Fragged!
- Thread starter Chillen
- Start date
That's horrible. Strange, because this week in Oakland there was just this big thing about police brutality being a big problem. On officer shot and killed a guy who didn't even have a gun and was running away from him.
Anyway, there was no need to kill that guy in the car. It scares me to think that there are police officers like that.
Anyway, there was no need to kill that guy in the car. It scares me to think that there are police officers like that.
thou shalt not kill :[
To everything there is a season...a time to die...a time to kill
I don't know how the officer ended up on the windshield, maybe it wasn't his choice, and shot the guy because he was trying to escape/harm the officer by throwing him off.
I'm not taking his side or anything, but I'm just saying that might be something you haven't considered.
Either way that was a crazy video/chase. Holy ****.
I'm not taking his side or anything, but I'm just saying that might be something you haven't considered.
Either way that was a crazy video/chase. Holy ****.
The dude was running from the cops endagering other peoples lives that are driving. I'm not saying the officer was right or wrong but he did what he had to do in order to save other people from this idiot.
Imagine your family driving in a car that this guy smashes into and it kills them.....
Imagine your family driving in a car that this guy smashes into and it kills them.....
LV, i agree with you. i wouldn't want anyone, my family or not, to be on the street during this situation.
however, the police managed to stop the car. it wasn't moving anymore and not endangering others driving at the point of the shooting. there was a moment in time when the officer was on the hood of the car and not shooting, regardless of how short that moment was. the fact that the officer could actually get on the hood provides some evidence that he was in control of the driver. the 6 shots through the windshield seemed unnecessary at that point.
deadly force should be used against deadly force or when an officer reasonably believes that deadly force is necessary. however, once the situation is under police control, i'd imagine that it's up to them to contain the suspect and secure the situation so that the least amount of harm is done.
of course, no one really can get the full picture from this video but, this is my opinion about what i can see.
however, the police managed to stop the car. it wasn't moving anymore and not endangering others driving at the point of the shooting. there was a moment in time when the officer was on the hood of the car and not shooting, regardless of how short that moment was. the fact that the officer could actually get on the hood provides some evidence that he was in control of the driver. the 6 shots through the windshield seemed unnecessary at that point.
deadly force should be used against deadly force or when an officer reasonably believes that deadly force is necessary. however, once the situation is under police control, i'd imagine that it's up to them to contain the suspect and secure the situation so that the least amount of harm is done.
of course, no one really can get the full picture from this video but, this is my opinion about what i can see.
check the video again, the car was moving when the officer on the hood (no less) was shooting.....
ok, if you say the car was moving, i believe you. i watched it a billion times and didn't see that it was moving but it was a bit choppy and hard to watch on my computer. obviously, that changes my whole argument...my bad for not seeing that.
anyway, if the car was moving, then perhaps the officer felt that the six straight-on shots through the windshield were justified in order to stop the driver and car. i'm not sure if jumping on the hood of a moving vehicle is the best way of handling that situation but then again, i don't know how the officer even got on the hood! i also can't predict what the heck i'd do (but, i'm also not a cop). anyway, it was a dangerous moment and i'm sure that the officer did what he felt he had to do -- it's a judgment call and cops are trained to protect the public, follow laws and to have sharp instincts while acting in their capacity as cops. i'm sure that in many jurisdictions, a car is considered a deadly weapon, no different than a gun or knife and so perhaps deadly force is matched with deadly force here.
did anyone notice if the cops tried to shoot the tires?
how/when did that cop get on the hood? i can't see how that happened.
anyway, if the car was moving, then perhaps the officer felt that the six straight-on shots through the windshield were justified in order to stop the driver and car. i'm not sure if jumping on the hood of a moving vehicle is the best way of handling that situation but then again, i don't know how the officer even got on the hood! i also can't predict what the heck i'd do (but, i'm also not a cop). anyway, it was a dangerous moment and i'm sure that the officer did what he felt he had to do -- it's a judgment call and cops are trained to protect the public, follow laws and to have sharp instincts while acting in their capacity as cops. i'm sure that in many jurisdictions, a car is considered a deadly weapon, no different than a gun or knife and so perhaps deadly force is matched with deadly force here.
did anyone notice if the cops tried to shoot the tires?
how/when did that cop get on the hood? i can't see how that happened.
Which is why I said exactly what I said. We don't know how the cop got on the hood. He could have been trying to pull him out earlier but was somehow forced onto the hood. The car WAS moving when the cop was on the hood...if even just a few inches or feet. The black car was trying to worm it's way out. The third cop car on the scene diliberately did not ram the black monte carlo because they didn't want to hurt the cop on the hood.
I believe the cop that was on the hood was also the one shown with his peice drawn-- not firing any shots, and instead holstered his gun, probably in attempts to go pull the guy out. This was earlier in the video.
I'm not taking any sides, but come on people-- think about it. Your powers of observation should be greater than this.
I believe the cop that was on the hood was also the one shown with his peice drawn-- not firing any shots, and instead holstered his gun, probably in attempts to go pull the guy out. This was earlier in the video.
I'm not taking any sides, but come on people-- think about it. Your powers of observation should be greater than this.
ok, ok...the car was moving. i said that i believed CBWill even though i personally couldn't tell at the time. but i rewatched and now i see that the car was moving. so, once and for all, the car WAS moving and that is significant.
anyway, i bet we could watch the same scenario ten different times with ten different sets of cops and there would be slightly to dramatically different outcomes every time. as i said, it's a judgment call by those particular cops at that particular moment in time. whether or not that judgment call is ethical and appropriate is impossible to determine from this footage (or any footage without further evidence).
i personally think that it's hard to tell exactly what's really going at the end of the video and i don't think the police department would be doing their duty if they didn't at least investigate (which i'm sure they will).
anyway, i bet we could watch the same scenario ten different times with ten different sets of cops and there would be slightly to dramatically different outcomes every time. as i said, it's a judgment call by those particular cops at that particular moment in time. whether or not that judgment call is ethical and appropriate is impossible to determine from this footage (or any footage without further evidence).
i personally think that it's hard to tell exactly what's really going at the end of the video and i don't think the police department would be doing their duty if they didn't at least investigate (which i'm sure they will).
