Stop, Stop, Stop. That is FANTASY. This has already escalated to a lethal force encounter. There is NO LTL option at this point. After someone has already tried to kill you once, and comes back at you again, you do not abandon the lethal option and try a LTL option. With a LTL option you get exactly ONE try, and then you are screwed. If you miss you're dead. If it fails to have the desired affect as it often does then you're dead. At that point it is kill or be killed - literally. (again, no such thing as "non-lethal" - your continued use of that term simply tells us how little you understand the subject) You have seen too many movies and have had too little training and experience in these matters to comprehend these issues. You LITERALLY have no clue what you are talking about. You never, NEVER, try a LTL option when some one is charging you after trying to take your gun. Not unless you want to die.
30 feet is actually pretty far. I can agree with an imminent danger being 10 feet away but not with 30 feet. That is quite a distance and someone that large cannot cover that much ground in only a couple seconds.
Not if a person is shot few times already, i assume being shot would take him little longer than that. But anyhow why would you keep running towards the officer, it doesn't make any sense, why not lay on the ground? If a guy shot u few times why would you literally keep asking for more? Of course if the story that Wilson told is true.
He was apparently 30 feet away when the shooting started and 10 or so feet away when the shooting stopped. As I said, it happens quickly.
Why is it always the same people (SamFisher, Northside Storm, Rocket River and some lunatics) being on the wrong side of every single argument? I guess the internet needs some people like that to keep itself going. If nobody takes the idiot's position, whom can the reasonable people argue with?
The illogical person here is the guy who robbed a store for a cigar and walked in the middle of the street instead of a sidewalk.
What, in the last few years, has made you think that the cops will follow the rules? This is just the tip of a 5,000 case-strong iceberg, a tip America seems willing to accept again and again. One time the victim is a thug, the other time a bandit, the other time a kid who doesn't know how to play with toy guns. I think cops should be armed at the lowest level of force needed and the rules should be stricter. I'm willing to accept that means guns for the vast majority of people, but the option and training for LTL should be there. I can see why we disagree, and maybe it's a product of the experience I've had contrasted with yours---but I think violence should never be the first answer. I've left this unsaid, but might as well say it too that I think the people who are violently protesting this are in the wrong. I understand their anger but violence will only lead to more violence.
Not everyone reacts the same way. Some people get shot once and die. Some people you have to empty a mag into just to slow down, and they survive. His story was corroborated by multiple eyewitnesses in the grand jury proceedings. As for why someone would keep charging after that... A sane person wouldn't. Someone who was high and in the grasp of an adrenaline-fueled rage most definitely will act like that. Happens fairly often, actually.
He didn't have his hands up and if you were paying attention to the case, you'd know that. If he hadn't been a complete and total moron who attacked a cop, he'd be alive. Taking someone down non-lethally is a luxury, the best way to make sure cops don't kill you is to not attack them. Completely and totally irrelevant to the case. He wasn't killed for petty crime, he was killed for attacking a cop and you repeating that nonsense won't change the facts. His family had a responsibility to him to ensure that he didn't become a criminal, they failed him as he failed society. No one else had that responsibility to him. He was part of the problem and the world is better now that he's dead.
Hell, why couldn't the dude have driven away, and asked for backup that could have put it into a LTL situation? Probably because it's the norm that you have to shoot to kill to resolve situations.
Tip of an iceberg? The cop DID follow the rules, that's why he wasn't indicted. Really, your idea of disarming the cops... Not worth a discussion. DumbDumbDumbTooDumbForBambiDumb.
LOL, because cops are in the business of driving away when being violently assaulted, right? Your ignorance in these matters is just staggering. Too many movies.
Well the bullet wounds were all at different distances, but they say that the ballistics were consistent with the officer's story.
Their it is folks. Bottom line. We need to change the system. Race is a component but the entire police system needs to be shaken up. Rules of engagement are too loose for police.
