The police officers say he did and a gun was found on him, but his family says he didn't have one. As to being allowed to carry, a felon isn't allowed to carry a gun in any situation and when cops tell you to put down your gun and you don't, things might end badly for you. Until we see the other videos from dashcams and body cameras we probably won't know exactly what he did before the black officer opened fire. What's weird is that the police weren't even there for him, they were trying to serve a warrant on someone else but he probably got spooked because he was illegally carrying and was about to head back to prison so soon after getting out.
Generally fired from shotguns and considered "less lethal", depending on where you get hit, you can still die though (about 1 person a year dies from being shot by a bean bag round every year since they were introduced). Also, you'd have to have people carrying around shotguns for that to be an option. I like that you are thinking though.
Here's the deal. In the video and pictures, it looks like there isn't a gun there, and then 50 seconds later it looks there is one there. His wife said that he wasn't armed, and saying they wouldn't need to shoot the guy, that he had just taken his medication. They shout and then shoot him. Then after that, rather than administer first aid or any kind of assistance they put the dying guy in handcuffs. That's seems immoral. This was a guy who wasn't committing any crime, and wasn't the reason the police were there in the first place. The first cops that swarmed the place weren't in marked vehicles and it's entirely possible that the man was initially worried he was being robbed, or something else was going on. This shooting may end up being legally justified, but it doesn't make the right thing. Even if it is justified by the law, things need to change. Police need to be trained to de-escalate, if they suspect a person is armed, they should communicate and find cover, not rush up and put themselves in potential danger which then "justifies" the use of force. The video shows less than one minute of interaction between the cops and the man who was killed. Had they simply tried to stay safe and communicate with the man, the death could have been avoided. It isn't enough to for police to keep being able to kill people because they felt threatened. There needs to be more instances where the police are actually correct. It should be where they are actually really threatened before using deadly force, not just feel threatened. I don't want to put police in more danger. Even if a guy has a gun, it doesn't make it okay to shoot them. With open carry in different places, people are allowed to have guns. It shouldn't make it open season on those people. There is a difference in someone having a gun, and someone threatening law enforcement or others with a gun. If there is training and it becomes common practice to use de-escalation, and taking likely circumstances (like having just taking medicine for a brain injury etc.) into account. These actions on a wide scale over time might actually help to improve relations between communities and police. And that will make both civilians in that community and law enforcement officers safer.
First of all, he WAS committing a crime by being a felon carrying a gun. That's a felony that would have put him back in prison for several more years and is probably why he wouldn't put the gun down and go peacefully. Secondly, when they were trying to get him to put the gun down, that's trying to de-escalate the situation, he refused to comply. Can't do anything about that really. It's not open season on open carry people, but if they are openly carrying and an officer asks them to put their hands up and be disarmed, they have to comply. If they are carrying a gun out in the open in their hands and an officer tells them to drop it, they have to drop it. Simple as that. With most people, it won't be a problem, with multiple felons who have a history of resisting arrest.....well it's a problem.
Rushing up to him yelling coming from unmarked cars is the opposite of de-escalation. Shouting to put the gun down could be the exact thing car-jackers or robbers would do as well, and that isn't de-escalation. The problem is that deadly force wasn't the last resort. It simply wasn't. Like I said, they could have communicated from safe(er) cover, and had time to digest the fact that he suffered from a brain injury and had just taken medication. The wife could have spoken to him, and possibly gotten him to proceed in a way that allowed the officers to not feel threatened. The man would have still been covered by the armed law enforcement while they were behind some sort of cover. But instead they inserted themselves into danger, and then surprise, surprise... they felt endangered. If the guy from "Man on a Wire" documentary had fallen off the wire, he or his surviving family shouldn't really have a case to sue because he put himself into danger. There are definitely times when law enforcement officers have to put themselves in danger. This wasn't one of those times. Deadly force should only be the last option. There were other options these officers could have chosen that most likely would have brought this incident to an end without the man being killed. We don't know that he had a gun. He could have. But the police weren't there to investigate this guy, and he wasn't harming anyone.
LOL, yeah this is right up there with "We don't know that the moon landing was real" or "we don't know that 9/11 wasn't an inside job" or "we don't know that Obama was born in America". If you want to roll with crazy conspiracy theories then it makes this a much different conversation. What we do know is that the man was illegally carrying a gun and he refused to comply with the orders of officers. We also know that he's a multiple felon who has done serious time before and he has a history or resisting arrest and aggrivated assault with a deadly weapon. Pretty much everything else we don't know for sure or is crazy conspiracy theorist BS.
Actually we don't know that he was carrying a gun. At one point a gun wasn't there and the man was down. Then in a photo the gun was there. We know that his wife calmly told officers that he didn't have a gun. That being said, he certainly could have had a gun. There was a photo of what looked like a gun. So it was possible. But again, I'm not talking about whether or not the shooting was legally justified. Whether or not the man had a gun doesn't make a shooting the only possible outcome. I'm talking about the shooting not being necessary. It wasn't. And as long as unnecessary shootings are going to keep happening, there will continue to be problems and an increase in tensions that puts both law enforcement officers and community members at an increased risk. I'm talking about improving the current state of things and making it safer for folks. I'm not talking about whether or not there are ways that this could end up being legally justified.
If the shooting being legally justified isn't enough for you then that's okay but the justifiable shooting of a criminal with a long rap sheet that wouldn't put a gun down shouldn't bother most people. The shooting of someone on PCP shouldn't bother people. When we are living in a world that gets upset about things like this, it's clear that people are just looking to be upset and don't have any legitimate reasons so they are going out of their way to find whatever excuse they can.
Actually the killing of anyone that didn't need to be killed where deadly force was used as something other than a last resort should upset everyone. Using PCP isn't deserving of death. Being a criminal isn't an automatic death sentence. I don't believe in the death penalty, but even our legal system in places that does have the death penalty allows it only in certain situations, not just for being a criminal. If you think taking of lives shouldn't be a last resort, then that is on you, and you are entitled to feel that way if you wish. But I would disagree with you about whether or not that would bother most people. The bottom line is that I'm talking about ways to keep people safe. Everyone should want to live in a society with less tension between communities and law enforcement. Everyone should want to live in a society where both law enforcement officers and community members are safer. Police officers needlessly inserting themselves into a dangerous situation isn't a good idea for law enforcement. When that kind of recklessness ends the loss of a civilian's life, people should be bothered.
I don't understand the people who don't believe Scott was carrying a gun. The cops are yards away from him and they give multiple commands to drop the gun. But the armchair experts are denying the presence of a gun based on a cell phone recording from 30 yards away. There more than likely was a gun. Now as to whether the shooting was justified is another matter and harder to tell without more evidence. We can't tell if Scott was in any way a threat to those officers.
I don't think people should make up their mind either way that he had or didn't have a gun at this point. There is evidence of both possibilities that he did have one, and that he didn't have one. The shooting may well have been legally justified, but that doesn't mean it was the best way to handle the situation.
Those people caused their own deaths with their actions. When you choose to do drugs like PCP, you are accepting that death might be a result of that action. When you are illegally carrying a gun and you refuse to drop it when ordered by police, you are acting in a manner that will likely result in death. No one forced them to do those things, so it was their choice and their death is the result. That's life.
I mean, there's even Scott's DNA evidence and fingerprints on the gun. I think we can conclusively say that he had a gun.
It almost certainly is true that their actions played a part in their own death. But it doesn't mean that the only way out of either of those situations was the death of a stranded motorist, and a guy with a brain injury who had just taken his medication. There was a safer way to handle both of those situations. The law enforcement officers who are professionals need to handle things better.
True, and there is also the police photo of what looks like a gun at his feet. Yet in the video taken from the phone shows there is not a gun at his feet and the man is already shot and down. So it does raise the question where did that gun come from? The wife said he didn't have a weapon and didn't have a gun in the video. So yes, there is certainly evidence that shows he could well have had a gun. But there is also evidence that shows he may not have had a gun. I wouldn't be surprised at all if he did have a gun. But again it doesn't matter. Plain clothes officers approaching a car with a gun drawn emerging from unmarked vehicles could be frightening. The officers didn't have to handle the situation that way.
He wasn't stranded, he was high. His car was idling and he ran out saying it was going to blow up. That's why you don't do those kinds of drugs. As to it not being the "only way", sure, it might have been handled differently, but it wasn't and it very likely wasn't wrongful. As to the "guy with a brain injury", you are talking about the multiple felon with a history of assaulting people with deadly weapons who illegally had a gun and refused to drop it right? By "safer way" to handle the situations you mean safer for the felons, more dangerous for the officers. I don't think they should risk their lives just to ensure that the unresponsive guy on PCP or the felon that refuses to drop his gun really doesn't mean any harm. I'm just saying that if you were in that position, you'd do the same and probably have done it sooner.
That's exactly what I'm not saying. I'm talking about it being safer for the police. If you think someone might have a gun, don't have unmarked cars rush up, and plain clothes officers rush up with guns drawn. It would be much safer for police to draw their weapons, and take cover and to establish communication. That actually would make police safer. The fact that the guy who ended up dead would have also been safer is a bonus. I know that some law enforcement receive training on just that. There are videos of the conclusion of car chases where the police stay back until the suspect is out of the car. They keep him covered but they don't all just rush up with their guns drawn.
Which could have been planted there by the police if he had a gun to began with.If the officer that shot him is justified show the dam video why wait so long to show it.
