It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Oklahoma City police officer shoots, kills man holding metal pipe

page: 6
10
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 21 2017 @ 11:24 AM
link   
why do you need to kill someone who only has a pipe when you have a taser




posted on Sep, 21 2017 @ 11:32 AM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: SlapMonkey

If they were required to lock their weapons in the trunk of their car and only get them when absolutely necessary, I bet these shootings would decrease drastically.

That would make the firearms useless. That's like having a pistol for home protection, but keeping it locked in a safe when you're at home. What you propose is generally a reflection of people who have never been trained in tactical firearm usage or in how/why seemingly peaceful situations can escalate into life-threatening ones.


Why is it that other police forces around the world are able to operate without firearms but they are declared essential here in the states? Because of gangs?

Comparing apples to oranges does not create a logical debate. We are a country where we have a right to own firearms as private citizens, and in most states, to carry them either openly or concealed--that alone makes the need for officers to have equal or better weapons so that they can enforce laws a must. When and why they use them should be the debate, not simply having them.


If you want my sympathy, fix the gun issue first.

The gun isn't the issue, but I do think that training is--I think that our municipalities, in general, don't give our officers the proper training to resolve physical confrontations in a confident manner that doesn't involve a firearm.


You mention that not all officers are certified with non-lethal force. Well why is that even the case to begin with? All officers get handgun training but not all get non-lethal force training? How does that make sense in any logical way?

Probably a funding issue, but I'm sure that you can research it on your own instead of asking me about it when I'm not a LEO and have no clue about the "why" behind these training and equipment issues. But I'm willing to bet that the reason differs from department to department.



posted on Sep, 21 2017 @ 11:33 AM
link   
a reply to: SlapMonkey

There are a thousand and one avenues of deescalation that I'd attempt before thinking that a gun would be necessary. There is Pepper Spray for one. There is listening to the people yelling at you about the man's handicaps for two.



posted on Sep, 21 2017 @ 11:45 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

You would think differently if you were an LEO for one night. Lock their guns in the trunk. You have shown me now I can’t have logical discussion with you. Good day



posted on Sep, 21 2017 @ 11:46 AM
link   
a reply to: Simon_Boudreaux

Tazer, pepper spray, batons these are not effective on everyone see the videos posted by slapmonkey



posted on Sep, 21 2017 @ 11:47 AM
link   
a reply to: SlapMonkey

Um, he was not involved in the hit and run!! he was mentally impaired and sitting on his porch, his father was involved in the hit and run..still in his vehicle.



posted on Sep, 21 2017 @ 11:48 AM
link   
a reply to: toysforadults

Cause a pipe can kill you and tazers are not 100% effective refer to slapmonkeys videos posted in page 5. I love all you people who have never been put in these shoot or no shoot situations being pros at this.



posted on Sep, 21 2017 @ 11:49 AM
link   

originally posted by: norhoc
a reply to: Krazysh0t

You would think differently if you were an LEO for one night. Lock their guns in the trunk. You have shown me now I can’t have logical discussion with you. Good day

Since I wasn't talking to you to begin with then I don't know why I should care about your desire to talk to me anyways. I'm sorry that you are so narrow minded that you can't consider that police work can be carried out in ways other than how we do it in the States, but whatever.



posted on Sep, 21 2017 @ 11:55 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

No there are not 1000 avenues, not when someone is coming at you with a pipe even though you are drawing down on them with a gun. And again typical comment from someone that has never been in these situations. I went through training with guys that pepper spray had little to no effect on and seen perps on the street sprayed and not miss a step. Same with tazers again reference page 5 vids, also with neighbors yelling at the police he is deaf have you even been in a eoom whwre several people are talking loudly? You cant make out what they are saying, now add onto that someone coming at you with a weapon and you have to make a decision in seconds or less as to what to do. I dont expect you to understand having never been there



posted on Sep, 21 2017 @ 11:55 AM
link   

originally posted by: SlapMonkey
That would make the firearms useless. That's like having a pistol for home protection, but keeping it locked in a safe when you're at home. What you propose is generally a reflection of people who have never been trained in tactical firearm usage or in how/why seemingly peaceful situations can escalate into life-threatening ones.

Oh DARN! The pistol is useless. Oh well. No worries on my end.


Comparing apples to oranges does not create a logical debate. We are a country where we have a right to own firearms as private citizens, and in most states, to carry them either openly or concealed--that alone makes the need for officers to have equal or better weapons so that they can enforce laws a must. When and why they use them should be the debate, not simply having them.

Hence why they should be in their trunk. They still have them and can go get them if they really need them. Probably when they are calling for backup.


The gun isn't the issue, but I do think that training is--I think that our municipalities, in general, don't give our officers the proper training to resolve physical confrontations in a confident manner that doesn't involve a firearm.

Heck let's go a step further and disallow cops from having a firearm until they go through proper non-lethal takedown courses. Guns should be FAR more restrictive to police than they are currently.


Probably a funding issue, but I'm sure that you can research it on your own instead of asking me about it when I'm not a LEO and have no clue about the "why" behind these training and equipment issues. But I'm willing to bet that the reason differs from department to department.

That question was rhetorical. I know the reason isn't simple and something you can answer easily like that. The point is that there is problem where officers have gun's and gun training as a priority over being issued non-lethal deterrents and being trained with them.
edit on 21-9-2017 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 21 2017 @ 11:55 AM
link   
a reply to: norhoc

I see, not always effective so why bother..just ventilate him. If this mentally impaired deaf man had a gun..sure, you wouldn't hear a peep from me.
One cop clearly thought it was worth a try.



posted on Sep, 21 2017 @ 11:57 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

You are being close minded thinking these officers should only have handled it the way you think they should from the safety of your home. I wish average citizens could go through a basic scenario on a police judgemental range and see how difficult it is



posted on Sep, 21 2017 @ 11:59 AM
link   
a reply to: vonclod

I somehow think even if he had a gun we would hear the same opinion from you guys on here



posted on Sep, 21 2017 @ 12:00 PM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Just shows me you dont value the police officers life



posted on Sep, 21 2017 @ 12:02 PM
link   
a reply to: norhoc

3 posts in the span of a few minutes? I thought you weren't talking to me?



posted on Sep, 21 2017 @ 12:02 PM
link   
a reply to: SlapMonkey

The problem with some your videos is that they at least tried non lethal means first. They didn't automatically go for their sidearms. If non lethal means don't work then use whatever means necessary to subdue the suspect. If you're too scared in your line of work that lethal means are your first choice, then yes, you're a coward and in the wrong profession.



posted on Sep, 21 2017 @ 12:04 PM
link   
a reply to: Simon_Boudreaux

Not about being scared it is about going home at the end of your shift



posted on Sep, 21 2017 @ 12:07 PM
link   
a reply to: norhoc

You guys..


And as far as I go you are WRONG.



posted on Sep, 21 2017 @ 12:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: norhoc
a reply to: Krazysh0t

You are being close minded thinking these officers should only have handled it the way you think they should from the safety of your home. I wish average citizens could go through a basic scenario on a police judgemental range and see how difficult it is


I wish cops had to go through a basic day in the life of a citizen and see how it feels to wonder if your encounter with a cop is going to be your last day of life.



posted on Sep, 21 2017 @ 12:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: norhoc
a reply to: Simon_Boudreaux

Not about being scared it is about going home at the end of your shift


Tell that to the people you kill. Or does it not matter if they go home?




top topics



 
10
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join