Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

19 Yr Old Hostage Gunned Down By Police While Escaping Captor

page: 3
53
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 4 2012 @ 10:27 AM
link   
People need to stop and think about this.

Was the young man at fault for not listening to the police?

Think about it for a moment. If you've ever been in a situation where your life was threatened, you'll know what I'm talking about. Your adrenaline is maxed out. Your heart is beating like mad. Your breathing is very labored as your chest tightens up. Your mind is screaming "RUN!". Many don't hear anything except the roaring of their own blood.

It's part of the "Fight or Flight" response.

Now think on this. How old was he? 19?

Just a kid. A very scared kid, who feared for his life. I'm not surprised he didn't listen to the police. He most likely didn't even understand what they were yelling at him, as more than likely all he could think of was "RUN! RUN OR I"M DEAD!"

Was the reaction of the cops correct? Sadly, a lot of police training will say "yes" in this case.

That's the problem now. Police are not about "Protect and Serve" anymore. It's more about "Get Them, So They Don't Get You" or "Survive At All Costs"

I know this, as I have a brother who's a cop. And he'll tell you the same thing: He doesn't want to see people get hurt or killed, but he's going to make DAMN sure he gets to go home for dinner.

The problem here is: everyone was too scared. The kid was too scared to listen and obey. The cops were too scared to stop and think

The cops are suppose to be trained. I highly doubt that kid was trained to listen and obey in a life threatening situation.
Was shooting the kid necessary?

Absolutely not. I don't care if it was night time or not. They heard a shot, and then someone running from the door. Agreed they don't know WHO was running. That means there was not a Clear and present danger.

It was UNCLEAR and UNKNOWN. Did not any of them stop to think the person running may have been the victim?

This event is a clear indication that police are not being trained well, or evaluated well. The cops that shot the kid should be removed from service right away, and the rest of the police trained to handle a situation like that better.

For those that would say: "Well those cops have family too. They didn't want to take the chance of being killed."
I understand that. However, they are in a high risk line of work. They need to understand that.

That kid had family too. He more than likely just wanted to get out alive and go home too.




posted on Sep, 4 2012 @ 10:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by Echo007
I don't know how police officers can live with themselves when they take someones life like that out of their own fear.


Because they see non police as the ENEMY.
They have no problem looking at themselves in the mirror after an incedent like this.



posted on Sep, 4 2012 @ 10:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by VforVendettea

Originally posted by GoldenRuled
reply to post by DerepentLEstranger
 


Negligent homicide in it's purest definition.
2nd line.


No, this is more like Murder Under Color of Law.


You are correct.

I wonder if it also might be that he was shot 'because he was colored'?



posted on Sep, 4 2012 @ 10:45 AM
link   
If a cop kills someone, such as in this situation... people say "hey the kid should have listened"... or "they want to make it home at the end of the day". And its basically swept under the rug. They fired because they feared for their lives and the person didn't comply. And they get off. No charges.

Let's reverse the situation. You have a cop being very aggressive towards you. He pulls his gun on you and he isn't listening to your side of the situation. You fear for your life and you too have a gun. You kill the cop.

Why is that homicide? Why is this any different?

The difference between 'legal' and 'illegal' = A badge.

Welcome to America.



posted on Sep, 4 2012 @ 10:50 AM
link   
A good portion of our police force is made up of Iraq/Afghanistan veterans. How is anyone surprised that our police are militarized? Killing unarmed people and justifying it as just another worthless hadji is the usual for them.



posted on Sep, 4 2012 @ 10:56 AM
link   
More and more research is being done on people in traumatic incidents and the physiological reactions to "combat stress". This young man and even criminals are going through the same kind of physical reactions to stress that officers are going through.
Tunnel vision.
Reduced hearing ability
Reduced senstivity to touch
Reduced blood flow to extermities
All of these are physical reactions to extream stress. In stressful situations you have to know and understand these reactions. You need to train to control them and understand the effects they will ahve on your capabilities.

Anytime I hear of an police shooting I have to ask myself "how would I have handled that situation as a citizen that carries a firearm." If i would have reacted the same then I cant fault the police for doing so. That reaction however would not absolve me from the consequences of that reaction. It should also not absolve any police officer from consequences. If you read about a police shooting ask yourself if you reacted the same way would you be in jail? If the answer is YES then the cops should be at least suspended without pay pending an independant investigation by a citizen grand jury. NOT a DA ran "all proceedures were followed"
whitewash.

So given all that I said above I would not expect the young man running out of the room to even hear police yelling anything. I would expect Police who should be trained to suppress the affects of stress to be able to see the man was unarmed and subdue him without lethal force. I would expect that if I had been walking past that room, a gun shot rings out and a man charges from the room that I would not have been justified in drawing down on him and blasting him. I would be in jail on murder charges.

Since thats the case clearly the police were at fault here and should be facing investigation and charges here.



posted on Sep, 4 2012 @ 11:31 AM
link   
when you want your life to be in danger, call the cops, they'll make sure it is.



posted on Sep, 4 2012 @ 11:35 AM
link   
All this police incidents keep getting worse and worse..

I met this guy 2 days ago that was beaten by 7 cops and tazered he said he went through s psychotic breakdown.

Of course he admitted he had a fine for breaking and entering but they behaved like animals screaming and beating him senselessly we was a conspiracy nut just like us.

He was a really cool guy seemed very well educated too.



posted on Sep, 4 2012 @ 11:37 AM
link   
Why didnt the police kill all the hostages/victims to get the situation over with quicker and capture the bad guy?



posted on Sep, 4 2012 @ 11:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by Frankenchrist
The po po saw a black man running.

The po po thinks a black man running is a bad guy.

The black man is now dead.



That's about it...

Should not have happened.



posted on Sep, 4 2012 @ 11:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by LittleBlackEagle
when you want your life to be in danger, call the cops, they'll make sure it is.


increasingly this does indeed appear to be the case.



posted on Sep, 4 2012 @ 11:39 AM
link   
Hats off to our cowboys in blue for heroically and without thought for the own safety shooting and killing the hostage they were supposed to protect. Truly heroes, one and all.
edit on 4-9-2012 by Monger because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 4 2012 @ 11:53 AM
link   
reply to post by DAVID64
 

Good points.

"Innocent until proven guilty."

That's the best one.

But this happened at night. And the hostage came bursting through the door after gunfire is heard. Policeman have to protect themselves and prevent escape. Do they assume this person is innocent or do they assume that the person is armed? Because it's dark and there's a good chance they don't know. So what do they do? In a lot of ways, this reminds me of Iran. There's a lot of darkness. A lot of gunfire. It's hard to see who's who. We have to assume that their intentions are bad. I think it was Dick Cheney who said that even a 3% chance that Saddam had nukes was good enough reason. That's like saying if there's a 3% chance that the man bursting out the door is the armed suspect then shoot first, ask questions later. That appears to be how situations like this are handled.

Please note I've only read some of the thread. Haven't read the linked article. So if I've made any factual errors, I am regretful. I just wanted to say that the fog of war is present here.

en.wikipedia.org - Fog of war...

I realize fog of war is a term used with military context, but I think it shares many characteristics in common with some of the situations police find themselves in. Unfortunately, we all see its results and it's not hidden away in some distant enemy land. Criminals can use this fog of war too. Say, for example, that policeman didn't pull the trigger when the hostage burst out the door. If this became the norm then criminals would start using this tactic to potentially escape. It's sort of like how militants in rogue countries will hide themselves in the midst of common citizens. These are what're known as human shields. This decreases the chances that a bomb strike will be ordered.

This is at the heart of the statement "Sometimes you have to be evil to be good." It's a recognition that evil will exploit every rule in the books to escape or otherwise thwart your actions.

I think that coupled with this statement is also the admission that we must live with some evil in the world. Why? Because otherwise we would have to turn evil ourselves in order to destroy it.
edit on 4-9-2012 by jonnywhite because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 4 2012 @ 12:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by Kastogere
If the guy didnt comply to police orders...then yes they will shoot you in those circumstances....they heard a gun shot, the door opened....and without knowing what the perp looked like they shot him.

Im surprised it doesnt happen more often.

Honestly I dont see how the police are at fault for this...granted they should have hesitated....yet when gun fire is involved would you expect any less of a reaction?


Please tell me this is sarcasm. So, since they didn't know what the perp looked like, you find no fault with them shooting an innocent person? That's one of the dumbest things....
So if you don't know what the perp looks like, it's ok to just open fire on anybody, just because they might maybe possibly who-the-hell-knows be the perp? In a hostage situation where you know there are innocent people involved, no less??? If anything, that's more reason NOT to open fire. Don't be ridiculous. This is inexcusable.



posted on Sep, 4 2012 @ 12:45 PM
link   
Is this really anything new?

I have read countless stories recently of such incidents, the not too recent one where a guy was loaded with enough bullets to fill a box?

I won't throw the colour mix into this but I am pretty sure had the situation been different there was less of a chance they would have been shot (had he been white) but still, based on recent events involving "Cops n Civilians" there was a likely chance he would have been shot anyway.

When you need people to enforce a (flawed) rule of law on other people, you inevitably end up in this situation.



posted on Sep, 4 2012 @ 12:47 PM
link   
Lack of education. Lack of intelligence.

But worse...Lack of caring and awareness.

How can you be that dumb?



posted on Sep, 4 2012 @ 12:48 PM
link   
I see the moral of this episode, and countless episodes like it, as this:

A 911 call reporting a crime with a gun is going to bring on a load of trigger-happy police and probably a SWAT team. That may or may not improve your chances of survival. Be really sure that a SWAT team is your best option before calling 911 and reporting the presence of a gun.



posted on Sep, 4 2012 @ 01:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by MrWendal

Originally posted by Kastogere
If the guy didnt comply to police orders...then yes they will shoot you in those circumstances...


The real gunman fired a shot at him. Show me ONE sane person who will run out of a room with someone shooting at them- and stops right outside the door and gets on their knees! In the victim's mind, if he stops running he will get shot.



This comment here makes me think it was his fated day.. Everybody has to go at some point or another.



posted on Sep, 4 2012 @ 01:27 PM
link   
reply to post by Mizzijr
 




Everybody has to go at some point or another.

Yep.
Especially when you have three cops shooting at you. Seems to hasten your chances.



posted on Sep, 4 2012 @ 01:31 PM
link   
since this is a lunatic fringe's board...

let me say this: he failed to comply when confronted with an armed force (including the kidnapper) and people who take these risks fall outside the category of sheep...


plus:


an unclear, hectic situation ie. the perfect opportunity. i do NOT believe that this is a conscious decision, though, it all boils down to trained response, if you show any initiative they'll kill you, so better dodge them, too, or neutralize the attacker yourself - without giving the game away or you'll be shot while disarming the perp. oh, the best way to do that is before the cops arrive, gives you a chance to get away as a bonus.

my honest 2c









 
53
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join