn't a taser, baton round, dog, shield somewhere close by. I guess the rules are different there but the level of force used far exceeded the level of threat in my opinion, Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robl Posted August 14, 2012 Report Share Posted August 14, 2012 I think the phrase they use over there is ‘Suicide by Cop’. Different states have different procedural guidelines. But, I do believe that in NYC they have a zero tolerance policy to most things. I haven’t watched the video. But, I’m going to assume that the police felt there was a serious threat. So they shot. When they shoot, they shoot to kill. I have been told (with no evidence) that when you shoot to kill in such situation then you keep shooting till the targets dead. Maybe that’s not true in terms of the snipers around here, but with handguns against people intent on doing you harm I think it’s sensible. Two policemen don’t have a huge range of options open to them. They have shout at the man, go hand to hand, or shoot. Having exhausted the first option, and realising option 2 is only good for Steven Seagall then the only option left is shoot the man before he runs into the crowd. Perhaps if the situation had continued in a standoff support would have arrived with less lethal options. But it didn’t. Blaming the police for this is like blaming a driver when someone jumps in front of their car. It’s just misdirected anger. One last question. If the police had shot the bloke in the leg and he was suing for injury, would you be on the side of the police or the knifeman? Oh, The Canadian clip is great. But, there were a lot more police, and the swordman was running away. I wonder what would have happened had to run towards the crowd swinging the sword. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ferguson_tom Posted August 14, 2012 Report Share Posted August 14, 2012 I cant see why the "victim" gets any sympathy he was carrying a knife and the only reason he was carrying that knife was to hurt someone else with it. The police stopped him because of smoking drugs in a public place he then got violent and threatening, police warned him he would be shot if he didnt put the knife down, he ignored warning therefore he got shot. It doesnt matter if it was one shot or 1000 shots the end result was the same he come down and the police had done the job they are trained to do which is protect other members of the public. If the police hadnt reacted the way they did if this knife carrying thug could of hurt or killed someone else then the police would be in the wrong for not bringing him down sooner. Using an alternative method was possible in this situation but the police over there seem to have a no tolerance policy you get a warning, if you dont follow it these are the consequences, maybe this policy has come about more because of the gun culture unlike England so it is not needed to be as strict here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
88b Posted August 14, 2012 Report Share Posted August 14, 2012 "And the prize for general sweeping statement of the month goes too........88b" :blink: Just stating fact but never let that get in the way, obviously no one else picked up on it was a totally different situation. Well except for the next post Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gixer1 Posted August 14, 2012 Report Share Posted August 14, 2012 I'm guessing NYC police (much like thier UK collegues) don't carry a couple of alsatians in thier back pocket for just such an occasion The guy ran off with a knife and from what the story says most of the cops were close by - they didn't have time to get baton rounds, dogs, tazers, shields, mary poppins suitcase - you're probably looking at the whole event lasting 3 minutes! Regards, Gixer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muddy Funker Posted August 14, 2012 Report Share Posted August 14, 2012 I'm guessing NYC police (much like thier UK collegues) don't carry a couple of alsatians in thier back pocket for just such an occasion The guy ran off with a knife and from what the story says most of the cops were close by - they didn't have time to get baton rounds, dogs, tazers, shields, mary poppins suitcase - you're probably looking at the whole event lasting 3 minutes! Regards, Gixer No that'd be about right, but it would be reasonable to think that in a city such as NYC there might just be a dog unit close by? And if other equipment isn't available then it shows a massive flaw in the system. American tactical options are apparently either: 1 - Talk to suspect/offender 2 - Shoot them For others I'm not showing sympathy I couldn't give a toss about the knife man, I'm just trying to point out that other things could have been considered. I'm done on this now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robl Posted August 14, 2012 Report Share Posted August 14, 2012 American tactical options are apparently either: 1 - Talk to suspect/offender 2 - Shoot them Sounds like a couple of sensible options. Much better than; Approach, and repeat ultimatum in an even firmer tone of voice. Add the words, "or else" (10 internet points if you can guess the film) Alternative tactics available include; Get stabbed by them. Get bitten by their dog. Get Shot by them. Watch them run away while shouting for them to stop. Get punched in the face by them. Get spat in the face by them after they have bitten their inner check so you get a facefull of their disease ridden blood. I think the American police have a good policy. There’s a line, if you stay on one side of it they treat you with respect. If you cross that line they come down on you like a tonne of bricks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.