Shooting at Carl's Junior.

BluesStringer said:
1) The jerks taking the video are 100% irrelevant to evaluating the scene and shooting.

2) The K9 handling officer has no duty to send his partner in to face a potentially deadly weapon (the conduit bender) in place of a uniformed officer. If the handler was justified in shooting to protect his human partner from the bender being swung, he was justified in preventing his K9 partner from being the target of the same weapon. If he had let the dog go, it would have vastly reduced his shooting options, or at least put his K9 partner in the line of fire if he decided after letting the dog go that it was time to open fire.

3) While the second volley of shots is a valid action to question and scrutinize for those investigating the shooting, the only video we have to go on prevents us from seeing what the perp is doing once he disappeared from the camera's eye from the first volley. If he was still holding the bender and made an attempt to get up again, or actually, it's possible that he never went all the way down, the second volley would be justified. If not, well, I can't say what other threatening movement he might have made, if any at all. I'd be interested to hear both officers explain the second volley, but I'm nowhere near ready to judge it unjustified based only on this video. Chances are the first volley of five shots would've killed the guy eventually anyway, but if a Taser to the bare skin of his face didn't slow him down from being threatening, the second volley may well have been necessary to stop the threat, and there's no question that will be the officer's explanation, a second volley was necessary to stop the threat.

Blues
Click to expand...

Very well stated.
 
rifleshooter474 said:
Just a legal reason and way for the cops to just kill someone.
Click to expand...

wuja5l_th.jpg


213nm2x.jpg
 
rifleshooter474 said:
Just a legal reason and way for the cops to just kill someone.
Click to expand...

Nope, you are wrong sir.
This nutjob was 'smashing all of the windows'!
He was clearly enraged and not being rational!
Could it have been handled better by the cops? "Yes" definately.
Was it the cops 'just wanting to kill someone'? "NO".
 
rifleshooter474 said:
Just a legal reason and way for the cops to just kill someone.
Click to expand...

Is it your position that either the cop that tasered the guy or the dog (or both) should've taken a blow or two from a conduit bender before deadly force would be morally justified? I'm asking about morality only because you already ceded the legal point.

Blues
 
Dogs cost a lot of money. An average price for a police dog, including training, can be in excess of $10,000. I can remember working K9 training with various PD's. The thought process was that you don't send the dog against someone wielding a weapon if the dog will certainly be injured or killed. There is no doubt that a person wielding a bludgeon can kill the dog. He may get bit in the process but he'll still win. Tweekerw and crackheads aren't scared by a dog and they're not stopping after an inital bite. The dog is a police officer, has specific uses and is expensive to replace.
 
BC1 said:
Dogs cost a lot of money. An average price for a police dog, including training, can be in excess of $10,000. I can remember working K9 training with various PD's. The thought process was that you don't send the dog against someone wielding a weapon if the dog will certainly be injured or killed. There is no doubt that a person wielding a bludgeon can kill the dog. He may get bit in the process but he'll still win. Tweekerw and crackheads aren't scared by a dog and they're not stopping after an inital bite. The dog is a police officer, has specific uses and is expensive to replace.
Click to expand...

I have heard before that dogs are no different in the eyes of the law than an LEO, but stopped short of making that reference because I wouldn't have known where to look if asked to back up that assertion. But my evaluation of the video held that premise as a basis for not turning the dog loose to face a weapon that was already in the process of being deployed on the taser-cop.

I don't think it's quite accurate to say there's no difference between human and K9 officers. For instance, if a perp kills a K9, but doesn't kill any LEOs, he couldn't get the death penalty. At least I'd be very surprised to find that wasn't true. As I understand it, where they can legitimately be described as the "same," is when they're being threatened. If a K9 is facing a deadly threat, it's no different than a human officer, in that it would be enough justification to respond with deadly force, thus either the dog or the cop that deployed the taser getting threatened with the bender justifies at least the first volley from the dog handler. Do I have that more or less right BC1?

Blues
 
BluesStringer said:
I have heard before that dogs are no different in the eyes of the law than an LEO, but stopped short of making that reference because I wouldn't have known where to look if asked to back up that assertion. But my evaluation of the video held that premise as a basis for not turning the dog loose to face a weapon that was already in the process of being deployed on the taser-cop.

I don't think it's quite accurate to say there's no difference between human and K9 officers. For instance, if a perp kills a K9, but doesn't kill any LEOs, he couldn't get the death penalty. At least I'd be very surprised to find that wasn't true. As I understand it, where they can legitimately be described as the "same," is when they're being threatened. If a K9 is facing a deadly threat, it's no different than a human officer, in that it would be enough justification to respond with deadly force, thus either the dog or the cop that deployed the taser getting threatened with the bender justifies at least the first volley from the dog handler. Do I have that more or less right BC1?

Blues
Click to expand...
Not sure how the officer can legally react to an attack on the dog. I know I love my dogs and would defend them if they were attacked. I think most LEO simply won't introduce the dog to a situation where it will likely be killed unless doing so to protect himself or another officer. Dogs work very well for crowd control, backing-off an aggressor, breaking up fights, searching premises/property and other situations where the officer could face injury. An armed agressor attacking a LEO calls for a more direct response.

The military will sacrifice the dog in today's applications. A GSD was used by Seal Team Six when they killed bin Laden. Those dogs can cost as much as $25K in special training.
 
I am wondering if possibly only ONE taser wire entered the perp? When I have seen them demonstrated the wires spread usually close to 10". the unit is useless if only one wire hits bare skin. Being that he was shot in the face there is a good chance one wire missed. Its hard to tell by the video.
 
The_Outlaw said:
The cop with the K-9 did an excellent job of protecting his fellow officer i.m.h.o.
He did not have time to release the K-9 because the suspect was allready taking the swing at the other officer who was clearly not even paying attention to the suspect at that moment.
However, I believe that the 2nd cop (with the pepper spray) was incompetent and it was both a combination of his incompetence & the suspects stupid reaction that forced the K-9 officer to use deadly force i.m.h.o.
And WHY in the hell did the same incompetent officer have to add even more bullets into the suspect AFTER the suspect was already shot and down on the ground? ~SMH~
Click to expand...

Sorry but there is very little reason why the dog, which is there, could not have prevented this whole episode way before what I saw. Then again--I was not there, you were not there and who the heck knows. Let me understand what I saw--guy with metal something, cops with dog, pepper spray and more than one of them--guy gets hammered with a hail of bullets--sorry guys--bad police work.
 
I think the dog could have been sent in when the guy was walking away from the taser and taken him down without injury to the dog, it was viable. But, and this is a big but, in a stressful situation you don't see every opportunity for what it is. So I don't think I fault the officer for not releasing him.

I can't get to the video to check, but didn't the same officer fire all 10 shots? And if what I think I saw was what happened, that the second 5 rounds were fired into his back, it was way over the top. IMHO the second five round make it a questionable shoot.

And what us with putting on rubber gloves to cuff him and watch him die? Some sort of first aid should have been given. Even a boy scout can apply direct pressure.

Sent from my PG86100 using Tapatalk
 
titaniumman said:
I am wondering if possibly only ONE taser wire entered the perp? When I have seen them demonstrated the wires spread usually close to 10". the unit is useless if only one wire hits bare skin. Being that he was shot in the face there is a good chance one wire missed. Its hard to tell by the video.
Click to expand...

Hmmmm...Good point. Maybe he's not superman afterall.
 
titaniumman said:
I am wondering if possibly only ONE taser wire entered the perp? When I have seen them demonstrated the wires spread usually close to 10". the unit is useless if only one wire hits bare skin. Being that he was shot in the face there is a good chance one wire missed. Its hard to tell by the video.
Click to expand...

It seems to me that, more often than not, when I see a tasing video (a real tasing, not a demo) it has little or no effect on the perp. Not every time, just most of the time. A LEO friend of mine doesn't even bother carrying one any more.
 
Warbirds said:
I think the dog could have been sent in when the guy was walking away from the taser and taken him down without injury to the dog, it was viable. But, and this is a big but, in a stressful situation you don't see every opportunity for what it is. So I don't think I fault the officer for not releasing him.

I can't get to the video to check, but didn't the same officer fire all 10 shots? And if what I think I saw was what happened, that the second 5 rounds were fired into his back, it was way over the top. IMHO the second five round make it a questionable shoot.

And what us with putting on rubber gloves to cuff him and watch him die? Some sort of first aid should have been given. Even a boy scout can apply direct pressure.

Sent from my PG86100 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

2 officers. Five shots each. The first officer was within reason when it got to the point of swinging the weapon. The 2nd officer with the other five shots is a tough call. The perp begins to turn and seem to start to fall when the other 5 shots were fired. After the first 5 shots, the perp is behind a car mostly obscured from camera view, presumably falling from the first dose. Then as you can tell from seeing the top of his head, his back appears to be turned when the second dose was given. However, being behind the car, I have no way of knowing exactly what he was doing. Was he falling to the ground or reaching for a firearm or another weapon? Maybe all but 1 of the first 5 shots missed and the perp was still somewhat active. My point is, we just can't tell for sure. I tried to watch the impacts of the first 5 shots, but you can't tell anything, nor was really expecting to see that much detail.

Would others agree with this summary?
 
Why didn't they release the dog into the restaurant before the perp came out?

10 shots?

What's with all the bystanders standing around as the cops have their guns out? WTF?
 
rrman12280 said:
That is in California, right? Explains a little. JK.
Click to expand...

It may or may not. All I'm sayin' is that stats show that cops hit what they aim at roughly 30% of the time when they fire their guns. So where do the other 70% go? Not a good time to stand there rubber necking....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

New Threads

Members online

No members online now.
Total: 1,490 (members: 0, guests: 1,490)

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
49,533
Messages
610,703
Members
75,032
Latest member
BLACKROCK6

Share this page

Back
Top