1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Man shoots self in ass

Discussion in 'The OT' started by Dave, Aug 16, 2012.

  1. jdskycaster

    jdskycaster Legend

    272
    7
    Sep 1, 2008
    Maybe he deserved to be shot?

    If I ever deserve to be shot by the police I hope they do me the same favor of completing the task at hand and not worrying about the cost of ammo. This man obviously did not suffer.
     
  2. MysteryMan

    MysteryMan Well-Known Member DBSTalk Club

    8,449
    514
    May 17, 2010
    USA
    Watch the CNN video and see for yourself. CNN just reported the Justice Department is investigating the shooting. Again, a three round burst is more than sufficient to bring down a human. If all six police officers fired a three round burst that would add up to a total of 18 rounds. Less than half of what they actually fired and way more than enough to get the job done.
     
  3. jclewter79

    jclewter79 Hall Of Fame

    1,833
    0
    Jan 8, 2008
    What I am saying he probably passed some type of training course but, still shot himself. I personally know a guy that is ex military with plenty of training that accidently shot himself in the leg like this guy due to a defective gun. Accidents do happen but I do think the good outweights the bad here. More training can prevent some accidents but not all of them. And, I am 100% certain this was not leaglly allowed to carry his weapon without some type of training, minimal as it might have been.
     
  4. MysteryMan

    MysteryMan Well-Known Member DBSTalk Club

    8,449
    514
    May 17, 2010
    USA
    Read the report. It states he had a "valid" permit to legally carry. Again, you should be more concerned about the six police officers who fired 46 rounds to stop one man. :sure:
     
  5. jdskycaster

    jdskycaster Legend

    272
    7
    Sep 1, 2008
    Watched the video. I doubt he felt a thing. Hard for me to believe that all six of those police officers would fire in that way unless each and every one of them thought this man needed to be put down. Or, could it be that the coffee was just a bit too strong at the local DD that morning?
     
  6. Stewart Vernon

    Stewart Vernon Roving Reporter Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    21,609
    380
    Jan 7, 2005
    Kittrell, NC
    Is what you describe required in all 50 states? Are you required to re-certify every year?

    I believe someone posted that police officers are required to re-certify proficiency a couple of times a year...

    Drivers have to renew licenses every so many years... I think gun owners should have to re-certify every year or at least every few years and prove that they still know how to use and respect their guns.

    I don't know why anyone would get so defensive about that.

    Like I keep saying... you can't prevent all the criminals from having guns no matter what even if we went to a police-state which none of us want!

    But you can work to help everyone else be a little bit better with their guns. All I'm saying is I don't care who shoots me... be it a criminal, a police officer, or an accident from a careless neighbor... I don't want to get shot when I'm not deserving of it... and I have a greater chance of being shot by a random accidental neighbor than I do of a policeman (since I'm not a criminal) or a criminal (since there are less criminals than there are other citizens).

    Again... if you want to compare cars and guns... You have to renew drivers' licenses... why not renew gun licenses too? You have to take training to get a driver license... why not to get a gun license?

    You want to say how you are more likely or whatever... that's because you're more likely to be in a car and around other people in cars on a regular basis... so you're going to have a greater chance of being in an accident... The more you are around people with guns, the more chance of an accident there too.

    What does this have to do with anything?

    If the guy was innocent then he shouldn't have been shot... but if he was an imminent danger to others... then we are only arguing over wasted bullets... That's 100% different than arguing over the death of an innocent man.

    Come back to me when you think this guy was innocent and was killed by cops needlessly... then we have a conversation... but if you believe he was a danger and it was ok for the police to kill him... then arguing over how many bullets they used is just silly.

    That's my point though... More training has to be a good thing. For anyone to argue for less training and certification makes no sense. Some bad things will still happen, but that doesn't mean you can't try to prevent some of them.

    IF proven otherwise, I'll eat my words on this specific guy... but I'll be very surprised if we find out this guy has much in the way of practice and proficiency in the use of his gun. I just can't imagine anyone who respects and knows how to use his gun being so careless that he has one that can fall out of his pocket and shoot anyone, including himself.

    The key point here is... once it fell from his pocket it could have shot anyone around him... it was just dumb luck that he only shot himself and not someone else. I don't want that guy allowed to have a gun anywhere near me now that he has proven his ineptitude.

    Again, what does that have to do with anything?

    Please argue that the guy the officers killed was innocent, then you can make a case... but if your only argument is that they wasted bullets, that has nothing to do with anything as long as they only killed a man who was a danger to others in a justified shooting.
     
  7. Rich

    Rich DBSTalk Club DBSTalk Club

    26,993
    522
    Feb 22, 2007
    Piscataway, NJ
    Is Nevada a state that allows people to carry guns? NJ does, but it's damn near impossible to get a permit. I do know a couple of guys with a Federal carry permit, but that's something different.

    The bloodshed in NYC is getting intolerable and, naturally, it's all related to guns. Now the NYPD is saying that gangs are leaving one gun in a known (to other gang members) place so that anyone can use them and not take the chance of getting caught carrying.

    101.5 reported the other day that a bill is before the state legislature that would fine first time offenders of the Texting While Driving law $200 and add two points to their driving record. Like that will stop anyone. As one of the hosts of that show said, the death penalty doesn't seem to stop anyone from killing someone, how will that texting law stop folks from texting?

    Rich
     
  8. MysteryMan

    MysteryMan Well-Known Member DBSTalk Club

    8,449
    514
    May 17, 2010
    USA
    I can only speak for the state I obtained my initial permit to carry and licensing and the one I reside in now. No, I do not have to be recertified. You stated drivers have to "renew" there license every so many years then stated gun owners should be "re-certified" every so many years. There's a big difference between renewing and recertifying. You want gun owners to be "re-certified" every so many years in the name of saftey. Yet you have no problem with people who go through their adult lives operating 4,000lb vehicles moving at high rates of speed on public roads simply "renewing" their drivers license and not being "re-certified" in the name of safety. :sure: Let me again remind you that the odds of you witnessing or being involved in a shooting pale in comparison to the odds of you witnessing or being involved in a motor vehicle incident. The guy who got shot in the ass has a valid permit to carry but was incompetent. But then there are of motorists who hold a valid drivers license and operate motor vehicles who are incompetent. As for the Michigan police shooting the facts speak for themselves. Six police officers armed with hand guns (most likely 9mm) aided with a police dog taking on a deranged man armed with a knife in a unsecured parking lot. I'm all for justifiable shootings but 46 rounds fired at one man? Depending on the cartridge used and barrel length of the handgun a 9mm will travel between 1,000 and 1,500 feet per second. Had any of those rounds missed and ricocheted or continued to travel need I say more? And they were fired by your well trained and recertified policemen. The man killed had a long history of confrontations with the law and was no alterboy as I stated. But I don't have to argue his innocence. Title II, Chapter 1, Article 29 of the Constitution states that every person is presumed innocent until proven guilty according to the law. Looking at the two incidents and given a choice I would rather be in the proximity of the man who got shot in the ass for dropping his unsecured handgun than any of those well trained and recertified policemen who fired 46 rounds at a man in a unsecured parking lot.
     
  9. MysteryMan

    MysteryMan Well-Known Member DBSTalk Club

    8,449
    514
    May 17, 2010
    USA
    Be patient. There are over 22,000 gun control laws designed to protect us from criminals and gun violence. :sure: Perhaps when there are that many "Texting While Driving" laws on the books things will improve.
     
  10. jdskycaster

    jdskycaster Legend

    272
    7
    Sep 1, 2008
    Huh? Really? I would meet up with those same six officers every morning for a year before I would stand next to the yahoo with a bullet in his ass!
     
  11. James Long

    James Long Ready for Uplink! Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    45,738
    985
    Apr 17, 2003
    Michiana
    I'd like to rewrite that:
    Six Mentally Ill Michigan Police Officers Shoot Man 46 Times!

    No budgets for taisers in Saginaw? I understand that none of the dash cameras were working (although I don't understand why). If it were not for a citizen video this would be another swept under the rug police shooting - despite the 46 shots fired.

    Anyone who needs that many bullets to stop a suspect should not be a police officer. Even averaged out, that is too many shots.

    Perhaps each officer didn't think that the other officers were going to fire ... but once the shooting started they needed to show some self control. The amount of shots was unneeded. I would not want to be around a person who would intentionally fire a weapon with such reckless abandoned while aiming at a human being.
     
  12. jdskycaster

    jdskycaster Legend

    272
    7
    Sep 1, 2008
    I think we would need a bit more background on each of the officers to determine how reckless they have been up to this point. Since I was not there, and the video shows barely a few seconds of what was going on, I will side with the officers over a possible thug.
     
  13. James Long

    James Long Ready for Uplink! Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    45,738
    985
    Apr 17, 2003
    Michiana
    Past performance does not excuse what they did that day on that scene. How many shooters have no prior record? Should we decide that James Holmes and Jared Loughner were not reckless based only on actions prior to their public misuse of a weapon?


    The video is useful to bring the incident to the public. It should not have been needed. Any REASONABLE investigation into the shooting of a single man by six police officers with dozens of shots fired would not have needed a public video to bring the incident to light.

    Now that the proper state and local authorities are involved the investigation should be more accurate.

    Personally, I believe officers should account for every bullet fired. It may make them consider how many bullets they are firing.
     
  14. yosoyellobo

    yosoyellobo Icon

    2,766
    172
    Nov 1, 2006
    Jacksonville Fl
    When the police shoot a man 46 times I wonder if this is not the opposite of what happens in a firing squad were one person is given a blank so that the members could believe that they did not fire the fatal shot. In this case the six police officers could believe that they did not fire the fatal shot.
     
  15. Stewart Vernon

    Stewart Vernon Roving Reporter Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    21,609
    380
    Jan 7, 2005
    Kittrell, NC
    I'm sorry, but these just aren't equal incidents. The police may have been overzealous, but I have not yet heard that they shot an innocent man OR that they endangered others.

    IF new information comes to light, I will revisit that opinion.

    But the guy in the theater... he was careless and dropped his gun and while he only shot himself, in that brief moment everyone near him was in danger because unlike the cops who were taking aim on a subject, the theater guy was not in any control of his weapon.

    As I'm not a criminal in a circumstance that would have officers drawing a bead on me... I too would happily meet with those officers a thousand times more than I'd want to be anywhere near ass-shooting guy!

    If we're talking about "more likely" hypothetical situations...

    You're a lot more likely to be accidentally shot by ass-shooter than you are any of those police officers UNLESS you are a criminal... in which case you probably should look into a new safer line of work.
     
  16. James Long

    James Long Ready for Uplink! Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    45,738
    985
    Apr 17, 2003
    Michiana
    So you would rather support the intentional firing of 46 bullets at a suspect armed only with a knife than the accidental firing of one bullet?

    Most actions are judged by the intent of the person committing the action. The butt shooter did not intend to fire his weapon. He did not intentionally pull out his weapon and shoot himself in the ass. The officers intended to use their weapons to put down a fellow human being (and that is being polite in considering these officers human). They followed through on their intent.

    We need officers to use restraint and use the minimum force needed to subdue a suspect. If 46 shots is the minimum force required to take down a man with a knife then these officers need to be retrained.
     
  17. Stewart Vernon

    Stewart Vernon Roving Reporter Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    21,609
    380
    Jan 7, 2005
    Kittrell, NC
    To me it is a different argument. IF you're going to argue that the cops should not have killed the suspect, then discussion of "overkill" is relevant. IF we're not arguing over whether the suspect should have been killed or not, then the cops were accurate with their shots.

    Also... as I understand it, cops have to document each fired bullet and the investigation will be looking for all those bullets to see where they went... so there is a LOT of paperwork and investigation and some desk-time for any cop who fires his weapon... so for 6 of them to fire at a suspect like that, I'm giving the benefit of the doubt that they thought it necessary because of all the follow-up work that will have to be done to justify their actions.

    Meanwhile, the guy dropping the gun put no thought into his actions... his gun could have fallen out at any time and shot anyone.

    Without further information... I'm in no danger from those cops because I am not a criminal, and I don't walk around brandishing a knife and making threats... so those cops aren't likely to shoot me 46 times.

    BUT... if I'm next to the theater guy... his gun might fall out again and it might shoot me, because it is a pure accident he only shot himself this time.

    Intent is important... but lack-of-intent (i.e. negligence) also is important.
     
  18. phrelin

    phrelin Hall Of Fame DBSTalk Club

    15,010
    307
    Jan 18, 2007
    Northern...
    Sigh.

    Some logical rules apply to a police officer using a his/her gun.
    • Know that your gun is designed to, and you only pull it, to kill (likely you don't have the skill to shoot their gun out of their hand like some 1950's western and even if you seemed to have the skill, the stress of the situation makes it very unlikely you will succeed in doing anything other than getting yourself or some bystander harmed).
    • You pull your gun out only when not doing so likely would endanger your life or the lives of others (you can't always know, it just has to appear that way).
    • Don't use your weapon if doing so would endanger bystanders others unnecessarily (this is a tough judgement call and you might not always be right).
    • Don't empty your weapon unless you have no other choice as it leaves you with no ability to defend yourself.
    • Don't fire your weapon until you have identified your target as an immediate threat (an extremely difficult judgement call).
    This article National police expert criticizes, defends Saginaw police shooting, killing Milton Hall after CNN airs graphic footage indicates the difficulty of judging the situation.

    For me, this article Saginaw police union president wants to see sheriff's policing proposal before city 'makes it more attractive' raises a number of issues in my mind, such as has the City been doing "police-on-the-cheap."
     
  19. MysteryMan

    MysteryMan Well-Known Member DBSTalk Club

    8,449
    514
    May 17, 2010
    USA
    Nice to be on the same sheet of music with you for a change.
     
  20. MysteryMan

    MysteryMan Well-Known Member DBSTalk Club

    8,449
    514
    May 17, 2010
    USA
    You're forgetting the police were aided by a police dog. Why wasn't it released to distract the suspect so the six police officers could subdue him?
     

Share This Page