GymWolf
Member
To be fair, calling 395737482 other police men to block a single guy is not always an option when things get hot very quickly.
Last edited:
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Are you legally and morally in the wrong for shooting someone advancing at you with a knife?
- Thread starter PleaseDontBanMe
- Start date
notseqi
Member
How many british cops do you need to block a guy with a machete?
Joking aside, a couple of guys squeezing the guy with a knife with plastic shields seems the safer option to get the job done without victims.
Remember that a machete is probably the worst thing those cops have ever been attacked with, it's up there with broken-off bottles and pocket knives.
What they need in every car is a dog catchers pole with the wire rope at the end of it.
Dude is drunk, pilled out or straight manic.
From what I have seen in america you encounter naked superhumans on PCP or some other drug that takes you out and the probability is high that they have a gun, a knife with nothing to lose and a culture among the people getting into this type of trouble of 'stand your ground' (not the law but the concept).
Very different cases, if they handed me a bobby stick to go patrol Gary, Indiana, I'd tell them to turn the colour from black to brown and shove it.
GeorgPrime
Banned
Well.... if the guy with the knife is black, you will only have to decide between "Do i kill the guy" or "Do i let the police kill the guy". 
Sad but true lol
Sad but true lol
Last edited:
Melon Husk
Member
If you don't let the person advancing you know you have a gun you're kind of a dick
notseqi
Member
Get a writ that he has taken notice of the gun, seen the gun and checked that the gun has an empty chamber before he plunges his butterknife in your eyesocket.
30 feet in 2 seconds, mate, advancing, save for breaks when the attacker stops to smell the roses.
Lone Wolf
Member
Tasers fire once or twice, and are not accurate or effective at long ranges. You don’t want a knife wielding maniac anywhere close to you. there is a reason Law Enforcement is trained the way they are. It’s not to kill a disproportionate amount of minorities.
GymWolf
Member
My point was a different one tho.
When they catch someone with a taser it would be better having more stopping power, an higher electrical charge.
the narrative about taser being deadly if too powerfull it's literally bullshit when the alternative are a couple of bullets in your stomach, a more powerfull taser is still the safer way, unfortunately it turn out that some people can shave off the current taser power when they are full on adrenaline, but like i said, adrenaline doesn't make you superman...and there has to be a middle point between not nearly enough and deadly...
Of course if the guy is very close the gun is the only logic way, never said otherwise.
Last edited:
Evil Calvin
Afraid of Boobs
Hell no. That is a stupid question. (not calling you stupid but the scenario is stupid). It shouldn't even be a question. Threatening a life. But like the above poster said, a headshot no, but definitely anywhere else.
Last edited:
Lone Wolf
Member
Deadly force is met with deadly force. To put it simply
GymWolf
Member
I added some things to my post.
My point is related to when using a taser is safe, like if the subject is far enough, police use taser everyday, having more power seems the logic way to make the taser more usefull.
sol_bad
Member
Why is it primarily only in America where police are trained to kill? Why is it that so many other first world countries can de-escalate these types of situations without death?
Lone Wolf
Member
Trained to stop the threat. Not kill.
Hulk_Smash
Banned
So getting right with your maker is a mental illness? You’re telling me that 2 billion Christians all have a mental illness?
BigBooper
Member
Set tasers to kill.
I think everybody what iffing the scenario is really operating from the luxury of safety. If there are plenty of wrong moves you could make that end up with you bleeding to death on the ground your first concern isn't going to be "calm down sir, I'm not sure if you are crazy, stupid or high, let me get an emergency mental health professional to come and deescelate the situation they'll only be here in half an hour, hopefully they won't piss you off more than you are already."
Viewing this through the prism of race really distorts the reality of the picture too.
I do think it would be useful to replace tasers with bola wrap guns if confidence in them is so low. You don't need to be accurate or worry about how thick someone's clothing is, or if they are so jacked up on whatever that they don't drop.
Viewing this through the prism of race really distorts the reality of the picture too.
I do think it would be useful to replace tasers with bola wrap guns if confidence in them is so low. You don't need to be accurate or worry about how thick someone's clothing is, or if they are so jacked up on whatever that they don't drop.
T.v
Member
Nice reading comprehension there. The question was "are you legally and morally in the wrong?" Now read my post again, this time remembering the actual question in the thread title.
InterMusketeer
Member
How is someone approaching you with a knife ever "non-threatening" ? People don't just hold knives for fun, y'know? You don't see people casually holding knives in the suprmarket, or in the bus. People hold knives either because they intend to threaten, or to inflict harm. There is no other reason to hold a knife outside of a kitchen.
GymWolf
Member
When you are in sushi restaurant and the waiter is bringing you some cutlery because you are shit at handling chop-sticks maybe?!
diffusionx
Gold Member
I’m pretty sure that most people do and would in fact feel terrible if they took a life. Read some accounts of police officers, it does haunt them. The fact is though in a “him or me” situation everybody picks “me”, it is why we exist as a species today. The lefties seem to think cops have a moral obligation to get murdered whenever a person attacks them.
Last edited:
InterMusketeer
Member
People eat sushi with knives?
GymWolf
Member
Cutlery means both fork and knife
And yeah, i eat sushi very often and a lot of people can't use chop sticks.
Apocryphon
Member
If efforts to defuse the situation and non-lethal means have been exhausted or are not possible, and if you, or more importantly the general public are in immediate danger? Sure, we fall back to lethal force.
If the public is not in immediate danger and the police are in a position to attempt non-lethal means of ending the situation then they should. Tazers, pepper spray, rubber bullets, or other means should be deployed first if possible. Plenty of knife wielding suspects have been detained using non-lethal force in other countries.
If the offender has a gun, things are different. If they don't respond to officers telling them to drop the weapon or if they point the gun at somebody or appear to move towards doing so, then I don't see a problem with using deadly force.
There are problems on both sides. For some inexplicable reason, people refuse to comply with the police despite knowing that it isn't a fight that they can win. When they get hurt, people defend them blindly. Fuck reasonable, rational discussion... let's just tear shit down...
Police in America do overwhelmingly appear to be too agressive and quick to shoot people though. They need better training and they need to be given more options to combat armed suspects.
If the public is not in immediate danger and the police are in a position to attempt non-lethal means of ending the situation then they should. Tazers, pepper spray, rubber bullets, or other means should be deployed first if possible. Plenty of knife wielding suspects have been detained using non-lethal force in other countries.
If the offender has a gun, things are different. If they don't respond to officers telling them to drop the weapon or if they point the gun at somebody or appear to move towards doing so, then I don't see a problem with using deadly force.
There are problems on both sides. For some inexplicable reason, people refuse to comply with the police despite knowing that it isn't a fight that they can win. When they get hurt, people defend them blindly. Fuck reasonable, rational discussion... let's just tear shit down...
Police in America do overwhelmingly appear to be too agressive and quick to shoot people though. They need better training and they need to be given more options to combat armed suspects.
manfestival
Member
I play enough call of duty to know that I do not let anyone get close to me with a knife without me dropping a bunch of bullets in them.
Zadom
Member
It’s funny to me when people say they should have shot him in the leg. We have all seen these shootings where 15 shots are fired and suspect was shot 5 times. That’s only 33% and that’s not even trying to hit legs. It’s not that the cops are bad shots, but have someone coming at you, the adrenaline flowing, there is a great tendency to spray rounds. It’s not target shooting. Good luck trying to hit legs.
The tasers send out two prongs that separate and both have to implant to form an electric circuit to effect the guy. If one prong gets stuck in jacket or misses, that’s it. And a guy charging with a knife leaves no second chances.
look up knife wounds on google and tell me those images don’t make you have fear and make you willing to shoot.
The tasers send out two prongs that separate and both have to implant to form an electric circuit to effect the guy. If one prong gets stuck in jacket or misses, that’s it. And a guy charging with a knife leaves no second chances.
look up knife wounds on google and tell me those images don’t make you have fear and make you willing to shoot.
DispatchNinja
Banned
Plenty of knife wielding suspects have been detained in the U.S. using non-lethal force (and de-escalation) as well, you just won’t hear about them because they don’t fit the narrative.
Last edited:
TheContact
Member
Nope. But cops should be trained to de-escalate people with mental health issues so these shooting don’t occur in the first place (and have their salary increase as a result). This is why police need more funding, not less, but allocated more appropriate.
Woo-Fu
Banned
The way it is here is first you have castle doctrine. If you're in your home/on your own property, you can use deadly force if you believe yourself to be in imminent danger, no need to retreat. It also applies to anybody else in your home/on your property who is being threatened, you can use deadly force to defend them as well.
It appears you can also legally use deadly force to stop anybody committing a violent felony, regardless of where it happens. Presumably this means at the point that retreat is not an option. If it is domestic abuse it's basically a free fire zone. Beat your spouse repeatedly here and they can put you in the ground. Good.
I'm not going to shoot you if there is a safe way to avoid it. I mean who wants to do all that paperwork, much less deal with potential criminal and/or civil suits if they don't have to? But if you corner me or my family I'm going to keep pulling the trigger till the gun is empty and worry about the morality and legality of it after they're safe.
I don't care if you have mental health problems. They're your problems, not mine. If you make them mine then you might not care for the solution I come up with. I'm not a police officer. I'm not here to protect and serve, just protect.
It appears you can also legally use deadly force to stop anybody committing a violent felony, regardless of where it happens. Presumably this means at the point that retreat is not an option. If it is domestic abuse it's basically a free fire zone. Beat your spouse repeatedly here and they can put you in the ground. Good.
I'm not going to shoot you if there is a safe way to avoid it. I mean who wants to do all that paperwork, much less deal with potential criminal and/or civil suits if they don't have to? But if you corner me or my family I'm going to keep pulling the trigger till the gun is empty and worry about the morality and legality of it after they're safe.
I don't care if you have mental health problems. They're your problems, not mine. If you make them mine then you might not care for the solution I come up with. I'm not a police officer. I'm not here to protect and serve, just protect.
Last edited:
notseqi
Member
'Narrative'... They're just less newsworthy, in a time when there is enough shooting going on shitty media can report about. 'If we don't report on that shooting other news outlets will and we only have Stabsy Collins over here brandishing a knife'.
Halo is Back
Member
Open fire boys
notseqi
Member
Yeah, fuck that windshield!Open fire boys
Halo is Back
Member
daveonezero
Banned
T.v
Member
See my last post in this thread for a complete explanation.
Ballthyrm
Member
Maybe they are peeling an apple , or an orange, you know, knife stuff.
Maybe they are coming to help you cut something tied to something else.
I can think of plenty of reason, someone can approach me with a knife in hand.
99.99% of which is not to stab me.
As for OP question, like everything in life, it depends.
You can murder someone coming at you with a knife if we can prove that the other person was "non-threatening" , like in a video where someone is just walking toward you and you shoot them without warning.
What we really need is a non lethal weapon that works 100 %, like a portable Active Denial System.
Or Pulsed Energy Projectiles. The US Army has really cool toys.
Last edited:
PleaseDontBanMe
Banned
"No Blood shit, No crip shit, WE KILLING COPS....." - Future Astronaut and nobel prize recipient who made the news recently
time stamped
time stamped
GymWolf
Member
VAL0R
Banned
Those policemen took a risk. At any time he could have run at any one of those men and started hacking them with potentially mortal blows. He chose not to do so. Even as the police came at him in shields he could have struck at their legs, etc., causing serious injury. He went down without a fight willingly. Not all men do.
nikolino840
Member
Where?
If you are inside your house and you see him from the window?
If you are inside your house and you see him from the window?
nikolino840
Member
Razvedka
Banned
No, you're not legally or morally wrong in gunning someone down attacking you with a knife. Keep pulling the trigger until the threat is neutralized.
JSoup
Banned
Some police academies advocate training cadets in knowing how to shoot from the hip specially for situations like those. The rule still applies, but the idea behind the training is 'every second counts'.
nikolino840
Member
Portugeezer
Member
You're entitled to escalate it in that situation. I don't see an issue. But once the guy is taken out, know when to stop shooting.
Last edited:
Texas Pride
Banned
The "21 ft rule" is a thing for a reason. Inside of 21 ft a knife is deadlier than a gun. A person with a knife can cover 21 ft in 1.5 seconds. That's about the same time a trained officer can draw and fire two shots. If you ask me the officers in Philly if anything showed too much restraint if you consider the distance between the officers and the perp in this context after he ignores commands. He wanted to be ended and ended he was. Pour one out for stupidity.
www.forcescience.org
The 21-foot “Rule” is Back in the News! - Force Science
Yes. The 21-foot “rule” is back in the news. And if we’ve been doing our job as police trainers, most of you will be thinking, “It’s not a rule! It’s simply the principle that an average person can sprint 21 feet in roughly 1.5 seconds. Incidentally, that’s about the same time it takes an officer
www.forcescience.org
Last edited:
Similar threads
- Locked