What's new

Police Power and Racial Tensions in Ferguson, Missouri

Regardless of the social backdrop, isn't the only relevant question at hand being if the officer's action was justified?

As far as if that particular officer is punished, yes. There is no other question.

But the encounter and the culture behind it should be addressed at some point as well. We can't just micro focus on every incident where police can justify why they killed a black man and feel good about our society because technically the shooting was justified.
 
That's murder.

No, I disagree here. If the person who was shot had just been wandering around, it's murder. He headed straight for the police, knife in hand, and was only a few feet away when the gunfire started. It's disturbing to watch, but I can't blame the police for firing here.

This is why body cameras would be such a good idea. Much more often than not, they exonerate the police.
 
I'm not trained in the use of a gun or deadly force, so I'm not going to judge whether, when nine shots are fired in two seconds, it's really possible to decide that the last two, or six, are excessive. I'd appreciate if those more experienced weighed in.
 
I'm not trained in the use of a gun or deadly force, so I'm not going to judge whether, when nine shots are fired in two seconds, it's really possible to decide that the last two, or six, are excessive. I'd appreciate if those more experienced weighed in.

I agree. It's definitely splitting hairs to say that the first five shots were justified but the last three make the cop a murderer. At some point you have to take into account that the officers are humans who are firing lethal rounds into a person they felt was threatening their life. The adrenaline is high and once you make that decision to shoot I'd say it's not uncommon to continue shooting until you finally realize that the threat is gone. I think many untrained people who shoot an attacker fire every round in their magazine or cylinder and often don't realize it until they are told so later.
 
No, I disagree here. If the person who was shot had just been wandering around, it's murder. He headed straight for the police, knife in hand, and was only a few feet away when the gunfire started. It's disturbing to watch, but I can't blame the police for firing here.

This is why body cameras would be such a good idea. Much more often than not, they exonerate the police.

IMO, it's only common sense when the cost/benefit ratio is as good as it is. Lawyers can waste millions arguing over these details with no evidence in hand, and do. . . . totaling a billion dollars a year easy. Put the money into technology and have actual information in real time.

I think every auto ought to have a few cams. . . front, rear, and cab. . . . for the same reason, with sound. "your honor, here's my cam footage of the incident".
 
I'm not trained in the use of a gun or deadly force, so I'm not going to judge whether, when nine shots are fired in two seconds, it's really possible to decide that the last two, or six, are excessive. I'd appreciate if those more experienced weighed in.

I am speculating on the caliber of the round, but in general police use 9mm pistols. The guy that died was a young big guy. It might have taken all 9 rounds to stop him. Especially with most of the shots not hitting vital areas. The bullets into the guys head are what would have stopped him. The other shots might have eventually killed him but to stop him with a 9mm usually you have to hit a vital area.

I have heard stories about big tongan guys shrugging off 10+ 9mm rounds to attack someone only to bleed out later.

Guns are not magically death rays. Shot placement is critical.
 
I am speculating on the caliber of the round, but in general police use 9mm pistols. The guy that died was a young big guy. It might have taken all 9 rounds to stop him. Especially with most of the shots not hitting vital areas. The bullets into the guys head are what would have stopped him. The other shots might have eventually killed him but to stop him with a 9mm usually you have to hit a vital area.

If the cop was using a .357 magnum, then the first shots couple of shots probably would have stopped him.

I was referring to the St. Louis shooting, not the Brown shooting in Ferguson. Brown was shot 6 times, not 9. We don't know where teh bullets hit the guy in St. Louis.
 
I was referring to the St. Louis shooting, not the Brown shooting in Ferguson. Brown was shot 6 times, not 9. We don't know where teh bullets hit the guy in St. Louis.

The principle is the same- especially with smaller caliber pistol it can take a lot of rounds to stop someone.
 
I am speculating on the caliber of the round, but in general police use 9mm pistols. The guy that died was a young big guy. It might have taken all 9 rounds to stop him. Especially with most of the shots not hitting vital areas. The bullets into the guys head are what would have stopped him. The other shots might have eventually killed him but to stop him with a 9mm usually you have to hit a vital area.

If the cop was using a .357 magnum, then the first shots couple of shots probably would have stopped him.


I tend to think that round choice is over-hyped. 9mm rounds are not low power or ineffective at all, especially +p varieties.

Law enforcement agencies have tried .40cal and .45acp, the FBI even tried 10mm, then returned to 9mm. It's a damn good round, if you ask me.

You start shooting a .357 and that first shot that misses the mark will be your best one as the next few end up going high. 9mm is good for follow up shots.
 
I grew up with several guys who went on to be cops and while I haven't spoken to them about this subject I can remember more than one saying if they make the decision to shoot someone they're emptying their gun.
 
Back
Top