kidley   48 #265 Posted August 22, 2014 nobody has a gun to wound somebody. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
rainbow2411   11 #266 Posted August 22, 2014 I agree that it does seem very much like over kill but I don't think that it can be classed as a race based killing. It seems to me that pointing to the highly publicised whites/hispanics killings of blacks is contributing to the failure of the black community to accept what is actually happening in their community. These published figures are for America, where your example happened. Each year, roughly 7,000 blacks are murdered; 94 per cent of the time, the murderer is another black person. According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, between 1976 and 2011, there were 279,384 black murder victims .The 94 per cent figure suggests that 262,621 were murdered by other blacks.  Though blacks are 13 per cent of the national population, they account for more than 50 per cent of homicide victims. Nationally, the black homicide victimization rate is six times that of whites, and in some cities it is 32 times that of whites. Blacks are also disproportionately victimized by violent personal crimes, such as assault and robbery.  Economist Walter Williams points out that, “The magnitude of this tragic mayhem can be viewed in another light. According to a Tuskegee Institute study, between the years 1882 and 1998, 3,446 blacks were lynched at the hands of whites. Black fatalities during the Korean War (3,075), Vietnam War (7,243) and all the wars since 1980 (8,107) came to 18,425, a number that pales in comparison with black loss of life at home.  Read more at http://www.commdiginews.com/politics-2/african-americans-need-to-confront-black-on-black-crime-21424/#2b9LDxEJdIGXkmGq.99 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
hackey lad   3,991 #267 Posted August 22, 2014 Yes. Who they then shot at least 12 times within 15 seconds of arriving on the scene. I mean, I would have just disabled him by shooting him in the leg but I am sure it was completely necessary to shoot him at least 12 times to DEATH.  police do not shoot legs or arms to disable people . if the police deem it necessary to shoot, they shoot at a persons chest Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
monkey104 Â Â 10 #268 Posted August 22, 2014 Yes. Who they then shot at least 12 times within 15 seconds of arriving on the scene. I mean, I would have just disabled him by shooting him in the leg but I am sure it was completely necessary to shoot him at least 12 times to DEATH. Â Fortunately for you, you have never had to shoot someone at close range when your adrenaline is pumping through your body, concerned for your life and that of your colleague and then told to hit the knifeman in the leg only. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
rainbow2411   11 #269 Posted August 22, 2014 It's clear that these policemen where following their training correctly  21 Foot Rule - The 21 foot rule states that the average person with a knife or sword can get to and cut a person in about the same time that the average person can draw and fire a handgun.  In the time it takes the average officer to recognize a threat, draw his sidearm and fire 2 rounds at center mass, an average subject charging at the officer with a knife or other cutting or stabbing weapon can cover a distance of 21 feet. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
hackey lad   3,991 #270 Posted August 22, 2014 It's clear that these policemen where following their training correctly 21 Foot Rule - The 21 foot rule states that the average person with a knife or sword can get to and cut a person in about the same time that the average person can draw and fire a handgun.  In the time it takes the average officer to recognize a threat, draw his sidearm and fire 2 rounds at center mass, an average subject charging at the officer with a knife or other cutting or stabbing weapon can cover a distance of 21 feet.  :thumbsup::thumbsup: Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Halibut   12 #271 Posted August 22, 2014 It's clear that these policemen where following their training correctly 21 Foot Rule - The 21 foot rule states that the average person with a knife or sword can get to and cut a person in about the same time that the average person can draw and fire a handgun.  In the time it takes the average officer to recognize a threat, draw his sidearm and fire 2 rounds at center mass, an average subject charging at the officer with a knife or other cutting or stabbing weapon can cover a distance of 21 feet.  Does the training say shoot on sight without any attempt to de-escalate or use lesser degrees of force? I suspect not. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
rainbow2411 Â Â 11 #272 Posted August 22, 2014 Do you think that they didn't try to de-escalate the situation. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
mort   10 #273 Posted August 22, 2014 Back on topic please. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
magwitch   10 #274 Posted August 22, 2014 I've walked through the area tonight and had no problems, might be because I haven't shaved yet though;) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Tommo68 Â Â 10 #275 Posted August 22, 2014 Does the training say shoot on sight without any attempt to de-escalate or use lesser degrees of force? I suspect not. Â In the Uk to the best of my knowledge if a firearm officer is armed and attending a scene if that officer feels that their own life, the life of another police officer or any other person is being directly threatened that officer is authorised to use deadly force. Â It is also my understanding that shooting to kill is the only response that is authorised if that officer elects to discharge their weapon. Â In the Uk they do not do warning shots nor do they shoot with any other intention than that of stopping the threat, to the best of my knowledge. Â The understandings which I have expressed do come form talking to someone who at the time was a firearms officer. Though I do forget the correct title. . . Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
monkey104 Â Â 10 #276 Posted August 23, 2014 Does the training say shoot on sight without any attempt to de-escalate or use lesser degrees of force? I suspect not. Â Is that not shown on the video? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...