Looks like joker beat me to it by minutes:
viewtopic.php?f=108&t=70391
Search found 2 matches
Return to “Unarmed man charged with wounding bystanders”
- Thu Dec 05, 2013 5:31 pm
- Forum: LEO Contacts & Bloopers
- Topic: Unarmed man charged with wounding bystanders
- Replies: 3
- Views: 1410
- Thu Dec 05, 2013 5:30 pm
- Forum: LEO Contacts & Bloopers
- Topic: Unarmed man charged with wounding bystanders
- Replies: 3
- Views: 1410
Unarmed man charged with wounding bystanders
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/05/nyreg ... .html?_r=0
I might be able to understand a LEO shooting someone for reaching in his her pocket. PDs should advertise more effectively though - it might lead to fewer deaths: "If you don't follow directions and reach into a pocket, we will try to kill you". I'd rather see that on police cars rather than "protect and serve". It's a much more attention grabbing motto.
I don't understand why you take a shot at someone that you haven't confirmed as a deadly threat with a backdrop full of people. Maybe it's because I haven't been in that adrenalin fueled type of event? Before you even raise a gun, aren't you going to think about the backdrop?
And lastly, I don't understand a criminal justice system that charges an unarmed guy with assault when he clearly was not a deadly threat. If you follow that to it's logical conclusion, any action that I might take that results in LEO gunfire, I'm inherently responsible for, regardless of how justified or unjustified that use of force was. It's no different than having an offer club me and accidentally hurting someone else, then charging me with two crimes.
I'm calmed down by recognizing that hopefully this is a pretty isolated incident in day to day public/police interaction.
I might be able to understand a LEO shooting someone for reaching in his her pocket. PDs should advertise more effectively though - it might lead to fewer deaths: "If you don't follow directions and reach into a pocket, we will try to kill you". I'd rather see that on police cars rather than "protect and serve". It's a much more attention grabbing motto.
I don't understand why you take a shot at someone that you haven't confirmed as a deadly threat with a backdrop full of people. Maybe it's because I haven't been in that adrenalin fueled type of event? Before you even raise a gun, aren't you going to think about the backdrop?
And lastly, I don't understand a criminal justice system that charges an unarmed guy with assault when he clearly was not a deadly threat. If you follow that to it's logical conclusion, any action that I might take that results in LEO gunfire, I'm inherently responsible for, regardless of how justified or unjustified that use of force was. It's no different than having an offer club me and accidentally hurting someone else, then charging me with two crimes.
I'm calmed down by recognizing that hopefully this is a pretty isolated incident in day to day public/police interaction.