Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
Tulsa PD shoots unarmed black man
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Glocktogo" data-source="post: 2908034" data-attributes="member: 1132"><p>But he wasn't. How would you deal with that fact? She and the other officers had multiple other options they chose not to exercise. Failure to comply with a lawful command is not a capital offense. <img src="/images/smilies/frown.png" class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":(" title="Frown :(" data-shortname=":(" /></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>On edge, yes. Kill a man because they're on edge? No.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>No. You have to determine to a "reasonable person" standard that the person HAS a weapon and is about to point it at you. We've had shoots where a person turns with a dark or shiny object and is shot on the assumption the item was a weapon, only to be a innocuous object. Most of those shoots are ruled justifiable due to the object. In this case, it <u>appears </u>that the lethal shot was fired as he reached towards the passenger compartment and that the bullet entered the side, which would be prior to any turning or presentation of an object. Transverse thorax shots have a high percentage of lethality, because multiple organs are in the path of the bullet.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>This video shows and you hear the shot better than some of the other videos (if the audio and video are in sync).</p><p></p><p>[MEDIA=youtube]Df1TLMpoqfw[/MEDIA]</p><p></p><p>The gunshot report happens right as the time goes from 1:38 to 1:39. He doesn't actually fall until 1:51, which would explain the appearance of blood on the door of the truck.</p><p></p><p><img src="http://www.okshooters.com/attachments/screenshot_2016-09-19-22-20-11-png.60187/" alt="" class="fr-fic fr-dii fr-draggable " style="" /> </p><p></p><p>He never turned and the shot (again, if the audio and video are in sync), would've had to occur almost as soon as the Taser was deployed. That and the fact that is was a single shot, would tend towards sympathetic response as the reason for the shot. The subject never turned towards the officers after the shot. He just kind of hangs on the truck until he falls backwards.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Me personally? I'd be defaulting to training on managing unknown contacts (MUC). In this case where you've lost control over the subject and you have backup on scene, fall back to cover and deploy a rifle. Also, considerations such as spacing, clear lines of fire and comms come into play. If you're really concerned that your large, uncooperative subject is returning to his vehicle to get a weapon, why would you leave cover and advance on him of you aren't committed to preventing him from reaching the vehicle? Why didn't she Taser him before he reached the back corner of the truck?</p><p></p><p>It's easy to MMQB her from the safety of a computer in a controlled environment, but the one thing I see time and again in these marginal shoots, is a tendency to overcommit to the apprehension. If you can't control the subject, then control the terms of engagement! Back off and utilize all your available resources. If he gets in the truck and takes off, then you'll have an army of officers on hand when he's finally stopped. If he gets a gun, you'll have cover and tactical spacing with multiple angles of fire to work him. Get the long guns and use them, that's what they're there for!</p><p></p><p>All in all, it's a sad day for everyone involved. Nobody won this one. <img src="/images/smilies/frown.png" class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":(" title="Frown :(" data-shortname=":(" /></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Glocktogo, post: 2908034, member: 1132"] But he wasn't. How would you deal with that fact? She and the other officers had multiple other options they chose not to exercise. Failure to comply with a lawful command is not a capital offense. :( On edge, yes. Kill a man because they're on edge? No. No. You have to determine to a "reasonable person" standard that the person HAS a weapon and is about to point it at you. We've had shoots where a person turns with a dark or shiny object and is shot on the assumption the item was a weapon, only to be a innocuous object. Most of those shoots are ruled justifiable due to the object. In this case, it [U]appears [/U]that the lethal shot was fired as he reached towards the passenger compartment and that the bullet entered the side, which would be prior to any turning or presentation of an object. Transverse thorax shots have a high percentage of lethality, because multiple organs are in the path of the bullet. This video shows and you hear the shot better than some of the other videos (if the audio and video are in sync). [MEDIA=youtube]Df1TLMpoqfw[/MEDIA] The gunshot report happens right as the time goes from 1:38 to 1:39. He doesn't actually fall until 1:51, which would explain the appearance of blood on the door of the truck. [IMG]http://www.okshooters.com/attachments/screenshot_2016-09-19-22-20-11-png.60187/[/IMG] He never turned and the shot (again, if the audio and video are in sync), would've had to occur almost as soon as the Taser was deployed. That and the fact that is was a single shot, would tend towards sympathetic response as the reason for the shot. The subject never turned towards the officers after the shot. He just kind of hangs on the truck until he falls backwards. Me personally? I'd be defaulting to training on managing unknown contacts (MUC). In this case where you've lost control over the subject and you have backup on scene, fall back to cover and deploy a rifle. Also, considerations such as spacing, clear lines of fire and comms come into play. If you're really concerned that your large, uncooperative subject is returning to his vehicle to get a weapon, why would you leave cover and advance on him of you aren't committed to preventing him from reaching the vehicle? Why didn't she Taser him before he reached the back corner of the truck? It's easy to MMQB her from the safety of a computer in a controlled environment, but the one thing I see time and again in these marginal shoots, is a tendency to overcommit to the apprehension. If you can't control the subject, then control the terms of engagement! Back off and utilize all your available resources. If he gets in the truck and takes off, then you'll have an army of officers on hand when he's finally stopped. If he gets a gun, you'll have cover and tactical spacing with multiple angles of fire to work him. Get the long guns and use them, that's what they're there for! All in all, it's a sad day for everyone involved. Nobody won this one. :( [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
Tulsa PD shoots unarmed black man
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom