Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Shot 7 times at 7-11

All the couch commandos must have better judgement than the cop. The teen played a dumb game and got his prize. Unfortunate for everyone involved but I cant say I wouldn't have done the same thing in the officer's case. Impossible to determine what he had in his hands in that split second that could have been life or death for the cop.

Interesting.

(Not really)

I'm going hunting.




Dave

Gotta hand it to the kid, he took that lead like a champ!

I'm going with "don't fight someone with a badge and a gun".

COMPLY!!!!! you goofy dopey mother-fu-kers!

What's so hard about establishing general order so a man can do the job the damn city hired him to do?

This ^^^^^ The officer had less than one second to size up the situation, assess the threat, and then decide who was going to go home at the end of the day... No instant replay. No alternate camera angle. Adrenalin out thru the roof... Play stupid games, win stupid prizes...

Attempting to get an officers gun is a deadly force incident. Extended fighting, dumping adrenalin while someone is grabbing at your duty belt is exhausting and degrades survivability. The assailant could be on drugs which likely increases their stamina. As in the Michael Brown case, attempting to acquire a police officers gun should send you to the closest morgue.

That way he would be able to get back on the street and maybe kill the next one. That's a great idea.

Bottom line...

Damn good shooting. (Justified) that blade is quite easy to see, even on a phone screen. Looks like a straight razor. I do not know what lead to this point, but the video above by fttb, clearly shows a life or death struggle to keep control of the weapons. The number of shots could be questioned, but not the need for them.

I'm a firm believer that of you're attacked by a stranger you should assume you're fighting for your life and act accordingly whether your attacker has a weapon or not. Without not knowing what started this confrontation it appears this isn't a good shooting.

Did you use a double negative on purpose? I'm not following what you are trying to say.

+1
"Without not knowing?"

When all is said and done .... I think that is "the moral of the story."

There is no justifiable law that gives anyone the right to shoot anyone else who is posing no threat. Seven times....sad. The cop will not likely be charged. They are given ridiculous leeway to shoot people today. If more people shot back, things might change.

Looks pretty bad.

Now, if only that actually happened....
The dead guy is/was clearly armed, and dangerous.

So you were there, and saw the whole incident, eh? You are asserting things that are also indefensible, given your ignorance. Did I? Maybe you should read my post again.

Another dead welfare breeder ----- who cares ?

No weapon of any sort in possession of the victim here. Cop didn't seem to be in imminent danger at the time of the shooting, and doesn't claim he mistook the object in hand to be a weapon.

Not 100% parallel to a citizen shooting, since a citizen doesn't have the duty to arrest criminals as police officers do, but I think the only possible justification might (depending on the circumstances) be the "fleeing felon rule." That would require that the cop reasonably believed the fleeing felon constituted an ongoing threat to the population at large, should he escape. So if he was reasonably convinced this guy was, for example, the serial killer that they'd been looking for, and he believed he wasn't going to be able to prevent his escape from custody by non-lethal means, it would be a justified shooting IMO, but that's unlikely the case here. It doesn't look good. No imminent threat to the officer when he shot the victim, so bad shoot absent fleeing felon justification.