US cops again

[Sharpie]

2 minutes ago, Tazio said:

This genuinely seems to be a tragic accident as a result of an officer panicking. But as Dorothy says there must be a liability attached to it but I don’t believe it to be malicious. 

 

Why would a twenty six year veteran be panicking when covered by other officers, and one suspect. I give some consideration that she may have known that he was or had been involved in legal matters concerning firearms, but panic is not a good emotion for a police officer at this juncture, I am not suggesting she deliberately killed the young man, it is quite possibly an act of extreme carelessness in drawing the wrong weapon, but should never have happened.

 

[Seymour M Hersh]

4 minutes ago, Sharpie said:

 

I do not intend to quarterback anyone, I did however although in the past serve thirty six years of my life  in the police from recruit to Detachment Commander. I received training in firearms, in those days we were advised to double tap. I take it now you are suggesting that they use multiple rounds, even at one of the United States top training institution I do not recall in firearms training to fire multiple shots.  You also comment that "she thought" she was holding her Taser, excuse me if I am rabbiting and talking nonsense, but If she "thought"she was holding her Taser  she is condemned right there, you shouldn't be thinking about anything with training and experience and general practise of equipment being in the same place at all times and the two in particular normally well spaced to avoid error, you have to know what you are doing it should be second nature. In my humble opinion with some experience in the profession both as an armed and unarmed officer, I knew the importance as did those around of total concentration on the job at hand. This young lady failed, she has to unfortunately suffer serious consequences officially as I am sure she must be doing personally.

 

My armchair quarterback comment included me as well as a. none of us were physically present and b. none of us have been in that exact same situation. As for the multiple shots I read that in an american paper possibly the San Diego Union Tribune. You respond as if I alone am coming to these conclusions when I'm only passing on what I've read elsewhere. 

[Dorothy]

7 minutes ago, Sharpie said:

 

Why would a twenty six year veteran be panicking when covered by other officers, and one suspect. I give some consideration that she may have known that he was or had been involved in legal matters concerning firearms, but panic is not a good emotion for a police officer at this juncture, I am not suggesting she deliberately killed the young man, it is quite possibly an act of extreme carelessness in drawing the wrong weapon, but should never have happened.

 

You bring up a very good point that is struggling to get traction, at least over here: for an officer as well trained and experienced as they are trying to portray her to be, her actions speak of ill training at the very least.

[indianajones]

A taser and a gun are so far apart. 

 

Hard to believe it was an accident imo. 

[NANOJAMBO]

32 minutes ago, Tazio said:

This genuinely seems to be a tragic accident as a result of an officer panicking. But as Dorothy says there must be a liability attached to it but I don’t believe it to be malicious. 

Police officer draws a "tazer" which is fundamentally different in size , shape, weight , she then looks down the gunsight to fire (presumably) but neither she nor her colleagues notice anything is wrong.  Or are we supposed to believe that the tazers are so like a fire arm they can't easily be told apart. I get that US police are in a potentially lethal situation at any given incident due to the prevalence of guns but they can't have it both ways. If cops can be confused by guns & tazers then there are fundamental issues with  either with the whole way they are trained - and how likely is that. 

[Mikey1874]

If you take the reaction of gun supporters to say school shootings which is to say teachers should be armed.

 

Anyone who may break the law in minor ways needs to get tooled up with the most powerful guns. 

[Tazio]

28 minutes ago, NANOJAMBO said:

Police officer draws a "tazer" which is fundamentally different in size , shape, weight , she then looks down the gunsight to fire (presumably) but neither she nor her colleagues notice anything is wrong.  Or are we supposed to believe that the tazers are so like a fire arm they can't easily be told apart. I get that US police are in a potentially lethal situation at any given incident due to the prevalence of guns but they can't have it both ways. If cops can be confused by guns & tazers then there are fundamental issues with  either with the whole way they are trained - and how likely is that. 

I’ve not seen the incident. The initial reports I read said there was a scuffle and that’s when the gun went off so I presumed, possibly incorrectly, that it was at very close quarters and she wouldn’t have had eyes on the gun. I also said very near the start of this thread that anyone who has actually handled a handgun knows they are a lot heavier than expected and I didn’t understand how you could get them confused. If she actually took a correct stance for firing a weapon then it’s not as simple as her panicking. 

[Mikey1874]

4 minutes ago, Tazio said:

I’ve not seen the incident. The initial reports I read said there was a scuffle and that’s when the gun went off so I presumed, possibly incorrectly, that it was at very close quarters and she wouldn’t have had eyes on the gun. I also said very near the start of this thread that anyone who has actually handled a handgun knows they are a lot heavier than expected and I didn’t understand how you could get them confused. If she actually took a correct stance for firing a weapon then it’s not as simple as her panicking. 

 

This is what we have

 

 

[Sharpie]

3 minutes ago, Tazio said:

I’ve not seen the incident. The initial reports I read said there was a scuffle and that’s when the gun went off so I presumed, possibly incorrectly, that it was at very close quarters and she wouldn’t have had eyes on the gun. I also said very near the start of this thread that anyone who has actually handled a handgun knows they are a lot heavier than expected and I didn’t understand how you could get them confused. If she actually took a correct stance for firing a weapon then it’s not as simple as her panicking. 

 

Yes you are correct to an extent there was a scuffle but there seemed to be male officers closer to deal with the young man trying to get back into his car, I am sure it has not changed that much since my time but patrol officers by experience in their job are generally if two on one pretty good at manhandling a struggling prisoner. In fact even in the old dark days we were taught hand to hand techniques, carrying out an arrest one of them. I stand to be corrected but with the number of police personnel on the scene even the Taser seemed over the top.

Last night I watched on the news a demonstration of the Taser, one of the victims was a volunteer, a cop, he was a muscle man a big strong man and he was hit once went to his knees, and suffered numerous problems as a result, teary eyes because of the pepper spray released, difficulty breathing, and inability to get back up. I would suspect that there are warnings to potential users of even the Taser just how devastating they can be, but better than a bullet.

[Sharpie]

The female police officer has been charged with Manslaughter.  Small demonstration at the police headquarters, hopefully no looting like there was the first night.

[doctor jambo]

On 12/04/2021 at 19:01, Jamie Walker Tash said:

The biggest arse hole country on the planet. 

That’s why more people want to live there than anywhere else

[Governor Tarkin]

7 hours ago, doctor jambo said:

That’s why more people want to live there than anywhere else

 

85% of people are arseholes, as a general rule. 👍

[Norm]

9 hours ago, doctor jambo said:

That’s why more people want to live there than anywhere else

When the majority of the planet earn less than a dollar a day, and movies and TV paint the States as some magical place where anyone can make it rich, then clearly folk will want to move there. I'd wager the number of folk who want to move there from an already developed nation is minimal. 

 

Certainly I don't know anyone from Europe who looks at the place and goes "Yup. America. That's where I want to be."

[highlandjambo3]

15 hours ago, NANOJAMBO said:

Police officer draws a "tazer" which is fundamentally different in size , shape, weight , she then looks down the gunsight to fire (presumably) but neither she nor her colleagues notice anything is wrong.  Or are we supposed to believe that the tazers are so like a fire arm they can't easily be told apart. I get that US police are in a potentially lethal situation at any given incident due to the prevalence of guns but they can't have it both ways. If cops can be confused by guns & tazers then there are fundamental issues with  either with the whole way they are trained - and how likely is that. 

And, a point which seems to have been missed, For the pistol to be made “ready” from its state of “loaded” one needs to chamber a round (bullet) by grasping the top part of the pistol and pulling it firmly to the rear then letting go.  I’d be surprised (maybe I wouldn’t) if any officers were carrying around a “ready” fire arm as standard procedure.........there is ABSOLUTELY no way you could mistake both.

[muldoon74]

1 hour ago, highlandjambo3 said:

And, a point which seems to have been missed, For the pistol to be made “ready” from its state of “loaded” one needs to chamber a round (bullet) by grasping the top part of the pistol and pulling it firmly to the rear then letting go.  I’d be surprised (maybe I wouldn’t) if any officers were carrying around a “ready” fire arm as standard procedure.........there is ABSOLUTELY no way you could mistake both.

This is an excellent point. 

 

It takes more than the tiny pull back seen in movies to make a handgun ready. 

 

I've shot browning 9mm and sig sauer 9mm, both required a conscious effort to make ready. 

 

Safety catch also has to be off, so there's another point of difference 

 

[Tazio]

1 hour ago, highlandjambo3 said:

And, a point which seems to have been missed, For the pistol to be made “ready” from its state of “loaded” one needs to chamber a round (bullet) by grasping the top part of the pistol and pulling it firmly to the rear then letting go.  I’d be surprised (maybe I wouldn’t) if any officers were carrying around a “ready” fire arm as standard procedure.........there is ABSOLUTELY no way you could mistake both.

Well that comes round to training and gun culture again. It could be that officers are carrying guns with a round already chambered so they just need to flick off the safety and they’re ready to go. Not something any instructor would teach but some of the more extreme elements seem to think it’s a good thing as you have an extra round and you’re “ready to go” instantly. 

[highlandjambo3]

1 hour ago, Tazio said:

Well that comes round to training and gun culture again. It could be that officers are carrying guns with a round already chambered so they just need to flick off the safety and they’re ready to go. Not something any instructor would teach but some of the more extreme elements seem to think it’s a good thing as you have an extra round and you’re “ready to go” instantly. 

I’d find it extremely hard to believe anyone would carry a pistol about with a round chambered.  In all my military career, with all the different army’s I worked with none ever used this approach....a loaded pistol can be carried about but, on a firing range, the pistol is pointed at a target (or down range) before a round is chambered and it stays pointed down the range until it’s been declared safe (empty).

Even our most highly trained forces (Royal Marines) when doing rapid weapon transitions (from rifle to pistol) on a range, there is only ever 1 round in the pistol so as soon as you transit from the rifle and fire the one round in the pistol, it’s immediately empty and safe (minimising the risk) however, on saying that, we are talking gun crazy yanks here.

[Tazio]

5 minutes ago, highlandjambo3 said:

I’d find it extremely hard to believe anyone would carry a pistol about with a round chambered.  In all my military career, with all the different army’s I worked with none ever used this approach....a loaded pistol can be carried about but, on a firing range, the pistol is pointed at a target (or down range) before a round is chambered and it stays pointed down the range until it’s been declared safe (empty).

Even our most highly trained forces (Royal Marines) when doing rapid weapon transitions (from rifle to pistol) on a range, there is only ever 1 round in the pistol so as soon as you transit from the rifle and fire the one round in the pistol, it’s immediately empty and safe (minimising the risk) however, on saying that, we are talking gun crazy yanks here.

It’s a thing among the gun fanatic types. Google condition 1 carry to find out more. 

[Cade]

Shot and killed a 13 year old boy in Chicago

 

Didn't inform his mother for two days, by which time she'd registered him as missing.

 

Bodycam footage shows a brief foot chase, then the kid halts when instructed, turns around, put his hands in the air and is then shot in the chest at close range.

 

The USA is completely fecked.

[Jambo-Jimbo]

25 minutes ago, Cade said:

Shot and killed a 13 year old boy in Chicago

 

Didn't inform his mother for two days, by which time she'd registered him as missing.

 

Bodycam footage shows a brief foot chase, then the kid halts when instructed, turns around, put his hands in the air and is then shot in the chest at close range.

 

The USA is completely fecked.

 

What the Police bodycam footage doesn't show is the boy throwing away something behind the fence, however the security CCTV footage from the other side of the yard clearly shows something being flung away moments before he turns around.  A handgun was recovered at the scene.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-56768217

 

 

[Norm]

1 minute ago, Jambo-Jimbo said:

 

What the Police bodycam footage doesn't show is the boy throwing away something behind the fence, however the security CCTV footage from the other side of the yard clearly shows something being flung away moments before he turns around.  A handgun was recovered at the scene.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-56768217

 

 

If that's supposed to be an excuse for shooting an unarmed 13 year old boy with his hands in the the air at point blank range, it's a ****ing terrible one. 

[Mikey1874]

We're just seeing things now that happen normally. 

[Jambo-Jimbo]

21 minutes ago, Norm said:

If that's supposed to be an excuse for shooting an unarmed 13 year old boy with his hands in the the air at point blank range, it's a ****ing terrible one. 

 

I'm not excusing anybody and I hope you don't think that.

All I pointed out was there is other footage which shows more to the story.

 

As for shooting anybody of any age, it's America, nothing shocks or surprises me anymore about that country.

[I P Knightley]

On 14/04/2021 at 19:32, NANOJAMBO said:

Police officer draws a "tazer" which is fundamentally different in size , shape, weight , she then looks down the gunsight to fire (presumably) but neither she nor her colleagues notice anything is wrong.  Or are we supposed to believe that the tazers are so like a fire arm they can't easily be told apart. I get that US police are in a potentially lethal situation at any given incident due to the prevalence of guns but they can't have it both ways. If cops can be confused by guns & tazers then there are fundamental issues with  either with the whole way they are trained - and how likely is that. 

Picked up her shooting style from the best. None of this looking down the sights.

 

[dobmisterdobster]

4 hours ago, Norm said:

If that's supposed to be an excuse for shooting an unarmed 13 year old boy with his hands in the the air at point blank range, it's a ****ing terrible one. 

 

Clearly false if you watched the footage.

[Norm]

3 minutes ago, dobmisterdobster said:

 

Clearly false if you watched the footage.

Was he armed when he was shot? No. Therefore they shot an unarmed boy. 

[dobmisterdobster]

18 minutes ago, Norm said:

Was he armed when he was shot? No. Therefore they shot an unarmed boy. 

 

Police responded to a shots-fired call. He fled while armed. Police have milliseconds to make a decision.

I'm simply explaining why this will probably be ruled as a justified police shooting.

[The Real Maroonblood]

3 hours ago, I P Knightley said:

Picked up her shooting style from the best. None of this looking down the sights.

 

👍

[bean counter]

5 hours ago, Cade said:

Shot and killed a 13 year old boy in Chicago

 

Didn't inform his mother for two days, by which time she'd registered him as missing.

 

Bodycam footage shows a brief foot chase, then the kid halts when instructed, turns around, put his hands in the air and is then shot in the chest at close range.

 

The USA is completely fecked.

 

When I first saw this on the news I thought and still think it is tragic with the boy being so young

 

I then asked why was a 13 year old out and about at 2:30 in the morning and also as stated while this is a tragic incident the police we responding to a "shots fired" incident.

[Sharpie]

Watched the report of this incident on CNN news last night. What they reported was that a thirteen year old boy was out with a twenty two year old man at 2.30am in the morning. There was police body cam showing the incident , it stated that there was a weapon aimed at the officer, and a guest on the show stated that in his opinion the shooting was justified. I have not seen the opinion, but do wonder what a thirteen year old is doing out with a twenty two year old at that time of night, one opinion I will express is that without full information we should be careful not to rush to judgement. There recently have been police who and I agree with the description have acted badly and wantonly, but equally until as I have said the full circumstance are out judgement should be reserved.

[Ron Burgundy]

17 minutes ago, bean counter said:

 

When I first saw this on the news I thought and still think it is tragic with the boy being so young

 

I then asked why was a 13 year old out and about at 2:30 in the morning and also as stated while this is a tragic incident the police we responding to a "shots fired" incident.

Correct. Whilst tragic if he was running about at that time with a gun at 13 years old his life expectancy would not be that great.

[Cade]

Nobody is saying the wee laddie was a shining example of civil behaviour.

We're simply questioning why he had to die instead of being arrested.

Summary execution is not law enforcement.

[Norm]

3 minutes ago, Cade said:

Nobody is saying the wee laddie was a shining example of civil behaviour.

We're simply questioning why he had to die instead of being arrested.

Summary execution is not law enforcement.

Bingo. Even with the call to a shooting, even though the kid had a gun while being chased, at the point he was shot, he was unarmed with his hands up. And I've no doubt it'll be found a lawful killing by the cops.

 

That's what's ****ed up about it. The fact that the nation is so messed up that shooting an unarmed 13 year old boy with his ****ing hands up is seen as an unfortunate price to pay for freedom. 

[dobmisterdobster]

Policing in America (especially big cities) is not like policing over here. People don't realise how dangerous it is.

I'm glad I don't live there.

[Norm]

3 minutes ago, dobmisterdobster said:

Policing in America (especially big cities) is not like policing over here. People don't realise how dangerous it is.

I'm glad I don't live there.

I've no doubt the cops are terrified with all the guns on the streets. My comments aren't so much on yet another bad cop, more a comment on how messed up a country is that this is seen as pretty much acceptable. Clearly this isn't a Chauvin type case or police brutality, it's just another example of a broken nation  State. 

Edited April 16, 2021 by Norm

[The Real Maroonblood]

2 minutes ago, Norm said:

I've no doubt the cops are terrified with all the guns on the streets. My comments aren't so much on yet another bad cop, more a comment on how messed up a country is that this is seen as pretty much acceptable. Clearly this isn't a Chauvin type case or police brutality, it's just another example of a broken nation  State. 

Fair comment.

There are some people regardless of the situation will always blame the police for a death.

[Cade]

[doctor jambo]

2 minutes ago, Cade said:

How about campaign for all handguns to be banned instead?

that is the only thing that will stop civilians being shot, either by each other or by cops shit scared of being shots themselves .

Until the people of the USA vote for this, they appear willing to tolerate massacres and cop killings as the price for gun ownership.

[Jeffros Furios]

Far too many guns , nutters , drugs, shite parenting,  shite areas , gangs etc etc 

The US never changes its as if they know its funked up and Can't or won't change .

[Sharpie]

47 minutes ago, doctor jambo said:

How about campaign for all handguns to be banned instead?

that is the only thing that will stop civilians being shot, either by each other or by cops shit scared of being shots themselves .

Until the people of the USA vote for this, they appear willing to tolerate massacres and cop killings as the price for gun ownership.

 There is a plan to upgrade the system of application for a licence to own, and purchase weapons. There is also some moves to ban the ownership of military style automatic weapons. Whatever happens the United States has pretty well always been a violent Country. The fought a war of Independence, and I believe it was from there that the Right to Bear Arms was legislated as the 2nd Amendment, this proved dependent on personal opinion the taming of the Wild West, I don't in my opinion it was ever meant to carry into a 2021 society for protection against a burglar breaking into your house. I have mentioned before there are some places where you have to pass a character test to purchase a firearm, but can make a purchase at a gun show with not qualification of any sort required.

[highlandjambo3]

12 minutes ago, Sharpie said:

 There is a plan to upgrade the system of application for a licence to own, and purchase weapons. There is also some moves to ban the ownership of military style automatic weapons. Whatever happens the United States has pretty well always been a violent Country. The fought a war of Independence, and I believe it was from there that the Right to Bear Arms was legislated as the 2nd Amendment, this proved dependent on personal opinion the taming of the Wild West, I don't in my opinion it was ever meant to carry into a 2021 society for protection against a burglar breaking into your house. I have mentioned before there are some places where you have to pass a character test to purchase a firearm, but can make a purchase at a gun show with not qualification of any sort required.

I believe the replicas are semi automatic and not fully automatic but look identical to military grade weapons however, a semi automatic can fire as quickly as you can rapidly press the trigger so, almost as lethal......that’s my understanding of American civilians and their “look like” military weapons........Not 100% so I might be wrong.