Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 70
  1. #11
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    15,424

    Default Re: Police Shooting in Minneapolis

    Quote Quoting KK1968
    View Post
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v41ZwYbkAog

    I watched the video, reckon ten shots were sufficient?

    Guess so, he's dead and I didn't see him threatening or endangering anyone.

    1) It appeared the officer may have injured the audio pallete of any women and children with his gratuitous F-bombs that were completely uncalled for.

    2) It appeared he was close enough several times to taze him
    Do you truly believe that an intoxicated person, running with a gun in his hand, is NOT a danger to innocent bystanders? One who had previously fired the gun? One who could easily fire the gun accidentally due to running with it in his hand? Do you realize that tazing someone could cause their hand to contract and their finger to pull the trigger in that scenario?

  2. #12
    Join Date
    May 2018
    Posts
    189

    Default Re: Police Shooting in Minneapolis

    did any of the officers state he fired on them?

    I didn't see it or any reports that claimed they did.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    7,606

    Default Re: Police Shooting in Minneapolis

    Quote Quoting KK1968
    View Post
    I watched the video, reckon ten shots were sufficient?
    If 10 shots were necessary to stop the suspect, yup. Also, it appears multiple officers fired so there are going to be more shots.

    Quote Quoting KK1968
    View Post
    1) It appeared the officer may have injured the audio pallete of any women and children with his gratuitous F-bombs that were completely uncalled for.
    They have likely heard the word before. It's not at all uncommon for people hyped up on adrenaline, fear, anger or stress to have potty mouths. A little unprofessional maybe but you'll have to forgive him for being human.

    Quote Quoting KK1968
    View Post
    2) It appeared he was close enough several times to taze him
    First, it depends on whether they have tazers in the first place. Then, what kind of tazer. There are tazers that are contact only and don't have the nifty flying prongs. Next, a moving target is going to be hard to hit with those little prongs and probably won't make good contact. Moving on, you only get one shot with it and you have to reload. Finally, looking at the videos it doesn't appear he always had back up readily available throughout the entire chase so that would leave him unarmed against an armed suspect. Not a good situation. Oh yeah, as llworking mentioned, muscle contractions could cause a discharge.

    Quote Quoting KK1968
    View Post
    I didn't see it or any reports that claimed they did.
    According to the article I just read, he apparently did not fire. The prosecutor's statement said he turned towards them with the gun, which makes him a viable threat as he had already allegedly been discharging the gun.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Posts
    101

    Default Re: Police Shooting in Minneapolis

    I didn't post the vid, nor a link to it, as I was unsure as to whether or not that is appropriate.

    Quote Quoting PayrolGuy
    View Post
    Assuming the shoot is otherwise clean, while the police may have shot him in the back there where people somewhere in front of the armed, fleeing suspect.
    I don't know what "clean shot" means, but if you look at the vid, it is obvious that there is nobody in front of Mr. Blevins.

    If you look at the pic below, which I grabbed from the vid, it is clear that Mr. Blevins was not firing at the officers giving chase, nor did he turn the gun towards them. That vid shot is the exact moment before the first shot was fired.

    Obviously, I have no idea when the officer made up his mind to shoot. It might have been moments before - I don't know what the time frame is on situations such as this. Mr. Blevins did in fact turn his head around, towards the officers moments before the first shot, but it is obvious he was just looking to see how much ground he had gained.



    ps#1 - my link is invisible and should be in that ^ blank space

    ps#2 - is there no way to up images to this forum?

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    California
    Posts
    20,320

    Default Re: Police Shooting in Minneapolis

    You DO NOT use a Taser on a guy with a gun - especially if he has already used that gun against others!

    Second, the police DO NOT have to wait to be fired upon to use deadly force!!! While CA seems intent on changing the law to require that - and worse - this is still NOT the standard anywhere in the US where "reasonable" is the standard for the use of force.

    KK1968, how many armed suspects have you squared off against? How many instances of men drawing guns on you have you had to make the split-second decision to shoot or not to shoot? How many agonizing months or years have you had to wait as legal scholars debate the reasonableness of your action in a 1/2 a second, and still these experts will not be capable of coming to a unanimous decision?

    Everything I have seen or read indicates this is a good shooting. Or, as "good" as a shooting can be since it's likely the officer(s) involved will be haunted by it for the rest of their lives as a result.
    **********
    Retired Cal Cop Sergeant & Teacher

    Seek justice,
    Love mercy,
    Walk humbly with your God

    -- Courageous, by Casting Crowns ... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pkM-gDcmJeM

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    15,424

    Default Re: Police Shooting in Minneapolis

    Quote Quoting riffwraith
    View Post
    I didn't post the vid, nor a link to it, as I was unsure as to whether or not that is appropriate.



    I don't know what "clean shot" means, but if you look at the vid, it is obvious that there is nobody in front of Mr. Blevins.

    If you look at the pic below, which I grabbed from the vid, it is clear that Mr. Blevins was not firing at the officers giving chase, nor did he turn the gun towards them. That vid shot is the exact moment before the first shot was fired.

    Obviously, I have no idea when the officer made up his mind to shoot. It might have been moments before - I don't know what the time frame is on situations such as this. Mr. Blevins did in fact turn his head around, towards the officers moments before the first shot, but it is obvious he was just looking to see how much ground he had gained.



    ps#1 - my link is invisible and should be in that ^ blank space

    ps#2 - is there no way to up images to this forum?
    There was no one in front of Mr Blevins at that moment. However, who could have gotten in his way down the road? Who could he potentially shoot if the police just let him get away?

  7. #17
    Join Date
    May 2018
    Posts
    189

    Default Re: Police Shooting in Minneapolis

    Quote Quoting cdwjava
    View Post

    KK1968, how many armed suspects have you squared off against?
    From your tone, I deduce you expect my answer to be zero.

    Answer, more than enough to say I wouldn't have emptied my magazine into this kid's back.

    So, police can kill people with impunity.

    Government officials can rob the people blind with impunity.

    That doesn't mean they should every chance they get.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    California
    Posts
    20,320

    Default Re: Police Shooting in Minneapolis

    Quote Quoting KK1968
    View Post
    From your tone, I deduce you expect my answer to be zero.
    Pretty much.

    Answer, more than enough to say I wouldn't have emptied my magazine into this kid's back.
    So, you've been in law enforcement? And, you have enough time on to say without qualification that you would NOT have done as this officer did? Interesting. I have been at this for nearly 3 decades and I cannot say I would or would not have done as he did. I CAN say that his actions appear to be legally justified. Though, it seems the standard for too many these days is that the police need to have actually been wounded before they can fire back ... there was a riot in SF some months back when the police shot a guy who was actively shooting at them, but since the suspect did not hit any officers, the protesters thought it was inappropriate.

    These are bizarre times we live in. Why anyone would want to be a cop today is beyond me ... that's also one of the many reasons why agencies cannot fill the ranks. We shall reap what we sow.

    So, police can kill people with impunity.
    Huh ... I don't see where ANYONE ever said that.

    Government officials can rob the people blind with impunity.
    Where'd that one come from? And what's THAT got to do with anything?

    That doesn't mean they should every chance they get.
    An armed subject with a demonstrated criminal use of a firearm risking the lives of others drawing the firearm in the clear presence of advancing officers, that's not "every" chance, that's nearly textbook good cause.
    **********
    Retired Cal Cop Sergeant & Teacher

    Seek justice,
    Love mercy,
    Walk humbly with your God

    -- Courageous, by Casting Crowns ... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pkM-gDcmJeM

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    California
    Posts
    20,320

    Default Re: Police Shooting in Minneapolis

    And, how many rounds are "justified" when shooting someone with a gun? An armed suspect is still a danger, even on the ground. Not to mention that given observation and reaction time, a delay of 1 1/2 seconds to stop shooting is not entirely unreasonable.

    But, I'll let the experts hash that all out. But, as you will likely hear over the next year or so, there will be mixed decisions on how many shots should have been fired, when they should have started shooting and when they should have stopped ... even whether they should have shot or not. This ongoing evaluation will be conducted by so-called legal and use of force experts through the use of legal statutes and court precedent, the evaluation of forensics and cameras, and the benefit of hindsight (which will hardly be a universal truth) ... and the officers had only a split second to conduct the same evaluation absent the hindsight. Easy, right?
    **********
    Retired Cal Cop Sergeant & Teacher

    Seek justice,
    Love mercy,
    Walk humbly with your God

    -- Courageous, by Casting Crowns ... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pkM-gDcmJeM

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    1,213

    Default Re: Police Shooting in Minneapolis

    Quote Quoting EJay
    View Post
    I feel the shooting was justified but that the amount of shots fired was excessive. It sounded like 10 from one firearm and another 3 from a different firearm after the suspect was already on the ground.
    I'm always amazed when people make comments like that. When dealing with an armed suspect who has already fired his gun and is actively resisting arrest, it's not like cops can stop and have a casual conversation about shooting etiquette. "Hey Burt, how about if I take one shot at him and if that doesn't stop him, you take one? If you miss, ask Joey over there if he'd like to try a shot or two and see if that works. If it doesn't, we'll get together, regroup and talk out another strategy." It just doesn't work that way. There isn't time. It only take a fraction of a second for the suspect to pull the trigger and kill someone during the time you laboriously take to decide who is going to fire how many shots and in what order.

    When someone's conduct appears to pose an imminent risk of death or great bodily injury, you simply fire until the threat is stopped. If three officers fire six shots before the suspects stops and is no longer a threat, that's just what happens. Again, and as has been repeated many times over by law enforcement, deaths like this would not occur if the public would simply comply and not resist arrest. How hard is that? Really - how hard is that?

    I would like to point something else out here.

    As far back as time has recorded, every society has reserved unto itself, the right to regulate the quality of life within that society. It has done this by (among other things) passing laws telling its citizens what acts, which are deemed antisocial or unsafe, are prohibited. In anticipation that some people will not be in compliance, every society had employed some form of police and empowered them to enforce those laws by arresting law breakers. In doing so, it has passed additional laws authorizing the police to use force in arresting law breakers who resist and has told the police they will not be deemed as the aggressors when the do so, nor will they lose their right of self defense. To further clarify this, over that past 242 years, our courts have reviewed these laws when they were in dispute and clarified what officers can and cannot do.

    Nonetheless, as of late it seems like every time an officer makes an arrest or uses force, the position of a significant portion of society and the media is that he is a criminal who has somehow abused his authority and should be sent to prison. No one bothers to see what authority they as a society and the law have authorized the officer to exercise in this matter. Instead, in judging the matter they insist on substituting their own personal philosophy (which varies from person to person) for the consistency of the law. It's like telling the officers, "I know that in the police academy and your law classes we said you were authorized to do this, but you should have know we really didn't mean it, and now we're going to punish you for being stupid enough to believe us in the first place."

    This crap has to stop.

    Most of the time I see people showing videos of officers apparently acting completely within the law and their training, yet demanding they be tried and sent to prison in the name of justice for simply doing their jobs. Just for once I would love to see someone who makes a complaint about a police officer get up and actually say - Here's what the officer did, here's the law he violated and then articulate exactly how he violated the law, establishing the elements of the crime and demonstrating how he know this to be true. It's rarely going to happen because most people have no idea the law says or what we as a society had authorized the police to do on our behalf.

    1. Sponsored Links
       

Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Weapons Offenses: When Does a Shooting Constitute a Drive-By Shooting
    By Solo95502 in forum Criminal Charges
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 04-02-2017, 08:11 AM
  2. Deprivation of Civil Rights: Wrongful Death from a Police Shooting
    By meanderer in forum Civil Rights
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 06-22-2012, 10:00 AM
  3. Questionable Police Shooting
    By jk in forum Debate the Issues
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 10-06-2008, 02:26 AM
  4. Retail Fraud / Shoplifting: Teenage Son Caught Shoplifting in Airport in Minneapolis
    By jncole13 in forum Criminal Charges
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 08-05-2008, 08:38 AM
  5. Search and Seizure: Police Haven't Returned My Property After A Shooting Incident
    By talentscout21 in forum Criminal Procedure
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 11-09-2007, 11:16 AM
 
 
Sponsored Links

Legal Help, Information and Resources