SHOCK VIDEO: Police gun down carjacking suspect on live TV

Originally posted by Hellas
The suspect expired at the scene..

Wow what a comment!

The dehumanized him, by referring to him as a expired product, something like a week old loaf of bread.

Well by his own actions he prove he was no longer capable of interacting with other humans so it seems appropriate.

reply to post by boncho


Careful using the term weapon... People have a tendency to only equate weapon to gun. A baseball bat, crowbar, a pen, pencil, umbrella, shoes, etc etc etc can be used and classified as a weapon depending on the manner its used.

A vehicle can also be classified as a weapon if the vehicle itself is purposely used. Driving down the road and accidentally hitting another vehicle is an accident. Driving down the road and purposely maneuvering the vehicle in order to purposely make contact with another vehicle, is an assault (in my state is a felony).

I guess the question you need to think about is this...

Based on what the article states, was this guys actions a danger to the public?
If he is a danger to the public, and you have him stopped in a location that is relatively shielded, protecting passing cars in the road and people walking in the area, would you allow the person to leave the parking lot?

The rights of the suspect are paramount, however the moment his actions interfere with the rights of others, an action must be taken. Based on the info, the guy was a threat to the public and police, and his actions from start to finish only reinforced that conclusion.

Contrary to tv, we dont pull a felony traffic stop and wait for the negotiator to arrive on scene to talk the guy down.

As a follow up there was new video released. It shows the suspect pointing his gun at one of the patrons t the gas station. He also was pointing the gun at the people inside the gas station.

The end results were within law. Its a justified homicide.

Originally posted by boncho
reply to post by andersensrm

 

Over a half a dozen cops unload their pistols into a car and you think it is automatically justified? Whether it is or it isn't, it still needs to be reviewed and it isn't something to be taken lightly.

It's not about bashing here, it's whether or not they are doing their job properly as they are protecting the people. If it is automatic (Standard) to shoot someone when they are assumed to have a gun or they do have one, there will be cases where it was mistaken someone had one, or perhaps they had one but had one legally.

Any decent cop will tell you the idea is not to put someone down either, the goal is to arrest them without injury to the officer or the suspect. So I don't understand how people can jump up and say "great" when someone is killed. That isn't the idea. Nor is it supposed to be.

Respectfully - I dont agree. The goal is to ensure everyone goes home at the end of the night, citizens and police alike. If that means making an arrest or shooting to stop an imminent threat to the public, then thats how it goes.

As I stated before it was reported the guy was armed, and that was corroborated by the video at the gas station where the new video clearly shows him pointing the gun at the guy in the car next to the pumps and at towards the store window.

I understand your argument, I just dont agree with it because it doesn't take the appropriate laws into account. A person does not have to shoot first in order for police to respond.

The situation was a deadly force encounter before the gas station by virtue of a gun being present. Ignoring commands by the police, and knowing a weapon is present, a reasonable person can clearly see that if the incident was not stopped, it could have gotten a lot worse.

What if the ignored the police and walked towards the door of the 7-11, with customers inside?

As with all shooting it will be reviewed by the agency IA, an independent agency (out there they seem to use the PA's office instead of Highway Patrol. Based on those results, an investigation by the FBI could occur to look into a civil rights violation (using deadly force on an individual is considered a seizure under the 4th amendment).

ETA - In reference to the comment about holding a gun.
Its not relevant if its pointed down or pointed at an officer, its a threat. That threat pegs when you are yelling at the guy to drop the weapon and they dont.

If the police held their fire because he had the gun pointed down and head to the car and its drive, or towards the 7-11 then what? You can squeeze off a decent amount of rounds in very short order before the reaction of the police.

His actions are what ended his life, not the police. Also if im coming across snotty my apologies. Until you are actually standing there, pointing your gun at someone, its difficult to relay the mindset / emotions / thought process etc.

You have to make a mental line in the sand.

With that, im heading back out.. Ill check in later on tomrrow nightish.

night all.

Why is this so shocking? I've seen LAPD gun down men on live news before. They always cut off and apologize for the "brutal images we just viewed", used to come home to a car chase almost daily on LA local news that always end in brutal handling of the suspect or at gunpoint.

reply to post by Xcathdra


As always I respect your opinion even if I don't see eye to eye on it completely. I think the reservations I have is that I would like to police more as mediators to bad situations than aggressors.

Obviously there are cases where use of deadly force will be unquestionable (The LA bank shootout comes to mind) (Public/school shootings of course)

Some responsibility lies with the people as well. There will always be the status quo and the people who rail against it. With stronger force, stronger laws, stronger actions... I see stronger criminals. And it's just not worth the lives on both sides of the fence.

Still trying to figure out what a 20 kid thought while he was in that car. Sure it might have helped his social standing with his friends when he ultimately got sentenced, but in the end, going that far cost him his life. The officers involved have to live with what they did as well, and no matter what they will question their own actions whether justified or not.

The cops and robbers, good vs. bad culture has really progressed to a whole new animal.

reply to post by boncho


Again some good points.. As always though we are viewing this entire situation after the fact. We have information (more detailed) than the officers did.

As far as the last comment, cops robber, good bad, I agree somewhat. My issue is the perception that law enforcement is always in the wrong. Using this thread as an example, the focus is on the police and the end result, while people ignore the suspect and his actions, which are what resulted in his death.

People are so quick to judge the police and their actions without first gathering info / researching and knowing the law (which places the bulk of police action into proper context) that the end result is essentially blaming the police for everything, while completely ignoring the person who should be held accountable.

I see the same argument over and over.. If the police would have only wounded him, if they would have ended their pursuit, if the police would have put their guns away because the suspect had his gun pointed down.

You guys are confusing law enforcement with everything but law enforcement.

As I said, and am curious how you view this -
How many chances do you think the officers should have given this guy?

The reason I ask is because you seem fixed on the shooting while ignoring every action the suspect made up to that point.

We can come up with a list on everything law enforcement could have done to end the encounter. The problem with that view point is it ignores the obvious and most direct resolution - The suspect should have stopped / surrendered in the 1 hour plus run up to his end.

The police can give anyone all the chances under the son, but ultimately the decision belongs to the suspect, not the police.

It looks like the guy at the pump starts to hit the floor before the cops start shooting...so that leads me to believe that the suspect shot first..

Even if he didn't shoot...I agree with the others..one down, more to go. Criminals..get no sympathy from me!

reply to post by Xcathdra

As I said, and am curious how you view this -
How many chances do you think the officers should have given this guy?

The reason I ask is because you seem fixed on the shooting while ignoring every action the suspect made up to that point.

The suspect number 1 took something from someone at gunpoint, so obvious deserves to be apprehended for that. In my opinion, deserves to pay back to the person who he tried to steal from, but don't let me run off on a tangent, the justice system would have been fine...

That was the major crime he committed. Although he had a weapon, as far as I know he didn't use it on the old man. For all we know it may not have been loaded, could have been a fake pistol, etc.

So now you have the added violations of failing to stop, driving infractions, etc.

The idea that this is means that he doesn't care what the officers think, or respect the law, is quite accurate. But if he did respect the law, I suppose he wouldn't be robbing old men at gunpoint.

He didn't shoot anyone, didn't shoot at the cops, but it seems he had plenty of opportunity too. Him, "pointing a gun at people inside the store" just doesn't make sense to me. Why would he?

How many chances does he have? I couldn't hear the audio of the police telling him to get out with there guns drawn. The shots fired seemed to happen pretty quick.

If he had the gun in his hand, then fine. If he was pointing it at an officer then fine.

The only thing I thought was strange at first was the statement about pointing it at people in the store because it didn't make sense. And beyond that, the whole discussion blew up a bit. If there were a way to bring him in alive, without anyone in the public getting hurt, of course that would be the best result.

Hopefully the police can do the same in returning our Constitutional rights from the crooked politicians. If they can get a car back, why not our rights?

I see nothing wrong. They obviously had reason to fear for their lives, we know he had a gun, you can't just go on a high speed chase and suddenly stop and expect everyone to be okay. I'm going to assume they saw him reach for the visible gun on the dashboard and had fear for their/public's safety and in that, they were justified in shooting. I'd hate to be the guy pumping gas....that had to be the scariest thing to go through...

reply to post by Xcathdra


My husband (who dislikes ATS) actually sat and watched this whole video.

Thank you for showing us what a police officer's reality is.

While I am one of the most vocal people against "police brutality / abuse of power" again, in this instant there was no other outcome to be had.

To people out there reading this, if you steal a loaf of bread to feed your kid that's one thing.

BUT to hijack a car, threaten anyone with a gun or knife and then try to out run the police putting yet more people on the road in danger...................sadly you deserve what you get.

Once a person crosses that line of decency, once they show no respect for life - well the police have few choices left.

Again, going back over this - I remember having a big (45) held to my face, if the guy had pulled the trigger it would have blown my entire head right off. he told me to get into the car with a bunch of young men.

In my most humble voice I said, "No thank you" turned around and walked away. Luckily they drove off laughing.

Most people have never had a gun held directly right at them............it is a hallowing experience no words can describe. I almost wet myself I was so scared.

I do not condone police abusing their power, but each night I go to bed I am thankful that I know if I have to dial 911 I will have the police at my home within a couple minutes tops.

Read the novel, "Lights Out" by David Crawford, about a EMP blast and our country going into chaos with no police to call.

Looting, raping, stealing, kidnapping - there are a lot of really crazy, mean, horrible people in this world and the only thing that sometimes stands between them and the rest of us are our police officers.

When I was in nursing, I got to know many policemen (dated one) but he drank. Many have a drinking problem because they are under such stress. (So do doctors).

In closing, the video you presented deserves applause because it showed the process and protocol of how real law enforcement works.

Thank you for sharing that video......................it is the only video my husband to date has watched on ATS.

He said, "That's about how it is."

Originally posted by Vanna
I see nothing wrong. They obviously had reason to fear for their lives, we know he had a gun, you can't just go on a high speed chase and suddenly stop and expect everyone to be okay. I'm going to assume they saw him reach for the visible gun on the dashboard and had fear for their/public's safety and in that, they were justified in shooting. I'd hate to be the guy pumping gas....that had to be the scariest thing to go through...

Well, a high speed chase is not exactly confrontational. The suspect was confrontational with a old man, most likely a complete coward.

Fleeing, should not automatically end in a shootout.

His earlier actions of course didn't help him.

Originally posted by mileysubet

Originally posted by Hellas
The suspect expired at the scene..

Wow what a comment!

The dehumanized him, by referring to him as a expired product, something like a week old loaf of bread.

Well by his own actions he prove he was no longer capable of interacting with other humans so it seems appropriate.

Well they are
not going to say
*he was murdered at the scene*
They always use that term
for anyone who dies.
Whitney Houston was *expired*
at the scene. It is just official cop lingo

Well, that was his own fault. If you steal a car, lead police on a chase, and then wave a gun around pointing it at people, you're gonna get shot.
Completely reasonable police response. The guy could've at least stuck his hands out the window.

Holy crap! Did you see those gas prices? $4.21 for unleaded!

Oh sorry, this was about someone being shot?

Well, the suspect obviously had a gun, but the response by police was very... interesting.

Overkill, perhaps. But what else could one expect when flashing a weapon in California?

Lethal force was met with extremely lethal force, as expected by police forces with the latest military grade weaponry. The nearby subjec... erm, I mean, citizens, are lucky the officers on scene were good shots.

I'm calling this one a suicide via police bullets.

reply to post by boncho


The problem is, if you wait for the criminal to shoot, it's too late, which is why it is up to the officer's discretion to choose when it is necessary to shoot. A non responsive criminal with a gun, is enough to be shot. At any point he could have just started firing at anyone and everything, and the cops would have gotten blamed for that. Whats kind of ridiculous here, is we're blaming the cops for bringing down the guy trying to shoot/rob everyone in sight. Now granted, he didn't shoot anyone, but are we just going to wait around until he does? There are cases of police corruption of brutality, but none here. It wasn't like the guy was pulled over for speeding by 12 cops, and then they got no response from the guy, so they just started blasting.

The whole thing about the guy waving his gun or pointing his gun at people in the store, what's not to get? He was pointing the gun at people as a means of control, as do most people carrying guns.