The Porn Dude

RCMP shot and killed a man in DT Vancouver

Previous Thread Next Thread
K

Kevin101

Member
Feb 11, 2009
569
0
16
http://www.vancouversun.com/news/Officers+shot+dead+Friday+were+armed+with+Tasers/1416692/story.html

Also one of the RCMP officers that came in later after the shoot had occured took a cell phone from someone who was recording it and deleted the video footage. One of the cheifs got questioned about that "was it apporpreiate to delete the video footage that was caught on camera" and he replied "it was inapporpreiate for him to delete the evidence, yes. We will look into it" somewhere along those lines. Cocksuckers always say they will look into it and never do.

So my question is: Was it right for the officers to shoot the guy? If not what would YOU have done if you were the RCMP officer?
 
F

FortunateOne

Banned
Jan 29, 2008
1,693
10
0
vancouver
Right or wrong, it is fairly standard in cases where the suspect is armed & refuses to cooperate. It is usually considered "suicide by cop" to do something like that. Maybe he did it that way because they were female officers and he figured he could get away with it, but that is hard to say. If he had done the same thing to 2 male officers, it would have had the same result: he would be shot. It has happened before. Many people have been shot due to the same behaviour: they have a knife, they refuse to drop it, they approach the officers or threaten someone.
 
A

Arrrg

Active member
Mar 20, 2006
542
205
43
Vancouver
Anica Green said:
It was a pathetic box cutter.............it's police being lazy....were where the tazers they advocate?
Deleting incriminating evidance? Fucking gross.....
Click to expand...
didn't the tazers get revoked because of concerns of a batch of them not producing the right voltage (too high voltage)

and box cutter or not, I wouldn't let the guy have a chance to get close to me either. Why risk it?
 
L

LightBearer

Banned
Nov 11, 2008
867
2
0
Arrrg said:
didn't the tazers get revoked because of concerns of a batch of them not producing the right voltage (too high voltage)

and box cutter or not, I wouldn't let the guy have a chance to get close to me either. Why risk it?
Click to expand...
The police have armor, pepper spray, baton, taser, firearm and some combat skills. They have many options before the gun. Oh no a knife!?!?!
 
K

Kevin101

Member
Feb 11, 2009
569
0
16
LightBearer said:
The police have armor, pepper spray, baton, taser, firearm and some combat skills. They have many options before the gun. Oh no a knife!?!?!
Click to expand...
Acutally they are told in training that if you are in danger you are supposed to shoot the suspect.

My cousin's dad told me that my cousin in training was in the same situation and he used the taser or something and they told him "if your life is in danger you shoot him."

They gave him orders to drop the knife and he didn' obey there orders therefore he got the worst of it in this situation.
 
A

Arrrg

Active member
Mar 20, 2006
542
205
43
Vancouver
LightBearer said:
The police have armor, pepper spray, baton, taser, firearm and some combat skills. They have many options before the gun. Oh no a knife!?!?!
Click to expand...
yea using any skills or tools remotely close (like arms length) would be a last resort in my opinion. You go ahead and be a hero and wrestle them.

The police are often people just like us with families, why you expect them to put themselves at any risk regardless of how much protection/advantage they have over their "opponent" is beyond me. It's not a game.
 
T

Thatotherguy

Active member
Jan 31, 2008
1,132
12
38
The guy had a knife (yes, an x-acto is a very small knife, but it's also a very sharp knife, and it takes virtually no pressure on the blade to cut through human flesh), and he refused to drop it. If they had been armed with tasers, this is exactly the kind of situation tasers are intended for (note: tasers are for taking down guys armed with knives, not guys holding staplers). Since they weren't armed with tasers, shooting was an appropriate response.

Of course, deleting the cellphone video should be grounds for immediate suspension, and possible criminal charges for tampering with evidence.
 
L

LightBearer

Banned
Nov 11, 2008
867
2
0
Thatotherguy said:
The guy had a knife (yes, an x-acto is a very small knife, but it's also a very sharp knife, and it takes virtually no pressure on the blade to cut through human flesh), and he refused to drop it. If they had been armed with tasers, this is exactly the kind of situation tasers are intended for (note: tasers are for taking down guys armed with knives, not guys holding staplers). Since they weren't armed with tasers, shooting was an appropriate response.

Of course, deleting the cellphone video should be grounds for immediate suspension, and possible criminal charges for tampering with evidence.
Click to expand...
Pepper spray and a baton and everyone would still be okay. No need for taser or firearm. Deleting the video is just plain pigish.
 
A

Arrrg

Active member
Mar 20, 2006
542
205
43
Vancouver
Missy Mariposa said:
Why not just shoot him in the hand or foot?
Click to expand...
lol, you miss or it goes right through, ricochets of the ground, dumpster or whatever into some innocent bystander running trying to catch a bus.

People watch too much tv and/or play too many video games to know what real life is like anymore.
 
W

wess

New member
Jan 5, 2009
613
2
0
Kevin101 said:
http://www.vancouversun.com/news/Officers+shot+dead+Friday+were+armed+with+Tasers/1416692/story.html

Also one of the RCMP officers that came in later after the shoot had occured took a cell phone from someone who was recording it and deleted the video footage. One of the cheifs got questioned about that "was it apporpreiate to delete the video footage that was caught on camera" and he replied "it was inapporpreiate for him to delete the evidence, yes. We will look into it" somewhere along those lines. Cocksuckers always say they will look into it and never do.

So my question is: Was it right for the officers to shoot the guy? If not what would YOU have done if you were the RCMP officer?
Click to expand...
As I was reading this post i noticed that my bullshit detector was going off. It says nothing in the article about the cops deleting something from a phone.
 
L

LightBearer

Banned
Nov 11, 2008
867
2
0
Arrrg said:
lol, you miss or it goes right through, ricochets of the ground, dumpster or whatever into some innocent bystander running trying to catch a bus.

People watch too much tv and/or play too many video games to know what real life is like anymore.
Click to expand...
Like CSI Miami, Horatio shoots everyone perfectly in the shoulder.
 
A

Arrrg

Active member
Mar 20, 2006
542
205
43
Vancouver
Missy Mariposa said:
No, I'm speaking as someone who knows how to aim and shoot a handgun and has done so at a range for sport.

Police are trained to shoot to disarm, shoot to injure, and shoot to kill. All I'm saying is from what we know from the articles there were ways to disarm this guy. He was wielding an X-acto knife, that's not exactly a machete. Especially since they've got Kevlar.
Click to expand...
You might be setting yourself up here but we'll see :)

Bottom line, the police got put into this position. Nobody would die if everyone would simply drop and put their hands where everyone can see them :) It's pretty simple.
 
P

Pooner5000

Banned
Jun 3, 2007
87
0
0
Vancouver, BC
/Rant mode on

There are use of force guidelines in place for situations like this.

First step is the actual presence of a police officer. That didn't do anything obviously, so the next step is the use of verbal commands. For example, "Police! Put the knife down", etc.. Obviously that didn't get a response.

Third step is something called "empty hand control". This includes holds, pressure points, and even up to punching and kicking if necessary. Some responses here have said that this option should have been explored more. However, when you take into account the fact that these were 2 women officers there's a chance they may not have enough strength to take an armed, agitated man down. Plus he's armed.. so the next step comes into play immediately.

That next step is the use of batons, pepper spray, or tasers. Pepper spray is usually a poor choice in situations like these as it often enrages the target and if they are high or full of adrenaline the effects can be negligible. The officers didn't have a taser, and this would have probably been the best use of force. However, police officers are starting to worry about carrying tasers because of all the bad press and the danger of legal proceedings against them. So, on to the next step.. which is the use of deadly force.

No officer, or police organization that I know ever teaches to shoot for anything other than a kill. Shooting a suspects arm, hand, leg, etc is only seen in the movies and is far too dangerous to use in real life. "If a police peace officer has probable cause to believe that a suspect poses a significant threat of death or serious physical injury to the officer or others then the use of deadly force is justified."

I think they did the right thing, considering the options they had. If this was the movies however, they would have used their karate techniques to kick the knife out of the suspects hands, or disarmed him with a well aimed shot to the hand, all while never messing their hair nor smudging their makeup. If only life was like the movies..

/rant mode off
 
T

TheGuy

Banned
Jul 26, 2003
1,183
7
0
Vancouver
Police in Canada kill people, tazer people, beat people up. It happens every day and the Government still allows the Police to monitor their own actions.

Why? Because the 'average" Canadian is okay with it! If people were to write to those we elect and tell them we don't like what is going on it will change. I have written to Harper, Campbell, Wally Opal, The RCMP have you? If not, why not?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Ashley Madison
Previous Thread Next Thread
Vancouver Escorts
Top Bottom