New Orleans Police Involved In Justifiable Shooting

The Central Scrutinizer · 27th December 2005, 08:16 AM

http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/12/26/pol...ing/index.html

It was justifiable, in case anyone is wondering.

hammegk · 27th December 2005, 08:32 AM

Per tv talking heads, man in suit, surrounded by 10 cops with guns drawn, waves 3" blade pocketknife, will not drop per command, shot 7 times ...

Engagement policies just gets stranger & stranger ...

Bjorn · 27th December 2005, 08:35 AM

Originally Posted by The Central Scrutinizer

http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/12/26/pol...ing/index.html

It was justifiable, in case anyone is wondering.

And yet ...

Quote:

After a standoff that lasted at least several minutes, during which several police officers were pointing their guns at the man, he lunged within a foot of one of them, Adams said.

Since he didn't have a bomb, not even a gun, wasn't this a time when the police could have aimed at his legs - if they had to shoot him?

HarryKeogh · 27th December 2005, 08:43 AM

Originally Posted by Bjorn

Since he didn't have a bomb, not even a gun, wasn't this a time when the police could have aimed at his legs - if they had to shoot him?

or taser him?

they did Mace him though to no effect.

The Central Scrutinizer · 27th December 2005, 08:47 AM

Originally Posted by Bjorn

And yet ...

Since he didn't have a bomb, not even a gun, wasn't this a time when the police could have aimed at his legs - if they had to shoot him?

Interesting you should mention that. On CNN they were interviewing a guy that said police are trained to aim for the "center of mass" (or something like that). In other words, when a guy with a knife is lunging at you, the adrenaline is flowing, and the hands are shaking, you aim for the biggest target. You don't have time to say "Excuse me Mr. Man-with-a-knife. Could you hold still while I try to shoot the knife out of your hand?"

The Central Scrutinizer · 27th December 2005, 08:48 AM

Originally Posted by HarryKeogh

or taser him?

they did Mace him though to no effect.

I don't think Taser guns are standard issue. So they have to call in someone that has one, and they person may be 10 minutes away. I suppose it he has stood still for 10 minutes, it would have worked.

HarryKeogh · 27th December 2005, 09:03 AM

if the cops could predict the future: "ok, he's going to lunge in a few moments, you shoot him in the leg everyone else stand by."

what probably happened: "let's not shoot this guy unless we have to" (man lunges)..."what the!? shoot!!!"

I do think they were justified in their actions but perhaps it should have been handled differently but hindsight is 20/20.

Bjorn · 27th December 2005, 09:14 AM

Originally Posted by The Central Scrutinizer

Interesting you should mention that. On CNN they were interviewing a guy that said police are trained to aim for the "center of mass" (or something like that). In other words, when a guy with a knife is lunging at you, the adrenaline is flowing, and the hands are shaking, you aim for the biggest target. You don't have time to say "Excuse me Mr. Man-with-a-knife. Could you hold still while I try to shoot the knife out of your hand?"

I understand that, and would certainly aim for the biggest target myself if someone was attacking me with a knife.

However ...

Quote:

a standoff that lasted at least several minutes, during which several police officers were pointing their guns at the man

It looks like the police had "several minutes" when the guy wasn't attacking anyone, although he had a knife in the hand and wouldn't drop to the ground.

Instead of waiting for him to attack (and blam, blam, blam, kill him) why didn't anyone aim for his legs during those "several minutes"?

The Central Scrutinizer · 27th December 2005, 09:15 AM

Originally Posted by HarryKeogh

if the cops could predict the future: "ok, he's going to lunge in a few moments, you shoot him in the leg everyone else stand by."

what probably happened: "let's not shoot this guy unless we have to" (man lunges)..."what the!? shoot!!!"

I do think they were justified in their actions but perhaps it should have been handled differently but hindsight is 20/20.

Yep. And I think if they did the "shoot him in the leg" thing, then you would have the same crowd whining "Why did they shoot him the leg? He was just standing there"

The Central Scrutinizer · 27th December 2005, 09:16 AM

Originally Posted by Bjorn

Instead of waiting for him to attack (and blam, blam, blam, kill him) why didn't anyone aim for his legs during those "several minutes"?

Originally Posted by The Central Scrutinizer

Yep. And I think if they did the "shoot him in the leg" thing, then you would have the same crowd whining "Why did they shoot him the leg? He was just standing there"

I must be psychic.

Just thinking · 27th December 2005, 09:18 AM

Originally Posted by hammegk

Per tv talking heads, man in suit, surrounded by 10 cops with guns drawn, waves 3" blade pocketknife, will not drop per command, shot 7 times ...

Engagement policies just gets stranger & stranger ...

Ever consider what a sharp 3" blade could do slicing across your neck? In all the likely confusion of a lunge and struggle (with no shots being fired) and a knife present in the hands of an uncooperative, the above scenario I just mentioned is not all that impossible.

Bjorn · 27th December 2005, 09:19 AM

Originally Posted by The Central Scrutinizer

I must be psychic.

Why? Am I a whining crowd or something?

The Central Scrutinizer · 27th December 2005, 10:07 AM

Originally Posted by Bjorn

Why? Am I a whining crowd or something?

No.

But there are those who will criticize no matter what the police do. Agreed?

Cleon · 27th December 2005, 10:11 AM

Originally Posted by The Central Scrutinizer

No.

But there are those who will criticize no matter what the police do. Agreed?

And there are those who will justify whatever the police do.

brodski · 27th December 2005, 10:25 AM

I am certainly no police apologist, but how stupid do you have to be to lunge with a knife at a police office who is pointing a gun at you, and is backed up by several other, all ready to "put you down" to protect their own?

It's either terminal stupidity or suicide by cop.

That is if the reports are accurate of course.

Maybe the cops could have tackled him without shooting him, but that would require extensive retraining and a reorganization of the criminal justice system in the US. American cops go armed, and are trained in the most effective use of those arms. If you except a routinely armed police force, then this is the kind of situation where it is perfectly acceptable for the cops to shoot. Which s one of the very many reasons I oppose the routine arming of police in my country, because our bobbies are expected to be able to subdue a knife wielding assailant without resorting to leathal force, and they get the training and equipment to achieve this. US cops face more threats to their life, and are given appropriate tools to deal with those threats, unfortunately in practice this meas that cops in the us are More likely to kill an assailant that unarmed cops are. Still, if you threaten the life of an armed officer what do you expect?

I wont be loosing any sleep over this case, unlike the Harry Stanly or Jean Charles de Menezes cases.

The Central Scrutinizer · 27th December 2005, 10:48 AM

Originally Posted by Cleon

And there are those who will justify whatever the police do.

True. But when you wave a knife at a cop, after being told repeatedly to drop it, you can't complain about the outcome.

Cleon · 27th December 2005, 10:52 AM

Originally Posted by The Central Scrutinizer

True. But when you wave a knife at a cop, after being told repeatedly to drop it, you can't complain about the outcome.

Well, typically when you're fatally shot, you tend to have some difficulty complaining about the outcome anyway...

fishbob · 27th December 2005, 10:59 AM

Originally Posted by HarryKeogh

they did Mace him though to no effect.

He must have been a robot or a space alien then, because that stuff will definitely affect humans.

corplinx · 27th December 2005, 11:00 AM

Originally Posted by fishbob

He must have been a robot or a space alien then.

He was pepper sprayed, not maced. And he partially covered his face.

Grammatron · 27th December 2005, 11:02 AM

Originally Posted by fishbob

He must have been a robot or a space alien then, because that stuff will definitely affect humans.

Depending if he was on drugs or not.

The Central Scrutinizer · 27th December 2005, 11:20 AM

Originally Posted by Cleon

Well, typically when you're fatally shot, you tend to have some difficulty complaining about the outcome anyway...

Which is as it should be.

Skeptic · 27th December 2005, 11:24 AM

Originally Posted by Cleon

And there are those who will justify whatever the police do.

Yes, but whatever you think of the police, shooting a man who lunges at you with a knife after being told for a few minutes to stop it is rather justifiable.

I agree with those who think it's probably "suicide by cop", which is more common that one might imagine.

fishbob · 27th December 2005, 11:25 AM

Originally Posted by corplinx

He was pepper sprayed, not maced. And he partially covered his face.

Oh. Then he must have been a robot or a space alien then, because that stuff will definitely affect humans with partially covered faces.

Just goofing a little. There is something not right with the report where it says he was pepper sprayed with no effect.

Freakshow · 27th December 2005, 11:43 AM

Originally Posted by fishbob

Oh. Then he must have been a robot or a space alien then, because that stuff will definitely affect humans with partially covered faces.

Just goofing a little. There is something not right with the report where it says he was pepper sprayed with no effect.

Nope. It happens. Especially when people are under the influence of certain drugs, such as PCP. I've seen a Taser demonstration video that showed police hitting someone with pepper-spray (the guy was on PCP), and it had no effect other than making him blink. So they used a Taser on him, and that worked.

Pepper spray is far from being 100% effective.

ETA: Found it. http://www.personal-selfdefense-onli...deo_center.htm Look at the "PCP user LASD" video.

Bjorn · 27th December 2005, 01:56 PM

Originally Posted by The Central Scrutinizer

No.

But there are those who will criticize no matter what the police do. Agreed?

Sure. We just had a thread here about the guy who was shot and killed by air marshals, and a typical defense of the marshals' actions went like this (by Skeptic):

"people had 15 seconds to choose if they risk a plane being blown up"

I can understand the reasoning in that case - it happened fast, it was confusing, he "reached into his bag" and so on. In the present case we had 5-10 police officers around a guy with a knife in his hand for several minutes, and yet the reason for shooting him is basically the same: What are you supposed to do if someone lunges a knife at you? Maybe you could shoot him in the leg before it got that far.

You wrote

And I think if they did the "shoot him in the leg" thing, then you would have the same crowd whining "Why did they shoot him the leg? He was just standing there"

I think the opposite - I think most people would say "good, at least they didn't kill him". I might be wrong.

Freakshow · 27th December 2005, 02:09 PM

Originally Posted by The Central Scrutinizer

Yep. And I think if they did the "shoot him in the leg" thing, then you would have the same crowd whining "Why did they shoot him the leg? He was just standing there"

They already do...
http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/engAMR510671997
http://www.amnestyusa.org/countries/...256F190042408D

What exactly do these people want the police to do? (Rhetorical question...I already know. And I'm glad Amnesty Int. is not in charge of my local police force.)

The Central Scrutinizer · 27th December 2005, 02:10 PM

Originally Posted by Bjorn

I think the opposite - I think most people would say "good, at least they didn't kill him". I might be wrong.

I think you are wrong!

Manny · 27th December 2005, 02:15 PM

Heh. Even that assumes that the guy doesn't die from being shot in the leg. If the cops hit the wrong artery, or if he had pre-existing health problem, or if the ambulance gets stuck in traffic or any of a thousand other ifs and all of a sudden people are saying "why did the cops kill the guy? He was 20 feet away and posed no immediate threat!"

Giz · 27th December 2005, 02:15 PM

Originally Posted by The Central Scrutinizer

I think you are wrong!

I think the lawyers would have liked it.

LW · 27th December 2005, 02:26 PM

Originally Posted by Bjorn

Maybe you could shoot him in the leg before it got that far.

Perhaps they hoped that they could in the end defuse the situation without shooting at all.

And mind you, outside movies shooting at a leg is not exactly a harmless way of disarmament. A single shot that hits the femoral artery [I knew that the anatomy book that my girlfriend forgot here when she left to visit her family would be useful for something] may be lethal. A single shot that crushes leg bones may leave the victim crippled for life, especially if it hits the knee.

Tmy · 27th December 2005, 02:28 PM

The guy appeared to be mentally ill. So shouting commands probably wouldnt do much. Cant reason with a crazy, thats what makes them CRAZY!

It looked like 1/2 the police force had him surrounded. And he ends up with 9 bullets in him??? Sorry but thats f'upd. basically he was dead as soon as he picked up the knife. Someone shouldve taken his leg out instead of letting it progress to a fatal shooting.

Skeptic · 27th December 2005, 02:40 PM

I can understand the reasoning in that case - it happened fast, it was confusing, he "reached into his bag" and so on. In the present case we had 5-10 police officers around a guy with a knife in his hand for several minutes, and yet the reason for shooting him is basically the same: What are

The crucial difference which you are missing is that in this case the police knew he had a knife, not a bomb, so there is more time and ways to neutralize him as he is not an imminent threat to others (though wielding a knife on a plane would still justify deadly force.) The fact that they waited for several minutes and tried mace and other things first shows they would probably not have shot him if he calmed down.

But then he actually attacked them with the knife--then, you only have a few seconds and are at point-blank range, so it is an imminent threat; you have no time to pause and think if you can hit their hand or leg, which is a lot harder, incidentally, than the movies make it appear.

It's a totally different situation in far more ways than merely the time of the incident. The police acted correctly in both cases.

P.S.

I, for one, would much rather give the police the power to shoot me dead if I attack them, than the power to shoot me in the leg if they think I might attack them in a few minutes and didn't want the situation to "get that far". The second is, in effect, the right to shoot in the leg anybody for rude behavior.

Tmy · 27th December 2005, 02:54 PM

Yeah but it looked to me that the guy was nuts. Are you saying the only solution was to shoot him dead?

I think its lame that a large police department like NOrleans, would be without non-lethal methods. Its a party town for christsakes. Im sure they have been bag guns and rubber bullets available.

luchog · 27th December 2005, 03:10 PM

Originally Posted by fishbob

He must have been a robot or a space alien then, because that stuff will definitely affect humans.

Not always, no. See below.

Originally Posted by Grammatron

Depending if he was on drugs or not.

Not necessarily. It is possible for a normal person to be completely immune to Mace (CS agent) and have a high tolerance to pepper spray.

I know this not only from reading (the info is easily available if you so a little homework); but from my own personal experience. I am highly resistant to Mace. It takes 3-5 times the normal level and duration of exposure for it to have the desired effect on me. My basic training senior drill seargent was completely immune to it, as was one of the trainees in my unit.

I also have a somewhat higher resistance to pepper spray than the average person.

When pepper spray first became widely available for law enforcement, there was a concern voiced by police in, i think it was, Texas or SoCal, concerning it's effectiveness in the predominantly hispanic populations. The theory being that their high consumption of capsacinoids would give them a high tolerance for the pepper spray. That turned out not to be the case; but some individuals do have a naturally higher resistance to it's effects.

But yes, various drugs can also lend a high level of resistance, or even temporary immunity.

luchog · 27th December 2005, 03:23 PM

Originally Posted by Tmy

Someone shouldve taken his leg out instead of letting it progress to a fatal shooting.

Aside from the refutations that Freakshow and LW have already posted, have you ever tried to do this? Under similar circumstances? It is very difficult to hit a leg, even at point-blank range; [b]especially[b] in an urban setting where you're worried about potential civilian casualties.

You can claim that police should be trained to do so. No, they not only should not, they cannot be trained to do this. Unlike you, I actually have relevant training and experience; and can tell you that what you see in the movies is just so much garbage. No one with a scrap of intelligence is going to aim for a limb, even a leg. Even stationary, it's a difficult target. Moving, you can forget it unless you have a truly legendary marksmanship and combat ability.

Quote:

I think its lame that a large police department like NOrleans, would be without non-lethal methods. Its a party town for christsakes. Im sure they have been bag guns and rubber bullets available.

Do you have any experience at all with these sorts of things? I'm guessing no. I'd put a lot of money on it. Rubber bullets are moderately effective when used with other methods for crowd control. They are completely useless when dealing with individual violent criminals. Particularly nutcases and those under the influence of any of several different drugs. Even a reasonably fit normal person can shrug off a volley of rubber bullets fired at point blank range, and still move fast enough to stick a knife in your chest before you have time for a second volley. Someone with a high pain tolerance, or defective pain response, can do so even while being fired upon.

Plus, depending on the type of rubber bullet and the strength of the round being used, they are potentially lethal at short range.

Bjorn · 27th December 2005, 04:16 PM

Originally Posted by Skeptic

I can understand the reasoning in that case - it happened fast, it was confusing, he "reached into his bag" and so on. In the present case we had 5-10 police officers around a guy with a knife in his hand for several minutes, and yet the reason for shooting him is basically the same: What are

The crucial difference which you are missing is that in this case the police knew he had a knife, not a bomb, so there is more time and ways to neutralize him as he is not an imminent threat to others (though wielding a knife on a plane would still justify deadly force.)

I didn't miss that at all, it was in fact my point.

Originally Posted by Skeptic

The fact that they waited for several minutes and tried mace and other things first shows they would probably not have shot him if he calmed down.

I cant find any 'other things' than pepper spray in the story, and for "several minutes" after that was used, nothing much happened.

Originally Posted by Skeptic

But then he actually attacked them with the knife--then, you only have a few seconds and are at point-blank range, so it is an imminent threat; you have no time to pause and think if you can hit their hand or leg, which is a lot harder, incidentally, than the movies make it appear.

I've already mentioned that I wouldn't hesitate to shoot someone who attacked me with a knife, small or large. The question is what other means they could have used in those minutes when he didn't attack.

Bjorn · 27th December 2005, 04:24 PM

Originally Posted by Freakshow

They already do...
http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/engAMR510671997
http://www.amnestyusa.org/countries/...256F190042408D

What exactly do these people want the police to do? (Rhetorical question...I already know. And I'm glad Amnesty Int. is not in charge of my local police force.)

Your links aren't very relevant. The second one is about pepper spray used against peaceful demonstrators, in the first one (about tasers) Amnesty states that it "acknowledges the importance of developing non-lethal or "less than lethal" force options to decrease the risk of death or injury inherent in the use of firearms or other impact weapons such as batons" - but questions if it is sometimes used when not necessary (on a handcuffed person according to their example).

Tmy · 27th December 2005, 04:44 PM

Originally Posted by luchog

Do you have any experience at all with these sorts of things? I'm guessing no. .

Your right I dont. Ive been shooting before. Im not a professional but an accurate shot at 10 feet aint all that hard.

But Im guessing there should be somthing to handle a similar situation. A friggen net, or bolo, tranquilizer, a boomerang, dog doo on a stick, WHATEVER. It seems that shoot to kill is a pretty lousy policy compared to "try n shoot in the leg." Its not like their was only one police officer around. There were like a dozen of them. Youd think they couldve come up with somthing a little less leathal.

No one had a tazer?

Freakshow · 27th December 2005, 04:48 PM

Originally Posted by Tmy

Your right I dont. Ive been shooting before. Im not a professional but an accurate shot at 10 feet aint all that hard.

It is when it is a life-or-death situation. You'd be surprised as how inaccurate trained, experienced police officers can be when their lives are on the line.

Tmy · 27th December 2005, 05:02 PM

Has anyone seen the shooting part of the video? On the news, they cut it off before the money shot.

27th December 2005, 08:16 AM	#1
The Central Scrutinizer Penultimate Amazing Pither Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: The White Zone Posts: 42,264	New Orleans Police Involved In Justifiable Shooting http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/12/26/pol...ing/index.html It was justifiable, in case anyone is wondering.
	__________________ If I see somebody with a gun on a plane? I'll kill him. Last edited by The Central Scrutinizer; 27th December 2005 at 08:18 AM.

27th December 2005, 08:32 AM	#2
hammegk Banned Join Date: Jan 2002 Posts: 8,422	Per tv talking heads, man in suit, surrounded by 10 cops with guns drawn, waves 3" blade pocketknife, will not drop per command, shot 7 times ... Engagement policies just gets stranger & stranger ...
hammegk Banned Join Date: Jan 2002 Posts: 8,422

27th December 2005, 08:35 AM	#3
Bjorn Off Topic Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: San Diego, CA Posts: 2,974	Originally Posted by The Central Scrutinizer http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/12/26/pol...ing/index.html It was justifiable, in case anyone is wondering. And yet ... Quote: After a standoff that lasted at least several minutes, during which several police officers were pointing their guns at the man, he lunged within a foot of one of them, Adams said. Since he didn't have a bomb, not even a gun, wasn't this a time when the police could have aimed at his legs - if they had to shoot him?
	__________________ Little did I know, that all those days that came and went, were my life ....

27th December 2005, 08:47 AM	#5
The Central Scrutinizer Penultimate Amazing Pither Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: The White Zone Posts: 42,264	Originally Posted by Bjorn And yet ... Since he didn't have a bomb, not even a gun, wasn't this a time when the police could have aimed at his legs - if they had to shoot him? Interesting you should mention that. On CNN they were interviewing a guy that said police are trained to aim for the "center of mass" (or something like that). In other words, when a guy with a knife is lunging at you, the adrenaline is flowing, and the hands are shaking, you aim for the biggest target. You don't have time to say "Excuse me Mr. Man-with-a-knife. Could you hold still while I try to shoot the knife out of your hand?"
	__________________ If I see somebody with a gun on a plane? I'll kill him.

27th December 2005, 08:48 AM	#6
The Central Scrutinizer Penultimate Amazing Pither Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: The White Zone Posts: 42,264	Originally Posted by HarryKeogh or taser him? they did Mace him though to no effect. I don't think Taser guns are standard issue. So they have to call in someone that has one, and they person may be 10 minutes away. I suppose it he has stood still for 10 minutes, it would have worked.
	__________________ If I see somebody with a gun on a plane? I'll kill him.

27th December 2005, 08:43 AM	#4
HarryKeogh Catholic School Survivor Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: New York, NY Posts: 11,342	Originally Posted by Bjorn Since he didn't have a bomb, not even a gun, wasn't this a time when the police could have aimed at his legs - if they had to shoot him? or taser him? they did Mace him though to no effect.

27th December 2005, 09:03 AM	#7
HarryKeogh Catholic School Survivor Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: New York, NY Posts: 11,342	if the cops could predict the future: "ok, he's going to lunge in a few moments, you shoot him in the leg everyone else stand by." what probably happened: "let's not shoot this guy unless we have to" (man lunges)..."what the!? shoot!!!" I do think they were justified in their actions but perhaps it should have been handled differently but hindsight is 20/20.

27th December 2005, 09:14 AM	#8
Bjorn Off Topic Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: San Diego, CA Posts: 2,974	Originally Posted by The Central Scrutinizer Interesting you should mention that. On CNN they were interviewing a guy that said police are trained to aim for the "center of mass" (or something like that). In other words, when a guy with a knife is lunging at you, the adrenaline is flowing, and the hands are shaking, you aim for the biggest target. You don't have time to say "Excuse me Mr. Man-with-a-knife. Could you hold still while I try to shoot the knife out of your hand?" I understand that, and would certainly aim for the biggest target myself if someone was attacking me with a knife. However ... Quote: a standoff that lasted at least several minutes, during which several police officers were pointing their guns at the man It looks like the police had "several minutes" when the guy wasn't attacking anyone, although he had a knife in the hand and wouldn't drop to the ground. Instead of waiting for him to attack (and blam, blam, blam, kill him) why didn't anyone aim for his legs during those "several minutes"?
	__________________ Little did I know, that all those days that came and went, were my life ....

27th December 2005, 09:15 AM	#9
The Central Scrutinizer Penultimate Amazing Pither Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: The White Zone Posts: 42,264	Originally Posted by HarryKeogh if the cops could predict the future: "ok, he's going to lunge in a few moments, you shoot him in the leg everyone else stand by." what probably happened: "let's not shoot this guy unless we have to" (man lunges)..."what the!? shoot!!!" I do think they were justified in their actions but perhaps it should have been handled differently but hindsight is 20/20. Yep. And I think if they did the "shoot him in the leg" thing, then you would have the same crowd whining "Why did they shoot him the leg? He was just standing there"
	__________________ If I see somebody with a gun on a plane? I'll kill him.

27th December 2005, 09:16 AM	#10
The Central Scrutinizer Penultimate Amazing Pither Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: The White Zone Posts: 42,264	Originally Posted by Bjorn Instead of waiting for him to attack (and blam, blam, blam, kill him) why didn't anyone aim for his legs during those "several minutes"? Originally Posted by The Central Scrutinizer Yep. And I think if they did the "shoot him in the leg" thing, then you would have the same crowd whining "Why did they shoot him the leg? He was just standing there" I must be psychic.
	__________________ If I see somebody with a gun on a plane? I'll kill him.

27th December 2005, 09:18 AM	#11
Just thinking Philosopher Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: New Jersey Posts: 5,169	Originally Posted by hammegk Per tv talking heads, man in suit, surrounded by 10 cops with guns drawn, waves 3" blade pocketknife, will not drop per command, shot 7 times ... Engagement policies just gets stranger & stranger ... Ever consider what a sharp 3" blade could do slicing across your neck? In all the likely confusion of a lunge and struggle (with no shots being fired) and a knife present in the hands of an uncooperative, the above scenario I just mentioned is not all that impossible.
	__________________ Our greatest challenge is not just to ask the important questions, but to recognize the meaningless ones. Last edited by Just thinking; 27th December 2005 at 09:21 AM.

27th December 2005, 09:19 AM	#12
Bjorn Off Topic Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: San Diego, CA Posts: 2,974	Originally Posted by The Central Scrutinizer I must be psychic. Why? Am I a whining crowd or something?
	__________________ Little did I know, that all those days that came and went, were my life ....

27th December 2005, 10:07 AM	#13
The Central Scrutinizer Penultimate Amazing Pither Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: The White Zone Posts: 42,264	Originally Posted by Bjorn Why? Am I a whining crowd or something? No. But there are those who will criticize no matter what the police do. Agreed?
	__________________ If I see somebody with a gun on a plane? I'll kill him.

27th December 2005, 10:11 AM	#14
Cleon King of the Pod People Moderator Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Atlanta, GA Posts: 20,506	Originally Posted by The Central Scrutinizer No. But there are those who will criticize no matter what the police do. Agreed? And there are those who will justify whatever the police do.
	__________________ "People like me are what stand between us and Auschwitz." - Newt Gingrich

27th December 2005, 10:25 AM	#15
brodski Tea-Time toad Join Date: Mar 2005 Posts: 15,067	I am certainly no police apologist, but how stupid do you have to be to lunge with a knife at a police office who is pointing a gun at you, and is backed up by several other, all ready to "put you down" to protect their own? It's either terminal stupidity or suicide by cop. That is if the reports are accurate of course. Maybe the cops could have tackled him without shooting him, but that would require extensive retraining and a reorganization of the criminal justice system in the US. American cops go armed, and are trained in the most effective use of those arms. If you except a routinely armed police force, then this is the kind of situation where it is perfectly acceptable for the cops to shoot. Which s one of the very many reasons I oppose the routine arming of police in my country, because our bobbies are expected to be able to subdue a knife wielding assailant without resorting to leathal force, and they get the training and equipment to achieve this. US cops face more threats to their life, and are given appropriate tools to deal with those threats, unfortunately in practice this meas that cops in the us are More likely to kill an assailant that unarmed cops are. Still, if you threaten the life of an armed officer what do you expect? I wont be loosing any sleep over this case, unlike the Harry Stanly or Jean Charles de Menezes cases.
brodski Tea-Time toad Join Date: Mar 2005 Posts: 15,067

27th December 2005, 10:48 AM	#16
The Central Scrutinizer Penultimate Amazing Pither Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: The White Zone Posts: 42,264	Originally Posted by Cleon And there are those who will justify whatever the police do. True. But when you wave a knife at a cop, after being told repeatedly to drop it, you can't complain about the outcome.
	__________________ If I see somebody with a gun on a plane? I'll kill him.

27th December 2005, 10:52 AM	#17
Cleon King of the Pod People Moderator Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Atlanta, GA Posts: 20,506	Originally Posted by The Central Scrutinizer True. But when you wave a knife at a cop, after being told repeatedly to drop it, you can't complain about the outcome. Well, typically when you're fatally shot, you tend to have some difficulty complaining about the outcome anyway...
	__________________ "People like me are what stand between us and Auschwitz." - Newt Gingrich

27th December 2005, 10:59 AM	#18
fishbob Seasonally Disaffected Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Chilly Undieville Posts: 5,666	Originally Posted by HarryKeogh they did Mace him though to no effect. He must have been a robot or a space alien then, because that stuff will definitely affect humans.
	__________________ When you believe in things you don't understand, then you suffer . . . " - Stevie Wonder "Stupidity - a callow indifference to facts or data" - Stuart Firestein -neuroscientist. I hate bigots.

27th December 2005, 11:00 AM	#19
corplinx JREF Kid Join Date: Oct 2002 Posts: 8,944	Originally Posted by fishbob He must have been a robot or a space alien then. He was pepper sprayed, not maced. And he partially covered his face.
corplinx JREF Kid Join Date: Oct 2002 Posts: 8,944

27th December 2005, 11:02 AM	#20
Grammatron Philosopher Join Date: Jul 2003 Posts: 5,446	Originally Posted by fishbob He must have been a robot or a space alien then, because that stuff will definitely affect humans. Depending if he was on drugs or not.
Grammatron Philosopher Join Date: Jul 2003 Posts: 5,446	__________________ Private Information, Do not read this!

27th December 2005, 11:20 AM	#21
The Central Scrutinizer Penultimate Amazing Pither Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: The White Zone Posts: 42,264	Originally Posted by Cleon Well, typically when you're fatally shot, you tend to have some difficulty complaining about the outcome anyway... Which is as it should be.
	__________________ If I see somebody with a gun on a plane? I'll kill him.

27th December 2005, 11:24 AM	#22
Skeptic Banned Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Behind the chessboard Posts: 18,361	Originally Posted by Cleon And there are those who will justify whatever the police do. Yes, but whatever you think of the police, shooting a man who lunges at you with a knife after being told for a few minutes to stop it is rather justifiable. I agree with those who think it's probably "suicide by cop", which is more common that one might imagine.

27th December 2005, 11:25 AM	#23
fishbob Seasonally Disaffected Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Chilly Undieville Posts: 5,666	Originally Posted by corplinx He was pepper sprayed, not maced. And he partially covered his face. Oh. Then he must have been a robot or a space alien then, because that stuff will definitely affect humans with partially covered faces. Just goofing a little. There is something not right with the report where it says he was pepper sprayed with no effect.
	__________________ When you believe in things you don't understand, then you suffer . . . " - Stevie Wonder "Stupidity - a callow indifference to facts or data" - Stuart Firestein -neuroscientist. I hate bigots.

27th December 2005, 11:43 AM	#24
Freakshow 526a0118ae8c43594f3cfdcabb3274ed Join Date: Jul 2005 Posts: 3,319	Originally Posted by fishbob Oh. Then he must have been a robot or a space alien then, because that stuff will definitely affect humans with partially covered faces. Just goofing a little. There is something not right with the report where it says he was pepper sprayed with no effect. Nope. It happens. Especially when people are under the influence of certain drugs, such as PCP. I've seen a Taser demonstration video that showed police hitting someone with pepper-spray (the guy was on PCP), and it had no effect other than making him blink. So they used a Taser on him, and that worked. Pepper spray is far from being 100% effective. ETA: Found it. http://www.personal-selfdefense-onli...deo_center.htm Look at the "PCP user LASD" video.
	Last edited by Freakshow; 27th December 2005 at 11:45 AM.

27th December 2005, 01:56 PM	#25
Bjorn Off Topic Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: San Diego, CA Posts: 2,974	Originally Posted by The Central Scrutinizer No. But there are those who will criticize no matter what the police do. Agreed? Sure. We just had a thread here about the guy who was shot and killed by air marshals, and a typical defense of the marshals' actions went like this (by Skeptic): "people had 15 seconds to choose if they risk a plane being blown up" I can understand the reasoning in that case - it happened fast, it was confusing, he "reached into his bag" and so on. In the present case we had 5-10 police officers around a guy with a knife in his hand for several minutes, and yet the reason for shooting him is basically the same: What are you supposed to do if someone lunges a knife at you? Maybe you could shoot him in the leg before it got that far. You wrote And I think if they did the "shoot him in the leg" thing, then you would have the same crowd whining "Why did they shoot him the leg? He was just standing there" I think the opposite - I think most people would say "good, at least they didn't kill him". I might be wrong.
	__________________ Little did I know, that all those days that came and went, were my life ....

27th December 2005, 02:09 PM	#26
Freakshow 526a0118ae8c43594f3cfdcabb3274ed Join Date: Jul 2005 Posts: 3,319	Originally Posted by The Central Scrutinizer Yep. And I think if they did the "shoot him in the leg" thing, then you would have the same crowd whining "Why did they shoot him the leg? He was just standing there" They already do... http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/engAMR510671997 http://www.amnestyusa.org/countries/...256F190042408D What exactly do these people want the police to do? (Rhetorical question...I already know. And I'm glad Amnesty Int. is not in charge of my local police force.)

27th December 2005, 02:10 PM	#27
The Central Scrutinizer Penultimate Amazing Pither Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: The White Zone Posts: 42,264	Originally Posted by Bjorn I think the opposite - I think most people would say "good, at least they didn't kill him". I might be wrong. I think you are wrong!
	__________________ If I see somebody with a gun on a plane? I'll kill him.

27th December 2005, 02:15 PM	#28
Manny Illuminator Join Date: May 2005 Posts: 3,295	Heh. Even that assumes that the guy doesn't die from being shot in the leg. If the cops hit the wrong artery, or if he had pre-existing health problem, or if the ambulance gets stuck in traffic or any of a thousand other ifs and all of a sudden people are saying "why did the cops kill the guy? He was 20 feet away and posed no immediate threat!"
Manny Illuminator Join Date: May 2005 Posts: 3,295

27th December 2005, 02:15 PM	#29
Giz Illuminator Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: UK/US Posts: 3,424	Originally Posted by The Central Scrutinizer I think you are wrong! I think the lawyers would have liked it.

27th December 2005, 02:26 PM	#30
LW Master Poster Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: 60°N 25°E Posts: 2,800	Originally Posted by Bjorn Maybe you could shoot him in the leg before it got that far. Perhaps they hoped that they could in the end defuse the situation without shooting at all. And mind you, outside movies shooting at a leg is not exactly a harmless way of disarmament. A single shot that hits the femoral artery [I knew that the anatomy book that my girlfriend forgot here when she left to visit her family would be useful for something] may be lethal. A single shot that crushes leg bones may leave the victim crippled for life, especially if it hits the knee.

27th December 2005, 02:28 PM	#31
Tmy Philosopher Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Republic of Massachusetts Posts: 6,489	The guy appeared to be mentally ill. So shouting commands probably wouldnt do much. Cant reason with a crazy, thats what makes them CRAZY! It looked like 1/2 the police force had him surrounded. And he ends up with 9 bullets in him??? Sorry but thats f'upd. basically he was dead as soon as he picked up the knife. Someone shouldve taken his leg out instead of letting it progress to a fatal shooting.
	__________________ "Common sense is something that skeptics can and should do without." -shanek

27th December 2005, 02:40 PM	#32
Skeptic Banned Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Behind the chessboard Posts: 18,361	I can understand the reasoning in that case - it happened fast, it was confusing, he "reached into his bag" and so on. In the present case we had 5-10 police officers around a guy with a knife in his hand for several minutes, and yet the reason for shooting him is basically the same: What are The crucial difference which you are missing is that in this case the police knew he had a knife, not a bomb, so there is more time and ways to neutralize him as he is not an imminent threat to others (though wielding a knife on a plane would still justify deadly force.) The fact that they waited for several minutes and tried mace and other things first shows they would probably not have shot him if he calmed down. But then he actually attacked them with the knife--then, you only have a few seconds and are at point-blank range, so it is an imminent threat; you have no time to pause and think if you can hit their hand or leg, which is a lot harder, incidentally, than the movies make it appear. It's a totally different situation in far more ways than merely the time of the incident. The police acted correctly in both cases. P.S. I, for one, would much rather give the police the power to shoot me dead if I attack them, than the power to shoot me in the leg if they think I might attack them in a few minutes and didn't want the situation to "get that far". The second is, in effect, the right to shoot in the leg anybody for rude behavior.
	Last edited by Skeptic; 27th December 2005 at 02:42 PM.

27th December 2005, 02:54 PM	#33
Tmy Philosopher Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Republic of Massachusetts Posts: 6,489	Yeah but it looked to me that the guy was nuts. Are you saying the only solution was to shoot him dead? I think its lame that a large police department like NOrleans, would be without non-lethal methods. Its a party town for christsakes. Im sure they have been bag guns and rubber bullets available.
	__________________ "Common sense is something that skeptics can and should do without." -shanek

27th December 2005, 03:10 PM	#34
luchog Neo-Post-Retro-Revivalist Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: The Emerald City Posts: 7,957	Originally Posted by fishbob He must have been a robot or a space alien then, because that stuff will definitely affect humans. Not always, no. See below. Originally Posted by Grammatron Depending if he was on drugs or not. Not necessarily. It is possible for a normal person to be completely immune to Mace (CS agent) and have a high tolerance to pepper spray. I know this not only from reading (the info is easily available if you so a little homework); but from my own personal experience. I am highly resistant to Mace. It takes 3-5 times the normal level and duration of exposure for it to have the desired effect on me. My basic training senior drill seargent was completely immune to it, as was one of the trainees in my unit. I also have a somewhat higher resistance to pepper spray than the average person. When pepper spray first became widely available for law enforcement, there was a concern voiced by police in, i think it was, Texas or SoCal, concerning it's effectiveness in the predominantly hispanic populations. The theory being that their high consumption of capsacinoids would give them a high tolerance for the pepper spray. That turned out not to be the case; but some individuals do have a naturally higher resistance to it's effects. But yes, various drugs can also lend a high level of resistance, or even temporary immunity.
	__________________ "All opinions are not equal. Some are a very great deal more robust, sophisticated and well supported in logic and argument than others." -- Douglas Adams "The absence of evidence might indeed not be evidence of absence, but it's a pretty good start." -- PhantomWolf "Let's see the buggers figure that one out." - John Lennon

27th December 2005, 03:23 PM	#35
luchog Neo-Post-Retro-Revivalist Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: The Emerald City Posts: 7,957	Originally Posted by Tmy Someone shouldve taken his leg out instead of letting it progress to a fatal shooting. Aside from the refutations that Freakshow and LW have already posted, have you ever tried to do this? Under similar circumstances? It is very difficult to hit a leg, even at point-blank range; [b]especially[b] in an urban setting where you're worried about potential civilian casualties. You can claim that police should be trained to do so. No, they not only should not, they cannot be trained to do this. Unlike you, I actually have relevant training and experience; and can tell you that what you see in the movies is just so much garbage. No one with a scrap of intelligence is going to aim for a limb, even a leg. Even stationary, it's a difficult target. Moving, you can forget it unless you have a truly legendary marksmanship and combat ability. Quote: I think its lame that a large police department like NOrleans, would be without non-lethal methods. Its a party town for christsakes. Im sure they have been bag guns and rubber bullets available. Do you have any experience at all with these sorts of things? I'm guessing no. I'd put a lot of money on it. Rubber bullets are moderately effective when used with other methods for crowd control. They are completely useless when dealing with individual violent criminals. Particularly nutcases and those under the influence of any of several different drugs. Even a reasonably fit normal person can shrug off a volley of rubber bullets fired at point blank range, and still move fast enough to stick a knife in your chest before you have time for a second volley. Someone with a high pain tolerance, or defective pain response, can do so even while being fired upon. Plus, depending on the type of rubber bullet and the strength of the round being used, they are potentially lethal at short range.
	__________________ "All opinions are not equal. Some are a very great deal more robust, sophisticated and well supported in logic and argument than others." -- Douglas Adams "The absence of evidence might indeed not be evidence of absence, but it's a pretty good start." -- PhantomWolf "Let's see the buggers figure that one out." - John Lennon Last edited by luchog; 27th December 2005 at 03:32 PM.