This thread is interesting. When few facts were released we had people already saying this was not justified and that there was no defending what the police did, based on nothing more than one video from a good distance away showing one hand raised. We had multiple people accusing the police of lying, and when one person said they were interested in the facts of the case, they were questioned with "why?"

 

The facts are always important. Unfortunately, this day in age when a police officer is involved many people aren't interested in facts.

 

Like I said before, this is far from over in determining whether they were justified or not, but we're getting a much different picture now that more information is being released.

Still indefensible.

 

Are you saying it's still indefensible even if it turns out he had a weapon?

 

Still indefensible.

 

You don't know that, that's the problem.

 

Are you saying it's still indefensible even if it turns out he had a weapon?

 

I guess he's going to stick with his original opinion no matter what the evidence shows.

 

It's interesting how so many people are tricked into automatically believing this guy was unarmed with his hand raised, even though you can only see one hand. Just shows that all you have to do to convince someone of something is put it in the title of something.

I'd be curious to know how officers are trained in regards to a weapon.

 

Obviously, there is discretion and the "better safe than sorry" mentality.

 

Let's assume that when the victim raised his hands above his head there was a knife.

 

What is protocol? Shoot immediately? Assess mindset of the person? Wait for him to make a threatening move?

 

If it's "shoot immediately" and there was a knife then the officers are in the clear. My guess is that's not standard though.

 

If it's not "shoot immediately" then the challenge the officers are going to face is the small amount of time between recognizing there's a weapon and firing shots.

 

Anyone?

Are you saying it's still indefensible even if it turns out he had a weapon?

 

If he had a gun, no.

 

If it was a knife, which is what has been said, yes, indefensible. He had his hands in the air above his head.

You don't know that, that's the problem.

 

Nope, no problem here.

If he had a gun, no.

 

If it was a knife, which is what has been said, yes, indefensible. He had his hands in the air above his head.

So should the officers wait until he charges them with the knife before shooting him?

I'd be curious to know how officers are trained in regards to a weapon.

 

Obviously, there is discretion and the "better safe than sorry" mentality.

 

Let's assume that when the victim raised his hands above his head there was a knife.

 

What is protocol? Shoot immediately? Assess mindset of the person? Wait for him to make a threatening move?

 

If it's "shoot immediately" and there was a knife then the officers are in the clear. My guess is that's not standard though.

 

If it's not "shoot immediately" then the challenge the officers are going to face is the small amount of time between recognizing there's a weapon and firing shots.

 

Anyone?

 

If they were going to shoot immediately wouldn't they have shot him earlier in the video? At one point he approached them and they retreated.

 

Makes me think something happened with his left hand that made them both shoot.

 

Also, sorry if I'm not convinced he's a "victim" just yet. The female the police found injured and bleeding is a victim. Whether he is or not is yet to be determined.

 

If he had a gun, no.

 

If it was a knife, which is what has been said, yes, indefensible. He had his hands in the air above his head.

 

You can see through poles??

 

Do you realize how dangerous knives are?

 

Nope, no problem here.

 

I disagree. You don't know what you are talking about, but are pretending you do.

I disagree. You don't know what you are talking about, but are pretending you do.

 

Nope, not at all. I'm giving my opinion, no more no less. You obviously disagree. Good thing that carries zero weight with me.

A knife in his hand in his hand (while in the air) does not justify being shot.

 

Nope, not at all. I'm giving my opinion, no more no less. You obviously disagree. Good thing that carries zero weight with me.

 

So based on the one video, you are ready to arrest and prosecute these officers?

 

Can you see what his left hand is doing?

A knife in his hand in his hand (while in the air) does not justify being shot.

Was his left hand in the air when he was shot? I can't tell.

 

Maybe it was, but a man with a knife within that close of a range is a mortal danger to anyone around him...depending on the entirety of the situation shooting him may have been justified.

 

We'll see what else comes out.