Another police shootin

Big Chief

News lady said the suspect was armed with a "Point Forty Five Caliber"

Hi-Point or .45 ACP pistol??????



http://ktla.com/2015/12/12/1-person-struck-by-gunfire-in-deputy-involved-shooting-in-lynwood-authorities-say/

zorba

Here we go again...

Why was he shot when he was on his knees? Maybe, just maybe, he still had control of his weapon. We don't know, and neither do the protesters.

zorba

Wambli Ska wrote: »

These guys are toast...

Yep - and maybe they should be, or maybe not. Wait for it, Obummer will have something stupid to say...

tubabucknut

One, I don't see him turn towards them threateningly, but let us give them the benefit of the doubt. I hear all the time about decisions need to be made on the spur of the moment. So they had a right to shoot, whatever. When did it become mandatory police training to do mag dumps into targets that are no longer a threat. I believe in and train shoot until the threat is ended, but good grief. Reinforcing the stereotype daily. There is simply no way joe sixpack does not go to prison for murder in this situation. Of course this assumes all is as it appears.

Teach

Whatever happened to "double tap and evaluate the threat" like we've heard for as long as I can remember? I know that some former IPSC practices can lead to a defender reholstering his gun while a threat still exists, but remaining at the ready to see if more shots are needed seems to be a pretty reasonable approach. There seems to be far too many of these "mag dump by a cop" scenarios happening recently!
Jerry

Gene L

I didn't watch the video but will take you guy's word that it wasn't a justified shooting.

As for shooting a lot and many folks shooting at the same time, I've observed that when people think they're threatened, they shoot a lot. Happened in VN in my personal experience. Also, when someone opens up and there are others armed, THEY open up, too. Which is the reason I think that if everyone in a crowd is armed, they'll start shooting at what they perceive to be a threat, and will open up on each other. One or two per crowd is fine.

NCFUBAR

The LEOs were responding to shots fired and a man with a gun. One witness did say the man pointed the gun at the LEOs but The video doesn't seem to have been rolling then. The video I watched shows the 2 LEOs fire I think 11 rounds total. The guy was walking away from the LEOs but still had the handgun. When he went down from the initial 4 or 5 shots he does crawl but the video is not that great at showing much. Was he crawling with the gun still in hand? Was he crawling toward it? I don't think the LEOs were to afraid by their approach even before they fired but that is just my opinion. To ME this one is not going to fair well for these 2 LEOs, the LA Sheriff and his department and LA as a city when the protests start ... Christmas looting oops I mean shopping time.

As the what the review board will say I am not sure but BLM, Ovomit, Lynch, Sharpton and other agitators will be screaming murder and being LA I can see the pot boiling.

JasonMPD

NCFUBAR wrote: »

The LEOs were responding to shots fired and a man with a gun. One witness did say the man pointed the gun at the LEOs but The video doesn't seem to have been rolling then. The video I watched shows the 2 LEOs fire I think 11 rounds total. The guy was walking away from the LEOs but still had the handgun. When he went down from the initial 4 or 5 shots he does crawl but the video is not that great at showing much. Was he crawling with the gun still in hand? Was he crawling toward it? I don't think the LEOs were to afraid by their approach even before they fired but that is just my opinion. To ME this one is not going to fair well for these 2 LEOs, the LA Sheriff and his department and LA as a city when the protests start ... Christmas looting oops I mean shopping time.

As the what the review board will say I am not sure but BLM, Ovomit, Lynch, Sharpton and other agitators will be screaming murder and being LA I can see the pot boiling.

Eh...so? I've gone into plenty of situations where I was a bit afraid but didn't show it. You approach anyways. You have a duty to approach.

JasonMPD

At this stage in the game with the blatantly unmitigated lack of mental health treatment, Jihadis in every Christmas party, and so many potential grandiose delusional "mass shooter" copycats out there, it all starts boiling down to a simple, cynical saying:

"Play stupid games and win stupid prizes."

And that cuts both ways, too.

We're the cops in the wrong? Legally? Morally? Meh.. Who knows? That video is not profound evidence. The guy was ACTIVELY doing SOMETHING to attract an ARMED police reaponse--called in by a citizen who wanted that response.

So, the hammer responds and found a nail. I bet thousands of other nails escaped the hammer that night because they didn't act in a way to attract the hammer.

Cynical? Sure. But it's accurate.

This quarterbacking thread is going to need a lot of armchairs.

N320AW

Wambli Ska wrote: »

Bad video for the cops. This guy was crawling away from them and they emptied their guns and reloaded and sent a second barrage while he's on the ground!!! Looks like an execution. These guys are toast...

http://a.abcnews.go.com/images/US/AP_lynwood_california_shooting_2_jt_151213_33x16_992.jpg

They're not toast. He NEVER dropped his gun!

Gene L

In 32 years of LEO experience, I only fired my gun in qualification. I lived in Athens, which isn't exactly East St. Louis, but wasn't Mayberry, either. As I said, I didn't watch the video, but if anyone has a valid reason to shoot a guy who's not offering an active threat, I'd like to hear it. Because he merely had a gun doesn't work for me, we all here have guns, although none of us is dumb enough to have it in our hands. We have those "Shoot/Don't Shoot" scenarios on video or film to hone the senses on when and if a threat is offered.

I'd make a better witness than a defendant. Times have changed, I realize, and with all the terrorist threats, I might be more vigilant, but I'd like to think I have enough confidence in my abilities to wait for a moment or two until the threat became real.

NCFUBAR

N320AW wrote: »

http://a.abcnews.go.com/images/US/AP_lynwood_california_shooting_2_jt_151213_33x16_992.jpg

They're not toast. He NEVER dropped his gun!

And while the gun may not have been pointed at the LEOs, what about innocent people in that direction?

It still will be a big BLM, Sharpton, etc protest (and 5 Finger Christmas Shopping) along with possible Ovomit and DOJ words and but that photo shows what a person who can be unbiased as still a threat to the community. Liberal PC LA officials could still leave the 2 hanging but the more witnesses, video/stills and such that come out the better.

Oh yeah, if CA is a contributory negligence state how much does the man contribute by not obeying the basic orders I'd bet the LEOs did give ...STOP, DROP THE GUN, PUT YOUR HANDS ON YOUR HEAD. Like many other shootings ... if he had just done what he was told he for sure would have been cuffed and stuffed but he'd be alive.

Gene L

That's a pretty weak reason, NCFUBAR. It's a Last Ditch defense. If he was heading into a crowd, it may work, or if he'd committed an immediate forcible felony, it would help.

Al Sharpton and BLM need fuel, and if they're denied that fuel, they'll go away. I can't stand them, but wouldn't do anything to make them valid. Let's not confuse a distaste for BLM as an excuse for condoning a possibly bad shooting.

NCFUBAR

Gene, I am not saying it is a good or bad shooting. Just saying we don't know what was in the direction the man's gun was pointing. There is more stuff than a video and some still photos ... like I said a witness said the man pointed the gun at the LEOs before the video portion that was shown, we don't known who else will come forward or other stuff. The whole story is not even close to be out yet.

The last part about contributory negligence was a joke ... that I am pretty sure applies to civil in criminal matters. The BLM, Sharpton, etc was not a joke though ... there will be some big words coming from them.

Gene L

You're right about Al and BLM. I have no idea whether it was a good or bad shoot. Just for cops to be careful out there.

tubabucknut

http://news.yahoo.com/los-angeles-sheriffs-deputies-fatally-shoot-armed-man-085235952.html

Murphy's Law

If that had been one of the killers during Paris or San Bernardino would it then be justified to unload? Not passing judgement but a perp with a gun, even when down and crawling, can quickly swing around and fire upon police or bystanders no matter how wounded. I'd have to say justified just from what I've seen so far.

N320AW

Wambli Ska wrote: »

Yep, saw that. I stand by what I said. In today's climate these guys are in for a world of trouble...

Don't forget . . . In today's climate the bad guys with guns are also in for a world of trouble too.

JasonMPD

Wambli Ska wrote: »

Even if the guy didn't drop the gun, he was on the ground, obviously already shot multiple times, probably mortally wounded, and not even pointing it at them, just holding it. These guys reloaded and opened fire on him again and not a couple of rounds but a hail of bullets.

Don't know if it was justified or not, I'm thinking probably no, but I have nothing to do with making that decision and won't even try. But I can certainly say that these guys are most definitely toast.

And if an autopsy proves the first shot were to his back (which it looks like in the video) I can almost guarantee they'll be facing charges.

He was "just holding it" before he attracted gunfire and he was still "just holding it" after gunfire. Send more gunfire.

A beating heart and a conscious mind are enough to shoot a gun.

Stop one, or both.

Who says I have to shoot someone in the front? Carrying a gun in any aggressive manner towards crowded or otherwise populated areas after commands to loose your weapon are ignored is gonna get ya plugged. In the back if necessary.

It's my job to protect innocents, not perps.