Welcome to the Utopia Forums! Register a new account
The current time is Tue Mar 26 07:52:34 2019

Utopia Talk / Politics / cop shooting... reasonable or no?
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Wed Feb 20 15:47:47
this is the police statement of events so unknown amount of truth:

----------

At approximately 10:36 PM, the Vallejo Police Department Communications Center received a 911 call from Taco Bell employees located at 974 Admiral Callaghan Lane regarding a subject slumped over in the driver's seat in their drive-thru. Two Vallejo Police patrol officers arrived on scene to check on the welfare of the driver. As the officers approached the vehicle they noticed the driver was unresponsive and had a handgun on his lap.

The officers performed a visual check to determine if other occupants were in the vehicle and began to formulate a plan to safely resolve the situation. The two officers decided to hold their position and did not attempt to wake the driver. Instead, they decided to wait for additional officers to arrive on scene and ensured that people in the parking lot were safe and did not approach the vehicle.

An additional patrol officer arrived on the scene and the officers elected to attempt to open the driver's door with the intention of one officer swiftly retrieving the firearm from the subject's lap, while another officer covered him. Unfortunately, the vehicle was locked. The officers noticed that the vehicle's transmission was in drive. At this time, additional units arrived and the officers positioned a marked patrol vehicle in front of the subject's vehicle to prevent forward or erratic movement.

Officers requested a Patrol Supervisor to respond to the scene for further assistance and began to position a marked Vallejo police patrol car to the rear of the subject's vehicle.

While officers were still positioning a patrol unit to the rear of the vehicle, and waiting for the supervisor, the driver began to suddenly move and looked at the uniformed patrol officers. Officers gave the driver several commands to put his hands up. The driver did not comply and instead he quickly moved his hands downward for the firearm.

Fearing for their safety, six officers fired their duty weapons at the driver. Officers continued to yell commands at the driver and ultimately reached through the broken glass of the driver's window to unlock the vehicle. Officers removed the driver from the vehicle, began rendering medical assistance and attempted lifesaving efforts on the driver. Unfortunately the driver was pronounced deceased at the scene.

Six officers fired their weapons firing multiple rounds. All shots were fired in approximately four seconds. The involved officers have been placed on administrate leave.

(full statement here, but above is all the relevant parts)
http://web...notation?permalink_uri=2SvZ22u

TLDR: black guy falls asleep (slumped over) in a Taco-Bell drive-thru... they call cops, cops spot a gun in his lap... eventually he gets startled awake & "moved his hands downward"* & so 6 cops shoot him (25 times total)

*they claim they shouted commands to put his arms up but i would guess we're talking less than two seconds from startled to shooting
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Wed Feb 20 15:50:58
oops... 25 times is an estimate... no coroner report yet
Paramount
Member
Wed Feb 20 16:50:19
It seems to be reasonable. The cops killed another citizen and the community is now safe again.
kargen
Member
Wed Feb 20 17:06:06
These types of stories seem to always highlight how many times the officers fire their weapons. How many times is really irrelevant to the story most of the time. Why they fired the first shot is what should be concentrated on.
Forwyn
Member
Wed Feb 20 17:38:51
Abilene father/son shooter media reports also focused on subsequent shots. There were like four shots fired in total, and cops went out of their way to say that the aggressor was unarmed at the time of final shots (because he threw his bat at the shooters).

Different rules for peons.
jergul
large member
Thu Feb 21 04:33:07
Kargen
The core question is if the police employed proportionate force to the task at hand.

A bullet count is a pretty clear gauge of proportionality.
Paramount
Member
Thu Feb 21 05:51:56
There is a clear difference if a cop fires one bullet or 10,000 bullets.
swordtail
Anarchist Prime
Thu Feb 21 10:26:46
reasonable.

http://www...ideo-of-deadly-police-shooting
Paramount
Member
Thu Feb 21 11:40:27
^ They should kill that mans family also, and bulldoze his home.
kargen
Member
Fri Feb 22 14:54:43
jergul the decision to fire your weapon is a decision to use lethal force. At that point the goal is to end the threat as quick and sure as possible. So multiple shot are fired.

They shoot to kill with every shot. If they were trying to incapacitate they would use a taser, pepper spray or something along those lines.

If they fired only one shot and the suspect raised his gun and shot a cashier at the window accident or on purpose the police would have hell to pay.

The focus should be on why the first shot was fired.
jergul
large member
Sun Feb 24 04:33:58
Kargen
The focus should be on if proportionate force was used. A spray and pray approach suggests a lack of proportionality.

There probably should be a lot more hell to pay for wayward bullets causing death or injury to bystanders or to other police officers (the whole concept of surrounding a suspect, then firing 100ds of bullets at him, seems flawed).
kargen
Member
Sun Feb 24 17:57:07
They had one suspect and only that one suspect was hit. How many times doesn't matter.

And sure if an officer positions himself so he could be firing on other officers that needs to be addressed. Doesn't seem to have happened here though.

They deemed deadly force was needed and they used it. When in that situation you don't just shoot once then wait and see if that one shot got him. Good way to get you or someone near you shot.
Nekran
Member
Mon Feb 25 00:58:03
They didn't even try to wake the guy?

US police always come off as such fucking pussies in these stories.
Forwyn
Member
Mon Feb 25 01:08:13
They know 100% they'll get off. Worst case scenario, they get a forced resignation and move a county away. Why take a .001% risk?

A tale of unequal protection:

http://www...swatting-mistake-won-t-n865626

http://www.kansas.com/news/local/crime/article215060245.html
kargen
Member
Mon Feb 25 04:23:50
Nekran the man did wake up and according to the police told several times to put his hands up. How many several is and in what amount of time would matter for the investigation. They say he instead reached down towards the gun.

This is an update.

"Our preliminary investigation has revealed that the firearm that was recovered at the scene was reported stolen out of Oregon. The firearm was a fully loaded 40 caliber semi-automatic handgun with an extended magazine inserted in the weapon. The firearm appeared to be fully functional and has been sent to an independent crime lab for further testing."

tumbleweed
the wanderer
Mon Feb 25 16:00:34
example of how much time is given to comply with orders...
see second 0:23
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZXVUD4s74FE

it seems unlikely to me that after being startled from sleep that he spent several seconds w/ hands motionless, comprehending commands, before deciding whether to raise or lower his hands
Forwyn
Member
Mon Feb 25 16:09:50
More likely he was startled awake and tried to tuck it away.

Although if he's a gun thief it's a shame they didn't torch the car with a flamethrower
Seb
Member
Mon Feb 25 17:07:11
tumbleweed:

Jesus fucking christ. It's like something out of that southpark episode "they're comming right for us". "Police" they yell, as they shoot. Bang bang bang. "Get on the ground".

The US is fucking terrifying.
Seb
Member
Mon Feb 25 17:07:46
"Nekran the man did wake up and according to the police told several times to put his hands up."

Before or after they shot him?
Wrath of Orion
Member
Mon Feb 25 17:13:03
"The US is fucking terrifying."

If you're someone that greets yells of, "Police, search warrant!" with a golf club, yes, I'm sure the US is terrifying. Right before you get shot.
kargen
Member
Mon Feb 25 17:41:07
"example of how much time is given to comply with orders..."

six seconds from time they yelled police to first shot fired. Plenty of time for the guy to decide a golf club might not be the best weapon for that fight.

Seb according to the report before.
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Mon Feb 25 17:42:17
there's multiple people shouting at once and breaking into his home, do you think he recognized it was police in those few seconds? seems doubtful he'd go for a golf club to defeat a police raid


car guy would be even more disoriented and probably had even less time to figure it out
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Mon Feb 25 17:48:33
'holy shit, someone's breaking in!'
*runs & grabs golf club that he leaves out for that purpose*

that's my guess
Wrath of Orion
Member
Mon Feb 25 17:52:40
People do stupid shit. Audio like that is usually pretty shitty, and it's clear what they're saying on the audio, so yeah, willing to bet he heard fine.

Additional information about the warrant and person's history would be helpful. It seems a good assumption from the video that it was a no knock warrant. Why was that issued? If it was a history of violence/high risk of harm to officers, the outcome isn't surprising. If it was concern over evidence destruction, maybe that changes things a bit.

Watching the video doesn't really give us the full picture.
Seb
Member
Mon Feb 25 17:56:55
Kargen:

They knocked down his door then shouted police literally as they shot him.

I can barely tell they are saying police with the mic with them.

He's in the house and has seconds to react.

Golf club? This is literally the scenario you lot argue personal ownership of firearms is for: attack in the night by home invaders.

They just aren't supposed to be the police. But if you don't know or realise they are the police, you die.

You are so, so fucked up as a society.
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Mon Feb 25 18:02:08
they're outside his house when they start shouting at approx 17.5 secs... he's at least a room deep inside, behind at least one door... the door breached after 2 secs... he's in the doorway w/ club 3 secs after... how much recognition & thought do you think he put into his choices?

perception/reaction time in driving tends to be estimated 1.5-2.5 secs & you're already semi-concentrating presumably w/ eyesight helping considerably, not just sounds


there's details of incident in the description plus names for anyone who wishes to google for details
kargen
Member
Mon Feb 25 18:03:06
"seems doubtful he'd go for a golf club to defeat a police raid"

seems like that is exactly what he did. It wasn't a smart move but that is why the police serve warrants like that. They try and overwhelm by being quick and loud so you have less time to react. Guy probably thought oh shit cops then grabbed the nearest thing to him. Like Wrath said kinda matters what the warrant was for in figuring out if the response was over the top or not.
Wrath of Orion
Member
Mon Feb 25 18:07:21
Seb lecturing anyone on living in a fucked up society is beyond hilarious. I'm sure we can all agree on that.
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Mon Feb 25 18:07:52
it was for drugs

also my main point was cops say they shout commands before shooting, but that doesn't mean the person had a realistic chance to comply

does anyone think he had an opportunity to respond to commands?
Wrath of Orion
Member
Mon Feb 25 18:19:33
Yeah, I just looked it up. In this case since it was for lookouts/evidence destruction, I'd call the response a bit extreme. I haven't seen anything that suggests a history of violence known to the cops. Whether he was aware of who they were/what was going on is debatable and can't really be determined. I'd say it's entirely possible he was fried out of mind and was about to attack the cops, but it's also possible he was just responding to what he thought were other criminals breaking into his place.

Regardless of that last bit, they probably could have handled the encounter with him better considering what the no knock was for.
Forwyn
Member
Mon Feb 25 18:27:36
"But if you don't know or realise they are the police, you die."

If you grab a golf club, yeah.

Guys that grab AKs and pop a few rounds through the door typically get a few minutes to ascertain the situation and peacefully surrender. <3
Seb
Member
Mon Feb 25 18:30:31
Wrath of Orion:

As fucked up as UK society is, we don't need to ever consider the possibility the state will come in the night and shoot us dead.

I mean for fucks sake, SWATing is a thing in your country. As in, you stand a non zero chance of getting someone killed by make a fake report.

Do you not get how exceptionally fucking weird that is?
Seb
Member
Mon Feb 25 18:31:23
tumbleweed:

They literally say "get on the ground" two seconds after he has collapsed after having been shot with multiple rounds.

Seb
Member
Mon Feb 25 18:32:13
WoO:

"I'd call the response a bit extreme."

Wait, are you... British? Are you doing our whole understatement thing?

Seb
Member
Mon Feb 25 18:36:02
Forwyn:

"If you grab a golf club, yeah."

Right. But don't you sell the whole idea of guns etc. with the idea of self defence against exactly this kind of scenario where it's *not* the police?

And, here's the kicker, if you didn't have guns, the police wouldn't need to behave in this - in any other country - insane way, because a guy with a golf club across the room is far less of a threat.

They didn't kill him because they thought he had a golf club. They killed him because they thought he *might* have a gun, and he might shoot them *whether or not* he was guilty because they know damn well he might not know they are police.

You've created a society where police-civilian interaction has way to high a probability of violence and death.

It's madness.

Forwyn
Member
Mon Feb 25 18:44:55
If we're being serious, no-knocks are a product of the War on Drugs, not an armed society.

We didn't have no-knocks 80 years ago, and police casualties have not risen in any measurable way.
kargen
Member
Mon Feb 25 19:48:14
"does anyone think he had an opportunity to respond to commands?"

He had time to grab a golf club so yeah he had time to lay his ass down on the floor.

"They literally say "get on the ground" two seconds after he has collapsed after having been shot with multiple rounds."

They yelled police six seconds before first shot was fired. They were in the next room. The man ran at them. That shit is on him.
Wrath of Orion
Member
Mon Feb 25 19:51:36
Seb used to be fairly rational, goddamn. It's actually a bit scary.
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Mon Feb 25 20:06:44
@kargen... 6 seconds is being pretty generous, grabbing the club was fatal, so would be about 3 to 4 seconds, and I don't see him running at them at all

if you suddenly heard shouting and your door being busted in as you were reading this post, would you be able to assess the situation and be on the ground within 5 or 6 seconds?
Forwyn
Member
Mon Feb 25 20:16:54
No-knocks are the antithesis of reasonable searches and seizures. They damn sure shouldn't be used because some tweaker may flush some drugs.

If they're shouting police when they're already in the living room, a resident has no obligation to assume they aren't gangbangers shouting police.
murder
Member
Mon Feb 25 21:24:27

"These types of stories seem to always highlight how many times the officers fire their weapons. How many times is really irrelevant to the story most of the time. Why they fired the first shot is what should be concentrated on."

kargen: Surely you understand that the chances that the shooting will end in death increase with every shot fired.

Why they fired is easy. Police are trained to protect themselves from any real or perceived threat above all else.

A rational person not burdened with police training would have taken cover.



"If they fired only one shot and the suspect raised his gun and shot a cashier at the window accident or on purpose the police would have hell to pay."

In my entire life I cannot remember a cop ever getting into trouble for firing too few shots ... unless the number of shots fired was zero.

murder
Member
Mon Feb 25 21:30:08

"They had one suspect and only that one suspect was hit. How many times doesn't matter."

WTF are you talking about? They had zero suspects.

You can't go around shooting citizens for having a gun, or for passing out in their car, or for blocking a drive thru, or for not putting their hands up. This is some seriously fucked up thinking. I don't care if he reached for his gun, if he doesn't point it at anyone, it is not reasonable to end his life.



murder
Member
Mon Feb 25 21:34:15

"there's multiple people shouting at once and breaking into his home, do you think he recognized it was police in those few seconds?"

Yes. And unsaid is that the whole point of having everyone yelling commands is to disorient the suspect.

murder
Member
Mon Feb 25 21:55:41

"He had time to grab a golf club so yeah he had time to lay his ass down on the floor."

Did the police instruct him to grab a golf club? If not then your response doesn't really prove anything.


"They yelled police six seconds before first shot was fired. They were in the next room. The man ran at them. That shit is on him."

It's funny how the person being gunned down is expected to accurately access the situation, but the guys in body armor and wielding guns aren't expected to discern a golf club (or anything else) from a gun.

Not haha funny, but funny nonetheless.

kargen
Member
Wed Feb 27 17:25:54
"kargen: Surely you understand that the chances that the shooting will end in death increase with every shot fired."

Yep. Do you understand that when an officer decides to use the gun it is a decision to use deadly force? They fire to kill.

"WTF are you talking about? They had zero suspects."
Then why were they there? Someone reported a man passed out at a drive through and the police determined he had a gun in his immediate possession. That makes him a suspect if he weren't already and a farther investigation would have determined if their suspicions were warranted. According to them his reaching for a gun ended any attempt to investigate.

The police access a threat and respond to stop the threat. I haven't seen anyone say the police thought the golf club was a gun. The police saw a man coming at them with a weapon. A weapon that could cause serious bodily harm or death. They stopped his advances. An investigation will decide if they were overzealous in their use of force.

"Yes. And unsaid is that the whole point of having everyone yelling commands is to disorient the suspect."
I addressed that.
Seb
Member
Wed Feb 27 17:35:46
Kargen:

"That makes him a suspect"

What's the crime he's suspected of?
Seb
Member
Wed Feb 27 17:35:46
Kargen:

"That makes him a suspect"

What's the crime he's suspected of?
Seb
Member
Wed Feb 27 17:38:02
"The police saw a man coming at them with a weapon"

It is the police that are coming at him. They broke down his door without knocking.


Rugian
Member
Wed Feb 27 18:10:46
Seb
Member Mon Feb 25 18:30:31
"I mean for fucks sake, SWATing is a thing in your country. As in, you stand a non zero chance of getting someone killed by make a fake report.

Do you not get how exceptionally fucking weird that is?"

Wikipedia has a grand total of two instances of swatting that resulted in someone getting shot since 2015. In one of those incidents, it was the responding cop that was shot.

So yes, it is exceptional...in the sense that it has only a 1:750,000,000 yearly chance of happening to you.

To repeat WoO here...you used to be fairly rational. What happened?
Seb
Member
Wed Feb 27 18:28:05
Rugian:

Can you break down that math for me - two instances of swatting resulting in fatalities in five years (call it one) is 1/750,000,000 implies you think that in the last five years there were 3.75bn SWAT raids in the US over that five year period.

Or that you are using an absurd divisor where you are also including the probability of being SWATed, which is besides my point. The point is the lethality of police calls out, not the chance that someone is the subject of a hoax call.


Seb
Member
Wed Feb 27 18:29:03
Sorry, 4 years and 3bn
kargen
Member
Wed Feb 27 18:35:06
What's the crime he's suspected of?

To be determined by the investigation. They were called to the scene.

It is the police that are coming at him. They broke down his door without knocking.

I didn't say he was chasing them around the yard. He is obviously coming forward and swinging the club.

I'm guessing two instances of swatting in four years and using the US population for what chance it is you? Just a guess.
Rugian
Member
Wed Feb 27 18:49:55
Seb,

Nigga, do you not understand odds?!
Rugian
Member
Wed Feb 27 18:51:51
Okay, I just rechecked my post and you're right, I was wrong. It was supposed to be 1:650,000,000.
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Wed Feb 27 18:58:11
some notes:

Seb is talking about odds of surviving a swatting, not odds of being and surviving swatification


and cops claim they 'shoot to stop' not 'shoot to kill'... interpretation of 'stopping' seems to vary though
Rugian
Member
Wed Feb 27 19:01:06
"Seb is talking about odds of surviving a swatting, not odds of being and surviving swatification"

Well who gives a fuck about the first one? That's like saying "50% of people who are attacked with lawnmowers end up dying as a result." What an irrelevant metric to care about.
show deleted posts

Your Name:
Your Password:
Your Message:
Bookmark and Share