To me it's about using a bit more force than what was needed... one cop and 3 rounds could have done it, they didn't need multiple cops, let alone multiple rounds.

Hitting a target with your weapon already on target - depending on distance of course, is like making sure your urine hits the urinal when you take a piss. Gota be pretty far away to miss a urinal, or drunk.

Now if they have some odd ball 3 shot center mass rule, that's sad. They should be protecting the people, if he isn't putting people into danger and yet is willing to put himself into danger, his head is wired on wrong - not everyone deserves to die, cops are trained to notice this - clearly these cops need more training.

You better be 100% sure of that. Not 'pretty sure'. Go ask them directly, then talk. In the past I've been friends with or otherwise been aquainted with no less than about 20 cops. I'm a bit more than 'pretty sure' that what I'm saying is right.

Doubtful. Not impossible mind you, but doubtful. It's about stopping power, as any cop will tell you. When someone's coming at you with a weapon, ANY weapon and won't put it down, they are trained not to fuck around but to put the person down with as few shots as required.

You're entitled to your opinion.

I wonder what the police statement would have said about the last shooting had it not been taped?

The situation that led up to the shooting I can't comment on, I wasn't there. Only that once weapons are drawn, against a knife wielding suspect rushing at them, you don't shoot for the legs, you don't shoot for the arm, you shoot to stop the attack.

One bullet 99 times out of 100 will not stop a knife wielding assailant unless you hit head shot that penetrates the skull, or hit spine which shuts down the body. Out of all people Doc, with your service record, you would know the facts. Don't know why you are keeping on this 1 bullet will do the trick mindset.

If you haven't been keeping up with the Military, they are all complaining about the 9mm not stopping Taliban and have to use multiple rounds to put them down, and that the .45 is making a comback.

The standard firearm for the Police? 9mm.

http://www.leatherneck.com/forums/sh...ad.php?t=21120

Based on what you're posting here it's pretty obvious to me you've

A) never been a cop

B) Never been in a similar situation, holding a gun on an armed perp who is threatening your life

C) not had enough life experience to know what you're talking about.


No offense, but you seem a tad naive to me. I thought it was common knowledge that cops don't go around trying to snipe armed perps in the shoulder or legs in hopes of saving the poor criminal's life, but rather they take the most reliable core shot... as per they're TRAINING.

Newsflash genius, this case didn't happen in Sweden, it happened in N America. But I'd still love to see some unequivocal proof posted that cops in Sweden are "trained differently" than cops over here. Are criminals over there trained differently? I doubt that too.

There are some good cops, but the truth is most start out as punk ass wannabe cowboys. That's why whenever you watch a video with multiple cops involved, they are all practically falling over themselves to get into the action, often to the detriment of the actual situation.

Just watch any chase on TV, when the suspect finally stops, every single cop draws their weapon, even ones behind other cops. It's a joke.

Unfortunately this happens with shootings as well. There are countless cases of suspects being shot over and over again by a bunch of cops when it is totally unnecessary.

For those that applaud the cops, what if that was a family member of yours who had a drug problem or a mental problem that got shot, would you be so quick to defend the cops then or only when it's a random nobody? I doubt it, I bet you would be on GFY talking about how you are going to sue those maniac cops for shooting an innocent man.

I'm not sure I buy the adrenaline defense or any of that. In a real shoot-out, yes you are not able to pick clean shots unless you are very highly trained and experienced in combat. But this was one guy with a knife and several cops all with their guns drawn. I doubt any of those cops felt truly in danger. Imagine if you and ten friends all had your guns pointed at one guy with a knife, would you be so scared you couldn't think properly?

I'm confused. Police got a call about an armed man, confronted him, and he attacked the police? Sorry Charlie, you come after the pigs with a knife and there is a good chance you'll get shot. End of story.

Quoted, because if I don't I fear no one will pay attention to the truth and common sense you posted.

I sem to keep reading things where someone was tased more than once - either they can't penetrate clothing very well or the police must be going out with partially charged batteries.

A) like I said I don't want to be a cop
B) I have never held a gun on an armed perp who is threatening my life since we are not allowed to carry guns in self defence. I have however disarmed people holding knives against me.
C) Well, I'm only 35 years old so my life experience is obviously limited to that lifespan.

In my naive world view you are not a criminal until you are convicted by a court of law. I also am naive enough to believe that you are just supposed to use the amount of force necessary in proportion to the threat you face. Obviously it is hard to decide what is proportional in each situation, so they will most likely get away with at most a reprimand.

I am well aware of where this incident took place. If you read what I have written again you will see that I was expressing an opinion about what is right and what is wrong.

As for Sweden we here is a rough translation of the relevant part of the law that regulates how the police may use their firearms:
-----------
7 § Before the police officer uses a firearm , he shall particularly consider the risk
to external damage . Gunfire in the area , where many
people living or staying , should be avoided as long as possible.

Before the shots are fired , the police officer shall give a clear warning,
unless such a warning would be ineffective. If firearms must be used,
the police officer , when circumstances do not prevent it, should first fire a
warning shot .

When shooting against a person the goal should be to only temporarily incapacitate him.
------------------

http://riksdagen.se/webbnav/index.as...11&bet=1969:84
Automatic translation will not work since it is old very formal Swedish.

such a bad one

Depending on the situation, depends on the weapon you're issued. Standing on a base or like small town cops, 9mm always does the trick. However I had a .45 at times and always had a shot gun, which I would take over a .45 in almost all situations.

Before the Military Police in the Marines, I was a Police Officer.

Both times I was trained, 1 shot, 1 kill. I was also taught we don't have spare ammo to go around just to unload on people, and I was taught to never discharge a weapon more than needed because it 'more than often' miss and hit someone else. And being that we're in war time, I can guarantee you police stations around the nation have ammo restrictions - so them shooting him more than once, it's rather bizarre - seeming that I know we're low on ammo.

Btw, I have never put more than 1 round into a person... ever. If you have a knife and you're 20 feet from me, I will hit you 100% of the time, any place I want. If you're a deer or a boar, on the move, I will hit you. If you're a bird, taking off, I can hit you with a bow.

Tell me people can't hit a human from 20 feet, coming at you, with aim already on them... crazy talk, pure stupid really. Fuck, it's impossible to miss.

If you actually hunt bird with a bow, what kind of arrow do you use? I have tried a couple out but not really gotten comfortable with any of them.

Sir, you are a fine specimen of man meat. I would like to mate.

Yeah, I re-read how I posted and it didn't really portrait what I was thinking in my head.

The entertaining part was only referring to Sly and Amp going at it. I don't really pretend to know shit about guns.

My point was more that if they took him down with a shot to the shoulder let's say, it's much harder (in my mind) to use the knife that it would be to shoot a gun at them because it limits their range of motion more. But again, this is in my cop show watching mind.

I don't disagree that knives are deadly at all.

That's part of the problem with this country: no fear of retaliation. If we all exercised our right to bear arms there would be less crime. Joe Criminal isn't going to jack you for your Lexus if he thinks you might pull out a 9mm and fill him with hollow points. Most criminals are cowards who won't commit crimes if it means risking personal injury.

When does the Gap start stocking the bullet proof line? Just in case I ever get the courage to leave the house I mean.

Then you are talking pure anecdotal evidence. One shot, one kill only applies to Snipers, and every defensive and tactical firearm course I've taken, the myth of one shot, one stop is abused and laughed at. You keep firing till you are safe, especially with 9mm. Empirical data fully supports this training in this manner.

The FBI uses one scenario where a Perp is shot twice center mass, fires back and kills the police officer. http://findarticles.com/p/articles/m...3/ai_n7577583/

There is a plethora of evidence of police officers unloading their clips and only hitting once. I remember my first firearms instructor telling me he got into a fire fight inside of an elevator, less than 5 feet from each other and they both missed before he could disarm the other guy.

Basing how a firefight would unfold without knowing the variables, behind your monitor, that's crazy. And frankly I'm surprised that you would post what you did considering you've been in combat and know if anything can go wrong, it will.

That is a completely different situation though. Tight, cramped quarters with no cover and nowhere to run, full adrenaline rush and a do-or-die situation. I can easily see both missing in a panic. Not the same at all as a whole platoon of cops standing with weapons drawn and aiming outside in the wide open.

Adrenal dump is the same if you are in an elevator, or out in the wide open of Montana. That doesn't change anything. Someone lunging at you with a knife is also a do or die situation. And really the example was made to show that in an space of less than five feet, you can miss, and you must shoot to win.

Let's not exaggerate Amp, there were five police officers, and at this time, no data reported on how many discharged their weapons or how many rounds were fired.

For what it's worth. This is the background on the Perp shot.

But they didn't know that at the time. He could've been an accountant for all they knew.

An accountant lunging at you with a knife in each hand is equally as dangerous as a loony lunging at you with a knife in each hand.

No difference.

Except the accountant could probably do your taxes better.

The point I'm trying to make, you have a split second to react. Do it to live.

Agreed. That's why his being mentally ill or having prior incidents is irrelevant at this point. They didn't know it before, and now that he's dead it doesn't matter. You're just trying to demonize the guy after the fact by posting up his priors.

EDIT: What I mean is, his past is irrelevant because they weren't aware of it at the time of the shooting. For all they knew at the time, he could have been a day trader or something just having a bad day. And because there's no video, do we really even know that he was "coming at them" with a knife? Maybe he was pulling it out to put it down. Maybe he was staggering from the two taser shots, versus "coming at them".

?

We'll likely never know anything other than what the police tell us, and as we know, that could literally be anything.

Not at all Amp, I'm trying to make the example that you don't know what you are going up against, and if he's lunging at you with a knife in both hands, it doesn't matter if he's a loony, accountant, or priest.

He's coming to kill you, and let's face it, he brought knives to a gun fight, and HE'S STILL COMING AT YOU. To me, that means he's got nothing to lose and will take me if not someone down with him.

I will shoot till he isn't attacking anymore.

Doc, btw there's no ammo shortage around my parts. 9mm, .40, .45 anyways.

He was a man walking around an urban center with a knife that concerned others, he resisted arrest, and he charged the officers with a knife. You're right, we don't need to know his past to demonize the guy.

Why would you pull out 2 knives and charge at Cops, Cops that you KNOW are armed and can VERY easily take you down??

Amp I get all your arguements, I read them all, but seriously man think about it for a second. Someone calls the Cops on this guy, ok he might not have done anything wrong, but as far as the Police are concerned they get a call about an armed man.

So they catch up to him and he takes off, instantly the Cops are thinking he has something to hide, not ideal but its the way human nature is unfortunately. So they try to subdue the suspect to get him under Police control, doesn't work. Then he pulls out not 1, but two knives and begins to run towards armed Police officers.... Tell me if you were a Cop, what would you do in that situation? The guy could have been harmless, but why is he walking down the street with 2 knives?

Sorry but I side with the so called sheep on this one, if I were a Cop with a family at home, last thing I need is my kids growing up without a daddy, the guy is going down. That coming from someone who doesn't agree with Guns and all citizens being armed btw.

Yes, but this assumes that we take the police version as fact. What if he was just not fully cognitive anymore from the tasers and they misjudged his movements as an attack. They'd never admit to that, so the story from the cops is to be taken for what it's worth.

Like I said earlier Amp, I can't comment on that, as I wasn't there, and we both know there's 3 sides to every story.

But to comment on your post, pulling out knives after being tasered twice isn't something a sane person would do. Don't you agree?

Meh... this is all just speculation anyway. We'll never know for certain what went down. But there's a lot of good-good feedback and points-of-view in here for sure. If he really did actually go after them with his knife, then sure... I suppose he got what is to be expected. If he didn't, he's dead just the same. They've already moved on to shooting other people, so time for me to move on too. :2 cents:

Yep, thanks for a great debate, and more people should think the same way. Question everything.

Personally, I think the Police have way too much power and not enough oversight.

Well, he had endurance, that's for sure. Might be a stretch but after two taserings, sanity is probably out the window by then already.

I know it sounds stupid but what the fuck is a BART COP ?

Bay Area Rapid Transit. Back in the early 90's, I loved riding it. It was clean, and the best way to go see an A's game.

I was taught at the age of 17 how to hunt bird with a bow. The type of arrow, I don't recall the brand/name, however depending on the bird the arrow head was flat with a stopper, like a punch or a small protruded tip with a stopper on bigger birds. I couldn't really recommend anything to you.

However what I learned with this is being steady, dealing with the dump of adrenaline to stay steady... knowing you have the shot, taking one shot because that's all you have, and committing to the line you selected.

It's not easy... but when your already in the ready, it's just about committing to it. A gun, makes it that much easier and more sure of it too.

Fuck you motha fucker

:1orglaugh he answered the question its public transit. :1orglaugh

I thought he was laughin at me. Im taking another dose of lamicital.

No worries. :)