policeman fired for not shooting man with unloaded gun ...

quote:

---

“I told him, ‘Put down the gun,’ and he’s like, ‘Just shoot me.’ And I told him, ‘I’m not going to shoot you brother.’ Then he starts flicking his wrist to get me to react to it.

“I thought I was going to be able to talk to him and deescalate it. I knew it was a suicide-by-cop” situation.

---

They cant win anymore

This whole thing may not end well. If protest groups are allowed to change policy, everyday citizens will be forced to take the law into their own hands to protect themselves. The average hood dwelling criminal will become emboldened and vigilante groups will need to be formed to hunt them.

I hope that doesn't happen though. I would rather let police do their job.

So the cop can clearly see this guy is wanting to die at the hands of police, makes the correct call and gets fired because he didn't follow the protocol which is to eliminate the threat? If he does eliminate the threat, and they then find an unloaded weapon, he still gets fired due to public pressure most likely. And at the very least, it would be plastered all over major news network to spark more outrage.

Bet he doesn't receive one frickING OUNCE of credit from Sharpton or BLM for doing EXACTLY what they all scream for.

quote:

---

eliminate the threat?

---

Isn't eliminating the threat the absolute last resort? Sounds like what Officer Mader was doing was the right thing, and full fulfilling his oath to protect and serve.

quote:

---

that he is even known to you today is because people are giving him credit publicly.

---

Of course "people" are. I am talking specifically about BLM and all the supporters of that movement. I want to hear them applaud this officer. But we both know why that will never happen, and the reasons behind it. If they were a fair and unbiased organization, they would do it.

quote:

---

the guy at some point is a risk to other officers and potentially the public if he is letting someone with a gun (loaded or not makes no difference as theres no way to know) put others at risk potentially.... but i have no idea if this situation was that bad. its a tough situation and a very fine line to walk. i dont see indication that he had strayed grossly away from reasonable actions though.

---

The bottom line is this was also a trained Marine, who responded correctly to the situation as he was already notified the guy was suicidal. He didn't overreact and kill the guy, probably due to his training and experience in the Marines. Of course, not all facts are known, but it seems like logic was tossed out the window. There's no way that two late-arriving officers felt that much more threatened than their fellow officer who arrived first.

ETA: IF there were others around in potential danger, with this guy waving his gun around, then yeah, he should have been shot by the first officer. I just doubt a Marine would allow that to happen; I am leaning more toward he had the situation under control.

The thought process you use to arrive to this conclusion is astonishing. I do agree the public should force changes in policy through their actions. That's how you get real change. Hell the cops do it all the time through lobbying. What good for the goose... Also the cop was insubordinate and cops can't have their own going rogue and thinking they know better than their lobbyists and experts. If that happens then you'd ultimately get cops who selectively enforce the law or want cops to face equal prosecution for crimes they commit while wearing a badge and they can't have that.

LINK

original story from the pitt gazette ... something's definitely up ... chief lied to the parents and might have a bone to pick with the fired officer ... but the officer deserves a damn pat on the back for being courageous enough to act that way ...