Georgia deputies fatally shoot CNN security guard as he tried to help distressed son

[katydid23]

Because it's the exact same conversation in numerous other threads regarding officer involved shootings.

Correct. There are endless criticisms of the officers for being unsympathetic, cold hearted, brutal etc. But my question stands---what should they do when being charged by a mentally ill subject who wants to harm them?

 

[RANCH]

So what is someone supposed to do if a mentally ill man charges them with a knife or a bat? Are they supposed to try hand to hand combat?

I've seen it suggested that LE use less lethal weapons instead of firearms no matter what the situation is. The problem is that they aren't effective or suitable in all situations.

The thought that an officer should engage in some kind of wrestling match with unarmed individuals has also been suggested to keep things "fair". Not sure why it has to be "fair" especially when the officer could lose his/her gun during such an attempt. JMO

 

[katydid23]

I've seen it suggested that LE use less lethal weapons instead of firearms no matter what the situation is. The problem is that they aren't effective or suitable in all situations.

The thought that an officer should engage in some kind of wrestling match with unarmed individuals has also been suggested to keep things "fair". Not sure why it has to be "fair" especially when the officer could lose his/her gun during such an attempt. JMO

Exactly. When the person they are fighting is running from a warrant or an arrest, why should the 'fight' be a fair one?

 

[DexterMorgan]

Hold on guys. The affluenza teen is running from arrest. So should we shoot him on site as well before his mamma gets a chance to say Don't shoot my baby?

 

[katydid23]

Hold on guys. The affluenza teen is running from arrest. So should we shoot him on site as well before his mamma gets a chance to say Don't shoot my baby?

If affluenza teen was i a physical fight with a cop, and tried to injure the cop or grab the gun, then by all means, shoot!

 

[DexterMorgan]

If affluenza teen was i a physical fight with a cop, and tried to injure the cop or grab the gun, then by all means, shoot!

I agree. If you are combative against the cops then you have no problem with being combative with others.

A cop should shoot on a 1 on 1 situation. But 4 cops against 1 should not require that. Jmo.

 

[bluesneakers]

Hold on guys. The affluenza teen is running from arrest. So should we shoot him on site as well before his mamma gets a chance to say Don't shoot my baby?

IMO
Nope, nope, nope.
I know the affluenza guy killed four people and later went on the run but ... IDK, is it necessary to shoot him on sight? I haven't kept up with that case though. Maybe he's the new Sundance Kid.

 

[Archangel7]

During a police response to a domestic, pointing a gun at a LEO is almost a guarantee to receive a lethal response.

To expect different or to change that response from that default reaction is silly.
You can't restrict lethal force action towards a police officer to non lethal reaction from him.

It really does not matter within the totality of Society and the law within the US, and in fact isn't a prerequisite to determine any mental or medical condition, once lethal force is directed at and towards a police officer in that exact moment it occurs.

 

[kimlynn]

I don't think anyone is disputing the right to protect your life. Problem is there is no proof of what actually happened in this case. We have three or four stories of what happened during this shooting.

I see the word bat (weapon) many times in this thread and new info. in that case indicates that officer was 20 ft away while firing.
IMO

 

[Archangel7]

I don't think anyone is disputing the right to protect your life. Problem is there is no proof of what actually happened in this case. We have three or four stories of what happened during this shooting.

I see the word bat (weapon) many times in this thread and new info. in that case indicates that officer was 20 ft away while firing.
IMO

Well, there is that ever surfacing 21 foot rule..........

Regardless, when the facts surface it will have to meet the objective reasonableness rule of law, be a totally accidental shooting(meaning a dropped and discharged gun)or a bad shooting and charges. Not many other real possibilities.

 

[Woodland]

During a police response to a domestic, pointing a gun at a LEO is almost a guarantee to receive a lethal response.

To expect different or to change that response from that default reaction is silly.
You can't restrict lethal force action towards a police officer to non lethal reaction from him.

It really does not matter within the totality of Society and the law within the US, and in fact isn't a prerequisite to determine any mental or medical condition, once lethal force is directed at and towards a police officer in that exact moment it occurs.

So far, no one has reported that anyone intentionally pointed a gun at LE. A struggle was in progress during what was reported as a hostage taking incident. LE could not have known who the players were when they arrived and the struggle was in progress.

They fired anyway - hoping for the best? They couldn't take cover until they knew who was who?

Fwiw, find the term 'a domestic' rather condescending regardless of the source. Imo, it diminishes an assault - a slang term giving less weight to the event. The one and only time I had to report an assault, the cop asked if it was 'a domestic'. I had to ask wtf is a domestic - I'm reporting an assault here. Only then was it viewed and treated as an assault. Can't believe the term is still prominent.

 

[DexterMorgan]

I don't think anyone is disputing the right to protect your life. Problem is there is no proof of what actually happened in this case. We have three or four stories of what happened during this shooting.

I see the word bat (weapon) many times in this thread and new info. in that case indicates that officer was 20 ft away while firing.
IMO

Agree. It's never the actual cop killing. But it's always about the cover up that gets them in trouble.

Especially when they write their reports but don't know about the eye witness videos.

Then once the videos don't match the report. Then that's a problem. Jmo.

The cover ups kill the department more than the actual shooting itself. Jmo

 

[EllieBee]

IMO
Nope, nope, nope.
I know the affluenza guy killed four people and later went on the run but ... IDK, is it necessary to shoot him on sight? I haven't kept up with that case though. Maybe he's the new Sundance Kid.

Yes. As much as I (in my deep down heart) think this affluenza kid is beyond redemption, he, like every other American citizen is entitled to due process.

Somewhere along the line, it seems LE decided to cut outvthe middle man.

 

[EllieBee]

Agree. It's never the actual cop killing. But it's always about the cover up that gets them in trouble.

Especially when they write their reports but don't know about the eye witness videos.

Then once the videos don't match the report. Then that's a problem. Jmo.

The cover ups kill the department more than the actual shooting itself. Jmo

Exactly.

If you weren't in the wrong, why all the lying? In many of these cases, the video/audio evidence directly refutes the LE version of what happened. I think it is important to ask "why?".

 

[kimlynn]

Agree. It's never the actual cop killing. But it's always about the cover up that gets them in trouble.

Especially when they write their reports but don't know about the eye witness videos.

Then once the videos don't match the report. Then that's a problem. Jmo.

The cover ups kill the department more than the actual shooting itself. Jmo

Way to many of these of late. And probably many that haven't been brought to light. It just seems way to easy to shoot and claim self defense. IMO

ETA and if someone with a bat is charging at me 20 ft away .... I'm going to run like hell.

 

[EllieBee]

Exactly. When the person they are fighting is running from a warrant or an arrest, why should the 'fight' be a fair one?

Every American is afforded due process. It isn't up to gun-happy LE to decide who deserves it and who does not.

 

[bluesneakers]

Agree. It's never the actual cop killing. But it's always about the cover up that gets them in trouble.

Especially when they write their reports but don't know about the eye witness videos.

Then once the videos don't match the report. Then that's a problem. Jmo.

The cover ups kill the department more than the actual shooting itself. Jmo

The attempted cover ups are what erode trust with the public. IMO they need to get out in front of the incidents, be truthful and take responsibility, and then when the witnesses talk and the videos surface they look really, really bad, and imo, untrustworthy.

 

[katydid23]

Way to many of these of late. And probably many that haven't been brought to light. It just seems way to easy to shoot and claim self defense. IMO

ETA and if someone with a bat is charging at me 20 ft away .... I'm going to run like hell.

You are allowed to run away from a crazy man with a bat. But the cops were called there to stop the guy with the bat. Do you want the cops to run from him?

 

[katydid23]

Every American is afforded due process. It isn't up to gun-happy LE to decide who deserves it and who does not.

Of course they are not. But if they go out to arrest someone and that person runs and then begins fighting them, then the cops have the right to defend themselves.

 

[kimlynn]

You are allowed to run away from a crazy man with a bat. But the cops were called there to stop the guy with the bat. Do you want the cops to run from him?

I think a retreat for a bit to check out the situation would have been appropriate.IMO

ETA not to leave the scene but to step back to see who was who and what was going on.