Page 3 of 4
#81
I didn't read the article, but why did he not use a taser first (I'm assuming he has one)?

It's my understanding that if someone isn't complying, that's the first thing to try.

But then again, rushing him and simply not complying are two different things.


But in general, "unarmed" doesn't mean a damn thing when the person is on shit like acid.
This ends now, eat the goddamn beans!
#82
Cool, now people will probably think LSD turns you into a zombie or something.
#83
Quote by Omniscient G
Cool, now people will probably think LSD turns you into a zombie or something.

The majority already do believe that.
#84
Quote by W4RP1G
That shit is pretty freaky.

Also, why the **** was the cop running away? Where in their police training do they learn to run away from a single, unarmed assailant?


well some people lately have been eating other people...obviously already high on something i wouldnt want to take the chance...

Besides...now there's one less idiot in the world.
#86
Quote by Trowzaa
English police would have given no ****s and rugby tackled the ****er.

I've actually seen a police officer chase down some running dude and tackle the shit out of him (I assume he was a fleeing criminal and not just an early morning jogger)
#87
I'm so happy a trained law enforcement official is incapable of taking down a drugged-up, skinny college kid without shooting him, preferring to escape any and all possibilty of miniscule danger by killing a student.

Seriously, the kid was butt-naked and was clearly not carrying a weapon. He had commited no serious crime. There is no justification for this horrible act of cowardice. A police officer should not reach for the trigger just to get out of a possibly "dangerous" situation with an UNARMED NAKED COLLEGE KID. I've seen people subdue drugged up assholes loads of times. Without training. Without weapons.
#88
Other things to consider...

How would you know what kid was on? How would you know the kid wasn't on PCP?

More on warning shots: Once you shoot it, you can't get the bullet back. It can travel a long way, even if you shoot into the ground (ricochet). If you shoot up, it can kill an innocent person over a mile away.
#89
Quote by jetwash69
If you shoot up, it can kill an innocent person over a mile away.

Nope.

281-330-8004, that's my cell phone number, hit me up on the low
#90
Quote by jetwash69
Other things to consider...

How would you know what kid was on? How would you know the kid wasn't on PCP?


PCP, as far as I'm aware, does not transform one into some kind of superhuman zombie.

It should still be within the officer's ability to subdue a 140 lb, 5'7" unarmed dude, PCP or not.

Oh, and the drugs he was on can be determined by autopsy, so I guess we'll have to wait for those results. Not that it's really of significance to the way the officer conducted himself.
#91
Quote by jetwash69
Other things to consider...

How would you know what kid was on? How would you know the kid wasn't on PCP?

What's he going to do? Willyslap someone?

Obviously the problem here is that these police rely so much on their guns that they don't actually carry a non-lethal weapon with them. It could save a lot of lives, considering that similar news stories keep appearing.

Quote by jetwash69
More on warning shots: Once you shoot it, you can't get the bullet back. It can travel a long way, even if you shoot into the ground (ricochet). If you shoot up, it can kill an innocent person over a mile away.

Are you suggesting that a warning shot is more dangerous than a direct shot to the body?
VENUSIAN
FB SC BC TW
Patterns In The Ivy present ethnicity on an intriguing and dedicated level. ~Ambient Exotica
A mesmeric melange of yearning voice, delicate piano and carefully chosen samples. ~Lost Voices
#92
Quote by Andrea55
Some naked people can be dangerous.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4FljTDZR1G4



True but nobody shot this guy and he was clearly violent. He slapped the shit outta that officer.

Rarely are people in the middle of combat so greatly affected by a hit unless its major. Adrenaline usually helps to keep going but the officer got popped and immediatley stopped fighting and set back to recover.

I will say in this guys case though multiple officers were there. If it were a lone officer against a man like that i could almost see a shooting being necessary. Especially in the case of the OP where the guy was actively going after the cop. The guy in this vid at least was just trying to run away.
Knowledge is power
#93
Quote by rabidguitarist


Are you suggesting that a warning shot is more dangerous than a direct shot to the body?


I'm suggesting aggressors deserve getting shot more than innocent bystanders. It's more dangerous to the public that the officer's duty is to protect.

Did he deserve to get shot? Does a drunk driver deserve to die in a single vehicle wreck? Not a great idea to attack anyone who has a gun whether you're armed or not. And being on drugs or clinically insane doesn't excuse you.
Last edited by jetwash69 at Oct 10, 2012,
#94
Quote by jetwash69
And being on drugs or clinically insane doesn't excuse you.


From what, exactly? Being shot?

They should have been issued tasers.
#95
maybe the student pointed his gun at him..
You who build these altars now

To sacrifice these children
You must not do it anymore
#96
The cop could quite easily have shot him in the leg instead if he was going to subdue him. MOST people would probably go down from that - handcuffs, non fatal. Could have been a totally different outcome.


Then again, if he got back up, the headline would have been "Officer shoots naked student twice and kills him" which would sound a whole lot worse.
Ball Custom Mark I

Korg Pitchblack > Dunlop Crybaby wah > mODDball audio Green Bastard > Marshall GV2 Guv'nor Plus > EHX Holy Stain > MXR Phase 90 > MXR Carbon Copy

Jet City JCA20h
Epiphone Valve Jr.
Blackstar HTV212
#97
Quote by ma_tt11
The cop could quite easily have shot him in the leg instead if he was going to subdue him. MOST people would probably go down from that - handcuffs, non fatal. Could have been a totally different outcome.


Then again, if he got back up, the headline would have been "Officer shoots naked student twice and kills him" which would sound a whole lot worse.

Or maybe "Officer shoots naked student twice but runs out of bullets, then beats him to death with a flower pot"
VENUSIAN
FB SC BC TW
Patterns In The Ivy present ethnicity on an intriguing and dedicated level. ~Ambient Exotica
A mesmeric melange of yearning voice, delicate piano and carefully chosen samples. ~Lost Voices
#98
My god the comments on that story are depressing.

It's like the yahoo news comment section, but where the posters have mastered a basic level of linguistic ability.

Anyway, it seems odd he didn't have someone supervising him when he dropped it, I thought it was standard procedure to have sober friends making sure you don't do crazy shit.
#99
I'd lol at the people shouting 'hindsight' as if it means something and excuses the fact that the police only carry lethal options for dealing with people, but someone died unnecessarily and it's actually not funny.

This is my favourite quote

The sheriff said it was unclear whether the officer could have avoided the shooting even if he had a non-lethal weapon.

"Had the officer had a Taser or some other less lethal instrument I don't know if that officer would have had an opportunity to shoulder his pistol and to use something else because the events were evolving so rapidly and he was approaching so close," Cochran said.


As if coming out with the weapon drawn is fine.
Rhythm in Jump. Dancing Close to You.

Quote by element4433
Yeah. people, like Lemoninfluence, are hypocrites and should have all their opinions invalidated from here on out.
#100
Quote by TooktheAtrain
PCP, as far as I'm aware, does not transform one into some kind of superhuman zombie.


You've obviously never heard of Big Lurch
#101
Quote by Lemoninfluence
As if coming out with the weapon drawn is fine.

That was the most flimsy excuse ever by the sheriff, I wouldn't read further into it.
VENUSIAN
FB SC BC TW
Patterns In The Ivy present ethnicity on an intriguing and dedicated level. ~Ambient Exotica
A mesmeric melange of yearning voice, delicate piano and carefully chosen samples. ~Lost Voices
#102
Quote by moscaespañol
Nope.


Yep.

As an example, a 9mm 124 gr RN bullet exiting the muzzle at 1120fps has a maximum travel range of 2400 yards, well over a mile, and will impact at 350fps with more than enough energy to be lethal.

Warning shots are a Hollywood fiction, as are shoot-to-wound scenarios.
“Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge.”
Charles Darwin
#103
Quote by jetwash69


More on warning shots: Once you shoot it, you can't get the bullet back.

dirtbag ballet by the bins down the alley
as i walk through the chalet of the shadow of death
everything that you've come to expect


#104
Quote by TooktheAtrain
PCP, as far as I'm aware, does not transform one into some kind of superhuman zombie.

Some people in this thread seem to think that LSD does. Man, I've been taking the wrong LSD apparently.
#105
Quote by Thrashtastic15
Some people in this thread seem to think that LSD does. Man, I've been taking the wrong LSD apparently.


PCP has been linked to several extremely violent episodes involving law enforcement, so that's not even a question. Anyone that claims otherwise is either lying or clueless.

LSD generally doesn't, and isn't usually considered a 'violent' drug. (The Miami 'face eating' incident notwithstanding...)

But how was the officer to know what drug or combination of drugs the offender was on, given that he had already attacked bystanders?
“Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge.”
Charles Darwin
#106
Quote by rabidguitarist
Or maybe "Officer shoots naked student twice but runs out of bullets, then beats him to death with a flower pot"


True, that is also possible.
Ball Custom Mark I

Korg Pitchblack > Dunlop Crybaby wah > mODDball audio Green Bastard > Marshall GV2 Guv'nor Plus > EHX Holy Stain > MXR Phase 90 > MXR Carbon Copy

Jet City JCA20h
Epiphone Valve Jr.
Blackstar HTV212
#107
Quote by Lemoninfluence
As if coming out with the weapon drawn is fine.

The guy was clearly out of it and, considering he was high as a kite and naked, the officer probably had no idea what to think. Coming out with weapon drawn and prepared is much safer from a shooter's perspective than it is to come out, face the guy, and then draw weapon.

This whole thing is a clusterfuck. The kid certainly didn't deserve to die and the officer should have held his position to wait for backup. That said, the officer had no idea what the guy was on. It could have been a really drunk kid or it could have been PCP. Depending on what it was, shooting hundreds of volts of electricity into their body might or might not have been a good idea. It's easy to pass judgment on the officer knowing the information in the article, sitting in front of a computer.

Warning shots are bullshit. If you fire your weapon, you should be shooting to remove a threat. That does not necessarily mean "shoot to kill". Shooting a limb is also practically impossible unless you're standing still and can spend time lining up your shot. Running after or away from someone, center mass is your best bet for a clean hit and minimizes the risk of hitting bystanders if and when you miss your fancy trick shot.

The night stick is bullshit. It's a club; if the cop had used that instead of a gun, there'd still be condemnations of extreme force. Besides that, it's easy to lose a melee weapon, especially if the guy grapples with you. not knowing what he was on, there's no way of knowing if a good smack or two would have stopped him or not.
#108
Quote by Arby911
PCP has been linked to several extremely violent episodes involving law enforcement, so that's not even a question. Anyone that claims otherwise is either lying or clueless.

LSD generally doesn't, and isn't usually considered a 'violent' drug. (The Miami 'face eating' incident notwithstanding...)

But how was the officer to know what drug or combination of drugs the offender was on, given that he had already attacked bystanders?

I'm not sure he knew he'd already attacked bystanders.

The cop responded after the guy banged on the door of the station. As far as we know that's all he knew. So because somebody banged on the door, he came out with his gun drawn and no non-lethal tools. It would only be after this that he can guess that the guy was on violence inducing drugs.
Rhythm in Jump. Dancing Close to You.

Quote by element4433
Yeah. people, like Lemoninfluence, are hypocrites and should have all their opinions invalidated from here on out.
#109
Quote by Geldin
<Snip...a bunch of stuff...>


You're using reason and logic in the Pit...


“Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge.”
Charles Darwin
#110
Quote by Arby911
PCP has been linked to several extremely violent episodes involving law enforcement, so that's not even a question. Anyone that claims otherwise is either lying or clueless.

I'm pretty sure that those cases with PCP aren't necessarily the norm, and PCP's become a sort of boogeyman substance due to the way media presents both the substance and the extremely violent episodes. Not that I'm condoning PCP in any way, shape or form.

Quote by Arby911
LSD generally doesn't, and isn't usually considered a 'violent' drug. (The Miami 'face eating' incident notwithstanding...)

But how was the officer to know what drug or combination of drugs the offender was on, given that he had already attacked bystanders?

I think it's pretty obvious that LSD isn't a "violent" drug, which is why I was taking the piss.

Obviously the officer wasn't privy to the knowledge of what substances the victim had consumed and was under the influence of (we still can't even say with any certainty and credibility what he was on based on what has been presented through the media so far), but that in itself is not a justification for a shooting. He should have used other, non-lethal means to subdue the kid. The whole didn't have time to put my gun back in its holster bit is ridiculous, as officers aren't supposed to take their guns out unless they have full intent to shoot. If their protocol doesn't include non-lethal means for the officer to utilize in order to subdue the individual, than the failure extends much further than the officer and that needs to be addressed. I don't believe that is the case, but if I'm wrong than at the very least this should serve as the publicity and pressure required for the protocol to be addressed in order for officers to have a non-lethal method for stopping these sorts of incidents. It's an absolute shame that this kid lost his life, regardless of how batshit he was due to what he had consumed, due to incompetence somewhere down the line from the police.
#111
So what's more shocking, that some uni kid got ****ed on LSD and started doing stupid shit, or that a campus security guard carries a gun around like a squirt gun.
#113
Quote by Geldin
The guy was clearly out of it and, considering he was high as a kite and naked, the officer probably had no idea what to think. Coming out with weapon drawn and prepared is much safer from a shooter's perspective than it is to come out, face the guy, and then draw weapon.


He would only have known he was as high as a kite after he came out.

This whole thing is a clusterfuck. The kid certainly didn't deserve to die and the officer should have held his position to wait for backup. That said, the officer had no idea what the guy was on. It could have been a really drunk kid or it could have been PCP. Depending on what it was, shooting hundreds of volts of electricity into their body might or might not have been a good idea. It's easy to pass judgment on the officer knowing the information in the article, sitting in front of a computer.


It might not have been a good idea, but it's a better idea than putting a bullet in his chest. If someone dies from taser usage, you still get public outrage, but at least the legal system and people who think rationally realise that you made an effort to be non-lethal.

Warning shots are bullshit. If you fire your weapon, you should be shooting to remove a threat. That does not necessarily mean "shoot to kill". Shooting a limb is also practically impossible unless you're standing still and can spend time lining up your shot. Running after or away from someone, center mass is your best bet for a clean hit and minimizes the risk of hitting bystanders if and when you miss your fancy trick shot.


I never said anything about warning shots. I know they're bullshit. Anyone who has a modicum of common sense knows they're bullshit. You say aim for center of mass because it minimizes risk of hitting bystanders. But that's only an issue if you're using a gun, which he shouldn't have been.

blah blah hindsight blah blah

I apologise in advance for expecting law enforcement officers to have at least a little bit of forward thinking.

The night stick is bullshit. It's a club; if the cop had used that instead of a gun, there'd still be condemnations of extreme force. Besides that, it's easy to lose a melee weapon, especially if the guy grapples with you. not knowing what he was on, there's no way of knowing if a good smack or two would have stopped him or not.

People can condemn him for using extreme force, but then the kid would most likely not be dead, so in the grand scheme of things it's irrelevant.

What happens now is we get condemnations of extreme force AND a kid is dead.

YAY!
Rhythm in Jump. Dancing Close to You.

Quote by element4433
Yeah. people, like Lemoninfluence, are hypocrites and should have all their opinions invalidated from here on out.
#114
Quote by Geldin
The guy was clearly out of it and, considering he was high as a kite and naked, the officer probably had no idea what to think. Coming out with weapon drawn and prepared is much safer from a shooter's perspective than it is to come out, face the guy, and then draw weapon.

Okay, so let me get this straight. Your defense of the officer here is that he was "high as a kite", which to me is presuming that the officer had prior knowledge of what the victim was on (to a certain degree) before coming out, hence why he left with the weapon drawn (and from that intent to shoot).
Quote by Geldin
That said, the officer had no idea what the guy was on. It could have been a really drunk kid or it could have been PCP.

However here you're appealing to the lack of information available to the officer as basis for leaving with intent to shoot. Which is it?

Quote by Geldin
. Depending on what it was, shooting hundreds of volts of electricity into their body might or might not have been a good idea. It's easy to pass judgment on the officer knowing the information in the article, sitting in front of a computer.

Tazing him could have potentially had negative consequences depending on what he was on (what substances, in this context, would have made tazing the kid fatal? Elaborate). Therefore, the officer should shoot him with his gun. And kill him. America captured in a quote folks.

Quote by Geldin
Warning shots are bullshit. If you fire your weapon, you should be shooting to remove a threat. That does not necessarily mean "shoot to kill". Shooting a limb is also practically impossible unless you're standing still and can spend time lining up your shot. Running after or away from someone, center mass is your best bet for a clean hit and minimizes the risk of hitting bystanders if and when you miss your fancy trick shot.

Warning shots are indeed bullshit. Officers only draw their weapons with both the intent to fire and when they perceive there is need to use them. I don't see how, in this scenario, there is a logical rationale for the officer drawing his weapon and then using said weapon. Either there's something incredibly wrong with the protocol the officer was following, or the officer, for whatever reason, did not properly follow the protocol set in place and unnecessarily took the life of the kid.

Quote by Geldin
The night stick is bullshit. It's a club; if the cop had used that instead of a gun, there'd still be condemnations of extreme force. Besides that, it's easy to lose a melee weapon, especially if the guy grapples with you. not knowing what he was on, there's no way of knowing if a good smack or two would have stopped him or not.

I certainly wouldn't condone the night stick. I doubt that the officer knew with any certainty what the kid was on. Certain substances can make people freakishly strong, which would make some sort of a melee a potentially horrible idea for the officer. That being said, I don't buy that the only conceivable options for the officer are either night stick or shoot.
#115
Quote by Lemoninfluence
He would only have known he was as high as a kite after he came out.

Precisely. It could have been LSD, it could have been a weird cut of pot, it could have been PCP, or the guy could have just been hammered, all of which would be very different situations to take hand-to-hand. That said, he didn't know if the guy was a danger to other students or not, as far as we know. I agree that he should have stayed put and waited for backup, but I can see where the clear and present threat of a kid who could have been loaded up on just about anything might make the guy want to go out and try to subdue him before he goes after another student.


It might not have been a good idea, but it's a better idea than putting a bullet in his chest. If someone dies from taser usage, you still get public outrage, but at least the legal system and people who think rationally realise that you made an effort to be non-lethal.

Remember this though - the officer did not know what the student was on. If he was on PCP, a taser wouldn't have done any good at all.

Quote by Thrastastic15
Okay, so let me get this straight. Your defense of the officer here is that he was "high as a kite", which to me is presuming that the officer had prior knowledge of what the victim was on (to a certain degree) before coming out, hence why he left with the weapon drawn (and from that intent to shoot).

What I'm saying is that the kid was naked and running around, two signs that he's not behaving normally for whatever reason. I'm not implying any prior knowledge.

That being said, I don't buy that the only conceivable options for the officer are either night stick or shoot.

At the outset, those two are not good options. But consider this - police officers are allowed to escalate the violence of a situation by one degree (what constitutes a degree varies between departments and municipalities, so I can't tell you what constitutes a degree in this situation) if, in his judgment, by doing so he can diminish the overall threat to public safety. Besides that, he was running from the kid already, indicating that the kid was pursuing the officer.

What we don't know is how the chase got started and how the situation escalated from the officer coming out with weapon drawn to the officer running away and ultimately shooting the student. We don't know is what the situation around him coming out to face the student was. How was the student behaving? What was his body language like? Did he appear to be a danger to other students? Did he appear to pose a threat to the officer? How did the chase get started? Was the cop running for his life, or just buying distance for a clean shot? Were other students present? How far away was backup? Did the student appear to be a danger to himself and/or to others?

What we know is that there is footage of the officer retreating, then firing on the student. That footage is not available to the public and it was not said if the footage shows the beginning of the confrontation. We know a student is dead because a police officer shot him after a brief chase.

Right now, it's really easy to leap to conclusions about what happened and what should and shouldn't have happened. I'm not going to pass judgment on this one until there is a little more hard evidence made available. There are far too many unknowns in this, and right now, it's really easy to assume it was a dumb cop who got tragically gung-ho one night. Personally, I'm not going to believe that (or anything else) to be the case until I see some evidence.
#116
Quote by Geldin
it could have been a weird cut of pot,

Losing essentially all credibility in my eyes already.

Quote by Geldin
What I'm saying is that the kid was naked and running around, two signs that he's not behaving normally for whatever reason. I'm not implying any prior knowledge.

Fair enough, I may have just been confused by the manner you phrased those sections of your post. Probably reading too far into it, apologies.


Quote by Geldin
At the outset, those two are not good options. But consider this - police officers are allowed to escalate the violence of a situation by one degree (what constitutes a degree varies between departments and municipalities, so I can't tell you what constitutes a degree in this situation) if, in his judgment, by doing so he can diminish the overall threat to public safety. Besides that, he was running from the kid already, indicating that the kid was pursuing the officer.

I just don't comprehend how an escalation of one degree of violence is from a naked runt of a kid chasing an officer (as far as I'm aware the officer was not aware of the previous incidents involving the kid?) turns into a shooting that could very well potentially be fatal.

Now, to me, it seems that tazing the suspect would have been a perfectly viable option. Logically that seems as if it would be an escalation in violence to the known conduct of the kid (regardless of whether or not the officer was aware of the previous incidents). Granted, we are both unaware of what falls under the blanket of appropriate escalation in violence by a degree in this particular jurisdiction, but one would have to imagine that tazing and shooting wouldn't necessarily fall under the same degree. We don't know with certainty, but it doesn't seem like they logically would given the nature of the two tools. One is a non-lethal device used to incapacitate suspects that are a danger to himself, those around him, and potentially the officer, and the other is typically used very conservatively when there are no other legitimate options and there is a serious threat (usually an armed suspect).

Quote by Geldin
What we don't know is how the chase got started and how the situation escalated from the officer coming out with weapon drawn to the officer running away and ultimately shooting the student. We don't know is what the situation around him coming out to face the student was. How was the student behaving? What was his body language like? Did he appear to be a danger to other students? Did he appear to pose a threat to the officer? How did the chase get started? Was the cop running for his life, or just buying distance for a clean shot? Were other students present? How far away was backup? Did the student appear to be a danger to himself and/or to others?

Given the situation and context, these answers are likely to lead to the officer to having the grounds to use a tazer or a similar tool/method in incapacitating the threat in a non-fatal manner.

You believe that the tazer could have been fatal, and that's your grounds for dismissing it (that's at least what I've gleamed from your posts so far). I think that's absurd, because even if I do accept your premise, so is a gun. I fail to see how the tazer is going to be more likely to cause death than a gun being shot at centre-mass. I'd appreciate an elaboration in your part on this area, as it's pretty vital to this whole incident.

Quote by Geldin
What we know is that there is footage of the officer retreating, then firing on the student. That footage is not available to the public and it was not said if the footage shows the beginning of the confrontation. We know a student is dead because a police officer shot him after a brief chase.

Right now, it's really easy to leap to conclusions about what happened and what should and shouldn't have happened. I'm not going to pass judgment on this one until there is a little more hard evidence made available. There are far too many unknowns in this, and right now, it's really easy to assume it was a dumb cop who got tragically gung-ho one night. Personally, I'm not going to believe that (or anything else) to be the case until I see some evidence.

Given everything that we do know, which is a fair bit, I think it's logical to initially assume that there is incompetence either from the officer, the department itself, or both. There is plenty of evidence available to make an initial judgement, and it seems reasonable to believe that the officer used an unnecessary amount of force to subdue the threat which led to the death of a college kid.
#117
Quote by Geldin
Precisely. It could have been LSD, it could have been a weird cut of pot, it could have been PCP, or the guy could have just been hammered, all of which would be very different situations to take hand-to-hand. That said, he didn't know if the guy was a danger to other students or not, as far as we know. I agree that he should have stayed put and waited for backup, but I can see where the clear and present threat of a kid who could have been loaded up on just about anything might make the guy want to go out and try to subdue him before he goes after another student.

He could also have been completely sober and in distress. He knew nothing of the situation except there was a banging on the door and came out armed with no non-lethal tools.

Remember this though - the officer did not know what the student was on. If he was on PCP, a taser wouldn't have done any good at all.

well then why use tasers ever? they could be on PCP and be ineffective.

He made the decision to not bring the taser BEFORE he knew the kid was on drugs.
Rhythm in Jump. Dancing Close to You.

Quote by element4433
Yeah. people, like Lemoninfluence, are hypocrites and should have all their opinions invalidated from here on out.
#118
Quote by Lemoninfluence
He could also have been completely sober and in distress. He knew nothing of the situation except there was a banging on the door and came out armed with no non-lethal tools.


well then why use tasers ever? they could be on PCP and be ineffective.

He made the decision to not bring the taser BEFORE he knew the kid was on drugs.


From what I've been able to find, the University police do not carry tasers.
“Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge.”
Charles Darwin
#119
Quote by Thrashtastic15
Losing essentially all credibility in my eyes already.

I'm basing that one off of personal experience. I've had a few experiences where I was supposed to be smoking pot, but what happened was extreme paranoia followed by huge bursts of easily-misdirected energy. I dunno about running around a police precinct naked, but I'm not gonna count it out.

I just don't comprehend how an escalation of one degree of violence is from a naked runt of a kid chasing an officer (as far as I'm aware the officer was not aware of the previous incidents involving the kid?) turns into a shooting that could very well potentially be fatal.

Like I said, there are far too many unknowns for me to pass judgment. In one scenario, it's completely illogical that the officer would open fire; in another hypothetical, it makes perfect sense. I will say this much - if he was running in fear of his life, he had good cause to shoot. We don't know how it all went down, simply that it did and now a kid is dead.

Now, to me, it seems that tazing the suspect would have been a perfectly viable option. Logically that seems as if it would be an escalation in violence to the known conduct of the kid (regardless of whether or not the officer was aware of the previous incidents). Granted, we are both unaware of what falls under the blanket of appropriate escalation in violence by a degree in this particular jurisdiction, but one would have to imagine that tazing and shooting wouldn't necessarily fall under the same degree. We don't know with certainty, but it doesn't seem like they logically would given the nature of the two tools. One is a non-lethal device used to incapacitate suspects that are a danger to himself, those around him, and potentially the officer, and the other is typically used very conservatively when there are no other legitimate options and there is a serious threat (usually an armed suspect).

Fair point on the tazing, though I will point this out - a classic behavior of people on PCP is to remove their clothing and act out (precisely what it sounds like what the kid was doing). Not knowing what the kid was on and having him potentially right at the door, going out with a taser that might or might not effect the kid is a dicey proposition. In hindsight, tasing could well have been the second best option (the first being waiting for backup unless the kid did something that posed a legitimate threat to himself or others).

You believe that the tazer could have been fatal, and that's your grounds for dismissing it (that's at least what I've gleamed from your posts so far). I think that's absurd, because even if I do accept your premise, so is a gun. I fail to see how the tazer is going to be more likely to cause death than a gun being shot at centre-mass. I'd appreciate an elaboration in your part on this area, as it's pretty vital to this whole incident.

Lemme set this straight - I dismissed the taser because (1) we don't know if the officer had one at the time (they aren't always standard issue to campus police), (2) it might not have effected the kid depending on what he was on, (3) it might have had extremely adverse effects on the kid depending on what he was on, and (4) the officer may have believed that simply drawing his weapon might subdue the kid. There are a lot of "ifs" and "mights" in there, highlighting that there is a lot that we just don't know.


There is plenty of evidence available to make an initial judgement, and it seems reasonable to believe that the officer used an unnecessary amount of force to subdue the threat which led to the death of a college kid.

The trouble is that we don't have access to video footage of the confrontation or the chase. We know that chase footage exists, but we don't have public access. Barring further evidence and testimony, I'm not going to ascribe to malice what I can to incompetence (as in, I believe the officer intended to subdue rather than kill the student and initiated the confrontation with a non-violent resolution), and I'm not going to ascribe to incompetence what I can to my own lack of knowledge (meaning that I won't assume that the officer catastrophically mishandled the situation and escalated the level of violence until I see proof).

There are way too many variables right now for me to be comfortable passing judgment on this one.
#120
Quote by Geldin

The trouble is that we don't have access to video footage of the confrontation or the chase. We know that chase footage exists, but we don't have public access. Barring further evidence and testimony, I'm not going to ascribe to malice what I can to incompetence (as in, I believe the officer intended to subdue rather than kill the student and initiated the confrontation with a non-violent resolution), and I'm not going to ascribe to incompetence what I can to my own lack of knowledge (meaning that I won't assume that the officer catastrophically mishandled the situation and escalated the level of violence until I see proof).

There are way too many variables right now for me to be comfortable passing judgment on this one.


Exactly. It's not like we NEED to rush to judgement. There's plenty of time to gather data and assess.
“Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge.”
Charles Darwin