Quote:
Originally Posted by Robbie
Here's what I think...cops are shooting to kill no matter what.
Any good bouncer in a nightclub could have handled this guy easily.
But cops are being "trained" to shoot to KILL.
Bottom line is...the guy was unarmed. The cop should be able to deal with him without murdering him...unless the guy gets the cop down on the ground and goes for the cops weapon.
Are all these cops unable to handle what a bouncer at a bar handles on a nightly basis?
|
Aren't you removing the possibility that the guy already went for the gun in the car in some sort of struggle resulting in it going off. Not sure I could make that call if that was the case.
All you would know at that time was the guy already went for your gun and it went off so you could think he already tried to shot you. Can you really say that you know 100% that he doesn't also have his own gun? Where would the reasonable line of thinking be in not shooting someone that is possibly armed that has already tried to use deadly force.
Cops are train to aim for center mass.
This is not a new thing, this is how it has been for decades and decades.
The thinking is that "should" a cop need to shoot some one it is only for life or death situations and missing the person could result in hitting someone else etc..
So missing someone that is not the intended target is really not an option...
Key point being that puling a gun should only be done if the situation falls into having a high possibility of ending up in a life of death situation.
Using the gun should only be as a last resort and only if its a life or death situation.
There does needs to be considerably more focus on constant training of cops to understand how to deal with situation to deescalated rather than have them escalated. And in saying that I agree the cop should have been trained to be able to see that he should not have entered a situation where he really should have just called for back up and not pulled his gun.