By the same token do you think that the officers should share some of the blame for allowing it to get to that point? The guy walked a good distance back to his vehicle while they watched him. They were armed with non-lethal weapons. Didn't they have time to use those non-lethal weapons before allowing the situation to get to that point?

I thought it was reported a taser was used, if it was used before the shooting then apparently it didn't have the affect they desired.

I thought it was reported a taser was used, if it was used before the shooting then apparently it didn't have the affect they desired.

That can't be right. Tasers are the solution to every incident that escalates. Hence the 'why didn't they just taze him' question that is asked in every police shooting.

One officer fired his taser, the other fired her gun.

 

It was my understanding from the article that both were done simultaneously.

I thought it was reported a taser was used, if it was used before the shooting then apparently it didn't have the affect they desired.

 

The male officer pulled his taser. I don't think we'll ever know if it would have worked given that the female officer shot him dead.

What if she asked him for ID, and he was going to retrieve it?

If she felt she needed to draw her gun on him, I would think she will wait until he is in cuffs before worrying about his ID.

One officer fired his taser, the other fired her gun.

 

It was my understanding from the article that both were done simultaneously.

 

I'm going to bet a donut that she fired her gun thinking it was her taser because she fired just once. Still wrong. If so, it's a training issue and not a racial one.

Right. Why didn't she taser him while he was walking away, with his hands up, if she felt threatened?

 

I'll ask again, why did they lie and say he refused to put his hands up?

Because she didn't have her taser out, she had her firearm.

 

And I will answer again, you can't tell what he did when he got back to the car. He could have put his hands down. If there is one thing we can agree on it's that the video is pretty much useless. You cannot tell if he did or did have his hands up the moment before he was shot and you can't tell if he did or didn't reach in the car.

If she felt she needed to draw her gun on him, I would think she will wait until he is in cuffs before worrying about his ID.

 

Another reason audio would be helpful. Lots of questions...

 

Wasn't this a broken down vehicle?

 

Why was the gun drawn in the first place?

 

Is that typical for officers responding to calls for broken downs?

 

What did the guy do to make her draw her weapon?

 

Why was he walking back to the car?

 

Did he reach into the vehicle?

 

If he did, why was reaching into the vehicle?

 

Did they tell him to stop?

 

Why did they claim he refused to put his hands in the air?

I'm going to bet a donut that she fired her gun thinking it was her taser because she fired just once. Still wrong. If so, it's a training issue and not a racial one.

I might agree if she hadn't had her gun drawn for so long. It wasn't a situation where she pulled it and shot within seconds of each other.

I'm going to bet a donut that she fired her gun thinking it was her taser because she fired just once. Still wrong. If so, it's a training issue and not a racial one.

 

FWIW, I never said it was a racial issue. This sort of thing doesn't help ease the tensions between blacks and officers though, regardless of whether it was training or otherwise.

 

And I tend to agree with your suspicions.

That can't be right. Tasers are the solution to every incident that escalates. Hence the 'why didn't they just taze him' question that is asked in every police shooting.

 

The Scribe, back away from the ledge. To the best of my knowledge, I'm the 1st person to mention tasers in this thread. Feel free to check my history of posts, and I don't think you'll find a single post stating that tasers are the answer to each situation. My point was simple: this guy was not a threat that required deadly force.

 

Many officers are put in situations where they must make life or death decisions in a split-second. I'm willing to give most officers the benefit of the doubt in those instances; however, this is not one. The decedent had both hands in the air and slowly walked quite some distance back to his vehicle. If the officer felt that the decedent was going to get a weapon from his vehicle, they should have prevented him from reaching that point. I don't care if that's done through physical restraint (i.e. handcuffs) or through non-deadly force (i.e. a taser). I do have a problem with him being shot.

 

Under no circumstances should this situation have escalated to the point where an officer felt deadly force was necessary.

The Scribe, back away from the ledge. To the best of my knowledge, I'm the 1st person to mention tasers in this thread. Feel free to check my history of posts, and I don't think you'll find a single post stating that tasers are the answer to each situation. My point was simple: this guy was not a threat that required deadly force.

 

Many officers are put in situations where they must make life or death decisions in a split-second. I'm willing to give most officers the benefit of the doubt in those instances; however, this is not one. The decedent had both hands in the air and slowly walked quite some distance back to his vehicle. If the officer felt that the decedent was going to get a weapon from his vehicle, they should have prevented him from reaching that point. I don't care if that's done through physical restraint (i.e. handcuffs) or through non-deadly force (i.e. a taser). I do have a problem with him being shot.

 

Under no circumstances should this situation have escalated to the point where an officer felt deadly force was necessary.

 

I agree it should not have escalated. Just stop walking away and no need even for a taser. If he has done nothing wrong, they wait for the tow truck and he goes on his way. If he stopped and had done something wrong, he has his day in court in front of a jury of his peers.

I agree it should not have escalated. Just stop walking away and no need even for a taser. If he has done nothing wrong, they wait for the tow truck and he goes on his way. If he stopped and had done something wrong, he has his day in court in front of a jury of his peers.

 

Who exactly was he putting in danger by walking away with his hands up?

Let me break it down for some who refuse to ever see things other than the guy was only shot because he was black.

 

Should it have escalated to become a shooting? Nope

What would have avoided the entire mess? The guy listen to the lawful orders given.

Some think because he had his hands up, that makes all the difference in the world. What I saw was while his hands were up he was not shot, what I saw was he possibly had his hands up to give himself time to hold the officers off until he got back to his vehicle to get something, possibly a weapon, no other reason why he would need to get back to his vehicle if you ask me.

 

He gets back to the vehicle, that is when his hands come down and he reaches for something and gets shot.

 

I just don't understand why people automatically 1. make it a race issue and 2. wonder why things escalate when people ignore lawful orders and make it worse when they make the officers safety feel in jeopardy.

 

The only thing black and white about this incident is the fact that if the guy obeys the orders given to him he would still be alive today.

Who exactly was he putting in danger by walking away with his hands up?

 

Apparently himself. Even though there is no audio do you think the cops are telling him to walk to his car? No!