Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Well, then the solution to that is obvious, isn't it? Come into the room firing your weapon, and don't stop until you are 100% sure the guy is dead. And if he happens to be innocent, too bad for him. Because an officers safety is more important then the lives of any number of innocent citizens, who they are supposed to be serving and protecting.
Had the driver legally owned a firearm that was in his vehicle and shot the crazed person yelling that he was going to shoot him in the head, how would the thread be playing out?
The issue here is the detective was off duty in his personal vehicle with no lights or other markings that identified him as a police officer. He could have easily been a police impersonator (anyone can have a realistic looking fake badge or paperwork). I would have reacted the same way, in fact I would have not spoken to or engaged with this gentleman even after he showed his badge. I would have pulled to the side, called 911, and asked for a uniformed officer to come and handle the situation. An off-duty detective has no right performing traffic stops on his own.
I would have done better then that. I would have reversed right out of there, and gotten away from him. Then I would have called 911 and reported that some guy was threatening to kill me. That would have changed the entire dynamics of the call. Instead of a call for an off duty police officer needing assistance, it would have been my call that some crazy guy (who later turned out to be a cop) was trying to kill me.
They still wouldn't have arrested the detective for threatening to kill me, but at least the incident would have been on the record.
and you might want to educate yourself as to the odds of any cop encountering someone capable of performing such a feat. Cops are at vastly more risk from dangerous drivers than they are from combat experts....
But there is that one in a million chance that they might respond to a burglary only to be ambushed by Bruce Lee's grandson. Can't take that chance. Better to shoot first and ask questions later.
Had the driver legally owned a firearm that was in his vehicle and shot the crazed person yelling that he was going to shoot him in the head, how would the thread be playing out?
With the video evidence, it's hard to say what would have happened. Without the video, he would have been arrested for murdering a cop.
and you might want to educate yourself as to the odds of any cop encountering someone capable of performing such a feat. Cops are at vastly more risk from dangerous drivers than they are from combat experts....
Did you even bother to read the back and forth between me and Kaaboom? He suggested that cops use mace when confronting knife wielding thugs. The video proves that this is not feasable. A cop encountering anyone with a knife is at a disadvantage even with a firearm if the distance between them is less than 21 feet.
Well, then the solution to that is obvious, isn't it? Come into the room firing your weapon, and don't stop until you are 100% sure the guy is dead. And if he happens to be innocent, too bad for him. Because an officers safety is more important then the lives of any number of innocent citizens, who they are supposed to be serving and protecting.
You suggested that police officers should use anything other than a gun when encountering knife wielding thugs. I proved that that is not feasable. Can you respond to that?
Well, then the solution to that is obvious, isn't it? Come into the room firing your weapon, and don't stop until you are 100% sure the guy is dead. And if he happens to be innocent, too bad for him. Because an officers safety is more important then the lives of any number of innocent citizens, who they are supposed to be serving and protecting.
This is a training film. The purpose of the video is to illustrate that law enforcement officers need to keep an appropriate amount of distance from an individual that is under investigation. It does not imply in any way that officers should come in with guns blazing. I have no idea where you came to that conclusion.
Whenever I encountered an unarmed individual, my level of response was to employ pepper spray, baton, taser, etc., if necessary. Escalate that to an individual with a knife, club, etc. and I unholstered my duty sidearm. Although I hold black belts in three different martial art disciplines, I did my best not engage in any type of physical contact/combat. A sure way to get hurt and possibly be on the losing end of a fight.
You suggested that police officers should use anything other than a gun when encountering knife wielding thugs. I proved that that is not feasable. Can you respond to that?
You suggested that police officers should use anything other than a gun when encountering knife wielding thugs. I proved that that is not feasable. Can you respond to that?
Cops in other countries like the UK would disagree.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
