For the FTP's amongst us

One of the problems involved in the bad/good police issue is the fact that, even though good officers should have a way to report and offer information on the actions of bad officers, in the end they have to be able to count on other officers to have their backs when in a touchy situation. They need to be able to trust and defend their fellow officers when they are in often violent encounters so it's tough to testify against another officer. If the accusations don't stick, and the bad cop is still on the force, how far will that accused officer go to protect his accusing fellow officer's life? Maybe not very far.
What do we do then? If there is no trust among fellow officers then law enforcement is going to be at an operational loss. It's a hell of a situation.

 

Technically yes... The rules of engagement are generally if you're not in fear of death or great bodily harm at the instant you pull the trigger, then it should not have been pulled.

 

What about if others are in immediate peril or may soon be in peril, aka an active shooter that is running away from police, but is potentially looking to find more unarmed victims around the next corner? It seem like that should be in there too.

 

Actually, it is, but I don't think this case qualifies since it requires a gun to be an active shooter.

 

I have no argument with that. The statement I quoted seemed to be a general one, so I was just making sure we were clear that isn’t the only scenario where use of deadly force is permitted.

 

I guess I should have elaborated slightly... If you *or someone else* is in fear of death or great bodily harm.

 

Like the shooting that was just called in that led to the car being pulled over in the first place?? The one that the cops had no way of knowing for sure if they were the shooters or still had the weapons on their person?

 

I keep my FTP card quite handy, but people who flee when they know they are being pursued create miles of grey area for minds to wander and scenarios to consider. A family friend was shot and killed (~2002)when he and his partner split up on foot chasing two teenage robbery suspects. The 16 year old he was chasing turned around and shot him in the head.

 

Are you suggesting that because they didn't know if they were the right suspects or if they were armed that that would be a good reason to shoot them?

 

I absolutely don’t understand the protests, yeah, I’m a long time democrat but I’m also a gun nut. Was the officer a bit quick on the trigger? Absolutely but guess what? Don’t want to get shot, don’t run from a fucking officer.

If you in a car being pulled over for suspicion of being involved in a shooting that just happened and you then jump out and run, expect to get shot, even if you left two semi-autos on the floor of the car...

 

I’m talking about the guys that were identified as the primary suspects in a shooting that took off running immediately to evade capture. So, yes. But you’re right ... they clearly should’ve waited for them to present the weapon and fire before acting on it. Maybe let them run into a public area with more potential targets. Their choice to run didn’t afford them the benefit of the doubt, but you’re too blinded to get that. We all know how you operate if the ftp is an option for you. You’ve been proven wrong in plenty of these discussions already.

 

You are doing a lot of projecting in your scenario. I believe that is exactly the reason they outlined parameters on when you can shoot in the first place.
If you think me not believing that any excuse at all is good enough for shooting people, especially in the back and/or unarmed is an ftp attitude, I don't care.

they clearly should’ve waited for them to present the weapon and fire before acting on it.
What weapon, the one they didn't have? And just how does one shoot while unarmed and sprinting away from you?
So, in light of the reality of the situation, yes, they should have waited for a weapon to be shown, especially since there wasn't a weapon in the possession of the guy who was shot.
That's imagined justification #1.

Maybe let them run into a public area with more potential targets
Targets for what? Even supposing that they had guns, which they didn't, the suspects they were looking for had just engaged in a drive-by shooting.
What reason would you have to think that they would then randomly shoot up a public place? They had specific targets that were not the general public and were actually trying to get away, something that would be a problem if they decided for no logical reason to suddenly start shooting people.
The chances of that happening were non-existent, so that's imagined justification #2.

And you can't use information only known after the shooting to justify it since the cop could not have used that information to make the decision to shoot in the first place. It has to be judged on what the shooter knew at the time they made the decision to shoot.

The fact is, the shooting took place so fast that I doubt any involved thought process went into the decision, and I absolutely disagree, as do the rules regarding when it is permissible to shoot, that running away justifies being shot.
The runner must present a clear (not imagined) and immediate danger to the officers or the public. Imagining possible scenarios doesn't fulfill that requirement. Using evidence found after the shooting doesn't either.
I think the cop just fucked up in this case and shot without thinking. Trying to justify it it is a mistake.

 

One of the two weapons that were left in the car. One of the weapons that the empty magazine in his pocket went to. One of the weapons used the shooting just prior that initiated the call about that vehicle that led to that stop in the first place. Take your pick.

You also don’t get to look back after the fact and exclude what the cops were told and had to make a split-second decision on at that exact time. But you continually refuse to accept that side of the equation.

 

Last report I saw ... yes.

 

Then you, and any sane person would be wrong. Just ask Mike.

 

Officer charged with criminal homicide.