Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

kentuck

(110,950 posts)
Mon Aug 18, 2014, 12:17 PM Aug 2014

Under what circumstances should a cop be able to shoot a suspect?

Should the suspect have to be armed? If unarmed, should the cop use his gun at all? Was Michael Brown armed?

In what world would anyone, cop or otherwise, be justified in shooting an unarmed person six times?

If the cop kills someone, not in self-defense, should he be tried in the same justice system as you or I? If not, why not?

12 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

TwilightGardener

(46,416 posts)
1. If he was out of control, under the influence or something,
Mon Aug 18, 2014, 12:20 PM
Aug 2014

and wouldn't respond to commands or got physically threatening, I suppose he could have been tasered, maybe.

IsItJustMe

(7,012 posts)
10. Not responding to an officer should not give that officer
Mon Aug 18, 2014, 12:43 PM
Aug 2014

a reason to shoot someone. There can be many reasons why a person may not be able to respond to an officer properly. Mental illness, hearing impared, mentally challenged or suffering from type of other medical condition.

God help us all when the police have the right to shoot you dead because a person is incapable of following that officers orders.

Recursion

(56,582 posts)
2. Maybe you should ask, "how certain must a cop be that a suspect is armed?"
Mon Aug 18, 2014, 12:22 PM
Aug 2014

Does a cop need to wait for the suspect to draw a weapon? Fire the weapon? (If they have to wait until the suspect starts shooting, you'll have a lot fewer shootings of unarmed people and a few more shootings of bystanders and cops... that's a difficult political line to walk.)

In what world would anyone, cop or otherwise, be justified in shooting an unarmed person six times?

In a lot of departments, the training is that once you start shooting you empty your magazine (there's no "non-deadly" use of a firearm envisioned). This means that if an officer starts a bad shoot, like this one certainly seems to be, he will probably keep going. The premise is that firearms are a last and definitive resort.

Your question is important but if we want to stop this we need to concentrate on the cop's POV, since the cops are the ones shooting: how certain of the existence of a weapon does a cop need to be before he shoots?

MADem

(135,425 posts)
4. When I was a little kid, and I got to see a cartoon at the movies, they sometimes involved
Mon Aug 18, 2014, 12:23 PM
Aug 2014

a guy chasing another guy, and capturing him with a gigantic butterfly net.

Well, that's probably not the way to do it in real life, but why in hell can't someone come up with a non-lethal way to capture people? Hell, the gladiators used nets to immobilize their opponents, surely there has got to be a better way than killing someone every time there's a confrontation?

A person accused of murder needs to go to court and answer the charges--what one does for a living has nothing to do with it.

 

NYC_SKP

(68,644 posts)
5. Same as a civilian, generally. Self defense or defense of another person under direct threat.
Mon Aug 18, 2014, 12:24 PM
Aug 2014

Should the suspect have to be armed? No, a person can use bare hands to strangle you or another.

If unarmed, should the cop use his gun at all? If the other person has a knife and about to use it, or is strangling you.

Was Michael Brown armed? We don't know, it doesn't seem he was, neither does it seem that he was close enough to be a threat with his bare hands.

In what world would anyone, cop or otherwise, be justified in shooting an unarmed person six times? Again, that person would have to be an immediate deadly threat in the process of carrying out that violent act.

If the cop kills someone, not in self-defense, should he be tried in the same justice system as you or I? Not sure.

If not, why not? Because, if anything, they should be held to a higher standard (but they are not).

Thus, they might be tried in the same system but only if we could really guarantee that it's done fairly, which would require considerable change in some jurisdictions.

Alternatively, we could create a different system for their trials, but that could just as easily go awry.

riqster

(13,986 posts)
6. To protect his life and the lives of others from an otherwise unavoidable threat.
Mon Aug 18, 2014, 12:25 PM
Aug 2014

Like, shooter is pointing and/using a weapon.

maxrandb

(15,193 posts)
7. Somehow the UK combats crime
Mon Aug 18, 2014, 12:27 PM
Aug 2014

and nearly 3/4 of their police don't carry guns.

My thoughts are you are allowed to shoot someone, if they have a gun pointed at you.

If you are in a fistfight, you might get your ass kicked, but that's one of the dangers of being a cop...and it's also why you are able to call for back-up.

We've made it way to easy to kill somebody in this country. Our love of guns and idiotic interpretation of the 2ND Amendment, combined with a tsunami or guns and "stand your ground" or "Castle Doctrine" laws, means that shooting someone has now become the FIRST OPTION, instead of the last resort.

We have basically said; "you can kill someone if you 'feel' threatened...AND EVERYTHING AND EVERYONE IS A THREAT, as long as you "feel" they are!

Basically, you can kill someone who you think is a threat...and a threat is whatever the fuck you think it is!

that's a fucking dangerous combination.

ancianita

(35,817 posts)
11. Police who caught the assailants of my holdup at gunpoint last year didn't. Being armed isn't cause
Mon Aug 18, 2014, 12:52 PM
Aug 2014

for police to shoot in my experience. Many places are conceal and carry, these days, so to me, simply being armed and a suspect just doesn't justify cops' use of deadly force.

The two young men who held me up have since been found guilty. Even though they pointed the Glock three inches from my chest, I'm glad they're not dead and will have a life allowing them to contemplate their choices. One of those that day was to let me live.

Random, maybe. But the cops' behavior wasn't.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Under what circumstances ...