CA - Mario Woods, 26, shot by LE, San Francisco, 2 Dec 2015

[bluesneakers]

Scary how many times we have only had their word due to not having video. IMO

It is. Reading about the police chief Jon Burge in Chicago made me sick to my stomach.

 

[PeregrineFaulkner]

So in SF lethal force/gun is better than a taser. I agree they could use better training but until then (I never thought I would say this) they need tasers.
All those LE in that video and they couldn't take him down without a gun....for shame. IMO

They have - and as I understand it, in this case, did use - beanbag guns in lieu of tasers. For what that's worth.

 

[bwt42]

In the oft cited report " the counted" from the Washington Post the number of deaths by taser is surprising. I would like to see stats on how often a taser victim dies as compared to a shooting victim. Excuse if I have the name & paper wrong.

 

[bluesneakers]

In the oft cited report " the counted" from the Washington Post the number of deaths by taser is surprising. I would like to see stats on how often a taser victim dies as compared to a shooting victim. Excuse if I have the name & paper wrong.

I'm only familiar with a few cases but I found this from November:


The Counted: Bolts from the blue

While deadly police shootings in the United States have gained international attention this year, Reid is one of 47 lesser-known people who lost their lives after law enforcement officers deployed a Taser, according to The Counted, an ongoing Guardian investigation documenting fatalities that follow police encounters.

Reid’s case is, in many ways, tragically typical of the other deaths following the use of a Taser by police in 2015: he was unarmed, as in all but three cases. Like nearly 40% of the victims, he was black. And as in at least 53% of such cases, the suspect was displaying signs of intoxication before his or her death.

As with many of these incidents, Reid died following shocks administered seemingly in violation of national guidelines, by officers belonging to a police department with lax rules on how these less-lethal weapons should be used.

 

[bwt42]

San Francisco does not have tasers. The Police Commission has thus far denied them and wants further or more advanced police training to deal with these kind of situations (kind of like they used to do). The Police Union wants tasers and after that they will be asking for bazookas. I say, demilitarize the Police, (and ban guns totally), but, that's just me.

Do you or any other posters think the police should unilaterally disarm?

 

[bluesneakers]

Do you or any other posters think the police should unilaterally disarm?

I say demilitarize them, but no, not unilaterally disarm.

What's your opinion?

 

[katydid23]

He had already stabbed someone. He was surrounded by cops who repeatedly asked him to drop the knife. They tried pepper spray and bean bag pellets---with no success. He would not comply, would not drop the knife.

Is anyone suggesting that they try hand to hand combat with him? He was a danger to the public if they let him continue on his way. It was his decision not to drop the weapon when ordered to do so, after he had stabbed someone already. He was a danger to everyone. He brought the shooting upon himself. JMO

 

[katydid23]

Why didn't they use a taser? I just don't understand why they would shoot when there was another option. He wasn't lunging at the officers...he was walking away.

Scary how often this is happening and the claims by LE of self defense. IMO

They tried pepper spray and shot bean bags at him. And YES, he was walking away, towards other possible victims. He had already stabbed someone. They could not let him 'walk away' with a bloody knife in his hand.

The cop had every right and moral responsibility to shoot this dangerous man, imo.

 

[Montjoy]

Then why didnt he drop the knife?

The only person who could answer that was shot multiple times by LEOs. Perhaps he was worried about becoming another civilian killed by the police? Or perhaps he was another civilian who was chronically or temporarily mentally ill. I don't think that anyone can answer your question -- but that doesn't change the fact that he was not charging/approaching/threatening the LEOs with the knife he held.

 

[katydid23]

The only person who could answer that was shot multiple times by LEOs. Perhaps he was worried about becoming another civilian killed by the police? Or perhaps he was another civilian who was chronically or temporarily mentally ill. I don't think that anyone can answer your question -- but that doesn't change the fact that he was not charging/approaching/threatening the LEOs with the knife he held.

He was refusing to comply with their valid orders to drop the bloody knife. He had just stabbed someone and was running from the scene. It does not matter if he was charging those officers or not. He was pepper sprayed and bean bagged, ordered to drop the weapon and he would not do so. He was not complying with valid direct orders, he was armed and he was running from a violent felonious assault. They had every legal right to shoot him at that point.

If as you suggest, he was worried about being another civilian killed by the cops, why hold on to the knife? That makes no sense.

 

[bwt42]

I say demilitarize them, but no, not unilaterally disarm.

What's your opinion?

I don't think it would be wise to unilaterally disarm them. Also, I'm unsure what you mean by demilitarize.

 

[kimlynn]

They tried pepper spray and shot bean bags at him. And YES, he was walking away, towards other possible victims. He had already stabbed someone. They could not let him 'walk away' with a bloody knife in his hand.

The cop had every right and moral responsibility to shoot this dangerous man, imo.

They SAY they tried pepper spray and bean bags but they also said he raised his hands to them and that is why they shot him. At this point I'm having trust issues with their story of what was tried.
It appears it is easier to shoot and is accepted by some as a means to handle these types of situations.Maybe that is part of the problem.
And no, he shouldn't be allowed to walk away and I didn't suggest that he should be allowed in my post.
Don't cops go through training to learn holds/restraining methods and how to subdue without using lethal force?
How about training in verbal prompts and reasoning to handle a suspect that won't comply?
And last but not least...do we know he was the dangerous man that stabbed another, or was that up to LE on the scene to determine? IMO

 

[bluesneakers]

I don't think it would be wise to unilaterally disarm them. Also, I'm unsure what you mean by demilitarize.

Cops should be cops and not soldiers. They don't need tanks, tear gas, armored cars, and machine guns.

They should look like this:

http://careercolonel.com/images/police_officers.jpg


Not this:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipe...jpg/350px-SWAT_team_prepared_(4132135578).jpg

 

[kimlynn]

Do you or any other posters think the police should unilaterally disarm?

Only if we have gun controls for the public. That is my opinion and I have zero desire to turn this into a gun control debate.

 

[magnolia]

Cops should be cops and not soldiers. They don't need tanks, tear gas, armored cars, and machine guns.

They should look like this:

http://careercolonel.com/images/police_officers.jpg


Not this:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipe...jpg/350px-SWAT_team_prepared_(4132135578).jpg

So, You don't approve of the armored cars used by LE to protect themselves and stop the threat in San Bernandino after the mass shooting. The shooters were both armed with an AR15. How would LE defend themselves and the public if they were not allowed to carry the same.

FRESNO, Calif. (KFSN) --

Armored vehicles were used to protect officers and stop the threat in San Bernardino after the mass shooting. It happened on live TV and has shed a new light on the debate about these types of vehicles being deployed in city streets.

Fresno Police Chief Jerry Dyer said, "The citizens of our community depend on us to be that last line of defense, to go out and to stop individuals like we saw yesterday."


http://abc30.com/news/armored-vehic...ernardino-start-conversation-at-home/1109242/

 

[bluesneakers]

So, You don't approve of the armored cars used by LE to protect themselves and stop the threat in San Bernandino after the mass shooting. The shooters were both armed with an AR15. How would LE defend themselves and the public if they were not allowed to carry the same.

Isn't that what the SWAT team is for?

 

[i.b.nora]

Lets don't turn this into a gun control debate. I apologize for mentioning the word gun in a previous post.

My own thinking about this particular incident is, in light of the fact that the official story doesn't exactly coincide with the videos I have seen, brings me to a time when a person wielding a knife would not necessarily be shot and killed.

I question why, for instance, the police couldn't have shot the knife out of his hand? Are they not good enough shots? Do they practise shooting up close? I just don't get it.

 

[bluesneakers]

Lets don't turn this into a gun control debate. I apologize for mentioning the word gun in a previous post.

My own thinking about this particular incident is, in light of the fact that the official story doesn't exactly coincide with the videos I have seen, brings me to a time when a person wielding a knife would not necessarily be shot and killed.

I question why, for instance, the police couldn't have shot the knife out of his hand? Are they not good enough shots? Do they practise shooting up close? I just don't get it.

I've always heard the rule is "Shoot to kill or not at all."

Shooting to kill: Why police are trained to fire fatal shots

Asked whether police officer training historically teaches a "shoot to kill" philosophy, veteran officers overwhelmingly answered "yes," but said death isn't necessarily the end goal.

"Killing isn't the objective," said Geoffrey Alpert, professor at University of South Carolina who researches high-risk police activity. "The objective is to remove the threat."

The most effective way to do that is to shoot at a person's torso because it's the largest part of the body – and where a shot is most likely to incapacitate someone who poses a potential threat, Joseph Morbitzer, president of the Ohio Association of Chiefs of Police said.

Officers who shoot at a suspect's upper body are often condemned by the public for not aiming at an arm or leg instead, but experts say that only happens in Hollywood.

"You're shooting something that's moving and turning, and people don't make themselves an easy target," Aveni said."Those that advocate shooting a gun out of a hand like you see in Roy Rogers movies – that's just not a plausible scenario."

Hubert Williams, 30-year veteran officer and former president of the Police Foundation, said the philosophy is to shoot to kill or not at all.

"[An officer] wouldn't be justified in shooting unless there is a threat to his life," Williams said. "If there's a threat to his life, he has to take counter measures against that threat. So he's going to shoot not to stop him – he's going to shoot for the kill zone."

 

[Montjoy]

I question why, for instance, the police couldn't have shot the knife out of his hand? Are they not good enough shots? Do they practise shooting up close? I just don't get it.

rsbm

Ok, with respect, I do not expect LE to be able to shoot the gun out of his hand. That is TV and movie stuff. Only speaking from my own experience, it is not that easy to do that outside of pretty specific sniper situations. Just the same, there are many ways to deal with people carrying knives.

Perhaps the LEOs in attendance were not trained for this. Perhaps they were not equipped for this. But if these things are true, I have to wonder why not.

I have had training for situations like this, years ago, so the training is out there. But I have to wonder if it's a matter of some things no longer being taught, or if some lessons are just ignored. I feel badly for everyone either way.

 

[katydid23]

Cops should be cops and not soldiers. They don't need tanks, tear gas, armored cars, and machine guns.

They should look like this:

http://careercolonel.com/images/police_officers.jpg


Not this:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipe...jpg/350px-SWAT_team_prepared_(4132135578).jpg

Depends upon where they are patrolling. Why shouldn't they have vests and helmets and machine guns if the 'enemy' they are trying to arrest has them?

The gangs in LA have AK47's, armored cars, kevlar vests. Why shouldn't the gang unit cops be able to protect themselves the same way?

Did you ever see the Hollywood Bank Robbery shoot out? What about San Bernardino? Shoudlnt the responding cops have a way to take them on equally?