Another unarmed man shot and killed by policeman

[Spartacus Sully]

I know other opinions really don't process with you, but I'll say it again. The minute you initiate physical contact with anyone, your right to draw a gun after that fact shout be revoked.

his story is stupid, a well educated officer wouldn't "move closer" to a visible agitated individual, especially given he dosnt know if the individual is armed. the individual would have to be on the ground or there would have to be backup right there before an educated officer would ever approach an individual who just put a brick through their cruiser windshield.

charging in isnt the act of some one trying to arrest some one for putting a brick through your window, charging in is the act of an uneducated vengeful idiot looking to get back at the ass hole who just put a brick through their windshield.

[Bushbaby]

his story is stupid, a well educated officer wouldn't "move closer" to a visible agitated individual, especially given he dosnt know if the individual is armed. the individual would have to be on the ground or there would have to be backup right there before an educated officer would ever approach an individual who just put a brick through their cruiser windshield.

charging in isnt the act of some one trying to arrest some one for putting a brick through your window, charging in is the act of an uneducated vengeful idiot looking to get back at the ass hole who just put a brick through their windshield.

Everything about that ordeal is stupid. The officer got physical 1st. Bottom line. If it was mandatory that once you get (physical 1st), your operating of a concealed weapon is revoked, I bet you wouldn't initiate contact anymore.

A lot of people who carry concealed weapons legally literally itch for confrontation. Some even escalate the violence by getting physical 1st. This cop did that. Once you touch someone in a threatening manner, the majority of the times people will respond negatively. Then you get to shoot them. Shouldn't be allowed after you make 1st contact.

[Spartacus Sully]

Everything about that ordeal is stupid. The officer got physical 1st. Bottom line. If it was mandatory that once you get (physical 1st), your operating of a concealed weapon is revoked, I bet you wouldn't initiate contact anymore.

A lot of people who carry concealed weapons legally literally itch for confrontation. Some even escalate the violence by getting physical 1st. This cop did that. Once you touch someone in a threatening manner, the majority of the times people will respond negatively. Then you get to shoot them. Shouldn't be allowed after you make 1st contact.

the only time a cop should be allowed to kill some one is in self defense.

their only special rights should be to the equipment provided and the education they gained at the academy.

[sleazyfellow]

How'd he know that was the officers car, and why the hell take a piss on it for revenge? Lol.

Anyways, not going to make headlines like the brown story, first it's Chicago second the guy who shot him was black.

[Mike Haynes]

Perhaps Cuauhtémoc1520 is right, some of these policemen are too quick to shoot.

This happened in Chicago a few days ago and this time the cop was off duty, but still had his gun.

Mannnn looks like this dude should have walked away once the guns came out....I got into a scuffle with two cops in GA after a traffic stop....the moment he reached for his gun, my life flashed before my eyes....I apologized and immediately stopped resisting.

[megas30]

Lmao......a non-white officer trying to use "the fear for my life" defense. This man is going straight to jail.

[squealpiggy]

I know other opinions really don't process with you, but I'll say it again. The minute you initiate physical contact with anyone, your right to draw a gun after that fact shout be revoked.

And I'm saying that such a broad stroke would be unworkable from a legal standpoint. Some guy breaks into your house, you push him out the front door and he pulls out a knife. Unarmed combat? Some guy steals from you and you chase after him to get it back, you grab the item he stole and he pulls out a gun, do you have to be all Neo? Bear in mind that I don't agree with widely available concealed carry permits.

Everything about that ordeal is stupid. The officer got physical 1st. Bottom line. If it was mandatory that once you get (physical 1st), your operating of a concealed weapon is revoked, I bet you wouldn't initiate contact anymore.

A lot of people who carry concealed weapons legally literally itch for confrontation. Some even escalate the violence by getting physical 1st. This cop did that. Once you touch someone in a threatening manner, the majority of the times people will respond negatively. Then you get to shoot them. Shouldn't be allowed after you make 1st contact.

You see I agree with much of this. I think that people mistake their concealed weapon for extra balls and deliberately get themselves into dangerous situations they would otherwise seek to avoid. That's how guns are marketed in the United States. The phrase used is "self defense" but what the target audience is supposed to think is "avenging gunman". Guns are marketed towards people that want to be Dirty Harry, not people who want to be Shaggy from Scooby Doo. As a result it's not surprising when you get a self-described "good guy with a gun" getting into a public shoot-out with another self-described "good guy with a gun" over a parking spot.

I understand that it will never be procedure but surely in a situation like that when the unarmed man is walking towards him, it was certainly possible to pull off a subduing shot?

It might be. But there's a problem: Shoot someone in the leg and you have almost as good a chance of killing them as you would shooting them in the chest. Hit the femoral artery and they will bleed out in under two minutes. And then you have to go in front of a jury and explain why you felt like your life was insufficiently threatened to shoot to kill yet you still opened fire with a deadly weapon.

That's one aspect of self defense law that is clear. You can only employ deadly force when confronted with a deadly threat. And pulling the trigger of a gun is always deadly force, regardless of whether or not you're aiming for a leg.

Surely it would be a good police officer who would not stick to protocol but try his best to use common sense to save lives? Did the officer even have to act under protocol since this was a street altercation? He just seems like a pretty scummy human being in general to be honest, as shown by not caring much about the guy he just shot.

Considering that all of the information about this incident was an anecdote posted on a message forum we have literally no information about the actual confrontation.

the only time a cop should be allowed to kill some one is in self defense.

In self defense or in the defense of members of the public under their protection, those are indeed the only allowances for the use of deadly force. Most of the time the officers and their lawyers are able to make a reasonable case that they were acting in self defense and in good faith so mostly they get acquitted.

their only special rights should be to the equipment provided and the education they gained at the academy.

You see citizens have the right to arrest somebody they catch in the act of committing an indictable offense. Police officers have the powers of arrest over people they have a reasonable suspicion of having committed an offense, or reasonable suspicion of arresting somebody who is about to commit an indictable offence. That is necessary. Here's an example:

You work in a store. You see a guy stealing something. You are entitled to arrest that person. However if you didn't see him but saw him commit the theft on video then you would not be allowed to arrest him the next week. A police officer can.

If you restricted officers to no special rights or powers then they wouldn't be able to arrest a rapist that they see on the street without first obtaining a warrant for that specific person. Wanted posters? Pointless. Citizens can't arrest people on the basis of warrants. Officers can.

The reason citizens can't arrest someone on the basis of warrants is that let's say they saw a warrant a week ago and then they see the suspect. They grab him and call the authorities. Authorities arrive and oops, that suspect turned himself in the day after the warrant was issued, he is out on bail and now that citizen is guilty of wrongful arrest and probably assault.

Officers have the power to detain that suspect, figure out that he is on bail and let him go. They need that power.

[Inkanyamba]

Mannnn looks like this dude should have walked away once the guns came out....I got into a scuffle with two cops in GA after a traffic stop....the moment he reached for his gun, my life flashed before my eyes....I apologized and immediately stopped resisting.

Tell me more. Where your rights violated? Why did they pull you out of your car for a simple traffic stop in the first place? You should have recorded their actions. I know police don't like it when they're being filmed, especially by minorities but it's important to always film the police.

[Inkanyamba]

Lmao......a non-white officer trying to use "the fear for my life" defense. This man is going straight to jail.

Ain't that the truth.

[Da Machine]

The cop initiated a fight, then pulled out a gun. The dude who got shot looked like his time was coming anyway, but this was ****ed up.