You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!
The banners on the left side and below do not show for registered users!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.
Vancouver Off-Topic / Current EventsThe off-topic forum for Vancouver, funnies, non-auto centered discussions, WORK SAFE. While the rules are more relaxed here, there are still rules. Please refer to sticky thread in this forum.
I only answer to my username, my real name is Irrelevant!
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: CELICAland
Posts: 25,652
Thanked 10,382 Times in 3,908 Posts
they're trained to take down suspects and they do it almost everyday far dangerous suspects in the dtes who actually do have multiple weapons on them
there were several officers there the suspect was all but subdued his only known weapon (his bicycle lock) was taken he was also severely injured and the other officers called for the trigger happy officer to hold his fire (he was the only one who fired several times).... you just have to open your eyes and see the obvious
That cop lost his shit in the heat of the moment and used excessive force. Coup de' grace to the head was not needed. Remember how the man with a huge sword in downtown was tackled down by the cops? Thats how it should've went down after he was crawling from several gunshot wounds.
this guy recorded it 5 years ago, went back to manitoba and never showed anyone the tape because he didn't know there were conflictin accounts. onlhy last week he checked online and realized there were conflicting accoutns and released it?
BULLSHIT.
if you saw some shit like this owuld you not check online what happened and any updates, until 5 yeras from the incident?
Keep in mind that the PCC's final report only came out in March this year, two months ago, detailing the fact that there was a lack of evidence/conflicting accounts etc.
The fellow with the video could have easily come across an article about it while browsing whatever news website he was on.
No point on arguing if the cop was right or wrong. The video is just too unclear. All that matters is how the officer / officers articulate the situation and how they write the crown.
Under the Use of Force continuum, it is an officer's job and duty to continually re-assess the situation and tactically reposition themselves. As soon as the threat is over, the officer should switch to another intervention option. So it really depends how the officer visualized the "threat." (on all fours, crawling...) KO 'ing an officer seconds before played a huge factor in the officers articulation for sure.
SOUNDY is right. Officer safety is paramount. You don't just charge in hands on and tackle the guy, even if hes been shot 7 times. There are protocols in place. What if you tackle the guy and he has needles on him or in his pocket stickint out? If you've ever been trained in searching individuals, you would be surprised where weapons can be concealed after a "THOROUGH" search. Tactical principle: 1+1 rule. No knife = 1 knife. 1 knife = 2 knives. Thats how officers are trained. Unknown risk. At the end of the day, Officer goes home to family.
SOUNDY is right. Officer safety is paramount. You don't just charge in hands on and tackle the guy, even if hes been shot 7 times. There are protocols in place. What if you tackle the guy and he has needles on him or in his pocket stickint out? If you've ever been trained in searching individuals, you would be surprised where weapons can be concealed after a "THOROUGH" search. Tactical principle: 1+1 rule. No knife = 1 knife. 1 knife = 2 knives. Thats how officers are trained. Unknown risk. At the end of the day, Officer goes home to family.
So basically you are saying that an officer is trained to not arrest an individual prior to being able to do a ''THOROUGH'' search first....because who knows if "he has needles on him or in his pocket stickin out"....and so if someone is resisting arrest, and therefore a search, you shoot them in the head. Okay, deal.
So basically you are saying that an officer is trained to not arrest an individual prior to being able to do a ''THOROUGH'' search first....because who knows if "he has needles on him or in his pocket stickin out"....and so if someone is resisting arrest, and therefore a search, you shoot them in the head. Okay, deal.
No. What I am saying is a officer is trained to assess situations before going hands on. That subject is ALREADY under arrest for assault and KOing a officer. He was shot 7 times and still moving. Does he look cooperative to you? If he was told to keep crawling then sure. Cooperative is belly down, feet apart, hands to side, ready to be cuffed. He has already shown that he has a weapon. How do you know he doesn't have another? I agree with the caution the Officers are taking. No where in my post did i AGREE with the shooting in the head. Read the first line of my post
If anything, I think they should have switched to a intermediate weapon.
He's been violent, he's been belligerent, he's been armed with a dangerous weapon... you've put him down and he's still coming toward you and may STILL be armed with another dangerous or even deadly weapon... what do you do?
Be great if it was really that easy, right?
The guy was mentally unstable and you're calling him a bitch after he lost his life due to actions that were caused by an illness???
Geeze, you really need to get out of your Peace Officer bubble and look at the bigger picture. Your perspective is skewed and narrow-minded and you fail to realize that it isn't always as simple as playing the victim card always as officers.
This isn't a volunteer job, officers get paid to do what they do. With that money that we pay them, they also get training to conduct themselves in a responsible and reasonable manner. I have never seen you once say a negative thing about an officer...Not once! They must all be perfect, I suppose.
"WHAT DO YOU DO?"
He's ON THE FLOOR ON HANDS AND KNEES SURROUNDED BY A DOZEN OFFICERS WITH THEIR GUNS DRAWN OUT AT HIM....WHAT DO U DO? If you can't figure out a plan to subdue him at that point, you definitely should NOT be a cop. There needs to be a higher expectation of education, logic skills and reasoning for police officers. Too many people think like you and fail to provide any service to our community.
Check my post history, you'll soon realize that I have just under a dozen friends and family who are active members. VPD, RCMP, King County Sheriff and Delta Police...Obviously the safety of these people is a priority to me. Obviously my perspective isn't skewed as I have a stake in the success of our police. I've stuck of for officers when people are blatantly wrong and I will stand against them when they have done something wrong. It's not as simple and clear cut as "the officer is always right."
what would you say if he simply died of his wounds in hospital before getting shot in the head?
holy fuck you're an idiot I was going to explain the difference to you but if you already don't know its not worth it so i'll just call you an idiot once again
It's really hard to imagine someone who has been shot 7 times being in any physical shape to mount an attack on anyone, let alone a police officer.
What IS easy to imagine is a bit of anger, frustration, and vindictiveness which may have been running through the mind of the officer that shot the guy in the head because the guy wasn't completely complying with orders.
My AFC gave me an ABS CEL code of LOL while at WOT!
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: vancouver, B.C.
Posts: 1,843
Thanked 563 Times in 229 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by NSX
No point on arguing if the cop was right or wrong. The video is just too unclear. All that matters is how the officer / officers articulate the situation and how they write the crown.
Under the Use of Force continuum, it is an officer's job and duty to continually re-assess the situation and tactically reposition themselves. As soon as the threat is over, the officer should switch to another intervention option. So it really depends how the officer visualized the "threat." (on all fours, crawling...) KO 'ing an officer seconds before played a huge factor in the officers articulation for sure.
SOUNDY is right. Officer safety is paramount. You don't just charge in hands on and tackle the guy, even if hes been shot 7 times. There are protocols in place. What if you tackle the guy and he has needles on him or in his pocket stickint out? If you've ever been trained in searching individuals, you would be surprised where weapons can be concealed after a "THOROUGH" search. Tactical principle: 1+1 rule. No knife = 1 knife. 1 knife = 2 knives. Thats how officers are trained. Unknown risk. At the end of the day, Officer goes home to family.
Should every person be shot at because we "think" they have weapons on them? What the fuck are we paying these people if they can't even exercise proper judgment and give them this much authority. Threat looks pretty much over when a man is on his hands and knees, shot 7 times, there are at least half a dozen officers around, and the bicycle chain was removed.
__________________
Cars:
02' Lexus IS300 5spd
07' BMW 323iA
05' BMW Z4 5spd
06' BMW 330i 6spd
10' Audi A4 quattro
08' BMW M3 6spd
15' Kawasaki Ninja300
08' Yamaha R6
10' Honda Ridgeline
17' Audi Q5
16' BMW X5D
Should every person be shot at because we "think" they have weapons on them? What the fuck are we paying these people if they can't even exercise proper judgment and give them this much authority. Threat looks pretty much over when a man is on his hands and knees, shot 7 times, there are at least half a dozen officers around, and the bicycle chain was removed.
This isn't a Treyvon Martin case where "we think" someone has weapons, or that someone has intentions to harm.
This particular case: Someone does have a weapon, and someone has already caused harm to someone.
What's the conjecture:
1. Oh he's probably under control.
2. He's probably subdued.
3. He probably won't lunge anymore.
4. He probably won't have any more weapons.
And everyone's gambling that #1 - 4 is true because it's really easy to gamble with someone else' life.
At this point, because the final shot was obscured by a vehicle in the video, I'll reserve my judgement based on what is actual fact rather than what our conjecture is.
This isn't a Treyvon Martin case where "we think" someone has weapons, or that someone has intentions to harm.
This particular case: Someone does have a weapon, and someone has already caused harm to someone.
What's the conjecture:
1. Oh he's probably under control.
2. He's probably subdued.
3. He probably won't lunge anymore.
4. He probably won't have any more weapons.
And everyone's gambling that #1 - 4 is true because it's really easy to gamble with someone else' life.
At this point, because the final shot was obscured by a vehicle in the video, I'll reserve my judgement based on what is actual fact rather than what our conjecture is.
Exactly. Finally someone that understands the concept of risk. No such thing as low risk. Only unknown and high risk. That is the principle that police go by and trained by. I only emphasized CAUTION.You can sit in front of you computer all you want and BLAH BLAH BLAh say that the "situation is contained! SO OBVIOUS! THERES NO WEAPONS! Fact of the matter is, up until the Cst. shot the guy in the head, their extreme caution in not running up and tackling him is correct. Not to mention hes been shot 7 times. 12 officers jumping on top of him and cuffing him is just gonna kill him faster.
BING: and NO. you dont just shoot someone for "thinking" they have weapons. Read my posts again PROPERLY, then post.
you're already concluding his death?
sorry I didn't want to call you a dumbass but you're a dumbass
The guy was shot seven fucking times before the lethal shot, most people don't survive 7 gun shots, especially when police protocol calls for the first shot to the chest..
Lol @ being called a dumb ass for thinking somone might be OK after taking 7 rounds..
Failstorm incoming because I'm not saying "FUK THA POLIZINAZIS" but any reasonable person who has failed to comply with police instructions up to the point where they've already been hit with multiple rounds is someone the police probably have to assume means to do them harm, armed or unarmed.
The police probably couldn't determine if the person was simply mentally ill, or high as everloving fuck, as his actions certainly didn't demonstrate those of a person who is simply bipolar. A simple Google search gives me stats on the amount of bipolar people who have violent incidents (around 15%) but they don't mention if these manic episodes include a complete disregard for the law, and for their own personal safety.
I'm not saying everyone needs to comply with every order from every authority figure ever, but its reasonable to assume that after swinging a chain with a lock on it at a police officer, and being shot, the VPD isn't going to give you a hug and cup of cocoa if you keep moving toward them after being told to stop your aggressive actions. Isn't it reasonable to assume the police are going to be suspicious of you continually coming after them especially if you've already attacked one of them?
The blame isn't entirely on the police here. And with that, failstorm me for not joining the anti-police circlejerk.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by MG1
She taught me right from wrong and always told me to stay positive and help others no matter how small the deed - that helping others gives us meaning to carry on. The sun is out today and it's a new day. Life is good. I just needed a slap in the face.
I only answer to my username, my real name is Irrelevant!
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: CELICAland
Posts: 25,652
Thanked 10,382 Times in 3,908 Posts
^^^^ except even the other officers was telling that trigger happy officer to hold his fire but he was like
even the police chief is like wtf
Quote:
Jim Chu says he normally doesn't speak out about these kinds of things, given the number of reviews underway into Boyd's death. But Chu tells us a new video of his death is so disturbing to him
The guy was shot seven fucking times before the lethal shot, most people don't survive 7 gun shots, especially when police protocol calls for the first shot to the chest..
Lol @ being called a dumb ass for thinking somone might be OK after taking 7 rounds..
By the way, I don't think people were calling you a dumbass because you implied that he was unlikely to survive after being shot 7x. I think they were calling YOU A DUMBASS because you insist that the outcome here is justified simply because he was probably going to die anyways. That's hardly a justification for killing someone and as far as I'm concerned, the point you tried to make isn't even relevant to discussion. Regardless of whether the man died or not, we the public, the police as a force and the government as a ruling body needs to make sure the appropriate steps were taken place and that adequate training is in place. I don't think we'll get anywhere in society with people saying "oh he was going to die anyways, so it's okay if there was one last lethal shot to the head..."
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!
The banners on the left side and below do not show for registered users!
