YEs he never had a gun, but what if he did ?
If he had a gun he
would be a threat. The fact that they didn't know makes him a
potential threat, and since they had NO KNOWLEDGE of a weapon (aside from what he said) other means to get him to come along/ give up should have been implemented.
you are to caught up in the fact that once it was over it was revealed he did not have a gun.
No, I am not caught up over that fact, but I had to mention it because it is obvious that your comprehension skills and lack of knowledge pertaining to the subject forced you to believe otherwise. The fact is he was fired upon BEFORE the dog even got to him, and before the threat was properly assessed.
After he was dead you can hear the officers asking for the whereabouts of the gun.
When he stands up you can see there is NO GUN, and since they did not know the whereabouts of a gun (because they didn't know if he REALLY had one) different precautions should have been taken.
And since they could not see the gun they should have used different precautions, ?
It is done in law enforcement EVERYDAY. Thats what the dogs are for and thats why you have NEGOTIATORS. Thats why you have tasers, pepper spray/mace, sticks and compliant holds. Thats why you have police POLICY that dictates to do "X" if "Y" occurs.
I dont know how the Cops around your way act, but here in Sac visable or not if I say I have a gun they are going to treat it as such.
And there are different ways to treat a person who claims to have a gun. Again, a KNOWN MURDERER had a gun and an officer was apprx 4 feet from him and tried to talk him into giving himself up. Why was this man not alloted the same treatment?
If the police code is to bring the suspect in for justice, why not practice
ETHICAL DECISION MAKING (something the majority of you replying know
nothing about) to close the situation? No one is saying for the officers to be idiots and should compromise their safety. What I am saying is
NON-LETHAL METHODS should have been implemented
before things escalated, and this is supported by the fact that
NO GUN was visiable, and the fact that he said he would
GIVE UP if he was allowed to talk to the woman who was pregnant with his child.
Btw, I'm in Vallejo, and have seen my share of police malpractice, so don't think I'm coming with some back of the woods bama mentality here.
I am sorry my heart does not bleed for this guy like yours and that I hold people accountable for their own actions.
My heart doesn't bleed for the man either, but some people are not held accountable due to mental issues, and this could be such a case. In addition, the fact that it actually appears that they could have VIOLATED protocol in their actions (which is why the wrongful death suit was filed) shows that someone else could have been responsible for his death.
Again, not everyone is accountable for their own actions, and this is why some are 5150, and why some are classified as unfit to stand trial. However, in your wacky world of criminal justice everyone should take responsibility for their own actions, and this is
IMPOSSIBLE.
I am sorry that you are prataking in a topic that you know nothing about and can't use your alleged CJ knowledge to validate ANY of your claims. So trust me when I say this, I don't need you to feel sorry for me, and I'm sure this guy doesn't need you to feel sorry for him either.
No I dont think he was insane just stupid, and if he was insane they still have to do whatever it takes to stop a threat, and yes he was a threat.
(emphasis mine)
First off, lets address your words in bold. An officer does NOT have to do whatever it takes to stop a threat. Police discretion and policy actually PROHIBITS officers from doing such a thing. This is why some departments have no chase policies, and why departments have strict guidelines when it comes to discharging a firearm.
You sound like a broken record. I've asked you to explain how this man was a threat and to whom and you FAILED to do so, yet you insist he was a threat. That my friend, is highly illogical and part of the reason why I have formed the assessment that you have limited knowledge when it comes to the cj field. Moreover, I've asked you to explain Mens Rea and Actus Reas (two things that have to do with a persons mentality and their actions), yet you FAILED to rely on your CJ education to formulate an answer and elaborate on that answer--this also is part of the reason why I say you have limited knowledge.
I am not trying to "wiggle" out of this, usually people like you start with talking trash like you have done then once I counter the lets meet up is next
1. You ARE trying to wiggle out of it.
2. I have not talked trashed. I have simply desmantled your argument to the point where you type babble over and over without providing any logic to support your claim.
3. If
YOU want to meet up and discuss this in person
THAT can be arranged, by simply hitting me on the PM or making your request known. MANY people here have met me personally, or have spoke on the phone with me, and I always give people the chance to get things off their chest.
Now, if YOU have something to get off your chest feel free to PM me and we can take it from there. Others than that, I see that YOUR insecurity and lack of knowledge is begining to get the better of you. :dead:
If I am such an idiot it says something about you to spend all of this time on here debating with me.
Some people get paid to talk to idiots all day long. Talking to you is not such a bad idea because it shows
YOU just how much idiocy you are capable of spewing, and it reinforces what I have already stated and/or impled.
You still continue to show disrespect towards me which is fine.
You have been given ample respect, but now that I see that you aren't articulate and want to type mush (on purpose), I have no reason to continue the convo in a manner that is pleasent for you. You are responsible for the treatment you are getting. Just like you say that guy was responsible for the police shooting him.
It takes away from you as a person and tells a lot about you.
No, it actually contributes to me as a person and sends the message that I don't tolerate a lot of BS from people who CLAIM to know something they actually have NO CLUE about. Out of all the people who have replied to this thread the ONLY TWO, that I have gone in depth with is NITRO, and yourself. BOTH OF YOU have made claims about the CJ system that are inconsistant with reality and rooted in --I don't know--nothing?
Your feeling of self worth is inflated by your forum talk which is sad.
No, my feeling of self worth is at a constant level, and it tends to be high because of how I am regarded offline. If you have low self esteem and people don't consider you remotely intelligent you need to go read a self help book (I don't have any, I have no use for them) or go talk to a shrink.
You should live in the real world a little more, put the book down and see what these streets are like
Again, I should live in the real world? Could the reason that I am so persistant (regarding this matter) be the fact that my loved ones or myself have been the victim of police malpractice? Leaving the streets and focusing on my life has paved the way for me to make a bit of money, and has also paved the way for me to branch off and do what I want to do (as far as helping people.) What has living in the real world and putting the books down done for you? Nothing.
Quit trying to be a lawyer and look at things rationally.
No, see you're just jealous of the fact that I CAN look at things from a lawyers perspective, and I take that as a compliment. However, I must inform you of the fact that I have looked at it from a very rational perspective. If a suspect says he will GIVE UP if he is allowed to talk to the mother of his unborn child, LET HIM TALK TO HER.
How much more rationality do you want, but before you anaswer that, maybe you should actually understand rationality before you loosely apply it.
If you had someone on your front porch acting the same way and you had a gun, what would you do ?
In your hypothetical scenario (which is actually dumb as hell) am I a police officer or myself? If I am myself, I believe he would have a different mentality and a whole different set of circumstances would have happened. I wouldn't be a FIGURE OF AUTHORITY or someone he may have a distrust for, so the outcome is different.
Please try again.
If I were a police officer I would do as I have already stated. Find another method.
Besides call the cops which is what I know you would do.
Why ask a question and turn around and provide what you
think is the answer? If I DID call the police it would be my right to do so because he was on my property. If I DIDN'T call the police and shot him down, that would probably be in my right to do so, but depending on the circumstances, you CAN kill someone on your property and still go to jail. However, you saying I would call the cops (in hopes of trying to insult me) is useless. You are the same person who jumped to the conclusion about two topics that have nothing to do with this discussion, so rest assured I am not offended by your stupidity--but you SHOULD be offended by your blatent stupidity.
Would you in fear of your life shoot him ? would you retreat and let him do as he pleases ?
If he retreats he is no longer a threat. I have no fear of loosing my life (based on my spiritual beliefs) so shooting him because of fear is not an option. Shooting him to protect my loved ones IS an option.
p.s.
The same guy who said he learns from tv shows is telling me I need to live in the real world and put the books down. CTFU! 
