The poilce are traind to shoot and wound a suspect, but why do so many police result to shooting and killing people. If the LAW states that you are innocent until proven gulity, why do so many people never make it before a judge and jury? I can understand if the suspect have a weapon in thier hand, but the police have the power to kill the person or just shoot to disarm the person. WHY DO THEY KILL?
2007-02-08 07:40:56 · 12 answers · asked by Kdog 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Law Enforcement & Police
ok! in Miami a black man had a brick in his hand whne police told him to put it down, he raised his had to throw it at them and they shot him 6 times, in west palm beach; a white man in the same situation. He ran towards police with an knife and the police only tazered him. In Denver, a hispanic guy was running from police and when he stop and turned around too fast police shot him 8 times, In Washington, a white man aimed a gun at police and threaten to shoot them, they pepper sprayed him...so tell what is the deal?
2007-02-08 08:12:21 · update #1
Police are trained to "shoot to kill" not shoot to wound. Believe me. My friend was shot and killed by police 2 years ago. Police think that they are above the law and can get away with killing innocent people. The cops in Kenosha Wisconsin shot and killed 4 people in less than 18 months. Two of them were in their own houses. My friend and Kelly Combs. My friend was shot and killed in front of his mom and sister and kelly was killed in his mom's basement. Police had no reason to shoot and kill these innocent men, but they were trigger happy.
2007-02-09 05:19:28 · answer #1 · answered by Jaime A 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Shoot to wound? Where did you get that info? Officers are trained to fire at center body mass, not try to shoot weapons out of a persons hand. They are also taught that they are to shoot to defend themselves or others when confronted with a threat of force against them. They are taught not to kill, but to stop the threat. Does this result in deaths? Of course. Contrary to popular opinion, the officer who is involved in a shooting is more likely to leave the profession than to remain on the force. Taking a life, even when justified, is not an easy thing.
Have some compassion for those willing to do what most would not. If you're up to it, I would suggest you complete a ride-along with a police department. If you go into it with an open mind, I guarantee you will have a change of mindset.
2007-02-08 09:26:42 · answer #2 · answered by Yankees Fan 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
People are not trained to shoot to wound, they are taught to shoot. There is no such thing as trying to shoot to wound.
First problem with shooting to "wound". If you shoot someone in most body parts there is a very good chance of death - torso, head and even parts of the thigh. So now you are trying to hit a leg or arm and there is a good chance you will miss and you WILL hit something behind the target and possibly kill them.
Second problem. When shooting someone you are trying to stop a threat and the best way to do that is to hit them in the torso. Not an arm or leg.
The police or anyone for that matter in the U.S. does not have the right to shoot someone that is not a threat.
2007-02-08 07:50:15 · answer #3 · answered by sfavorite711 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
shoot and wound? Where did you hear that? NO... they are trained to SHOOT TO KILL if their life is threatened. it would be nice to try to "disarm" the suspect or whatever the weapon they have, but some people are on drugs and a simple "wound" wouldn't stop them if they had a weapon. For example, my officer was out with a suspect with a butcher knife, about 5 feet away. The suspect lunged at the officer, the officer shot and killed the suspect. OUTRAGE from the community. but if that guy was on drugs, and the officer chose to, i dont know, shoot his knee out to disable him... it may not have affected him
2007-02-08 07:49:47 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
At user-friendly regulation, deadly stress replaced into authorized for use against a fleeing felon. One reason this replaced into allowed replaced into because of the fact throughout the time of the user-friendly regulation era, very almost all felonies have been punishable via death. maximum states interior the US had a statute that codified that user-friendly regulation rule and allowed deadly stress against fleeing felons. although, in 1985 in Tennessee v. Garner, 471 U.S. a million, one 0 five S.Ct. 1694, 80 5 L.Ed.2d a million, america ideal court docket held is replaced into unconstitutional to apply deadly stress against all fleeing felons. in specific, the court docket held that deadly stress won't be used against a fleeing felon "till it rather is mandatory to keep away from the get away and the officer has probably reason to have self assurance that the suspect poses an significant threat of death or severe actual harm to the officer or others."
2016-11-02 22:05:46 · answer #5 · answered by hinch 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If someone is that STUPID and IGNORANT to throw a brick at a Police Officer, then they should accept whatever happens. Police don't go around shooting innocent, upstanding people who when pulled over act properly. Its the criminal, keyword here,CRIMINAL that gets shot. The Police have had it with nonsense, so people better get with it or pay the price! Try that nonsense in the Middle east and see what happens!
2007-02-08 08:31:52 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
A weapon is not meant to wound. It is to be used under the gravest of extremes, that is, when deadly force is levied against you, and you have no choice but to protect yourself, or another person. In this case, you shoot to stop the agression,and if this means the perpetrator gets killed in the process, then so be it.
2007-02-08 09:10:13 · answer #7 · answered by WC 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I don't know where you got that. Police are trained to shoot and kill. They don't have time to aim at a person's hand or leg especially when their live is being threatened.
2007-02-08 07:45:44 · answer #8 · answered by Bonathon M 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I belive sometimes the choise isn't necessarily to kill. I will not judge because I have never been in their position. I do belive however that a man or woman who puts their life on the line (potentially) everyday for a meager salary and crappy retirement, has the right at the days end, to return home safely to their loving family, BY ANY MEANS NECESSARY.
2007-02-08 07:47:20 · answer #9 · answered by chasin_jasen 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
well police only shoot when they feel threatened (someone with a gun, knife or unkown car stop with someone with a warrent on them) put your self in their shoes, if you were to risk your life everyday you would be very careful about everything. and now most cops r armed with tazers and will use that more then a gun. ^_^
2007-02-08 07:55:32 · answer #10 · answered by Bob R 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋