WaGuns.org

I'm pretty sure that the discussion can take place without ad hominem attacks.

(of an argument or reaction) directed against a person rather than the position they are maintaining.

I think leadcounsel has this pretty well in hand, so I won't dive in too deep.

My thoughts, after watching the video, and knowing that hindsight is 20/20:

- I wish the officers had been more aggressive in the beginning. More beanbags, advancing quicker, maybe even opening fire.
- Yeah, once psycho dude started sawing with the knife, there's no more time . . . gotta BANG BANG BANG at that point and do the best you can.

TW, I get it that the officers killed an innocent woman . . . but seriously, you can't treat that as murder in a situation like this.

LAPD Chief says he wants to start arming officers with 40mm rifles that shoot foam projectiles.

Here we go, the coppers will have fucking Nerf guns.

leadcounsel wrote:Or, unless, as it was referenced by LOG, she died of knife wounds or they were otherwise unable to save her from a knife attack so they acted as fast as possible given their ONLY OPTION was to shoot him and hope for an instant successful kill shot. Under this stressful situation, it would have required championship level marksmanship.

It cannot be stated enough. Trained professionals, held to a higher standard. Don't you agree that trained professionals given perks not afforded to the unwashed masses when it comes to carrying firearms and using them with deadly force should be held to a very high standard of marksmanship. Championship sounds good. After all, they have free reign to kill you whenever they feel threatened.

leadcounsel wrote:I'm sure we'll get an official cause of death for the woman. I won't hold the cops at fault even if they did accidentally kill her whilst trying to save her from imminent death by a criminal with a blade at her throat and no other better options; and I'll go so far as to say that would be twisted.

So they had no choice but kill her because she was already dead?

leadcounsel wrote:I'd bet the anti-LEO crowd would have criticized the cops for waiting and not taking "an easy shot" if they waited and he killed her... Simply cannot win with the cop haters.

You sound just like the Moms Demand Action/Citizens for Gun Responsibility. Different script but same podcast. Any disagreements = haters. I'm tellin' ya you really are ready for ADA.

Their own Chief is coming out saying it's gotten a tad out of hand. PR notwithstanding if the LAPD Chief is not condoning the behavior, why are you?

leadcounsel wrote:
I appreciate your detailed response. I respectfully disagree. The cops never had a good angle/shot and moving to their left, put the woman directly as a backstop. They never had a "risk free" handgun shot as far as I can tell. Urban area, people all over the place. Ricochets kill. Errant bullets kill. Putting the woman as a backstop would draw criticism, especially if she was hit and injured/killed.

As you pointed out, this was fluid and fast. The man could have just as easily charged them, ran away, ran to their left. Or he could have complied. From the time he decided to take the woman until he had her was maybe 1 second. They had NO IDEA what he was going to do and were reactive.

I think it's a case of them being too cautious (keeping distance) and too reckless, albeit at different times. I won't fault them for their advance (or lack thereof) before he got to her. My move to the left would left an opportunity for the suspect to move right.. Directly towards the woman...

Let me ask this. If the cops simply did nothing and he killed her, would you hold them responsible for failing to take a shot and at least TRY to save her?

Yes and no... If they delayed, trying to get a better shot, and he stabbed her, then no, I'd give them the benefit of the doubt. If they just sat there and claimed '21 ft rule, officer safety, we can't get close enough to stop him', then yes....I'd roast the shit out of them.

I don't think that's fair or reasonable to throw a nearly un-navigable situation at a cop, and then expect him to perform flawlessly. Have you ever held yourself to a "flawless performance" standard?

I don't think it's unnavigable.. Difficult, sure. High likelihood of making a mistake? Absolutely. But those are decisions to be made, and consequence or reward come from that. What happens when you excuse the mistake of taking someone's life?

MadPick wrote:TW, I get it that the officers killed an innocent woman . . . but seriously, you can't treat that as murder in a situation like this.

How about negligent homicide or manslaughter, and terminated?

So they had no choice but kill her because she was already dead?

Remember the 'he was suicidal, and had a knife to his throat, so we had to shoot him to stop him from killing himself'....

I think that was Cali too.

dan360 wrote:

leadcounsel wrote:Or, unless, as it was referenced by LOG, she died of knife wounds or they were otherwise unable to save her from a knife attack so they acted as fast as possible given their ONLY OPTION was to shoot him and hope for an instant successful kill shot. Under this stressful situation, it would have required championship level marksmanship.

It cannot be stated enough. Trained professionals, held to a higher standard. Don't you agree that trained professionals given perks not afforded to the unwashed masses when it comes to carrying firearms and using them with deadly force should be held to a very high standard of marksmanship. Championship sounds good. After all, they have free reign to kill you whenever they feel threatened.

leadcounsel wrote:I'm sure we'll get an official cause of death for the woman. I won't hold the cops at fault even if they did accidentally kill her whilst trying to save her from imminent death by a criminal with a blade at her throat and no other better options; and I'll go so far as to say that would be twisted.

So they had no choice but kill her because she was already dead?

leadcounsel wrote:I'd bet the anti-LEO crowd would have criticized the cops for waiting and not taking "an easy shot" if they waited and he killed her... Simply cannot win with the cop haters.

You sound just like the Moms Demand Action/Citizens for Gun Responsibility. Different script but same podcast. Any disagreements = haters. I'm tellin' ya you really are ready for ADA.

Their own Chief is coming out saying it's gotten a tad out of hand. PR notwithstanding if the LAPD Chief is not condoning the behavior, why are you?

The event unfolded SO FAST and with so much confusion, particularly from the time he took the hostage, started cutting(?), and was shot, that I cannot even tell the order of events with 10 replay viewings on my monitor. Try doing it once, live fire, with lives on the line, in the heat/stress/anxiety of the moment not knowing what will happen.

I really don't think you're being fair or reasonable. Do we KNOW she was shot. Dunno. Do we KNOW that is her cause of death? Dunno. Would he have slit her throat? Did he slit her throat? Did she die of a slit throat or a GSW? We don't know yet. Seems like a lot of jumping to conclusions and armchair quarterbacking on your part.

Do you wear a uniform and have you ever worn a uniform and tasked with carrying a gun and making life/death decisions? I have in some capacity and I'll tell you it's extremely difficult. EXTREMELY.

And touche - you surely know that an ADA prosecutes people, right??? Like bad cops, for instance. So you're really not helping convince anyone you have any idea what you're talking about... if you don't know the basics.

leadcounsel wrote:I really don't think you're being fair or reasonable. Do we KNOW she was shot. Dunno. Do we KNOW that is her cause of death? Dunno. Would he have slit her throat? Did he slit her throat? Did she die of a slit throat or a GSW? We don't know yet. Seems like a lot of jumping to conclusions and armchair quarterbacking on your part.

Did you read the article? They admitted to fatally shooting her.

Do you wear a uniform and have you ever worn a uniform and tasked with carrying a gun and making life/death decisions? I have in some capacity and I'll tell you it's extremely difficult. EXTREMELY.

I carry a gun every day and have had many an opportunity/legal excuse to use it. I've managed to avoid killing people, so far. I even had a TPD officer ask me why I didn't shoot the guy because she would've shot him...

leadcounsel wrote:
Do you wear a uniform and have you ever worn a uniform and tasked with carrying a gun and making life/death decisions? I have in some capacity and I'll tell you it's extremely difficult. EXTREMELY.

Are you also calling out people that criticise government spending or law making by asking if they've ever been elected to make decisions on behalf of the governed?

Lullllllllllllll.

TechnoWeenie wrote:

leadcounsel wrote:I really don't think you're being fair or reasonable. Do we KNOW she was shot. Dunno. Do we KNOW that is her cause of death? Dunno. Would he have slit her throat? Did he slit her throat? Did she die of a slit throat or a GSW? We don't know yet. Seems like a lot of jumping to conclusions and armchair quarterbacking on your part.

Did you read the article? They admitted to fatally shooting her.

Do you wear a uniform and have you ever worn a uniform and tasked with carrying a gun and making life/death decisions? I have in some capacity and I'll tell you it's extremely difficult. EXTREMELY.

I carry a gun every day and have had many an opportunity/legal excuse to use it. I've managed to avoid killing people, so far. I even had a TPD officer ask me why I didn't shoot the guy because she would've shot him...

I think this is part of the disconnect. You have no moral or legal duty/obligation to spring into action and engage dangerous people. I don't believe you wear a uniform, are employed by anyone paying you to risk your life and expecting you defend people from harm. Apparently you have no relevant training THIS CENTURY. I'm sorry, but pardon me for not being convinced in your arguments of how you imply the resolution here was anything but tragedy 85 out of 100 times.

Conversely, I actually have done a lot of shoot/don't shoot real life and simulation scenarios with staged angry crowds, civilians or terrorist, detainee operations type stuff for the Army THIS CENTURY. For military and pre-deployment training, I did a lot of this type of training. I know first hand that the decision to carry and draw and point a gun, and make a life/death decision, in a nanosecond, is among the most high stress and difficult things a person can experience. I also stay somewhat educated on this stuff. It's not easy like you constantly imply.

In nearly any life event, if someone had a camera, others could scrutinize events ad naseum. But in the moment, decisions are made. The key events happened in about 1-5 seconds. Six or so people making independent decisions. Frankly there's just more going on than probably any human can even process - like 30 actions per second. More than a person can process.

I have to tap out, again. I just disagree with your world view. I am really really stumped why you're not in super high demand by every LEO in the nation on training officers b/c apparently they could learn a LOT from you.

leadcounsel wrote:
I think this is part of the disconnect. You have no moral or legal duty/obligation to spring into action and engage dangerous people.

FIFY.

I don't believe you wear a uniform, are employed by anyone paying you to risk your life and expecting you defend people from harm.

Do you hear that rumbling in the distance? The trumpeting? It's a herd of irrelephants coming this way!

Apparently you have no relevant training THIS CENTURY.

False.

I'm sorry, but pardon me for not being convinced in your arguments of how you imply the resolution here was anything but tragedy 85 out of 100 times.

With the officer shooting like that? I'd say 99 out of 100 times.

In nearly any life event, if someone had a camera, others could scrutinize events ad naseum. But in the moment, decisions are made. The key events happened in about 1-5 seconds. Six or so people making independent decisions. Frankly there's just more going on than probably any human can even process - like 30 actions per second. More than a person can process.

You are responsible for your actions. Someone pulled the trigger. Someone sent a bullet into her body... As pointed out so eloquently, there's no 'accidentally pulled the trigger'.. You're not responsible for what someone else does, you're responsible for what you do. As pointed out, any one of us did that and we'd be in jail.

I have to tap out, again.

I admire your ability to accept defeat.

I just disagree with your world view.

Which one?

I am really really stumped why you're not in super high demand by every LEO in the nation on training officers b/c apparently they could learn a LOT from you.

Parting shot? Classy.

No, you won nothing and convinced nobody. Re-read the last 3 pages of folks who almost unanimously disagree with you.

I'm tapping out because my dogs are more interesting than a cop-bashing thread.

Just another TW bait thread.

He sets the controversial trap, and then spends 3 pages arguing with any posters.

Nothing to see here, move along.

Protected the shit out of her. Now that she's dead she won't have to worry about anybody hurting or endangering her ever again.