Cell Phone Video Emerges That Refutes St. Louis Cops Version of Shooting

originally posted by: TorqueyThePig
a reply to: JamesCookieIII

You have your opinion and I have mine.

That being said since you are second ammendment supporter you better not ever use deadly force against a person advancing towards you or a family member with a knife unless you try to pepper spray or taser them first.

I won't, you have my word. I have fail-safes on fail-safes so that i will never end up in a situation where I HAVE to shoot somebody. Also, if my plans failed for peace, I would surely shoot to wound over killing someone. Also, before that, I would look for less lethal methods of defense. You have to admit, there WERE other possibilities that could have happened, including ones in which NOBODY got harmed. The only point that I'm making is that as an oath keeper, you should be advocating for THOSE non-violent resolutions over violent ones... Instead, I detect homicidal tendencies emitting from your posts. It's okay if you disagree with me; I can't force you to be right. in my opinion, if you kill it, you should eat it, or else you are a hypocrite in the natural sense.

a reply to: JamesCookieIII

Yes you got me. I have a homicidal rage deep within and I cannot control it.

Again subjective relativism.

Good day.

Well that was a completely and wholly unnecessary death.

Immediately jumping to the last possible option out of the options available to you doesn't make you a hero, it makes you bad at your job. I'm not an expert on law enforcement or training, it just seems avoidable. The fact that they cuffed him after he was dead made me believe we were dealing with utter morons wearing badges though.

a reply to: MentorsRiddle

I think the cops got this right. They protected the public, because the guy could have stabbed a civilian walking by. Were people not hearing the knife part???? Weapon.

a reply to: TorqueyThePig

Your a cop I am not you automatically win the argument right there. I support you and your right to go home intact with your life every night. And 99 times out of 100 I would back up your decision to use deadly force if it ment your life was at risk. But that one time when you do use it and it could have been avoided is where I have a problem as I am sure many of us do. And by you I don't mean you personally I mean law enforcement in general. From this side of the fence it is scary not knowing who is having a bad day at work... Things might be different on your side but I am guessing you find yourself in a lot of those situations as well.

originally posted by: jaynkeel
a reply to: TorqueyThePig

Your a cop I am not you automatically win the argument right there. I support you and your right to go home intact with your life every night. And 99 times out of 100 I would back up your decision to use deadly force if it ment your life was at risk. But that one time when you do use it and it could have been avoided is where I have a problem as I am sure many of us do. And by you I don't mean you personally I mean law enforcement in general. From this side of the fence it is scary not knowing who is having a bad day at work... Things might be different on your side but I am guessing you find yourself in a lot of those situations as well.

there were two cops with guns drawn... one could cover while the other tried non-lethal. This is disgusting police work, and I hope you are being sarcastic about the "he's a cop, so he wins the argument..." dude, with the level of barbarism on the streets and codified into law now, it's not who's legally right that matters anymore. It's who's human that really matters.

a reply to: jaynkeel

It is not even about me getting home safe. I mean of course that is a good thing but it is even more so about the safety of everyone else.

If I as a police officer do not stop a threat and they go on to harm an innocent bystander I have to live with that. I can also be found to be in dereliction of duty.

That is why what ifs absolutely play a role in police work.

In that situation what was of greater importance?

The officers stopping the threat from potentially harming innocent bystanders and themselves or being as gentle as possible with the person who is committing a crime?

a reply to: j.r.c.b.

Ok. I understand the perp had a knife. It's very visable. Cops need to protect the community, yes. But they don't always have to KILL. Most cops are armed with at least a .40 cal. You shoot someone in the stomach with that, they aren't going to do much after that. At the distance the cops were at, ONE cop should have shot once. If the guy continued moving again, the SAME cop should shoot again... It's not #ing rocket science.

We no longer as a civilization value human life. Even the lowest of the low deserve life; whether it be being free, or being in a cell eating ONE meal a day.. to think about what they have done in life..

I fail to see how the supporters of cops performing these actions are right. Yes, there are some sad situations where the perp puts himself into a position where the police have to kill him to protect their own lives, or others around them. But most situations can be unfolded by a couple shots. That is (2).

A .40 has about 400-425 ft lbs of energy, though it does drop off quickly at distance. Most people can be non-lethally subdued with a couple shots by a .40 cal...

The majority of situations I see and hear, are police unloading full magazines, or way more ammo than is actually needed


And what happened to the air tazer? They should be equipped with one, and that should be the first or second weapon they grab, unless the perp has a gun.

originally posted by: TorqueyThePig
a reply to: jaynkeel

It is not even about me getting home safe. I mean of course that is a good thing but it is even more so about the safety of everyone else.

If I as a police officer do not stop a threat and they go on to harm an innocent bystander I have to live with that. I can also be found to be in dereliction of duty.

That is why what ifs absolutely play a role in police work.

In that situation what was of greater importance?

The officers stopping the threat from potentially harming innocent bystanders and themselves or being as gentle as possible with the person who is committing a crime?

if he was mentally stable, he would be committing a crime. Since he was not, he had guilty action, but not guilty intent. The point is, he needed to be booked, not bagged. Again, you are being like an animal with that type of rationality. I pity the community that you serve. If you were on my hometown police force, I'd file internal investigations against you and request that you be mentally evaluated.

a reply to: JamesCookieIII

Your personal attacks are humerous.

That being said I would gladly submit to any mental health screening.

You know what's funny is how two people, one being the cell-phone recorder, walked past the guy without incident. Cops show up and kill the guy within seconds. There's no way to take their action as justifiable, especially with all the non-lethal methods at their disposal.

a reply to: TorqueyThePig

How is a guy going to hurt other people in the community if he is booked into jail for armed robbery? Which would likely have been the charge had he not been put on the firing line like death row.

The guy was begging to be shot, so he was very obviously suicidal. Would you, as a police officer, shoot someone standing on the edge of a bridge telling you to push him over the edge? Oh, but he is holding a knife in his hand so that makes the shooting justified.

People like you, whether you believe it or not, are the main problem in the world. Your attitude alone creates societal gaps due the alienation of people that do not agree with you.

a reply to: Trappenin

A man jumping off a ledge is a completely different situation then a man with a knife.

That being said we are just going back and forth here. I won't convince you and you won't convince me.

This is a waste of time for all of us.

originally posted by: TorqueyThePig
a reply to: JamesCookieIII

Your personal attacks are humerous.

That being said I would gladly submit to any mental health screening.

well maybe you should. I mean, you boiled down that situation to two possible choices in your mind:
1) kill him to "protect" the community
2) or gently dealing with an obvious lunatic

They are both flawed. The cops should have efficiently attempted to disarm that bloke with less-than-lethal methods. Since they did not, and since they work for the public (especially their particular geographic area) they should have been MUCH more prepared to deal with such a situation in a more popular method. They rolled up with the intention of pulling guns on a person, and probably with the intentions of making an example of him. He hadn't harmed ANYONE physically when they shot him dead. Case closed in my book, that's premeditated murder, it WASN'T self defense, but if it was, they are still less-than-courageous. Furthermore, they shouldn't be exempt from common sense policies like murder is wrong, even when you are forced to do it. I deal with nutjobs at my lifeguard gig all the time, and NEVER once have I threatened anybody with physical harm, even when they physically assaulted me and put me in risk of harm. I simply remained cool, reasoned with them, and once the situation was safe, informed my manager who told me to call the cops after the fact. If cops had shown up when this big dude was yelling at me and grabbing my shirt (because i told him to put the umbrella he was using down in the high winds to protect a sunbathing woman nearby downwind), they would have probably tazed him. However, because I know how cops can be, I decided to let them sort it out after the big bastard cooled off. This is because I am a non-violent type of guy. When you give people a badge and gun and legal immunities, you get this type of police work. Again, this sickens me to think that that's the best law enforcement has to offer. If that's the best, i think we should disband them and form militias again. They deprived that dead guy literally ALL of his fundamental rights, and THAT SHOULD BE A BIG DEAL. Instead, I bet these guys are high fiving it and getting beers on the chief. You are just a gang member if you don't police non-violently.

a reply to: TorqueyThePig
Different scenario, but they are both suicidal; albeit with different reasons. The guy with the knife probably had no intentions on harming the police, but instead thought/hoped he would go out and be another reason to protest against cops.

Lethal force was not necessary in this situation. I understand the cops mindstate, they are in a rough area where they are not wanted AT ALL, but they should actually bring justice. Their job is not to punish anyone, it is to apprehend and let the judicial system punish them.

I highly doubt that if you were in the situation depicted in the video, that you would have shot as many times as these officers did. A .40 cal IS GOING TO stop someone. You don't have to kill people. That is not justice.

originally posted by: JamesCookieIII

originally posted by: TorqueyThePig
a reply to: JamesCookieIII

Your personal attacks are humerous.

That being said I would gladly submit to any mental health screening.

well maybe you should. I mean, you boiled down that situation to two possible choices in your mind:
1) kill him to "protect" the community
2) or gently dealing with an obvious lunatic

They are both flawed. The cops should have efficiently attempted to disarm that bloke with less-than-lethal methods. Since they did not, and since they work for the public (especially their particular geographic area) they should have been MUCH more prepared to deal with such a situation in a more popular method. They rolled up with the intention of pulling guns on a person, and probably with the intentions of making an example of him. He hadn't harmed ANYONE physically when they shot him dead. Case closed in my book, that's premeditated murder, it WASN'T self defense, but if it was, they are still less-than-courageous. Furthermore, they shouldn't be exempt from common sense policies like murder is wrong, even when you are forced to do it. I deal with nutjobs at my lifeguard gig all the time, and NEVER once have I threatened anybody with physical harm, even when they physically assaulted me and put me in risk of harm. I simply remained cool, reasoned with them, and once the situation was safe, informed my manager who told me to call the cops after the fact. If cops had shown up when this big dude was yelling at me and grabbing my shirt (because i told him to put the umbrella he was using down in the high winds to protect a sunbathing woman nearby downwind), they would have probably tazed him. However, because I know how cops can be, I decided to let them sort it out after the big bastard cooled off. This is because I am a non-violent type of guy. When you give people a badge and gun and legal immunities, you get this type of police work. Again, this sickens me to think that that's the best law enforcement has to offer. If that's the best, i think we should disband them and form militias again. They deprived that dead guy literally ALL of his fundamental rights, and THAT SHOULD BE A BIG DEAL. Instead, I bet these guys are high fiving it and getting beers on the chief. You are just a gang member if you don't police non-violently.

but thanks for your opinions

a reply to: JamesCookieIII

While I do agree with you, we shouldn't attack a fellow member even though our mindsets are 100% different. We are all people, and fixing the problem can and should start on forums like these. If we can all come together here, where opinions are thrown around by the second, then surely we can all unite in "real life".

Cops should be held accountable for their actions. Searching cars and ripping the fabric on seats and trunks, and just driving away laughing about it.. Raiding houses and leaving it in more disarray than a team of burglars would.. down to shooting and killing victims.

GOPRO cameras and dash cams are a must. And they should both be hooked up to either a live feed that also records long term, or at least records for a long period of time until the video is properly reviewed.

It all starts with your attitude. If I was in a bad mood, got a call about an armed robbery in a side of town that I hate, I probably would have pulled up as these officers did. That is to establish, without a doubt, definite authority in the situation.

I mean they literally gave this guy about 30 seconds and then ended his life.

AIR TAZER. WHERE IS IT

originally posted by: Trappenin
a reply to: JamesCookieIII

While I do agree with you, we shouldn't attack a fellow member even though our mindsets are 100% different. We are all people, and fixing the problem can and should start on forums like these. If we can all come together here, where opinions are thrown around by the second, then surely we can all unite in "real life".

Cops should be held accountable for their actions. Searching cars and ripping the fabric on seats and trunks, and just driving away laughing about it.. Raiding houses and leaving it in more disarray than a team of burglars would.. down to shooting and killing victims.

GOPRO cameras and dash cams are a must. And they should both be hooked up to either a live feed that also records long term, or at least records for a long period of time until the video is properly reviewed.

It all starts with your attitude. If I was in a bad mood, got a call about an armed robbery in a side of town that I hate, I probably would have pulled up as these officers did. That is to establish, without a doubt, definite authority in the situation.

I mean they literally gave this guy about 30 seconds and then ended his life.

AIR TAZER. WHERE IS IT

I agree - I personally apologize to TorqueyThePig, and other LEO's who do their jobs well and go above and beyond for the people they serve. I can respect that, as a matter of fact, I always wanted to be a cop in my hometown until they PROFILED THE @#$$ outta me. Again, if Torquey is a GOOD GUY then he should understand the pain this causes in families and the community in general.

An honest question here. How do police overseas manage to disarm a bad guy with a knife without use of a gun or lethal force? And why can't those tactics be used here in the USA. Not only that but check out any martial arts professionals, they are so good at hand to hand combat I would shudder to confront them with even a gun for fear of a jam or defective round. Just questions running through my head?

a reply to: jaynkeel
Difference in culture, I guess.
And they probably look at their gun as more of a last resort and intimidation tool. Justice does not get served with death, but rather ostracization in a controlled environment, such as prison.

There certainly are situations where police are left no option but to use that kind of force. They should also ALL be trained to defuse a situation before they attempt force.