When CAN Cops Shoot a Perp?

[Streetbull]

So, a guy smashes car windshields, runs through backyards to get away, it’s dark, and he has a cell phone in his hand. He gets shot by the cops and the family screams murder and riots and protests break out (Sacramento).

How many here would take the chance that he really didn’t have a gun? He was unarmed’ moo the media. The grandma is crying, “They murdered my baby!”

Seriously...what the farking fack?

[Tamorlane]

When do you draw the line of when the government can go around shooting whoever they want without consequence?

I would say the police can shoot a perp when either their life or someone else's is put in immediate danger.

To people siding with authority, they will say don't break the law, don't run from the police and these things won't happen.

[Streetbull]

Hundreds protest.

Why? Just forking why?


http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefi...ento-city-hall

[Streetbull]

When do you draw the line of when the government can go around shooting whoever they want without consequence?

I would say the police can shoot a perp when either their life or someone else's is put in immediate danger.

To people siding with authority, they will say don't break the law, don't run from the police and these things won't happen.

There’s truly no way for a cop to win one of these — if he doesn’t shoot and the perp runs into a house and shoots an old grandmother and a baby, then the cop goes to prison. If he does shoot, “Why did you kill my innocent BABY!”, then he’s out of a job and possibly going to prison.

And it was dark. If someone is committing crimes and running like that, I HAVE to assume he’s holding a weapon.

Would anyone here risk getting shot in a situation like this? Most people would empty their sidearm into the mutha forker.

[Tamorlane]

"The Supreme Court held in a 1989 case, Graham v. Connor, that the appropriateness of use of force by officers “must be judged from the perspective of a reasonable officer on the scene,” rather than evaluated through 20/20 hindsight.

Can police officers shoot at fleeing individuals?

Only in very narrow circumstances. A seminal 1985 Supreme Court case, Tennessee vs. Garner, held that the police may not shoot at a fleeing person unless the officer reasonably believes that the individual poses a significant physical danger to the officer or others in the community. That means officers are expected to take other, less-deadly action during a foot or car pursuit unless the person being chased is seen as an immediate safety risk.

In other words, a police officer who fires at a fleeing man who a moment earlier murdered a convenience store clerk may have reasonable grounds to argue that the shooting was justified. But if that same robber never fired his own weapon, the officer would likely have a much harder argument.

“You don’t shoot fleeing felons. You apprehend them unless there are exigent circumstances — emergencies — that require urgent police action to safeguard the community as a whole,” said Greg Gilbertson, a police practices expert and criminal justice professor at Centralia College in Washington state."

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/...leeing-suspect

[TaeBoNinja]

When the perp is attacking teens in a school. Oh wait, the Left told me that I shouldn't expect them to engage....

[PSToolman]

When do you draw the line of when the government can go around shooting whoever they want without consequence?

I would say the police can shoot a perp when either their life or someone else's is put in immediate danger.

To people siding with authority, they will say don't break the law, don't run from the police and these things won't happen.

I think they might happen less, but will still happen. Simply running from the police, even breaking car windows, shouldn't be enough to get pumped with 20 slugs.

[fleeceitout]

Whenever a certain race is involved, there’s always going to be “protests” (riots).

They’re always good boys who’ve done nothing wrong & those damn white supremacist cops are always shooting them for no reason.

The leftist media always eats this chit up too & pushes the victim narrative.

[FFailed]

I feel like the best strategy in reducing your chances of getting shot by police is to not be involved in criminal activities especially at night time. Its sad someone lost their life over breaking car windows but putting yourself in those situations is usually bad idea. If its so well known that police are out there shooting unarmed people all the time why do they try to increase the chances of it happening to them even more by doing these things.

[arn710]

Why would you shoot someone that's running away from you?

Logically thinking, they're no longer a threat

[Streetbull]

If someone can explain how these officers were expected to see that he was carrying a cell phone and not a sidearm, then please do so. They have to believe that he is armed and that he will use his weapon to harm them or others.

My view is that if someone is smashing windshields, then they are violent. Now they are violent and have something small in their hand which I can’t see because it is dark. Do I assume the worst or hope for the best?

Better to be tried by 12 instead of buried by 6.

[fleeceitout]

Why would you shoot someone that's running away from you?

Logically thinking, they're no longer a threat

Did you even see the video? He was coming towards them after he ignored commands.

[Streetbull]

Whenever a certain race is involved, there’s always going to be “protests” (riots).

They’re always good boys who’ve done nothing wrong & those damn white supremacist cops are always shooting them for no reason.

The leftist media always eats this chit up too & pushes the victim narrative.

And one of the cops was of the same race as the dead guy. Also, this was not a man sitting on his front porch sipping a cold one. He started a bad scenario and paid with his life.

[MuzzieChik786]

So, a guy smashes car windshields, runs through backyards to get away, it’s dark, and he has a cell phone in his hand. He gets shot by the cops and the family screams murder and riots and protests break out (Sacramento).

How many here would take the chance that he really didn’t have a gun? He was unarmed’ moo the media. The grandma is crying, “They murdered my baby!”

Seriously...what the farking fack?

I've been following this closely (I own property in Sacramento).

It's a massive mess! Here's a link to an article on what's happening there today:

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/stephon...ay-2018-03-27/

Cliffs:

- dude's brother interrupted city council meeting, causing them to adjourn early because the protesters were banging on the windows and yelling/threatening
- protesters blocked people from going into a basketball game at the arena shouting "either you join our protest, or you don't go in"
- car of lady smashed as she confronted protesters blocking the road

It's absolutely crazy.

My problem with all this: the people aren't even letting the police complete their investigation before acting like monkeys in the streets.

[fleeceitout]

If someone can explain how these officers were expected to see that he was carrying a cell phone and not a sidearm, then please do so. They have to believe that he is armed and that he will use his weapon to harm them or others.

My view is that if someone is smashing windshields, then they are violent. Now they are violent and have something small in their hand which I can’t see because it is dark. Do I assume the worst or hope for the best?

Better to be tried by 12 instead of buried by 6.

Remember this video? I think it demonstrates quite well how hard it is to make that call.

And one of the cops was of the same race as the dead guy. Also, this was not a man sitting on his front porch sipping a cold one. He started a bad scenario and paid with his life.

In the majority of cases black perps are shot by minority cops, but that little fact gets ignored in favor of pushing the “racist” cop angle.

[arn710]

Did you even see the video? He was coming towards them after he ignored commands.

I didn't. Probably shouldn't have even commented

[KurtMussell]

Haven't followed the story in Sacramento, why was the guy smashing car windows to begin with?

[Tamorlane]

If someone can explain how these officers were expected to see that he was carrying a cell phone and not a sidearm, then please do so. They have to believe that he is armed and that he will use his weapon to harm them or others.

I agree with your overall sentiment toward protecting officers in the line of their duty, but there are holes in your one-sided logic. In this example, they don't have to believe he is armed with a gun because it was reported he was smashing windows. If the report that a man was shooting a gun off in the street or had just murdered someone then yes, but at this point even the police would probably tell you that they aren't sure what type of weapon he has, or if one at all unless specifically mentioned in the call-in.

My view is that if someone is smashing windshields, then they are violent. Now they are violent and have something small in their hand which I can’t see because it is dark. Do I assume the worst or hope for the best?

Do you just assume everyone has a gun and kill people like three times a week? What if after 10 years of service you had 20 people wrongfully killed because you thought they had a gun when they didn't, you just couldn't tell because your vision was admittedly impaired. But with this attitude that could very well happen.

If the person is running away with a gun the police aren't always expected or condoned to shoot them.

Better to be tried by 12 instead of buried by 6.

true but even better to go home at the end of the day

[MuzzieChik786]

Haven't followed the story in Sacramento, why was the guy smashing car windows to begin with?

Because he was having a bad day...

... why do you think homie?

Ps: the area where all this went down is the ghetto of Sacramento. It's quite bad there. People get shot by each other on the regular, drug activity is rampant and the city has been trying to address the problem for years now without success.

[SwollNMember]

It's so simple. Do we, the non police, have the ability to take someone's life whether fleeing or not? Yes, in certain circumstances. For instance to protect innocents. We all have that power and I would argue, responsibility, to try to stop to stop them. Do we, the non police, have the power to kill someone just because their fleeing? No. Therefore, we cannot give that capability to others like the police. You cannot give something you never had.

[DamagedAndDull]

"The Supreme Court held in a 1989 case, Graham v. Connor, that the appropriateness of use of force by officers “must be judged from the perspective of a reasonable officer on the scene,” rather than evaluated through 20/20 hindsight.

Can police officers shoot at fleeing individuals?

Only in very narrow circumstances. A seminal 1985 Supreme Court case, Tennessee vs. Garner, held that the police may not shoot at a fleeing person unless the officer reasonably believes that the individual poses a significant physical danger to the officer or others in the community. That means officers are expected to take other, less-deadly action during a foot or car pursuit unless the person being chased is seen as an immediate safety risk.

In other words, a police officer who fires at a fleeing man who a moment earlier murdered a convenience store clerk may have reasonable grounds to argue that the shooting was justified. But if that same robber never fired his own weapon, the officer would likely have a much harder argument.

“You don’t shoot fleeing felons. You apprehend them unless there are exigent circumstances — emergencies — that require urgent police action to safeguard the community as a whole,” said Greg Gilbertson, a police practices expert and criminal justice professor at Centralia College in Washington state."

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/...leeing-suspect

Doesn't apply, the dude was running towards the officers waving an object in his hand in the dark, that's why for all they knew he could have a gun so they shot him just in case. Fleeing felon rule is about those running AWAY.

[MuzzieChik786]

It's so simple. Do we, the non police, have the ability to take someone's life whether fleeing or not? Yes, in certain circumstances. For instance to protect innocents. We all have that power and I would argue, responsibility, to try to stop to stop them. Do we, the non police, have the power to kill someone just because their fleeing? No. Therefore, we cannot give that capability to others like the police. You cannot give something you never had.

It's not that simple.

My question is - what would you do if you were surrounded by cops and asked to put your hands in the air after having been [b]chased[b] by said cops? Would you 1) comply or 2) reach into your pocket for something?

Common sense tells you which action would get you shot.

Did the cops use excessive force? YES.
Was Stephon Clark an innocent dude? NO.

Two things need to happen:

1) cops need better training on how to behave in these types of situations. If you're a chickenchit trigger-happy cop, you shouldn't be in the force.
2) all those hooligans now terrorizing the public with their protests should wait for the investigation and not back up someone who was in the wrong.

People like Clark are not afraid of the cops. And that's a dangerous scenario for all involved.

[Cleveland33]

The laws are somewhat intentionally vague intentionally.

It has to be a situation where the police reasonably feel their life or someone else's is in danger.

It's dark, you've been running away and you turn and approach the officers with something in your hand - you're going to get shot. And it is reasonable for the police to feel their lives are threatened since you have something in your hand. They don't wait to positively identify it because they are taught not to, because it is too late.

Now we did see a couple years ago, the cop shot the guy running away in the back. After the initial reports, no one reported on it any longer because after the initial investigation the FOP only stood by him as a member but basically said the guy was wrong. And he was found guilty, because there was no reason for him to shoot at that guy, no one's life was even arguably in danger in that situation.

[Tamorlane]

It's so simple. Do we, the non police, have the ability to take someone's life whether fleeing or not? Yes, in certain circumstances. For instance to protect innocents. We all have that power and I would argue, responsibility, to try to stop to stop them. Do we, the non police, have the power to kill someone just because their fleeing? No. Therefore, we cannot give that capability to others like the police. You cannot give something you never had.

should police be allowed to pull vehicles over that are driving excessively fast or dangerously?

[KurtMussell]

Because he was having a bad day...

... why do you think homie?

Ps: the area where all this went down is the ghetto of Sacramento. It's quite bad there. People get shot by each other on the regular, drug activity is rampant and the city has been trying to address the problem for years now without success.

Odd. I usually just get a six pack and go home if that's the case. Different strokes for different folks.

[arn710]

Did you even see the video? He was coming towards them after he ignored commands.

I watched the video. The NYT one with the helicopter footage

The guy didn't look all that threatening to me but it was hard to see his exact movements. The cops also had a good position of cover

Its always easy to judge these things after the fact but it looks like the cops were too hasty to fire in my opinion

[MuzzieChik786]

Its always easy to judge these things after the fact but it looks like the cops were too hasty to fire in my opinion

They were. One cop had been on the force for less than a year, the other for two. They were relative newbies. And clearly in the wrong for shooting him 20 times. 20!!

That's why there's such an uproar about it all.

Shoot the guy in the leg/arm. Once. Not 20 times on a suspicion that he may have a gun.

[jumpropecatposy]

as someone living in Sacramento and my family has had all of our vehicles broken into or damaged multiple times im glad scums gonna scum ****s out of control over here not super uncommon see people sprinting through the court through my yard and over a wall that leads to apartments

[US_Ranger]

There’s truly no way for a cop to win one of these — if he doesn’t shoot and the perp runs into a house and shoots an old grandmother and a baby, then the cop goes to prison. If he does shoot, “Why did you kill my innocent BABY!”, then he’s out of a job and possibly going to prison.

And it was dark. If someone is committing crimes and running like that, I HAVE to assume he’s holding a weapon.

Would anyone here risk getting shot in a situation like this? Most people would empty their sidearm into the mutha forker.

It's simple bro. STOP SHOWING UP TO NEIGHBORHOODS LIKE THIS.

I lived in Sacramento for a year. I know where these neighborhoods are. When someone calls 911, dispatch needs to straight up say "We can't help you, good luck"

Until that happens, what's going on is going to escalate again and again and again.

"**** THE POLICE

"SOMEONE SMASHED MY WINDOW, CALL THE POLICE"

"POLICE KILLED THE GUY WHO DID IT, **** THE POLICE"

"RIOT, BREAK ****, CALL THE POLICE"


It's insanity and it's easily avoidable by not showing up to help them when they call for help. That's the only way this gets fixed.

[fleeceitout]

I watched the video. The NYT one with the helicopter footage

The guy didn't look all that threatening to me but it was hard to see his exact movements. The cops also had a good position of cover

Its always easy to judge these things after the fact but it looks like the cops were too hasty to fire in my opinion

They repeatedly told him to stop & show his hands, which he ignored, then they shot him when he started advancing towards them holding a black object in his hand which later turned out to be a cell.

If you’re peering around a corner at someone who you expect is armed & has continually ignored you commands to show is hands, what are you going to do if he starts advancing towards you? Let him just walk up on you, or maybe risk getting shot in the head? I know I’m putting him down.