Trigger Happy, or justified ?

[Trei]

http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/sto...44-661,00.html


Fair enough they shot him,

I'm interested in this quote:
"He was close enough for members to feel their lives were in danger and therefore they shot in the direction of the deceased," she said.

If they're trained police officers, why didn't they shoot the offender in the legs ? ... rather than just "shooting in the general direction" Weren't they looking or something? Did they have their eyes closed ?

believed to be in his 30s, for multiple gunshot wounds to the arm and chest but he died at the scene,

Multiple gunshot wounds... How many bullets does it take, to bring a guy with an axe, down ? 1, 2 ? ... or does it take 4,5 or 6 ? He's already been shot in the arm, so odds are he's dropped the axe... or perhaps they shot him in the stomach first, in which case they've shot him in the arm again (and by this time i'm assuming he's dropped the axe)... or perhaps they stood there pounding 4,5,6 bullets into him and he was still standing, coming towards them... with :O the axe ! YEAH, RIGHT .


Perhaps they should re-evaluate half the police force... or at least hire people who can look in the "same direction" as the person they're shooting, so they can shoot them in effective areas rather than just spray the guy with bullets. There's no doubt in my mind the guy should of been shot, to be taken down (and arrested, alive ) He's obviously a maniac... and I don't think it's right to criticise them for not using the capsicum spray because that's not going to do much against an axe... but did they have to pump the guy full of lead?

Sounds a bit dodgy to me. But no worries, it'll be covered up and we won't hear about it again.

[The Stig]

AFAIK Cops in australia are trained to shoot for centre of body mass, easiest part to hit...

and how many to take him down would depend on the weapon being used.. its stopping power etc etc...

again AFIAK the aussie cop gun is pretty weak in physical stopping power (IE some guns, one shot will knock you on your a&&.... this one wont)

And depends on him.... was he high on drugs? running on huge amounts of adrenaline? cos if he wasnt feeling it.. he wasnt stopping..

[Kingo]

If they're trained police officers, why didn't they shoot the offender in the legs ? ... rather than just "shooting in the general direction" Weren't they looking or something? Did they have their eyes closed ?

Police and defence personel are trained to shoot at the torso, as it presents the largest target area. Obivously a bad shot by the cops hit him in the arm.
What if they went to shoot his arms or legs and missed? Then uncle chop chop might have got them.
Also, if there were a number of officers, each one would have fired a couple of rounds.. that accounts for the 'multiple' gunshots.

The article is a little contradictory, in the beginning it says they don't know who fired the shots, then later it says one officer fired the shots...

[Tasmaniak]

I agree with the Stig

[Trei]

The Article Makes out the Police had their eyes closed and just pumped the guy full of lead.

Which also makes it interesting.... could they of perhaps, NOT shot him so many times.

[Kingo]

I think you are misunderstanding what the article is saying.

"He was close enough for members to feel their lives were in danger and therefore they shot in the direction of the deceased,"

Shooting in his direction as in AT HIM, as opposed to not shooting in his direction as in a warning shot.
Next you will say, omfg they shot at a dead guy? "shot in the direction of the deceased"

[Trei]

*yawn* If you want to have a different opinion, you have a right to.

But keep your smartarseness to yourself.

[pow3rslave]

sometimes you hear stuff and you think "yeah, that was a bit overkill/unjustified" but in this case if he was presenting an imminent danger the officers and possibly other people around him.

it's a bit sad because he was probably suffering mental illness, which is why i'm generally in favour of non lethal means (stungun etc)

[SMIT]

I once heard an argument like this...if they (cops) were persistent to maybe shooting the offender in the arm with a great deal of accuracy in training, could they do it in real life? i know a cop who was a real crack shot, could hit anything a mile away( exaggeration, but u get the point) he was on duty at a mall and someone produced a gun ( can't remember the whole story but you get the point), he knew he could easily shoot the gun out of his hand, hes never missed b4 so he shot for the gun, he missed in the heat of the situation, the offender was able to fire off a round at a young women before he could get another shot into him to take him down... what i'm trying to say is that the cop saw a man in a surburan street with an axe smashing cars, what if they did manage to shoot him in the arm in which he was holding the axe and he dropped it? what if then produced a gun that was hidden tucked away and shot and killed an officer? Police officers are here to protect society, whether or not you beleive they did the right thing or not, you were not there, in the end police officers save allot more lives than they sacrifice...

My two cents...
Not having a go at u...

[Trei]

it's a bit sad because he was probably suffering mental illness, which is why i'm generally in favour of non lethal means (stungun etc)

I agree.

what i'm trying to say is that the cop saw a man in a surburan street with an axe smashing cars, what if they did manage to shoot him in the arm in which he was holding the axe and he dropped it? what if then produced a gun that was hidden tucked away and shot and killed an officer? Police officers are here to protect society, whether or not you beleive they did the right thing or not, you were not there, in the end police officers save allot more lives than they sacrifice...

I know pressure ads another variable. I'm not complaining about where or why they shot him (they're trained to hit in the chest/upper body area, fair enough).

I'm complaining about how many times they shot him. Surely he couldn't of still been holding the axe and coming towards him after the second or third bullet ?

[SMIT]

as someone said above, there was more that one officer, so it would be plausible that each member fired a bullet or 2.... accounting for multiple gunshots...(unless im missing something)

[Marco-EFIVL]

This seems a little unclear on what actually happened, however in most cases, you'll find that when cops elevate to the use of lethal force (Guns/Firearms) then usually the assailant will end up a fatal casualty. It is just a fact of the force, with today's legal procedures and 'victims' being able to sue God for anything that goes amiss, if an officer shoots, and brings 'em down, then it saves a lot of legal bullcrap later. I will back the cops in saying that I think of Australian cops being the most tolerant and 'un-trigger' happy when compared to the other law enforcement agencies in the world.

The Police were issued in recent years with a new sidearm, one which could carry a few more rounds (bullets) 10 or 12 I think now, it is more accurate at moderate distances and more power (cause of a different round, I think the new one is .40 instead of 9mm) all with less recoil.

[badaz]

Its sad to to see this guy has been shot. Lets now feel sorry for those officers that had to shot him ,they will have nightmares about what they have done, yes I am a officer and yes I have had to draw my firearm on someone yes I was lucky they dropped the item they had and did the bolt a split second later it might of been a different story, and yes I had some restless nights after that.

[Kingo]

Just for interest...

the firearm adopted for use by most state police forces is the .38 or .357 Smith & Wesson revolver or increasingly the Glock .40 self-loading pistol (SLP).

I agree that this incident will probably have a lasting impact on the lives of all involved.
Killing another human being would mess you up fairly well. Just look at the high rate of mental illness with returned servicemen.

[minux]

Ah, it just shows how society today is heading. We pay these people to protect us and we when they need to protect themselves they questioned by tree huggers like this poster.

If the police officer fired 15 shots what would it matter? They are trained to fire a 3 round consecutive burst. If they fire more who cares, the first round is usually the lethal one.

I spent time on 2 live operations, i know how hard it is to fire at someone for the first time, however, at close range, i do not. If you think you can do a better job, then stop questioning our force and get off your ass and go do a better job.

I honestly cannot believe that people even question what they do, yet the people who question them wouldnt even get off their lazy ass to go do it themselves.

[calais_304]

Ah, it just shows how society today is heading. We pay these people to protect us and we when they need to protect themselves they questioned by tree huggers like this poster.

If the police officer fired 15 shots what would it matter? They are trained to fire a 3 round consecutive burst. If they fire more who cares, the first round is usually the lethal one.

I spent time on 2 live operations, i know how hard it is to fire at someone for the first time, however, at close range, i do not. If you think you can do a better job, then stop questioning our force and get off your ass and go do a better job.

I honestly cannot believe that people even question what they do, yet the people who question them wouldnt even get off their lazy ass to go do it themselves.

well if there was a guy coming at me yeiding an axe and i had a revolver in my hand that bastard would have every one of those 8 rounds put into his head, better him then me, and i don't blame the cops for 1 sec acting the way they did, you have to remember these cops don't know this person at all, they know is someone is coming at them with an axe and they have to take action to stop him even if it means ending his life.
he could of avoided it simply by dropping the axe but no he tried to be a tough man and got nailed for it.
good to see theres one less psyco out there.

[pow3rslave]

well if there was a guy coming at me yeiding an axe and i had a revolver in my hand that bastard would have every one of those 8 rounds put into his head

you mean you'd fire off the 6 shots and reload another 2 rounds?

[calais_304]

you mean you'd fire off the 6 shots and reload another 2 rounds?

woops my bad, only fired a revolver once...thought it was 8 oh well then yes i would re-load the other 2 followed by a kick to the guts

[Not_An_Abba_Fan]

Police officers are trained to fire until the threat has stopped, while this guy was still standing the threat was still there. Like others have said, more than 1 cop, more than 1 gun, you do the math. Age old argument, if this guy was at home watching TV instead of swinging an axe around he wouldn't have exposed himself to the situation.

[_Mukas_]

Age old argument, if this guy was at home watching TV instead of swinging an axe around he wouldn't have exposed himself to the situation.

simple as that... you continue to ignore police instruction, and come at them with an axe over your head, you got noone to blame but yourself... and if the family have a big sooky la la about it, theyre dumber than i thought.

[kalais6]

Yeah as above I think is spot on.

The guy is going towards the police, wielding an axe and yet we question either why he was shot or why he was shot however many times ??? I know what I'd do in that situation and its shoot until the iminent threat stops.

Put yourself in their shoes, this dude starts coming at ya, swinging a bloody axe - its a fair bet they arent stopping to check the result of each bullet as they are trying to defend themselves.

[Trei]

Ah, it just shows how society today is heading. We pay these people to protect us and we when they need to protect themselves they questioned by tree huggers like this poster.

We pay these people to protect us, not to pump people full of lead. I'm not a tree hugger, I don't vote Greens (such is your ignorance). I have a major problem with an overt use of force which isn't necessary. This thread was created to scope people's opinion, not for you to have a shot at me (got nothing better to do with your time I take it?) Now feel free to shut up and contribute to the conversation, but personal insults and your school yard like assumptions don't stand up.

I honestly cannot believe that people even question what they do, yet the people who question them wouldnt even get off their lazy ass to go do it themselves.

Bit defensive there are we ? Aren't we allowed to criticise and question members of the police force.... is it your opinion, they're above the law ?

I spent time on 2 live operations, i know how hard it is to fire at someone for the first time, however, at close range, i do not. If you think you can do a better job, then stop questioning our force and get off your ass and go do a better job.

Nobody really cares what you've done with your time. That's not what the thread's about. The thread's about two police officers who shot a guy, perhaps more times than they needed to < that was the point. Nobody's saying they shouldn't of shot him to stop him (Many would of done the same thing)

If you think you can do a better job, then stop questioning our force and get off your ass and go do a better job.

I called for better training and re-evaluation. I didn't say I'd do a better job.

[Not_An_Abba_Fan]

Who is to say the first shot wasn't lethal? They stopped firing when they felt the threat was no longer there. If it is equal force people are arguing then I suppose they could have told the guy to wait while they went home to get their axes.

[calais_304]

We pay these people to protect us, not to pump people full of lead. I have a major problem with an overt use of force which isn't necessary.

well we do pay them to pump people full of lead that deserve it and i would say an axe yeilding maniac would be good enough reason, how wasn't it nessary obviously "freeze it's the police" didn't work and i doubt trying to wrestle him woulda worked..what do you suggest? after all not every cop is going to sit their and play scissors paper rock to see who will be the lucky one to pop one in his noggin.

That's not what the thread's about. The thread's about two police officers who shot a guy, perhaps more times than they needed to < that was the point. Nobody's saying they shouldn't of shot him to stop him (Many would of done the same thing)

more times then they needed to, is their any rules that say how many times a cop is aloud to put one in someone?

it's people like yourself that are bringing this world down with all your pollitical BS, grow up and realise not everything is fair and more often then not people will get hurt or killed if their running at cops with an axe.

[_Mukas_]

Trei.... what is your opinion on this exactly? all you have done through this entire thread is question the integrity of the police, their training, their ability to deal with a LIFE THREATENING situation, and the people on this forum whom support them...

what exactly would you have done? after repeatedly telling the victim to "drop the axe or ill shot" and he has come to a position, where if you do not act immediately, you could well lose your life, what would you do? and if it got to a stage where he was at such close vacinity would you not expect your fellow officers to help you out, or just sit there playing with there capsicum spray while you get butchered, just on the off chance someone says they used excessive force?


*crackling supermarket pa* "can we please have a reality check to thread titled 'Trigger Happy, or justified'. thats reality check to Trigger Happy, or justified..."