Police gone wild? Yes.
When relaxed rules defining what constitutes justification of the use of lethal force are combined with shoot to kill policies (and policies that differ from the law are illegal no matter who's they are) you get trial by allegation and execution of sentence is instantaneous.
That is unamerican.
2006-11-24 03:00:26
·
answer #1
·
answered by Gaspode 7
·
2⤊
5⤋
The 92 year old woman shot three police officers first, get your facts straight before you rant.
We are trained to shoot as many times as it takes to stop the threat. We are also trained to fire at least 2-3 rounds at a time. Each officer will make a decision about shooting at the time. So, if you have ten officers with guns out and a man with a tire iron who begins to run at them. (a tire iron is a deadly weapon by the way) The officers don't have a committee meeting ahead of time to decide who will shoot or not, they will make their own judgement calls. If five shoot two rounds each, well, you do the math.
2006-11-25 01:45:46
·
answer #2
·
answered by joeanonymous 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
What is the difference between 5, 10,20 or 68? If there are several officers involved in a shootout with a cold blooded killer who is trying to kill them then they(the police) are going to kill this person before he can as much as injure one of them. Point being if your going to kill someone whats the difference between 5 rounds and 68 rounds. Try it for yourself before you pass judgment. You and several other people are being shot at by a person. Do you really think you are going to keep track of how many rounds you are firing? At a time like that do you think someone is going to say "OK lets keep track of our shots and lets try to keep this thing under 20 rounds total" Further more what difference does it make? When it is a real life or death situation and it involves your life you wont care either.
2016-05-22 22:15:32
·
answer #3
·
answered by Lilly 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Let's see...The first guy killed two police officers. They didn't stand around and shoot him when he was on the ground, so obviously he was left standing for some time. He was armed with the rifer, and obviously did not have a problem with murder. Officers will continue to shoot, if needed, until the person is no longer a threat (i.e. they're on the ground, they've dropped their weapon, etc.)
I can't comment on the handcuffed/tirerod incident, since I haven't heard about it.
The 92-year-old shouldn't have been pushing out of her house. Drug house raids are common. She's the one who came out, gun-a-blazing, firing at police officers. If she's hooting at them, they have to subdue her, so she doesn't kill anybody. If she was crazy, they can't just tell her to drop the gun, and they aren't going to just sit there and wait till she runs out of bullets. This was a residential area, should could have killed neighbors, children, in addition to officers. If it was a 25-year-old male who was dealing, this wouldn't be an issue. A gun still kills, with help from the person behind it.
And contradictory to what you hear, the police were at the RIGHT address. But even if they weren't, you don't need to be shooting at anybody, especially cops, if you didn't do anything wrong.
Do you believe that when an officer's killed, it justified? Would you rather have multiple caskets from people who are innocent, and weren't doing anything wrong, or 1 guilty person. True, if at all possible, no one should have to die, but sometimes the bad person only wants to hurt others. When this happens, you need to take care of that person, before they kill.
2006-11-24 03:11:43
·
answer #4
·
answered by amg503 7
·
6⤊
2⤋
Maybe the first 67 bullets didn't do the trick. Maybe he should have put down the tire iron when he was ordered to. Maybe the old drug dealer shouldn't have shot the 3 cops first.
2006-11-24 19:34:43
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
How many officers will be shot and killed this year? If someone is attempting to kill me or my partner, I will do anything within my power to make it home to my wife and children. In fact, if someone is attempting to kill you, I will do everything within my power to stop it so you can make it home to your family, even if that means I have to kill the suspect. My service weapon holds 15 shots, and I can shoot all of those shots in less than 3 seconds. It is not as TV projects, the suspect does not go down after he is shot once. We do not shoot to kill, we shoot to stop the threat.
That 92 year old lady shot three of the officers before she was shot. We don't live in a perfect world. I do not know one officer who wanted to shoot anyone. It was the offender's choice to use force, we respond to the threat. I wish that they would all surrender without firing, but it just doesn't always happen.
2006-11-24 03:27:00
·
answer #6
·
answered by Christopher H 3
·
6⤊
1⤋
Hey these cops are out of control,every once in a while some nut case kills a cop and the cops go nuts trying to find him because all they want is revenge.Some nut case killing a cop is good because it keeps the other cops inline.
2006-11-24 10:08:13
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
Maybe the guy would not stop moving, and they thought he was still a threat. I think the police should kiss everyone they arrest.
2006-11-24 06:02:48
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
I saw the video where the guy with the dog got shot --- I don't know how many times. If it doesn't stop, anyone could be next. Myself would feel safer in another country - this one has a bulls eyes on it!
2006-11-24 04:29:27
·
answer #9
·
answered by docie555@yahoo.com 5
·
1⤊
3⤋
just think of how much static Hitler got because of the S.S. and I don't ever remember hearing of them shooting anyone 68 times, ? but that is our Hero's or a 90 y/o woman or a 6 y/o kid with a cap gun? B,T, W, the 90 year old woman was not into drugs the police were at the wrong address.
2006-11-24 03:03:44
·
answer #10
·
answered by jim ex marine offi, 3
·
1⤊
5⤋
What does it matter if they kill him with 68 bullets or one or kill his dog or his kitty cat or tip over his fish tank? When he killed a cop he should have known his life was over.
I don't approve but that's the facts.
2006-11-24 03:18:09
·
answer #11
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
2⤋