If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Black guy shot in New Orleans by police (black police did not draw theirguns, white police did)
Notice on the amature video that caught part of the situation that all
the white officers had their guns pointed at this guy all the time but the black officers (if they had their guns drawn at all) kept them down at their sides. I guess they had to shoot the guy 10 times in the chest because he was too far away to get a good shot at his legs. Besides, shooting him in the legs would be cruel. I guess all the tasers owned by NO police were all shorted out by the flood. The cop(s) that shot him are now qualified to be Air Marshalls because they have demonstrated sufficient skill at identifing and dealing with mentally derranged people. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Black guy shot in New Orleans by police (black police did not draw theirguns, white police did)
Fly Guy writes: Notice on the amature video that caught part of the situation that all the white officers had their guns pointed at this guy all the time but the black officers (if they had their guns drawn at all) kept them down at their sides. Have you considered the possibility that this says worse things about the black officers than it does about the white officers? Maybe the black officers *should've* had their weapons at the ready under the circumstances. It's quite possible that such hesitation will prove fatal someday, either to some of those black officers themselves, to their colleages, or to innocent members of the public. After all, merely raising one's weapon doesn't compel one to pull the trigger, _n'est-ce pas?_ I guess they had to shoot the guy 10 times in the chest because he was too far away to get a good shot at his legs. Besides, shooting him in the legs would be cruel. That's right. If a good, clean shot to the chest is good enough for a deer, it's certainly good enough for a deranged human. I guess all the tasers owned by NO police were all shorted out by the flood. You're certainly doing a lot of hostile second-guessing, for someone who wasn't even present at the scene. The cop(s) that shot him are now qualified to be Air Marshalls because they have demonstrated sufficient skill at identifing and dealing with mentally derranged people. Maybe the upshot (heh) of this is that mentally deranged (like there's any other kind) people and their keepers will have second thoughts about commercial flying. That might just be better for all concerned. Now, if we can just find a way to dissuade people with infants and small children... Geoff -- "A foolish consistency is the knob-gobblin' of small minds." |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Black guy shot in New Orleans by police (black police did not draw their guns, white police did)
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Black guy shot in New Orleans by police (black police did notdraw their guns, white police did)
Fly Guy wrote:
Notice on the amature video that caught part of the situation that all the white officers had their guns pointed at this guy all the time but the black officers (if they had their guns drawn at all) kept them down at their sides. I guess they had to shoot the guy 10 times in the chest because he was too far away to get a good shot at his legs. Besides, shooting him in the legs would be cruel. I do not know the facts of this case, but if you are shooting at someone , you would aim for the larger target. Unlike what you see in the movies, it isn't really super easy to shoot a weapon out of someone's hand. I guess all the tasers owned by NO police were all shorted out by the flood. Maybe too many people complained about the police using them. The cop(s) that shot him are now qualified to be Air Marshalls because they have demonstrated sufficient skill at identifing and dealing with mentally derranged people. Again, not responding to this specific instance, because I don't know the facts, however, what is the difference if the dangerous person is mentally ill or not? If a threat is perceived, should the behave any differently if the person is mentally ill? |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Black guy shot in New Orleans by police (black police did not draw their guns, white police did)
john wrote: On 27 Dec 2005 14:50:45 -0800, (Geoff Miller) wrote: Fly Guy writes: I guess they had to shoot the guy 10 times in the chest because he was too far away to get a good shot at his legs. Besides, shooting him in the legs would be cruel. That's right. If a good, clean shot to the chest is good enough for a deer, it's certainly good enough for a deranged human. I guess if one good shot to the chest is good then TEN shots to the chest is even better? Right Miller? you can't take a chance that the perp might live. Is that your thinking, Miller? Cops are trained to fire their guns only as a last resort, but when they shoot they shoot to kill. A wounded suspect is extremely dangerous. If the cop thinks the situation warrants shooting then it warrants killing. Or, conversely, if it doesn't warrant killing the suspect then don't shoot at all. Cops are specifically trained *NOT* to shoot at the suspects legs. That's only in the movies. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Black guy shot in New Orleans by police (black police did not drawtheir guns, white police did)
Tchiowa wrote:
Cops are trained to fire their guns only as a last resort, The guy is on a wide-open street, in broad daylight, surrounded by 20 cops who are all no further from him than 25 feet. After 1 minute, it's clear to everyone that he is mentally unstable and following him for another 20 minutes down the street, screaming at him to do this or that will not do any good because he won't respond. So shoot the guy in the leg for christ sake. Do it from a distance of 20 feet. All your cop buddies are standing buy, ready to unload their guns into the guy's head or chest if he lunges for ya. What possible risk was there to shoot the guy in the legs? His legs were as big as tree trunks - you weren't going to miss. He wasn't listening to you, telling him to drop that small knife and lie on the ground. You knew he was mental (or on drugs) so what's the point? There was plenty of opportunity to use non-lethal force, and it was safe to do so. There was plenty of backup fire-power. Cops hate people that don't respond. To all cops, their adversary is always sane, crafty, super-human, dangerous, intelligent, and in control of their faculties. Even when presented with feeble, non-weapon-carrying, disabled or weak adversaries, cops think they are dealing with the monster from Alien or Preditor. It's a combination of their cop life-style, and adrenaline. They over-react. Ask Rodney King. I told you that humans aren't designed for jobs that entail activities that are rarely or never performed during years on the job. All the cops involved thought they were facing a life-threatening situation, and I bet all of them have never faced such a situation before - because if they had, that guy would still be alive. Instead, the primative animal instinct of the hunt kicked in, and they all thought they were facing a siber-toothed tiger, and they were moving in for the kill. but when they shoot they shoot to kill. Is that the only shooting they are capable of? In a controlled situation like that, where there was no split-second action? They were following that guy for at least several minutes. He didn't just lunge out at them from a dark alley in the middle of the night. A wounded suspect is extremely dangerous. Not when he's surrounded by a dozen cops with probably combined hundred rounds. It's not a mono-a-mono situation we're talking about. The guy didn't have a gun, a rocket launcher, or a grenade. He had what looked like a 6" knife. Cops are specifically trained *NOT* to shoot at the suspects legs. That's only in the movies. In this situation, not shooting the guy in the legs when there was plenty of opportunity is criminal. Why is the bar set so low for police behavior and skill? |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Black guy shot in New Orleans by police (black police did not draw their guns, white police did)
On 27 Dec 2005 18:31:57 -0800, "Tchiowa" wrote:
john wrote: On 27 Dec 2005 14:50:45 -0800, (Geoff Miller) wrote: Fly Guy writes: I guess they had to shoot the guy 10 times in the chest because he was too far away to get a good shot at his legs. Besides, shooting him in the legs would be cruel. That's right. If a good, clean shot to the chest is good enough for a deer, it's certainly good enough for a deranged human. I guess if one good shot to the chest is good then TEN shots to the chest is even better? Right Miller? you can't take a chance that the perp might live. Is that your thinking, Miller? Cops are trained to fire their guns only as a last resort, but when they shoot they shoot to kill. A wounded suspect is extremely dangerous. If the cop thinks the situation warrants shooting then it warrants killing. Or, conversely, if it doesn't warrant killing the suspect then don't shoot at all. Cops are specifically trained *NOT* to shoot at the suspects legs. That's only in the movies. Hey asshole Tchiowa: Don't you understand sarcasm? FLY GUY was being SARCASTIC in his comments about shooting at the legs. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Black guy shot in New Orleans by police (black police did not draw their guns, white police did)
john writes: I guess if one good shot to the chest is good then TEN shots to the chest is even better? Right Miller? Ooh, you're trying to earn machismo cred by addressing me by my last name. WhatEVER shall I do? Actually, no. While I can certainly understand the visceral appeal of pumping some dirtbag full of hot lead, it would've been a waste of ammo under the circumstances. you can't take a chance that the perp might live. Is that your thinking, Miller? Indeed it is. Go to the head of the class. Geoff -- "A foolish consistency is the knob-gobblin' of small minds." |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Black guy shot in New Orleans by police (black police did not draw their guns, white police did)
"Fly Guy" wrote in message ... I guess all the tasers owned by NO police were all shorted out by the flood. According to an interview with the police chief of NO, they had no tazers. Those are reserved to SWAT units, which were not present. He said he felt that the tazer was of questionable value, that there had been some deaths with tazers, or some suchlike. Doubletalk. I think this shooting in NO was poorly handled. Maybe it was necessary, but rather poorly organized and implemented. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Black guy shot in New Orleans by police (black police did not draw their guns, white police did)
On Thu, 29 Dec 2005 13:49:16 GMT, wrote:
"Fly Guy" wrote in message ... I guess all the tasers owned by NO police were all shorted out by the flood. According to an interview with the police chief of NO, they had no tazers. Those are reserved to SWAT units, which were not present. He said he felt that the tazer was of questionable value, that there had been some deaths with tazers, or some suchlike. Doubletalk. I think this shooting in NO was poorly handled. Maybe it was necessary, but rather poorly organized and implemented. I saw the video of the standoff on TV and it did not show the actual shooting. It was an amazing video. It shows the victim completely SURROUNDED by policemen all pointing their guns at him. The news show said that a total of 10 bullets were fired by 3 of the officers. I wonder how the shooting started. what made the first cop fire? Was he in danger? What prompted the other 2 cops to fire? nervousness? Were they in any danger? What prompted the cops to fire so many times? |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
London Police Shoot Innocent man !!!! | none | Europe | 218 | July 30th, 2005 10:23 AM |
Bombs in LOndon | The Reids | Europe | 799 | July 25th, 2005 09:03 AM |
holland america cruise holland america cruise line alaska cruise holland america holland america cruise ship | Islam Promote Peace | Cruises | 3 | July 31st, 2004 10:31 PM |
Human RIghts Watch, World Report 2003: Brazil | P E T E R P A N | Latin America | 0 | March 30th, 2004 01:15 PM |
Human RIghts Watch, World Report 2003: Brazil | P E T E R P A N | Travel - anything else not covered | 0 | March 30th, 2004 01:15 PM |