- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: President of Georgia Tech's Pride Alliance Shot Dead By Cop After Refusing To Drop Knife
Posted on 9/18/17 at 3:44 pm to tuptiger
Posted on 9/18/17 at 3:44 pm to tuptiger
quote:
I'm going to ask the next FBI agent I see to kill me.
Please do....also after you calmly tell them that run right at them and scream aloha snackbar!
1
Posted on 9/18/17 at 3:45 pm to Pettifogger
quote:
Give me your gut instinct about the chances those cops make it out of that conflict relatively unscathed without use of deadly force. I'm not holding you to it, and I'm not going to use it against the police in this particular instance. It's just for discussion of the broader topic.
Given what we know about the guy now? Probably pretty good. It was essentially suicide by cop.
Given what was known to them at the time? I believe they could have been harmed. They let him get pretty close with the knife, at least in the video I saw.
Posted on 9/18/17 at 3:45 pm to tuptiger
Tuptiger
First of all I am very balanced and I have over 25 years of LEO experience. I have been their in the middle of the night doing things that I had to do to survive because I didn't have all of these tools you so seem to think that LEOs have. I have been there and done that and have plenty of scars to remind me.
So with saying that the choices that you think should have been made but weren't are not only impractical but they are dangerous. First of all if I shoot you in the leg with a .45 caliber bullet you are probably going to die. If I miss you because I shot at a small target that bullet doesn't magically just stop. It will go somewhere and hit something. I am responsible for every bullet I shoot. That is why we shoot center mass.
You can go to your local department and see if you can do a ride along or a shoot don't shoot scenario. Try that. Then try imagine doing that every day for 25 years. Imagine the stress that puts on you and your family.
I also have a problem with your user name because it's obvious you are not a Tiger but a sheep
First of all I am very balanced and I have over 25 years of LEO experience. I have been their in the middle of the night doing things that I had to do to survive because I didn't have all of these tools you so seem to think that LEOs have. I have been there and done that and have plenty of scars to remind me.
So with saying that the choices that you think should have been made but weren't are not only impractical but they are dangerous. First of all if I shoot you in the leg with a .45 caliber bullet you are probably going to die. If I miss you because I shot at a small target that bullet doesn't magically just stop. It will go somewhere and hit something. I am responsible for every bullet I shoot. That is why we shoot center mass.
You can go to your local department and see if you can do a ride along or a shoot don't shoot scenario. Try that. Then try imagine doing that every day for 25 years. Imagine the stress that puts on you and your family.
I also have a problem with your user name because it's obvious you are not a Tiger but a sheep
Posted on 9/18/17 at 3:46 pm to TigersSEC2010
attempted suicide by cop. A lot of self hate in the gay community that doesn't get out there.
Posted on 9/18/17 at 3:47 pm to ABearsFanNMS
Good luck finding a FBI agent in the field
Posted on 9/18/17 at 3:48 pm to TigersSEC2010
Posted on 9/18/17 at 3:48 pm to slackster
quote:
Given what we know about the guy now? Probably pretty good. It was essentially suicide by cop.
Given what was known to them at the time? I believe they could have been harmed. They let him get pretty close with the knife, at least in the video I saw.
I'm honestly not seeking to question the judgment call in the moment. I'm asking, having watched the video, what percentage chance you'd give to those cops getting out of that situation (w/o a shoot) without significant injury. Pretty high, yes?
Posted on 9/18/17 at 3:49 pm to Pettifogger
quote:
Give me your gut instinct about the chances those cops make it out of that conflict relatively unscathed without use of deadly force.
Probably very high.
However, he was repeatedly, over the course of a long period of time, told to drop a weapon, and kept advancing. He advanced too close. My subjective thoughts in retrospect don't matter too much.
In the moment, the shoot was 100% justified.
Posted on 9/18/17 at 3:54 pm to Fun Bunch
quote:
Probably very high.
However, he was repeatedly, over the course of a long period of time, told to drop a weapon, and kept advancing. He advanced too close. My subjective thoughts in retrospect don't matter too much.
In the moment, the shoot was 100% justified.
See above, I'm just trying to confirm other people see it like I do, which is that it's very, very likely the situation would not have resulted in significant injury to the police officers.
I know in this culture it's tough to do, but my position is not anti-police. It's entirely about questioning where we put the risk threshold for police. Which, I suspect, will impact how police are trained.
I don't think it's easily comparable to the threshold of citizens. If some SJW is walking toward me with a knife, I'm probably running away. Ignoring I'm on a college campus, I'd probably be within my rights to shoot him, but would I? I don't think I'd feel threatened enough to make that leap. Anyway, I'm not advocating cops run away from aggressive people with knives, but I'm just indicating that I don't think the rational fear of imminent harm standards apply evenly (and makes it less settled of a discussion).
Posted on 9/18/17 at 3:55 pm to Pettifogger
quote:
I'm honestly not seeking to question the judgment call in the moment. I'm asking, having watched the video, what percentage chance you'd give to those cops getting out of that situation (w/o a shoot) without significant injury. Pretty high, yes?
Who can say for sure but I've watched the video and the subject with the knife advanced pretty close to the officers. Additionally, they were dealing with a volatile madman with a deadly weapon who has demonstrated he has zero regard for his life or anyone else's.
Sure, right after he lunges and stabs an officer in the neck, they'll be ready to kill the subject but what that does little good to the officer that gets stabbed. Why would you expect an officer to take that chance with his life?
Posted on 9/18/17 at 4:01 pm to Pettifogger
One thing you are not mentioning:
The police were informed in the 911 call that he had a knife AND a gun. They were operating under that knowledge.
The police were informed in the 911 call that he had a knife AND a gun. They were operating under that knowledge.
Posted on 9/18/17 at 4:02 pm to Pettifogger
quote:
If some SJW is walking toward me with a knife, I'm probably running away.
Whereas if I run away, I will be out of a job, or worse, an innocent person dies.
quote:
I'm not advocating cops run away from aggressive people with knives, but I'm just indicating that I don't think the rational fear of imminent harm standards apply evenly (and makes it less settled of a discussion).
There is no one-size-fits-all standard for response to an imminent threat, so deadly force incidents are almost always subjective in nature. A 5' 2" female officer will view a threat very differently than a 6' 4" male. If a 55 year old overweight cop knows that if he has to go hands on with two approaching attackers he will likely die, so he may opt for a deadly force response quicker than a 26 year old MMA-trained cop.
So at the end of the day, the only objective standard is this: if a reasonable person (aka, the police officer) determines that a individual possesses the means, opportunity and intent to cause you grievous bodily harm or death, you can use deadly force. I'm all for having a deep dive discussion on this but this is where these conversations ultimately return.
Posted on 9/18/17 at 4:03 pm to Pettifogger
Not speaking to you directly, but it seems like people want to constantly undermine the authority of police officers... its so easy to sit here and play the 'what if' game.. here's a what if for tuptiger... what if this guy would have just complied with the officers? Why do people constantly choose to blame and question the deputies in these situations without even trying to get the 'victims' to shoulder some blame??
Posted on 9/18/17 at 4:17 pm to ClientNumber9
quote:
Sure, right after he lunges and stabs an officer in the neck, they'll be ready to kill the subject but what that does little good to the officer that gets stabbed. Why would you expect an officer to take that chance with his life?
FFS, I'm not saying he/she should.
But I suspect you agree with me and the other poster who thinks it's likely the chance of serious injury is fairly low. I suspect you won't acknowledge it, because you think I'm trying to do some backhanded police criticism (I'm not).
If society thinks a 1%, 5%, 10%, etc. chance of serious injury should be irrelevant if an officer in good faith thinks there is a genuine risk of serious bodily harm (whether it rises to that or not) - Ok. But that's what I'm talking about.
Posted on 9/18/17 at 4:22 pm to ClientNumber9
quote:
Whereas if I run away, I will be out of a job, or worse, an innocent person dies.
Exactly. It's not the same standard at all then, is it? How can it be? And flight is another variable that would be part of any real discussion on whether or not we have a police overreach issue in this country.
quote:
So at the end of the day, the only objective standard is this: if a reasonable person (aka, the police officer) determines that a individual possesses the means, opportunity and intent to cause you grievous bodily harm or death, you can use deadly force. I'm all for having a deep dive discussion on this but this is where these conversations ultimately return.
Yeah, but that doesn't really end the inquiry, does it? You're an LEO of some sort, do you feel that as long as you can reconcile your actions with that standard, you're going to be alright? I'm not sure I'd have that sense of security in this environment. I think you probably feel better about the legal consensus than the public consensus, but either way, we're ultimately always discerning what is and what isn't the determination of a reasonable person (meaning it's not an objective standard).
Posted on 9/18/17 at 4:22 pm to Pettifogger
You're confusing our subjective thoughts after the fact with the objective reasonableness standard.
Objectively, when presented with an advancing suspect, armed with a weapon that could do great bodily harm, that does not comply, given previous knowledge that they may possess multiple weapons, it is objectively reasonable to use lethal force in this situation.
Objectively, when presented with an advancing suspect, armed with a weapon that could do great bodily harm, that does not comply, given previous knowledge that they may possess multiple weapons, it is objectively reasonable to use lethal force in this situation.
Posted on 9/18/17 at 4:23 pm to ClientNumber9
quote:
Why would you expect an officer to take that chance with his life?
45 years ago I saw a drunk lunge at a cop with a knife, the cop took him down with a night stick and cuffed him, risk of bodily injury was a accepted part of the job. Today it is acceptable to just shoot and kill someone for any perceived threat with even the most remote possibility of it resulting in harm to the officer.
Posted on 9/18/17 at 4:24 pm to Fun Bunch
quote:
You're confusing our subjective thoughts after the fact with the objective reasonableness standard.
I'm really not.
Posted on 9/18/17 at 4:27 pm to Mr. Hangover
quote:
Not speaking to you directly, but it seems like people want to constantly undermine the authority of police officers... its so easy to sit here and play the 'what if' game.. here's a what if for tuptiger... what if this guy would have just complied with the officers? Why do people constantly choose to blame and question the deputies in these situations without even trying to get the 'victims' to shoulder some blame??
It's a polarized discussion. I think there are those who are anti-police, and some who are blindly pro-police (often because of the types of people who are anti-police).
I have no interest in undermining authority of police officers. But I'm part of the populace that bestows them with that authority, and hence, I think it's a rational discussion to have. More importantly, I think it's a discussion, in a vacuum at least, that we have a responsibility to have. It may be impossible given all of the political and racial undertones, however.
Posted on 9/18/17 at 4:28 pm to EA6B
quote:
45 years ago I saw a drunk lunge at a cop with a knife, the cop took him down with a night stick and cuffed him, risk of bodily injury was a accepted part of the job. Today it is acceptable to just shoot and kill someone for any perceived threat with even the most remote possibility of it resulting in harm to the officer.
And without taking a position about whether one situation is preferable to another, this is exactly what I'm talking about.
Page 11 of 12
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News