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.

 

Man killed after grabbing officer\

page: 3
1
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 8 2008 @ 11:43 AM
link   
Honestly, what is bugging ME, personally, was the shot with intent to kill. Whatever happened to wounding them? Why could the officer not give a warning shot? And, WHY would the officer shoot the guy when his buddies were so close? I mean, either someone got trigger happy (we ALL know it's happened before and will happen again... they are humans), or this story is WAY off kilter.

But, what ever happened to wounding the guy? Ok, the tazer obviously didn't work, but maybe a shot to the thigh WOULD have got his attention, and would've been completely justified, given the situation.

Just my thoughts on it. I don't believe a shot to the torso to be a wound shot.




posted on Jun, 8 2008 @ 11:48 AM
link   
actually
the OFFICIAL police policy, and my friend (a police officer, showed me this thread) is shoot to stop (neutralize) that does not mean shoot to kill

Click here

i know its only yahoo answers, but you can feel free to do more research on it yourself. Personally - my real-life good buddy, whos a retired police officer, his word is good enough for me.

so i stand by my post of "maybe he didnt intend to kill the guy"

the gunshot its self may not have killed him either (since the media never really tells you the full story, no matter how they spin it)

He could be one fo those people who dont clot (bled to death)
he could have been so cracked out that he died from a heart attack

you never know

so stop being so fast to pass off judgement. I realize some people are just speculating and saying "what if" and to them, i give you 'applause' but to the others who are flat out saying "i was there, i know"

boo to you

[edit on 8-6-2008 by ybab hsur]



posted on Jun, 8 2008 @ 11:58 AM
link   
reply to post by Earthscum
 



Honestly, what is bugging ME, personally, was the shot with intent to kill.


If you don't intend to kill the person, then a gun is the wrong weapon.



Why could the officer not give a warning shot?


Never fire a round that you don't know where it is going, or where it will end up, if you can help it. A warning shot would pose a danger to the community, and even the other officers in the event of a ricochet for example.



And, WHY would the officer shoot the guy when his buddies were so close?


Goes to show exactly how necessary this officer thought the shooting actually was. Even if he really wanted to put a perp-kill on his piece, you know damn well he didn't want to shoot another cop, but felt the risk was necessary.

As far as "just wounding" the perp, police do not train to make any such distinction. To be politically correct, they "shoot to stop" which means shooting at the largest part of the target mass, which of course often results in death. An officer doesn't aim for a leg any more than for a head-shot.



posted on Jun, 8 2008 @ 12:05 PM
link   
reply to post by jackinthebox
 


i mean this is the most respectful way, jack, so please dont take it as harsh

but where exactly do you get your information on police training?

Is it conjecture or do you actually have a source?

My source (a police officer) says that you're wrong in stating police shoot to kill

Again - im asking in a non-harsh manner



posted on Jun, 8 2008 @ 12:05 PM
link   
So far I have only seen one person ask how? This story stinks like the woman that managed the strangle herself handcuffed to a bench in police custody.

I understand the guy resisted arrest and disobeyed the orders of the authorities.

I understand they shot him with a tazer.

I understand that by some fluke he managed to overcome the tazer shock and pull out the shocker probes against all odds.

Now as I read the story as it is reported it seems the perp grabed the tazer from the officer that used it. Ok thats possible. Then the artical says the perp "FIRED" it at the officers. This is where the story breaks down.

Did the perp re-coil the tazer wire and re-load as he fought the cops?

Tazers are one shot weapons. If you miss with a tazer your SOL and its time to draw a stinger or gun.... because you can not reload a tazer quickly in the middle of a dangerous event...

So how the perp managed to fire a discharged tazer is beyond me.

Now he could of shoved the discharged tazer into one or the other officers.. but not both at the same time....which means the other one would of been free to beat or shoot the perp like officer 3 did... but even if the perp did wrestle the used tazer out of one o0f the officers hands thier is not logical way he could of fired it after it had already been used....

and this story sounds like typical police hogwash .



posted on Jun, 8 2008 @ 12:10 PM
link   
reply to post by thegdfather
 


so you mean to tell me
That the officers and investigators seen no loophole in this story if it was indeed concocted and not screwed up by the media?



posted on Jun, 8 2008 @ 12:10 PM
link   
Warning shots are the fixation of movie cops and illegal in most states. I know of two officers that have been fired for reckless endangerment for doing just that. Shooting to wound is a misnomer also. You fire to hit the target not hit a bullseye. Maybe John Wayne of Hopolong could do it but not many police officers can in the heat and fear of a firefight.
Zindo



posted on Jun, 8 2008 @ 12:12 PM
link   
reply to post by ybab hsur
 


Well, it's not politically correct to say "shoot to kill" these days. But I can tell you this much, never ever shoot at someone you don't intend to kill. If they survive, lucky for them.

I have my own direct experience with firearms.



posted on Jun, 8 2008 @ 12:14 PM
link   
reply to post by ZindoDoone
 


i see...and you know this because you were a police officer

or because you've watched a few episodes of COPS and CHIPS?

its funny - because i had been talkign to my friend on the phone, and now he's running off to get his official police handbook....he's so angry that people insinuate things that they have no reason to insinuate

i guess we'll have to wait and see what an official law book says on the issue of use of firearms.



posted on Jun, 8 2008 @ 12:19 PM
link   
reply to post by jackinthebox
 


Okay - fair enough
but it is also fair to assume that you have no faith, what so ever, in our law enforcement? I give them the benefit of the doubt because they have training that i do not. Even under duress, they'd be better suited for these situations than me.

Personally - i've alwasy been of the opinion if someone was robbing me, i'd not hesitate to shoot them, but then again, i've never been in that situation so it's easy to speculate.

ALL IM SAYING is

don't believe what the media tells you, especially on stories like this
The media twisted the duke lacrosse case and had those boys convicted, though they were later set free

The media NEGLECTED to show the entire rodney king tape, but truncated it to show the message that THEY wanted to deliver - thus i blame the media 100% for the LA riots

The media neglected to bring forth all the facts about that incident just recently ( i forget where) but the man was shot the day of his wedding

If a police officer says "pul the car over" you pull over
if a police officer says "shut the car off" you shut it off
if a police officer tells you to do ANYTHING you should listen
it doesnt matter if you want to "FIGHT THE POWER"
if you "FIGHT THE POWER" you end up like Radio Rahem every time.

Disrespect for police officers in this manner (by "fighting the power") is a complete disrespect for a civilized society.
There is police brutality, this is true, but to use a few instances of brutality to justify overall disregard for authority is just plain ignorant.



posted on Jun, 8 2008 @ 12:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by blimpseeker
i love it how most ATS members blame the officers without even knowing the facts! i have two friends that serve as police officers and they are nice guys and respectful as most people in the south (or i wouldn't be friends with them).
sure there are bad cops out there but statiscally (sp) speaking they can't ALL be bad.

How about we give them the benefit of the doubt until we get more info, oh but wait,... the info will come from the msm so we can't rely on it hmmm a dilemma.

I guess i will just side on the police side this time and say the loser had it coming. attacking cops and resisting arrest means he was probably on some kind of drugs.

ANYTIME YOU ATTACK THE POLICE YOU MUST KNOW, IN THE BACK OF YOUR MIND WHAT THE ULTIMATE FINALE COULD POSSIBLY BE.



BS BS BS.

I work with cops every day as I am a Firefighter. A few years back an officer that I work with quite often I asked him to justify why a cop in Florida tazered a 7 year old child.

He stated: Do you have any idea how out of control a 7 year old can get?

Most are fearful cowards and become cops for the control. TRUTH.



posted on Jun, 8 2008 @ 12:29 PM
link   
reply to post by LoneGunMan
 


wow you bring up a "touchy subject" about one particular plice officer

i will say it again
to use a few instances (or in this case one instance) of police neglect and/or brutality to justify a complete lack of respect for authority is just plain ignorant

What would you rather the officer have done? Strongarm the 7year old? Then you'd be saying "POLICE BRUTALITY!!!" instead of police neglect.



posted on Jun, 8 2008 @ 12:30 PM
link   
reply to post by ybab hsur
 



but it is also fair to assume that you have no faith, what so ever, in our law enforcement?


I have a lot less faith than what I once tried very hard to keep.



I give them the benefit of the doubt because they have training that i do not.


Training is a double-edged sword. It often times supersedes common sense.



don't believe what the media tells you, especially on stories like this


I don't think you're going to find many people around here that believe a whole lot the MSM has to say.



The media neglected to bring forth all the facts about that incident just recently ( i forget where) but the man was shot the day of his wedding


That was here in NY. Sean Bell was his name, and justice has miscarried in that case.



Disrespect for police officers in this manner (by "fighting the power") is a complete disrespect for a civilized society.


Respect is a two way street.



There is police brutality, this is true, but to use a few instances of brutality to justify overall disregard for authority is just plain ignorant.


Police brutality is far more rampant than most people realize until they become a victim themselves, or go to work in the field.

But I do not recommend showing a blatant diregard for authority.



posted on Jun, 8 2008 @ 12:34 PM
link   
reply to post by jackinthebox
 



Okay, i think i see what you're trying to say, so that poses a new question for me, and please do correct me if im wrong in my assumption of your mentality

Q.)
If a police officer tells you to do something, and you feel as though what that officer is telling you to do is violating your rights, what makes you feel compelled to "fight the power" if you have done nothing wrong?
By how i interpret your mentality on the issue, i would have to say "wouldnt it be better to just do what they say, and be on your way" than to fight the power and make things worse for you?


Fact:
A police officer cannot be spittin rays of sunshine out of his hindquarters. Police officers are trained to be firm and direct, this is to shy away those more cowardly criminals. So the next time an officer says

'would you please step out of the vehicle and put your hands on your head'
you should do it - especially if you've done nothing wrong.



posted on Jun, 8 2008 @ 12:36 PM
link   
I still want an answer to what is bugging me. The stun gun or "tazer" is a single shot weapon. So how did he manage to fire it multiple times after it was dis-charged.

AFTER being tazed himself.????

A tazer is not like a revolver. It has one shot. You can pull the trigger again and again and electrocute multiple times but you can only "fire" it once.

So how did the perp fire a discharged tazer?



posted on Jun, 8 2008 @ 12:47 PM
link   
reply to post by titorite
 


ive already answered your question

the media screwed up the story.

look a few posts above and you'll see my explanation.



posted on Jun, 8 2008 @ 01:03 PM
link   
reply to post by ybab hsur
 


I read many posts up and no where do I see my question answered despite your assertation otherwise.

The media very well could of screwed up the story. But it does not change some basic facts.

Allow me to repeat myself for the sake of clarity just in case you have a genuine interest in truly answering my question.

Perp gets tazered, perp pulls tazer probes out and fights with cops, perp manages to get tazer from cop, perp fires tazer multiple times at cops, Cop three shows up and kills perp.

Even if perp grabed a fresh tazer gun from the other officer, how did he fire it more than once? It is a single shot projectile weapon.



posted on Jun, 8 2008 @ 01:17 PM
link   
Well it's a bit idiotic to try and fight 3 armed officers and take their weapons away from them.

If he would have just co-operated he would have got out of there alive, a couple of years in prison maybe, but it's better than being dead on the street.

Oh yeah and maybe, just maybe if he wasn't burgling someones property in the first place then this wouldn't have happened.



posted on Jun, 8 2008 @ 01:30 PM
link   
reply to post by C0le
 



thanks cole,


there's a GA cop who chimed in, but he didn't say WHY they had to taser this guy

he just justified using the weapon



nobody has explained why it necessary to short circuit someone who is unarmed like this bozo in the garden,

or a guy in a car who has no weapon other than a thick skull


I see no need, no valid reason, for tasering anyone who is not a definite threat to the officer,

to me, it is an unjustified ASSAULT on the citizen, and the cops should be prosecuted for abuse of power!



posted on Jun, 8 2008 @ 02:06 PM
link   
reply to post by toasted
 


Personaly, I am not so concerned with the cops reasons for tazzing and then killing the perp as much as I am concerned with the other facts of this report.

The perp is reported to of fired a dis-charged tazer multiple times.

That is not possible since the Tazer is a single shot weapon.

Now it could be possible that after he pulled out the tazer probes he charged the officers with it.... but as long as the officer holding the discharged tazer released the trigger he has no reason to fear the tazer itself.

but thier are two officers here. Even if the perp had one of the policemens tazer he could only use it on one of them... leaveing the other officer plenty of oppritunity to beat him with a stinger or mace him or shoot him dead.

But the second officer can not because the perp has a magical tazer that can fire probes like a revolver keeping the two officers preoccupied till the thrid officer shows up on scene to shoot the perp dead. The day is saved.

but what still is not explained, what I can not get anyone to address is how ANYONE cop or crook can fire a tazer multiple times when it is a single shot device?

I said it before and I say again, this story smells like the woman who died of self-inflicted strangulation hand cuffed to a bench in police custody.



new topics

top topics



 
1
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join