AnotherPea
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 2,968
Jan 4, 2015 1:47:52 GMT
|
Post by AnotherPea on Jul 21, 2016 19:06:49 GMT
looking at the still photos, I'm wondering if the cop got loosey-goosey with the trigger and intended to shoot the patient and ended up getting the therapist in the leg? The report states he was shot three times, but the therapist only mentioned one shot. Even if he meant to shoot the patient (wtf?!) and shot the therapist instead, at the very least it means he has shitty aim. Either way, that is not someone who should be on the police force. agreed, no question. Poor judgement, poor aim, he does not need to be a cop.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 3, 2024 11:41:49 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 21, 2016 19:11:06 GMT
Kerri W tmarschall I agree with you both. I just think it's not so black and white. As in most things "gray". There are always a facts that added or omitted from most stories that change opinions in an instant. I could see officers not even realizing how affected they are by recent happenings until an experience that brings it to life. Human nature often makes us think we can work through our doubts and fears. "I can do this. I'll be okay." Just like other professions, being deemed "incompetent" usually doesn't occur until something negative happens. Hopefully not life ending or extreme as in this case. Just tragic all around. That's exactly what I thought, but you said it very well.
|
|
|
Post by Sam on Jul 21, 2016 19:15:54 GMT
Maybe the police should use binoculars or, hell, even their iPhones to see whether or not the literal sitting target is carrying a gun or a toy. There seemed to be more than one LEO there.
|
|
inkedup
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 4,837
Jun 26, 2014 5:00:26 GMT
|
Post by inkedup on Jul 21, 2016 19:54:16 GMT
whoa, calm down there ladies! I never said that shooting an autistic patient with a toy was warranted. Step back and think a bit. Whew! It is more probable to me that a cop would think someone with a gun (as they were told in the 911 call), pointing it in different directions (as you can see in the video), is a threat than a man lying on his back with his hands in the air. Either way, pulling the trigger is wrong, no doubt. I can simply understand one mistake (I assume with the "I don't know.") more than the other. Charles Kinsey, the man who was shot, was respectfully and clearly communicating with the police officers on the scene. He shouts that the man is autistic; that he is his therapist; that Rinaldo, the autistic man, had a toy truck, and that there were no weapons present. So many of these situations begin because some idiot calls 911 with a false report. In this case, this person claimed that a man was walking around with a gun and threatening suicide. The police came in with guns blazing because of this. At the very least, the police officer who shot Mr. Kinsey is grossly undertrained and underprepared to do his job. Also, there were three shots total fired. Only one of which hit the victim.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 3, 2024 11:41:49 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 21, 2016 20:15:12 GMT
The professional associations, licensing boards, unions need to take quicker action removing people that are unfit for duty.
Unfortunately it's not that easy due to employment laws that can protect employees - ADA, FMLA, union contracts, discrimination laws, etc. It's often hard to know how to define "unfit for duty". You sometimes can't know until after with hindsight that someone might have been unfit. And ones definition of unfit is often not the same as someone else. A lot of times the employee must bring something to the employer's attention rather than the employer seeking it out...many times someone who might be "unfit" is concerned about losing their job if they bring it up (under ADA the employee generally has to bring forward the issue and to ask for help/accommodation and the law is setup for employers NOT to open a can of worms without that first and ADA has a privacy/confidentiality portion). Some industries do have fit for duty exams (like police, etc) but even then if the employee isn't forthcoming about issues and hides it well, there's not much more others can do.
I too hate the title of this post -- it is generalizing. I do think the culture is changing and cities/police groups need more training, but that can take time. And being in hiring, I can say that you don't always get to pick from the best and brightest people. You have to hire from those that apply. And you do your best to train them, but you can't always know how they will react in any given situation. I think we are at a point in history where the culture has been riled up on every side with way too much media coverage and way too much instant reaction and immediate judgement...
I am very thankful neither of these men were killed. I hope they all get the help that they will need.
|
|
Loydene
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 2,639
Location: Albuquerque, New Mexico
Jul 8, 2014 16:31:47 GMT
|
Post by Loydene on Jul 21, 2016 20:20:36 GMT
So many of these situations begin because some idiot calls 911 with a false report. In this case, this person claimed that a man was walking around with a gun and threatening suicide. The police came in with guns blazing because of this. At the very least, the police officer who shot Mr. Kinsey is grossly undertrained and underprepared to do his job. Also, there were three shots total fired. Only one of which hit the victim. They also happen because the officers are NOT listening -- they "bail" out of their vehicle with drawn weapons, they are "taking command" of the scene, shouting commands (sometimes contradictory - sit down, freeze, shut up, what's your name), shouting commands over the other officers' shouts. Not only are they not listening, but they can't "listen"! Another point - have any woman officers been involved in a wrongful shooting? Frankly, I don't know of any and I attribute that to the fact that women are more used to having "less" control so have much better speaking skills, listening skills, de-escalation skills -- teachers in high schools deal daily with teen age boys much bigger and stronger than they are - yet, the teachers know how to manage inappropriate and wrongful behavior -- even if the management is back off and call for help. Let's get some "moms" on the streets.
|
|
pridemom
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 2,843
Jul 12, 2014 21:58:10 GMT
|
Post by pridemom on Jul 21, 2016 20:22:18 GMT
The professional associations, licensing boards, unions need to take quicker action removing people that are unfit for duty.
Unfortunately it's not that easy due to employment laws that can protect employees - ADA, FMLA, union contracts, discrimination laws, etc. It's often hard to know how to define "unfit for duty". You sometimes can't know until after with hindsight that someone might have been unfit. And ones definition of unfit is often not the same as someone else. A lot of times the employee must bring something to the employer's attention rather than the employer seeking it out...many times someone who might be "unfit" is concerned about losing their job if they bring it up (under ADA the employee generally has to bring forward the issue and to ask for help/accommodation and the law is setup for employers NOT to open a can of worms without that first and ADA has a privacy/confidentiality portion). Some industries do have fit for duty exams (like police, etc) but even then if the employee isn't forthcoming about issues and hides it well, there's not much more others can do.
I too hate the title of this post -- it is generalizing. I do think the culture is changing and cities/police groups need more training, but that can take time. And being in hiring, I can say that you don't always get to pick from the best and brightest people. You have to hire from those that apply. And you do your best to train them, but you can't always know how they will react in any given situation. I think we are at a point in history where the culture has been riled up on every side with way too much media coverage and way too much instant reaction and immediate judgement...
I am very thankful neither of these men were killed. I hope they all get the help that they will need.
But an essential function of the job is to exercise good judgement and act in accordance with public safety. Those are crucial and if you can't do that, is not protected by ADA.
|
|
|
Post by crimsoncat05 on Jul 21, 2016 20:22:29 GMT
whoa, calm down there ladies! I never said that shooting an autistic patient with a toy was warranted. Step back and think a bit. Whew! It is more probable to me that a cop would think someone with a gun (as they were told in the 911 call), pointing it in different directions (as you can see in the video), is a threat than a man lying on his back with his hands in the air. Either way, pulling the trigger is wrong, no doubt. I can simply understand one mistake (I assume with the "I don't know.") more than the other. Charles Kinsey, the man who was shot, was respectfully and clearly communicating with the police officers on the scene. He shouts that the man is autistic; that he is his therapist; that Rinaldo, the autistic man, had a toy truck, and that there were no weapons present.
So many of these situations begin because some idiot calls 911 with a false report. In this case, this person claimed that a man was walking around with a gun and threatening suicide. The police came in with guns blazing because of this. At the very least, the police officer who shot Mr. Kinsey is grossly undertrained and underprepared to do his job. Also, there were three shots total fired. Only one of which hit the victim. haven't watched the video, and I am not condoning what happened, at all... BUT: as for the text above that I bolded?? After what's been happening the last couple days with police being fired on when they first come upon a scene, why should the officer believe what they're being told at face value as the truth? For all the officers know, they could have been lying and the whole thing was a set-up! They might have been acting like that to get the officers close enough so THEY could be shot at. (given what's been going on lately)
|
|
|
Post by refugeepea on Jul 21, 2016 20:22:30 GMT
The therapist needs to SUE THE CITY ... do not wait for "criminal" charges (which surely must be brought) but bring CIVIL CHARGES against the CITY. Until the City is paying out MILLIONS of damages and attorney fees, they won't be feeling the pain of lack of training of their licensed and armed employees. The Autistic Man's family might have a case. I can't imagine how far this will set him back.
|
|
|
Post by crimsoncat05 on Jul 21, 2016 20:26:00 GMT
...the city paying out millions of dollars for a lawsuit is exactly how the officers will get better training, and exactly the thing that will get better candidates to apply; yeah, that's it.
<sarcasm> I know it's a horrible situation, but suing the city for all they've got won't help the future.
|
|
|
Post by refugeepea on Jul 21, 2016 20:28:17 GMT
haven't watched the video, and I am not condoning what happened, at all... BUT: You should watch the video. The therapist is laying with his back directly on the ground. His feet are by the Autistic man who is sitting cross legged. The man is rocking back and forth and holding an item. It is hard to tell, but his hand are not in the position, that you'd think he has a gun. If it was true that he had a gun, that was not a safe position for the therapist. I HATE that there are people that assume people with Autism all must have the classic signs of hand flapping, rocking, and not talking, but this man was showing the classic signs. I understand the intimidation and I will ALWAYS side with law enforcement until the facts come out. I refuse to believe they are all racist. I honestly don't know what more this guy could have done. It appeared no one else was around. Make him lay there longer, call the group home, verify he is the therapist. I don't know.
|
|
|
Post by pierkiss on Jul 21, 2016 20:29:28 GMT
There are not enough words and angry faces to show how upset I am over this. I am a behavior analyst. He was doing his job, unarmed, trying to calm down his client and he got fucking shot over it. We (behavior people) get hurt every day working with clients. Some of us have been seriously injured by our clients. But I know that none of us ever expect to get shot by the police while we are trying to do our job. I know that this therapist didn't call the police, but sometimes we do have to call them to help de escalate a situation. And we do not worry about us getting shot. We worry about our client getting shot.
|
|
|
Post by LavenderLayoutLady on Jul 21, 2016 20:36:35 GMT
Charles Kinsey, the man who was shot, was respectfully and clearly communicating with the police officers on the scene. He shouts that the man is autistic; that he is his therapist; that Rinaldo, the autistic man, had a toy truck, and that there were no weapons present.
So many of these situations begin because some idiot calls 911 with a false report. In this case, this person claimed that a man was walking around with a gun and threatening suicide. The police came in with guns blazing because of this. At the very least, the police officer who shot Mr. Kinsey is grossly undertrained and underprepared to do his job. Also, there were three shots total fired. Only one of which hit the victim. haven't watched the video, and I am not condoning what happened, at all... BUT: as for the text above that I bolded?? After what's been happening the last couple days with police being fired on when they first come upon a scene, why should the officer believe what they're being told at face value as the truth? For all the officers know, they could have been lying and the whole thing was a set-up! They might have been acting like that to get the officers close enough so THEY could be shot at. (given what's been going on lately)We cannot use this as an excuse. We cannot allow police to use "it might be a set up" as an excuse to shoot innocents. So, if hypothetically police said they shot him because they thought the therapist was setting them up for ambush, should we accept that as okay? What if the next time they shoot a toddler or a dementia patient, because they won't follow command and lie on the ground? Is it okay in that case, if the police say that they thought they were being set up for ambush? No. Just no.
|
|
|
Post by crimsoncat05 on Jul 21, 2016 20:38:05 GMT
...I wonder what sort of training (and how much training) do police officers get to handle situations with patients like this (adults who are in the middle of some sort of meltdown, be they mentally unstable / nervous breakdown, developmentally disabled, etc.) if they ARE called??
I know enough to know that people who are high on certain drugs can ignore pain / act psychotic / do really dangerous things to themselves or others, and that perhaps they don't necessarily 'look' like they're high on drugs until you get close enough to them... I'm guessing police officers get training on how to handle that, but do they even GET training on assisting with situations like this involving developmentally disabled individuals, and how the disability can change the situation?? (I apologize if developmentally disabled isn't the correct term, but I can't think of what the correct one is; hopefully you guys know what I'm trying to ask here.)
ETA: come on, now-- in my earlier post I wasn't saying that recent events gave them an excuse to shoot anyone- I was just making an observation. I never said any of that made what happened okay.
|
|
|
Post by LavenderLayoutLady on Jul 21, 2016 20:41:22 GMT
If you are scared to death to do your job, then find a different one. There is NO excuse for this - NONE! ITA!! And I am worried for our law enforcement that has to wonder, now more than ever, just how much danger they are in as they go about their daily jobs. I saw someone being pulled over yesterday and while watching the officer cautiously approach wondered if that was me, how I could make them feel safer. Be still? Keep my hands on the wheel especially as they approached? Best thing you can do if you are being pulled over: Open your window before officer approaches. As soon as you come to a full stop, put your car in park, rest you hands both on the top of your steering wheel. Keep them in full sight. When officer approaches window, keep hands still. Answer every question clearly. If asked for driver's license & registration, move slowly, deliberately, describing what you are doing as you are doing it. "Okay, officer. I am reaching into my glove box now to get my registration. I am reaching into my purse for my wallet to get my license."The idea is that you do not want to spook them, or startle them. You want to give them no impression that you could even possibly be trying to do anything other than follow orders. And then be grateful when all they give you is a ticket and fine.
|
|
inkedup
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 4,837
Jun 26, 2014 5:00:26 GMT
|
Post by inkedup on Jul 21, 2016 20:42:44 GMT
Charles Kinsey, the man who was shot, was respectfully and clearly communicating with the police officers on the scene. He shouts that the man is autistic; that he is his therapist; that Rinaldo, the autistic man, had a toy truck, and that there were no weapons present.
So many of these situations begin because some idiot calls 911 with a false report. In this case, this person claimed that a man was walking around with a gun and threatening suicide. The police came in with guns blazing because of this. At the very least, the police officer who shot Mr. Kinsey is grossly undertrained and underprepared to do his job. Also, there were three shots total fired. Only one of which hit the victim. haven't watched the video, and I am not condoning what happened, at all... BUT: as for the text above that I bolded?? After what's been happening the last couple days with police being fired on when they first come upon a scene, why should the officer believe what they're being told at face value as the truth? For all the officers know, they could have been lying and the whole thing was a set-up! They might have been acting like that to get the officers close enough so THEY could be shot at. (given what's been going on lately) Mr. Kinsey did everything people like you say he "should" do when confronted by the police. And now you're justifying the fact that he was shot because of what he "might" have been doing? I guess it doesn't matter if you watch the video or not, because you have already decided that the shooting was justified. The two men were not behaving in a threatening way. One was lying on the ground with his hands up and the other was sitting and not advancing toward the police in any way. I would rather police learn to de-escalate and use force as a last resort. I do not believe it is appropriate to shoot at complaint civilians. Ever. I want police officers who are well trained enough to properly assess a situation before employing deadly force. I'm sure police officers around the country are terrified, and rightfully so. But they are charged with protecting their communities and shouldn't have a badge if they are too afraid to do their jobs.
|
|
|
Post by elaine on Jul 21, 2016 20:46:14 GMT
IMO, anyone watching that video should be as horrified at the shooting of that therapist as they are at the shooting of any police officer. In my mind, they are equally wrong.
There is absolutely no defense for the officer's actions, in this case. Just as there is no defense for shooting an LEO.
|
|
|
Post by gmcwife1 on Jul 21, 2016 20:46:58 GMT
The professional associations, licensing boards, unions need to take quicker action removing people that are unfit for duty.
Unfortunately it's not that easy due to employment laws that can protect employees - ADA, FMLA, union contracts, discrimination laws, etc. It's often hard to know how to define "unfit for duty". You sometimes can't know until after with hindsight that someone might have been unfit. And ones definition of unfit is often not the same as someone else. A lot of times the employee must bring something to the employer's attention rather than the employer seeking it out...many times someone who might be "unfit" is concerned about losing their job if they bring it up (under ADA the employee generally has to bring forward the issue and to ask for help/accommodation and the law is setup for employers NOT to open a can of worms without that first and ADA has a privacy/confidentiality portion). Some industries do have fit for duty exams (like police, etc) but even then if the employee isn't forthcoming about issues and hides it well, there's not much more others can do.
I too hate the title of this post -- it is generalizing. I do think the culture is changing and cities/police groups need more training, but that can take time. And being in hiring, I can say that you don't always get to pick from the best and brightest people. You have to hire from those that apply. And you do your best to train them, but you can't always know how they will react in any given situation. I think we are at a point in history where the culture has been riled up on every side with way too much media coverage and way too much instant reaction and immediate judgement...
I am very thankful neither of these men were killed. I hope they all get the help that they will need.
I completely agree, with everything you said.
|
|
AnotherPea
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 2,968
Jan 4, 2015 1:47:52 GMT
|
Post by AnotherPea on Jul 21, 2016 20:52:02 GMT
IMO, anyone watching that video should be as horrified at the shooting of that therapist as they are at the shooting of any police officer. In my mind, they are equally wrong. There is absolutely no defense for the officer's actions, in this case. Just as there is no defense for shooting an LEO. I disagree. Going only on the way the therapist quoted the officer, it seems as though this shooting was a quick lapse of judgement combined with poor training. When LEO have been killed recently, they have been hunted. To me intent means a whole bunch. I would hate being the therapist. He got a raw deal, no doubt. But I seriously doubt that he was shot because of his race or his profession.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 3, 2024 11:41:49 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 21, 2016 20:52:37 GMT
...the city paying out millions of dollars for a lawsuit is exactly how the officers will get better training, and exactly the thing that will get better candidates to apply; yeah, that's it. <sarcasm> I know it's a horrible situation, but suing the city for all they've got won't help the future. Actually, that's not true. It's what ultimately helped things in Portland. After a series of high profile officer-involved shootings of mentally ill individuals in crisis who needed to get mental health help - and the subsequent civil lawsuits and payouts - a much more comprehensive training program was implemented and new procedures and resources were developed for dealing with those kinds of situations. As a result, the incidence of injury/death to individuals in crisis when police intervene has dropped dramatically. It didn't happen overnight, but it did happen.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 3, 2024 11:41:49 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 21, 2016 21:01:15 GMT
But an essential function of the job is to exercise good judgement and act in accordance with public safety. Those are crucial and if you can't do that, is not protected by ADA.
I totally agree with you, but how as an employer do you know that the employee can or will exercise good judgment and act in accordance ? A great employee can make a horrible call/mistake in the heat of the moment. No employer has that kind of knowledge of every employee all the time. Unless the employee gives other hints/clues beforehand or personally brings it to the employer's attention by doing something else. Then they usually get warned and might be required to do some additional training, but rarely would be fired over something small because under employment laws even in "at will" states, employers don't generally terminate quickly enough. One bad decision doesn't always lead to many or worse bad decisions. I'd have no employees if I terminate each and every one of them for something small that might lead to something larger, and I am not in a life-threatening profession.
But hindsight and saying now that he didn't exercise good judgment doesn't help getting a cop off the streets PRIOR to that action of bad judgment.
|
|
Dani-Mani
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 3,706
Jun 28, 2014 17:36:35 GMT
|
Post by Dani-Mani on Jul 21, 2016 21:03:27 GMT
IMO, anyone watching that video should be as horrified at the shooting of that therapist as they are at the shooting of any police officer. In my mind, they are equally wrong. There is absolutely no defense for the officer's actions, in this case. Just as there is no defense for shooting an LEO. I disagree. Going only on the way the therapist quoted the officer, it seems as though this shooting was a quick lapse of judgement combined with poor training. When LEO have been killed recently, they have been hunted. To me intent means a whole bunch. I would hate being the therapist. He got a raw deal, no doubt. But I seriously doubt that he was shot because of his race or his profession. I'm curious. Are you white?
|
|
inkedup
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 4,837
Jun 26, 2014 5:00:26 GMT
|
Post by inkedup on Jul 21, 2016 21:05:23 GMT
IMO, anyone watching that video should be as horrified at the shooting of that therapist as they are at the shooting of any police officer. In my mind, they are equally wrong. There is absolutely no defense for the officer's actions, in this case. Just as there is no defense for shooting an LEO. I disagree. Going only on the way the therapist quoted the officer, it seems as though this shooting was a quick lapse of judgement combined with poor training. When LEO have been killed recently, they have been hunted. To me intent means a whole bunch. I would hate being the therapist. He got a raw deal, no doubt. But I seriously doubt that he was shot because of his race or his profession. I agree that this shooting was not racially or professionally motivated. I feel that police are undertrained and too quick to use deadly force in most of these circumstances. If the police are so terrified that they feel the need to pump several bullets in the general direction of anything that goes, "boo", then they are not effectively doing their jobs, IMO. In this case, there were at least two officers with their weapons trained on the gentlemen they were confronting. (Who were not, by the way, breaking any laws.) The officers were standing several yards away from where the men were, respectively, lying and sitting down. Mr. Kinsey was communicating with the officers and attempting to explain and diffuse the situation. He kept his hands in the air for the entire time he was on the video. And yet one of the officers was still so "scared" that he felt the need to fire three bullets in their general direction? Really? Doesn't sound like someone who is very good at his job, and certainly not someone I want in charge of my safety.
|
|
Dani-Mani
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 3,706
Jun 28, 2014 17:36:35 GMT
|
Post by Dani-Mani on Jul 21, 2016 21:09:00 GMT
I do not for one second believe that if that young man was with a ehite female she would've been shot. Not one second. Id be surprised if someone argues differently.
I absolutely do believe race played a role. It may not have been the only role, but I firmly believe it played a role for sure.
|
|
|
Post by refugeepea on Jul 21, 2016 21:10:41 GMT
I disagree. Going only on the way the therapist quoted the officer, it seems as though this shooting was a quick lapse of judgement combined with poor training. When LEO have been killed recently, they have been hunted. To me intent means a whole bunch. I would hate being the therapist. He got a raw deal, no doubt. But I seriously doubt that he was shot because of his race or his profession. I agree that this shooting was not racially or professionally motivated. I feel that police are undertrained and too quick to use deadly force in most of these circumstances. If the police are so terrified that they feel the need to pump several bullets in the general direction of anything that goes, "boo", then they are not effectively doing their jobs, IMO. In this case, there were at least two officers with their weapons trained on the gentlemen they were confronting. (Who were not, by the way, breaking any laws.) The officers were standing several yards away from where the men were, respectively, lying and sitting down. Mr. Kinsey was communicating with the officers and attempting to explain and diffuse the situation. He kept his hands in the air for the entire time he was on the video. And yet one of the officers was still so "scared" that he felt the need to fire three bullets in their general direction? Really? Doesn't sound like someone who is very good at his job, and certainly not someone I want in charge of my safety. I'm undecided on the motivation. My first automatic thought was incompetence or poor training. I truly do not know.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 3, 2024 11:41:49 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 21, 2016 21:11:02 GMT
This does not make me feel any better. Has shitty aim and doesn't listen to the person he perceives to be in danger, who is clearly telling the officer he is *not* in danger. Get that idiot off the force. NOW.
|
|
Dani-Mani
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 3,706
Jun 28, 2014 17:36:35 GMT
|
Post by Dani-Mani on Jul 21, 2016 21:12:16 GMT
This does not make me feel any better. Has shitty aim and doesn't listen to the person he perceives to be in danger, who is clearly telling the officer he is *not* in danger. Get that idiot off the force. NOW. I'm utterly disgusted for sure now.
|
|
|
Post by freecharlie on Jul 21, 2016 21:16:48 GMT
This does not make me feel any better. Has shitty aim and doesn't listen to the person he perceives to be in danger, who is clearly telling the officer he is *not* in danger. Get that idiot off the force. NOW. Don't they have to qualify on a shooting range to get a weapon? Shoot three times and not only miss your target 3 times, but also hit someone else? And if the guy had really thought the man sitting was a threat and missed him 3 times, why didn't he fire until he hit? If I think someone is threatening me enough to use deadly force, I am shooting until I hit them and they go down or I am out of ammo.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 3, 2024 11:41:49 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 21, 2016 21:19:58 GMT
This does not make me feel any better. Has shitty aim and doesn't listen to the person he perceives to be in danger, who is clearly telling the officer he is *not* in danger. Get that idiot off the force. NOW. Don't they have to qualify on a shooting range to get a weapon? Shoot three times and not only miss your target 3 times, but also hit someone else? And if the guy had really thought the man sitting was a threat and missed him 3 times, why didn't he fire until he hit? If I think someone is threatening me enough to use deadly force, I am shooting until I hit them and they go down or I am out of ammo. And correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't law enforcement training always train shoot to kill? Not debating whether that's right or wrong, but it's my understanding that if you fire your weapon, your intent is the kill the person who is an immediate threat to you or someone else. So he fired three times, missed completely twice, hit the wrong person AND the only bullet that made contact was non-lethal. Don't get me wrong, I am VERY glad no one died in this, but... there are lots and lots of problems with this officer.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 3, 2024 11:41:49 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 21, 2016 21:26:39 GMT
This does not make me feel any better. Has shitty aim and doesn't listen to the person he perceives to be in danger, who is clearly telling the officer he is *not* in danger. Get that idiot off the force. NOW. I'm utterly disgusted for sure now. Yes, it looks as if this officer was incompetent and poorly trained and scared. Not good, at all. If that is the case, HE should be removed from the job, but to start this thread stating that all police just WANT to go around shooting anyone they want is pretty disgusting too.
|
|