This one isn't getting nearly the exposure as the other and yet it seems like a better example of police being trigger happy. As a CCW holder I know they said that 'over killing' could expose you to excessive force charges. I counted 10 shots, 2 of which were after he was down.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ta2-7QJM78&bpctr=1408735833

8/22/2014 3:16:45 PM

RIP MO

8/22/2014 3:24:28 PM

to be fair, he did say "shoot me"

8/22/2014 3:30:46 PM

Quote :

"to be fair, he did say "shoot me""

In most cases that would be a sign of mental illness.

8/22/2014 3:45:39 PM

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tueller_Drill

8/22/2014 3:48:48 PM

Quote :

"expose you to excessive force charges"

So if you have a lawful right to kill somebody (law enforcement or carry concealed), you can over-kill someone?

8/22/2014 3:54:21 PM

^ ^that doesn't address the issue. 2 cops. Both have mace, tazers, batons and guns. They roll up on a disturbed man.

Before they got there, no one had been hurt just a petty theft.

When they left, a man had been shot 10 times and was dead.

[Edited on August 22, 2014 at 3:55 PM. Reason : .]

8/22/2014 3:55:09 PM

who cares how many times he'd be shot. that's the whole point of shooting them. to kill them. police don't wing someone in the kneecap.

8/22/2014 3:57:07 PM

Quote :

"So if you have a lawful right to kill somebody (law enforcement or carry concealed), you can over-kill someone?"

Only if you are a private citizen apparently. Cops seem to do it all the time.

If you are a Zimmerman and shoot Trayvon 10 times its going to seem excessive to a jury.

8/22/2014 4:02:06 PM

Mental illness perhaps to some degree, but looks like a suicide by cop to me. Commit "petty" crime and act out to get the police to respond.

Yell "kill me" to show you're state of mind and present a deadly threat.


I don't know if these two cops have tasers, but you never meet a deadly threat with anything less than deadly force unless you're in a condition and able to attempt to apply something else.

I know you're not a use of force expert, but that was a very short amount of time and very quick actions by mr knife man.

1 shot, 10 shots, 20 shots, doesn't matter, whatever it takes to stop the deadly threat.

Is it unfortunate? Very, a man is obviously dead, and two police officers have to live with knowing they were forced to take a life to protect themselves.


You should study some before posting a shooting video trying to bash cops who did the right thing. Suicide by cop is not an uncommon thing.

8/22/2014 4:03:20 PM

Quote :

"who cares how many times he'd be shot. that's the whole point of shooting them. to kill them. police don't wing someone in the kneecap."

I think the idea is to stop them and remove the threat, not necessarily end their life. I say I think, but I just heard a cop say literally the same thing on NPR yesterday.

Quote :

"but that was a very short amount of time and very quick actions by mr knife man."

Very quick actions? He was slowly pacing towards the cop with a knife at his side...not bum rushing him with the thing extended in the air.

Quote :

"1 shot, 10 shots, 20 shots, doesn't matter, whatever it takes to stop the deadly threat."

What about the shots after the dude is laying on the ground?


[Edited on August 22, 2014 at 4:06 PM. Reason : MOAR]

8/22/2014 4:03:55 PM

Quote :

"that's the whole point of shooting them. to kill them. police don't wing someone in the kneecap."

In most other civilized countries, police try to preserve lives. In our police state, its the most heavy handed approach.

8/22/2014 4:07:40 PM

8/22/2014 4:08:03 PM

It takes time for the brain to process high stress incidents.

8/22/2014 4:09:30 PM

Quote :

"I know you're not a use of force expert"

That's laughable. I pray that you aren't because we are in a far worse situation than I thought if you are.

8/22/2014 4:13:22 PM

Immediately upon their arrival they were giving him commands, either they were responding knowing that he was a deadly threat (information about him having a knife) or upon their arrival they observe the deadly threat...

Either of which upon your arrival you have to assess everything possible and without plan a, b, and c you can only protect yourself (or others) in the end.

10 shots for 2 officers isn't much, considering that would be 5 a piece and could easily be shot in less than 2 seconds.

Which brings me to your last point, there are psychological studies on this but I'll have to find them, it's not uncommon for there to be a short (usually less than 1 second) delay in your brain to your fingers.

Think about it, officer observes threat( deadly), officer must stop deadly threat (brain going oh shit shit shit) adrenaline and stress, a lot going on between your eyes, brain, and fingers.



And as far as the knife thing is concerned, at those distances he is very well a threat with any knife, google 21 foot rule.

8/22/2014 4:13:31 PM

What about the shots after the dude is laying on the ground?



[Edited on August 22, 2014 at 4:18 PM. Reason : nm i guess you addressed that?]

8/22/2014 4:15:36 PM

That's part of the loop. You are suffering from tunnel vision, audio exclusion, etc. The brain is still saying oh fuck, you need to still kill that shit, but you can't process quickly enough that the guy is lying on the ground.

8/22/2014 4:18:15 PM

We have answered that twice. Read psychological delay.

Then watch the video, time it, the shooting starts and stops very quickly.

8/22/2014 4:18:52 PM

So why is a taser not safe to use there? Dude could lash out after getting hit and hurt the officer? What's the SOP for using less than lethal instead of lethal?

Is backing up sometimes in the handbook?

I imagine that "psychological delay" doesn't explain this last slam right? - http://www.newsobserver.com/2013/12/10/3450233_wake-prosecutor-plays-video-of.html?rh=1

[thx for your posts guys]

8/22/2014 4:25:34 PM

I count about 15 seconds between when they step out of their vehicle and when they start firing. Seems like great care was put into assessing the situation.

The problem with the police here is they don't give space to calm the situation, they don't mace, taze or limit their shooting.

Its threat->kill



[Edited on August 22, 2014 at 4:29 PM. Reason : .]

8/22/2014 4:27:02 PM

Taser would have been great to try if the two cops had a plan of "I'll try to tase" as long as you cover me with deadly force. Tasers are ridiculously unreliable and most are single shot use. Depending on a taser wi get you killed.



That last slammed is not justified. Hence why that corrections officer is in prison.

8/22/2014 4:30:58 PM

Quote :

"So why is a taser not safe to use there?"

Could be, but I never had one. Did they? Also, if you were the officer, would want to risk the TASER not working correctly and getting stabbed? I've seen plenty of times that the TASER didn't work correctly (bad connection, miss, etc)

Quote :

"What's the SOP for using less than lethal instead of lethal?"

Depends on the agency.

Quote :

"Is backing up sometimes in the handbook?"

Sure could, but sometimes it just the way things happen.

8/22/2014 4:31:48 PM

Again, Tueller or 21' rule.
Inside that range of 21', or approximately <2 seconds, a person with knives, or fists can close and is a deadly threat.
At 15', a taser is not the correct response, especially if that person is already walking toward you.

Were there possibly other options they could have taken.....? Sure.
Can we second guess their actions all day....? Yep.
Did they do anything wrong....? Nope

8/22/2014 4:32:52 PM

Quote :

"Hence why that corrections officer is in prison."

LAWL that dude is not in prison, and never was. In theory he served 90 days in jail but I'm not sure even that happened - http://tinyurl.com/pdxc2ca

Quote :

"Also, if you were the officer, would want to risk the TASER not working correctly and getting stabbed? I've seen plenty of times that the TASER didn't work correctly (bad connection, miss, etc)"

There were two cops with guns pointed at the dude for like 10+ seconds. Not really depending on the Taser working in that case right?

Quote :

"Depends on the agency. "

There aren't things that are usually true from agency to agency. Can you give some examples?

Quote :

"At 15', a taser is not the correct response, especially if that person is already walking toward you."

Damn how far away are tasers effective.

[Edited on August 22, 2014 at 4:39 PM. Reason : ]

8/22/2014 4:33:47 PM

Did they have one? But again, I'm speaking to point of meeting force with the appropriate level of force. If this guy was just jumping around, saying "fuck you, come fight me" sure you might just use the TASER. But, he wasn't. He was armed with a deadly weapon and you don't take on a deadly threat with a less than lethal weapon.

8/22/2014 4:39:22 PM

Sure all this Taser talk is based on the assumption that he had one.

What % of officers carry them? If it's an agency policy issue, what % of agencies require them (obvi ballparks here)

8/22/2014 4:40:56 PM

Quote :

"He was armed with a deadly weapon and you don't take on a deadly threat with a less than lethal weapon."

That makes sense.

8/22/2014 4:41:22 PM

Quote :

"things that are usually true from agency to agency. Can you give some examples?"

The first department I worked for, to deploy a TASER, the suspect had to be actively assaultive (punching, kicking, threatening to fuck you up and they have the means to act on it). Second agency did not issue a TASER. Where I work know, they just have to be actively resisting (attempting to flee, pushing/pulling away, etc).

8/22/2014 4:43:51 PM

Agencies don't tipically require tasers in any way. They are simply a tool and other option usually associated only with active resistance (depending on departmental policy).


My agency has about 50% of sworn personal trained and equipped with tasers.
(FYI, they are very expensive)

8/22/2014 4:45:17 PM

LEO will cover their ass all day by saying something like this is a threat. The truth of the matter is that Soldiers deployed in Iraq have to show more restraint when confronting threats than cops here ever do.

This speaks to the LEO culture here in the US. Look at the way the protests were handled in furguson. Armored vehicles, desert cammo, Swat Gear. LEO speak to escalating force but in reality its a 0 to Max force in too many cases.

8/22/2014 4:45:38 PM

Quote :

"What % of officers carry them?"

I would say the vast majority. I never did, because the policy was very restrictive.

Quote :

"If it's an agency policy issue, what % of agencies require them (obvi ballparks here)"

Not sure, but new people at my current gig get them issued.

8/22/2014 4:45:43 PM

Quote :

"I never did, because the policy was very restrictive. "

Can you elaborate on this comment. Very restrictive as in, if you carry one and for some reason don't use it, you then open yourself up to liabilities?

8/22/2014 4:48:54 PM

Quote :

"The truth of the matter is that Soldiers deployed in Iraq have to show more restraint when confronting threats than cops here ever do. "

I went venture to say that the majority of engagements in war zones are at greater distances than those in law enforcement where you are in intimate distances with most everyone you deal with. And the rules of engagement and objectives are not even close. Military =/= Law Enforcement. We borrow stuff from them, (tactics like bound and over watch, building searches), but 2 vastly different animals.

8/22/2014 4:50:40 PM

Quote :

"Can you elaborate on this comment. Very restrictive as in, if you carry one and for some reason don't use it, you then open yourself up to liabilities?"

Sure. I felt that the level of force they wanted you to use them at was too great. You basically had to be getting your ass beat to use one. I think a TASER should deployed to avoid a situation like from happening.

8/22/2014 4:52:41 PM

Quote :

"Military =/= Law Enforcement. We borrow stuff from them, (tactics like bound and over watch, building searches), but 2 vastly different animals."

I think the argument here is that police borrow the wrong things from the Military, such as heavy handed tactics.

The military defends our constitution and the police should be upholding it, including peoples rights to life.

If the military can be expected to show restraint in a war zone, surely police can show restraint here. Members of both volunteered to risk their lives to protect people. Why on earth is there a shoot first attitude in our streets?

[Edited on August 22, 2014 at 5:01 PM. Reason : .]

8/22/2014 4:58:28 PM

Quote :

"Sure. I felt that the level of force they wanted you to use them at was too great. You basically had to be getting your ass beat to use one. I think a TASER should deployed to avoid a situation like from happening."

So then the alternative was to not carry one so that you could just go straight to shooting?

8/22/2014 5:00:21 PM

Nope. Just didn't want to deal with the annual and initial certifications with such a restrictive policy. Plus, too many guys were getting jammed up after using them.

[Edited on August 22, 2014 at 5:04 PM. Reason : ...]

8/22/2014 5:03:39 PM

The use of force continuum is not a must do this to try this next scale.

There are different levels of force starting with presence going all the way through deadly force.


If you have to think of a taser somewhere on there it's near where striking level techniques are (ie baton), in most agencies. Some agencies allow taser use for passive resistance which is like OC spray, but most are going away from that.

If you carry a taser you are in no way obligated to use it or try to use it.

8/22/2014 5:04:33 PM

Quote :

"Plus, too many guys were getting jammed up after using them."

This is pretty much the answer I was looking for.

We are in a pickle when

Quote :

"getting jammed up"

is more of a concern than keeping people alive. Reminds me to send my check to the ACLU.

8/22/2014 5:08:49 PM

Lol. Glad I could feed your troll.

8/22/2014 5:14:44 PM

Quote :

"The police arrive and instantly escalate the situation... Powell looks sick more than he looks dangerous. But the police draw their weapons as soon as they exit their car... They don't seem to know how to stop Powell, save for using deadly force. But all Powell had was a steak knife. If the police had been in their car, with the windows rolled up, he could have done little to hurt them..."

http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2014/08/the-killing-of-kajieme-powell/378899/

8/22/2014 5:17:06 PM

See, they got jammed up because they stopped a situation before someone got hurt. The brass would deem the level of force had not been met. Why implement a policy that won't prevent injury to person or police? Instead, someone had to face a great risk of bodily harm or near death to use one.

8/22/2014 5:17:23 PM

I understand protecting people and the preservation of life. But you believe a cop should have to be seriously injured or killed before they are able to use deadly force against someone else?

Police don't have to wait to be stabbed first or shot at first before protecting themselves or someone else takes priority.

Read NCGS 15A-401, d1 and d2.

8/22/2014 5:18:03 PM

Quote :

"would want to risk the TASER not working correctly and getting stabbed?"

LOL

would you want to risk the firearm misfiring and getting stabbed

8/22/2014 5:19:43 PM

Also, again I agree in the preservation of life. But it is in no way necessary or a good idea for police to flee and stand down.


That's how innocent people who cannot defend themselves then get hurt. Then the headline is (police flee from knife wielding man, onlooker stabbed to death due to police cowards)

8/22/2014 5:20:46 PM

Quote :

"But you believe a cop should have to be seriously injured or killed before they are able to use deadly force against someone else?"

No, but they should not so hastily put themselves into a dangerous situation if they don't have to. They could have separated themselves more from the guy and slowly approached him. Or stayed in the car and issued commands through the loudspeaker. Instead, they get out with guns drawn right next to him, which practically guarantees deadly force is going to be used unless he immediately complies, which is unlikely given his agitated state.

8/22/2014 5:24:38 PM

Quote :

"Instead, they get out with guns drawn right next to him"

That does seem to wildly escalate the situation.

8/22/2014 5:27:52 PM

Quote :

"would you want to risk the firearm misfiring and getting stabbed"

I will take my chances with a mechanical tool vs. a battery operated device that relies heavily on how it connects to something to operate effectively.

8/22/2014 5:27:57 PM

Yeah that's not really a fair comparison...guns are obviously more reliable.

8/22/2014 5:29:19 PM