And I say again, shooting someone six times is beyond excessive. I cannot believe as a trained police officer, he was unable to use any other method than shooting someone SIX times. Is that really supported by your government's policies? Which one? How worrying.
Yes a officer is has steps he is required to do before using deadly force. That officer did every step by the book which allowed him to use deadly force. Its basic law 101. Ok for everyone upset over 6shots being fired I ask you this. Have you ever had to do something so intense that it took you numerous times to do while u have adrenaline running through your body? If so did you notice how hard it was for you to do that task? Yes normally one shot would and should be enough however when u add adrenaline and nerves and everything surrounding you is put into play that one "simple shot" isn't so simple and very well could and possibly would require more then one shot.
Yes, I have. However, I am not a trained police officer who's job it is to protect people. Who has had time and classes and exercises specifically aimed to prepare me for high stress situations exactly like this. Tell me where it says 6 shots is not excessive. I'm sure i read somewhere that that is considered overkill by the law there, but if i was mistaken I will gladly accept it.
More than one shot maybe. More than two shots even..maybe. You cannot possibly believe that 6 shots is acceptable. Shooting someone SIX times, just think about that. The sixth time, in the head. You have just shot someone "in a panic" (a police officer) five times, then aim and take a sixth shot to the person's head. You cannot possibly believe that is okay.
3. A law enforcement officer in effecting an arrest or in preventing an escape from custody is justified in using deadly force only (1) When such is authorized under other sections of this chapter; or (2) When he reasonably believes that such use of deadly force is immediately necessary to effect the arrest and also reasonably believes that the person to be arrested (a) Has committed or attempted to commit a felony; or (b) Is attempting to escape by use of a deadly weapon; or (c) May otherwise endanger life or inflict serious physical injury unless arrested without delay. 4. The defendant shall have the burden of injecting the issue of justification under this section. (Via Sean Davis.) So, the suspect doesn't have to be armed, and doesn't even have to present an immediate threat. Instead, if an officer believes that there's no other way to make the arrest happen, and also believes that the suspect has attempted to commit a felony, the officer is justified in using deadly force. If a cop wants to arrest someone, and has a "reasonable" belief that the person has even tried to commit a felony, he or she is allowed to kill.
From what the cop said, every time he shot at him keep still tried to tackle him down. Basically he was shooting at the hulk. Two thigh shots would probably suffice but whatever. People are only rioting because they want the cop to go to jail.
Wow. That is shockingly awful. So it basically is a personal judgement call? You personally don't think 5 shots would've done the job? I am surprised and sad that he decided to kill that person. I believe as I have said numerous times, that as a trained officer he could have incapacitated the offender without killing him. That makes me so sad that you can legally kill someone even though you didn't really have to.
And of course that's what the cop would say lol. He doesn't want to go to jail. Despite everything that is being said here, NO ONE including myself knows what is the truth except for that police officer and the friend. Personally, I believe as someone specifically trained for these situations, the officer is in the wrong. And personally I think 6 shots and one that was intended to kill was excessive. Maybe he committed a felony. Maybe he hit the officer. I still think it is wrong. I think your laws need to be revised. This is a horribly sad situation and it saddens me that there are people saying "well the law says he can so it's okay". Six shots, one in the head. Not okay
And again that's your opinion. Never said our laws were perfect. But the law is the law. I thinkbthe riot has lost it reason.
Why would you just accept that some laws aren't perfect? Shouldn't you yourself want a fair justice system? "The law is the law", that isn't good enough for me.
Laws are there to as guide lines. Hell in some countries that Guy would have been shot just for stealing. And again I have no comment on our justice system. I will say I know what its like being put into a similar situation and it still comes down to the Law at the end of the day.
For him it'll come down to the truth only he knows. I hope he feels the gravity of what he has done..
Its a figure of speech... as in meaning there's a good chance that what happened will stay on his mind for the rest of his life. Smh