Do you think he was slowly walking towards the officer to give him a hug?
Don’t be cute. You and I both know that slowly walking towards someone does not constitute an attack.
You missed another relevant part.
He wasn’t stationary or just moving around - he was advancing, and kept saying “shoot me”, thus indicating that he was crazy and wanted to provoke the officer into shooting.
It does if he’s crazy and has a knife.
He wanted to force the officers to shoot him. It is reasonable to assume, therefore, that he was going to do something to force the officers to shoot him when he got close enough. Like stabbing an officer.
Read the cite, for heaven’s sake. They didn’t have Tazers, and they practically begged him to drop the knife and stop advancing on them.
Regards,
Shodan
The Georgia Tech shooting was about as clear-cut a case of suicide-by-cop as I’ve ever seen. It was tragic, but it was a tragedy almost entirely of the dead guy’s making.
No, that’s absurd. There’s no definition of the word “attack” that walking slowly towards someone would meet, even if they are armed and crazy. Even if it did, it would just mean that this guy “attacked” them and they waited more than a minute to shoot him.
That’s not a reasonable thing to assume. He may or may not have attacked the officers. They shot him before we could find out.
They had pepper spray and batons. Plus, there was at least four of them.
If these cops are seriously unable to subdue a suspect in a situation like this without resorting to shooting him then they aren’t qualified to be police officers.
I guess we will have to agree to disagree - finding out that he was going to stab someone by waiting until he stabs someone doesn’t strike me as a good idea.
Regards,
Shodan
That is completely and utterly ridiculous, there is absolutely no other description of what that was other than a blatant attack. Someone is coming at you with a knife with the intent to do harm, that is about as clear cut as it gets. Waiting a minute shows their restraint, it doesn’t say anything about the validity of the attack.
If he’s coming at you slow, you can back away. Sure, if he corners you, blaze away. Notice how the British Police in the video above don’t stand there and make themselves easy targets.
When someone in America wants the cops to kill them, it’s generally not too hard to get them to oblige. That’s not really a surprise. It’s the reason suicide-by-cop is a thing that people do.
And it’s a damn good reason for cops not to play along, don’t you think? Once again, check out the way the Brits handle such situations.
I think it would be fantastic if the police were a bit less quick on the trigger, but I’m not sure if comparisons to the UK are useful. They have significant differences from us.
Well given that in America, guns are virtually everywhere, American police don’t really have that luxury right? At least from the story I read about the Georgia Tech student, they responded to a 911 phone call that said he had a gun. Even if the 911 call said he only had a knife, they can’t assume for an individual cop’s safety and the safety of their fellow coworkers that the suspect doesn’t have a gun on his person somewhere. Isn’t that pretty much why cops don’t generally shoot to wound? If the guy really does just have a knife the story might end up having a happier ending, but what if you were wrong and the guy had a gun hidden on his person and he was only wounded?
Nobody who knows anything about guns “shoots to wound”. You never shoot at somebody unless you intend to kill them. Heck, you shouldn’t even point a gun at somebody you’re not willing to kill.
My mother could have taken this guy down. She’s 76.
He was advancing at the speed of a wounded slug. Seriously, the zombies in the original Night of The Living Dead moved faster. There were a bunch of cops who have had cop training. They had billy clubs.
You cannot reasonably believe that backing up and yelling 'He’s coming right for us! ala South Park was their only option.
You say this as though cops shooting people is a force of nature like a hurricane or a tornado.
I’m usually on the cops side in these cases, but this was egregious. No cop in this situation was in any real danger. The guy never raised his arms from his side or charged at the cop. It was just totally unjustified and a disgrace.
There was a case like this in Toronto, Canada four years ago. The cop ended up getting charged with attempted murder.
Basic case info: Sammy Yatim: Toronto cop guilty of attempted murder in streetcar shooting | Globalnews.ca
Most Toronto police officers don’t have tasers. Apparently only sergeants and up carry them. Sammy Yatim was in “crisis”. Due to pulling a knife, sexually harassing passengers, etc, the streetcar was evacuated. Yatim was waving a knife at multiple cops on the streetcar, and a taser would have been useful there. Except none of the cops had one. They called in a sergeant with one. Before the sergeant could get there, Yatim attacked, and then got shot by a police officer. Who then went on to shoot the obviously-incapable-of-threatening-anyone-anymore guy multiple times (hence the attempted murder charge; attempted because it turned out the first shots killed him anyway).
I’m not expecting a cop to play nightstick-trumps-knife, but (barring trigger-happy cops) I think a taser would have been very useful there.
I’m not going to argue your premise, here, that the cops were absolutely in the right to shoot this person. Let’s take that as granted.
Let’s also say that I’ve got a kid, or a partner, or a parent, who suffers from mental illness, and is in the middle of a breakdown similar to the one Scout Schultz experienced. I’m worried for their safety. What do I do? Assume for the purposes of this question that I don’t want my loved one to be killed. It sounds like “Call the cops” is right out, because if they perceive my loved one to be any kind of a threat at all, they’re going to shoot them, and be fully justified in their actions. I’m guessing, though, that if I call the paramedics, or the fire department, there’s going to be at least one squad car showing up, too.
What option would you recommend in this situation? Keeping in mind, again, that having my loved one killed is something that I want to avoid.
Before addressing those first two nonlethal options, while I am not a LEO I have quite a bit of experience being responsible for training Soldiers on the use of options that included the Taser and use of OC (Oleresin Capsicum aka pepper spray) before their deployment. My Training Support Battalion even deployed forward once to train foreign military forces on crowd and riot control because of our capability.
The Taser is an option but it’s got downsides too. Most of the systems are single shot (there’s a newer model that has two cartridges but I haven’t seen it in use anywhere I’ve seen police in public.) Sometimes the probes don’t deploy properly and sometimes the wires break. Sometimes people miss. It’s still pretty reliable but not as reliable as a firearm and it’s pretty much one chance. A taser isn’t entirely a bad option but it has it’s limitations.
Pepper spray, on the other hand, is a bad option. Some of the Soldiers we trained were required to go through an OC certification course. To be authorized to carry they had to be sprayed with OC. They then moved through a multi-station course. Some of those stations involved executing takedowns that ended with the suspect on the ground ready to be flex cuffed. Takedowns involved techniques both with and without the riot control baton in hand. They also had to block attacks and execute strikes with the riot control baton. All of it had to be done properly using the trained techniques or they would be ordered to do it again. The total course was timed so going too slow or repeating stations too often resulted in a failure. Failing certification the first time was rare. I suspect you assume OC is a lot more effective than it actually is. People can and do fight through the effects of OC. We required the troops we trained to do exactly that.
One addition, that might be in the article but wasn’t in your quoted part and I am being lazy by not looking:p. The 21 foot “rule” is based on the pistol still being holstered at the time the attack starts. The recommendation of the article to draw at the time the knife is identified thus changes the time-distance relationship; it’s a lot faster to engage if you don’t have to draw. Of course if they are training to draw in response to identifying a knife inside that range they have essentially committed to not using less lethal options. It takes even longer to switch than just draw and fire.
Most might be a safe estimate but in a lot of departments it’s not all. As pointed out earlier in the thread on of the cited examples they didn’t. My local PD does carry them. The Sheriff’s deputies don’t. In an act locally vein, people who want to make sure the option is available should check for themselves and be willing to do things like supporting taxes to pay the additional costs associated.
A couple issues that bear on the question:
- They cost money. It also adds what is probably an even bigger reccurring cost in paid time and ammo for routine training/certification since it is now a job requirement.
- A shotgun in the trunk also doesn’t help in the situation where you don’t know you need it right as you arrive and can’t take the time to go back and get it.
- There’s also a related issue that affects costs and potentially training. Departments that already field shotguns need to make sure their officers aren’t blasting a slug or 00 buckshot into someone when deadly force is not justified and they think it’s just a beanbag. LAPD deals with the issue by using color coded dedicated shotguns as the only platform to fire beanbag rounds. (Cite) Those dedicated, beanbag only guns, also cost money.
- There’s another important issue. In close and against elderly, frail, or pregnant targets it’s generally still legally considered deadly force. (Cite) That cite has 10 feet as the standoff distance. ISTR a longer distance for the nonlethal 12 gauge rounds we used in training. Still that takes a big chunk of the distance under the 21 foot rule and you have to remember reaction time can chew up some more as the attacker closes. Beanbag rounds are a better option at longer distances where it’s very clearly not the same legally as firing 00 buck center of mass. At closer distance you just added yet another decision to a high stress, time sensitive situation with the non-lethal only shotgun in hand. It’s not just “Can I legally use deadly force?” It’s also “Is this deadly force?” An extra decision can slow things down when they really should be acting. Officers will also get that extra decision wrong at times and use deadly force when they didn’t mean to and didn’t have justification.
Just to inject a few facts here, the 911 phone call was apparently placed by the dead guy himself, and he claimed to have a gun.
Like I said, suicide by cop.
ETA: source
I think the ‘treat them like wild animals’ philosophy generally has a lot going for it.
I’ll wager you any amount of money you like that the relevant legal authorities reach a different conclusion than yours here.