Here in Los Angeles a few months back there was an incident .A guy, high on drugs, got in to an argument with his wife.He wound up barricaded ( with his baby daughter) in his place of business with the LAPD all around.In the end this guy comes out with a hand gun and fires on the Police officers.The officers fire back ,killing the man and the baby.
Now the Family of the Man and Baby are suing everybody.The officers, the PD and the City.
What was "supposed" to happen , who should the blame fall on?
I am perplexed by the question.What do you think?
2007-07-23 20:17:21 · 11 answers · asked by SHAWN 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Law Enforcement & Police
A lot of people feel the Police should not have fired back , with the baby in play.
2007-07-23 20:24:32 · update #1
I can assure you that SWAT, negotiators and all resources were called. A temp negotiator tries to reason with the guy until SWAT and all others respond but until then road patrol handles the scene and hopes they can keep the guy under control. In the mean time officers keep a distant perimeter for safety and try to evacuate as best they can to protect the public. Rarely before the these specialists arrive the offender loses it and starts firing with hostages at no fault of the cops. I am not familiar with this situation but if a criminal offender comes out at road officers and the public firing a gun then they have to respond with deadly force to try to stop the offender. Generally officers want SWAT, negotiators and a sniper and wait it out. I am sure in this case the offender reacted before this happened. Non lethal force (pepper spray lol and other methods would be insane to use on a guy randomly firing a gun at people unless you were within 5 feet of the guy which I am sure is not the case if he was barricaded - kind of like throwing a rock at a tank). If you spray him from a distance, rubber bullets...(only SWAT can do that and I am sure they were not there yet) they would stun him only and he would 90 percent of the time kill the baby himself after being attacked and really increase the police liability. The officers do not want to harm the baby but what if none of the officers fired at this guy while he shoots randomly at officers and the public and kills 10 people? Bullets can kill people for blocks in an occupied area. It is so sad the baby had to suffer but the officers never intended to harm the child. Contrary to popular belief it is extremely difficult to shoot an offender from a distance with any real accuracy and bullets can go astray. Even a trained sniper can have difficulty with an enraged person on drugs who is moving around and firing while holding a baby.
It is normal for a family to sue the police after a death occurs. The huge bank robbery in LA where the offenders with high powered fully automatic weapons shot dozens of people and were eventually killed actually also sued (families) the LA police and ofcourse lost.
I am sure the officers were broken hearted about the child and may GOD bless him.
The family will have no case unfortunately.
2007-07-23 20:30:19 · answer #1 · answered by flafuncop 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋
What was "supposed to happen" was that the fool should not have done drugs in the first place, the woman should not have allowed the baby to be around drugs or the husband. The police should sue her.
It really sucks when an innocent dies....but what were the cops to do? Get shot by this idiot because they wouldn't shoot back? that would be very hard to shoot at someone holding an infant. But I would rather be tried by twelve than carried by six.
2007-07-23 20:23:59 · answer #2 · answered by Vindicaire 5 · 3⤊ 0⤋
What should have happened is htat SWAT should have been called and a hostage neogotiator...don't know the circumstances, but, when you shoot at a cop...believe me, they are going to use deadly force...however, someone should have used some sense with a baby involved...would bet that internal affairs is on this...no way that they can get away with shooting a hostage...but, they have to determine who actually killed the baby I am sure...again, I don't know all the fact, however, this is the first I have heard where a cop killed an innocent person in this fashion....
2007-07-23 20:28:12 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
it is obvious! the fault falls on the father. he shot at the officers. the officers have to go home at the end of the day i am a police officer and i would have done the same. problem is that the family isn;t blaming the father or the dumb ***** that got involved with him. oh yae the pepper spray a man shoting bullets thats dumb richard k dumb *** non lethal how much knowledge do you have i sure a wooded dowel or rubber shot wouldn't have a lethal affect on the infant dumb ***.
2007-07-23 20:25:11 · answer #4 · answered by stvcosta 1 · 1⤊ 0⤋
You are perplexed? Are you kidding? The whole fault falls upon the idiot who was holding the baby. It is sad but there is no way that the police should take a fall for this and I'm not pro police at all.
2007-07-23 20:21:09 · answer #5 · answered by Chloe 6 · 3⤊ 0⤋
i belive the police have done the right thing by trying to subdue the assailant because the guy on drugs was a danger to every one including himself and might possibly in the high state he was in may have shot the baby or injured the baby anyway
2007-07-23 21:50:47 · answer #6 · answered by jack d 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
In this case, the blame falls on the man and his drug problem (however it started). Too many people want to blames others and not take responsibility for their own actions or their families'.
2007-07-24 01:44:28 · answer #7 · answered by M S 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Pray to God continuously on a similar time as attempting, as God facilitates people who help themselves extremely than people who're lazy. Lord Krisna mentioned in Bhagavad Gita, we would desire to accomplish our works and renounce the fruit of our action. So we would desire to save attempting and discover exhilaration in doing our artwork, no count if or not we get the wanted result. we would desire to continuously not lose wish. Do your acceptable and leave something to God,it relatively is going to all come perfect some day or night.
2016-12-14 17:15:25 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I'll bet whomever fired the round that killed that baby never gets a good nights rest for the remainder of his life.
2007-07-23 21:19:22 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
The police officers had the right to return fire when fired upon, however, they could have used pepper spray or other nonlethal means to subdue the man without firing bullets. It is really tragic that a baby died in the crossfire. I've seen advances in nonlethal technology for police officers, but I have not seen their implementation anywhare on the news. I wonder if it's a matter of having the budget to afford them or if they can pass the stringent government testing.
2007-07-23 20:25:55 · answer #10 · answered by Handyman 3 · 0⤊ 4⤋