US police doctrine is “always shoot to kill, never shoot to wound.” This is literally an article of faith among American police.
Other First-World police forces do not take such a dogmatic approach, and often include “shoot to wound” as a use-of-force option, in line with their policy that “shoot to kill” should be the very last option, if NO other choice exists. This always prompts a round of mutual incomprehension on the rare occasions that US police discuss training with their foreign counterparts.
The sad thing is, in this case, they tried a non-lethal takedown simultaneously with the lethal takedown. Another officer fired a taser at the same time. Now, honestly, the taser wasn’t called for either, but at least that had a much lower chance of killing the man.
I want to react and I agree with the post. But I can’t bring myself to like the realization that getting stopped by the police when black+deaf is tantamount to a death sentence.
I’m afraid the honest truth is they’re pussies and are afraid the person will still be able to kill them with a bum leg.
Let me see if I understand the position of the police and the precedent they wish to set here. If you are on your property, not threatening anyone, but rather simply holding something that may be used to defend yourself, then the police can order you to drop it even though it is yours and you are on your own property. If you fail to follow that order, they can execute you without trial or even levying a charge against you. Is that about it? Is that what they want from us now?
There was a story recently about a combat vet / cop who DIDN’T shoot a guy, and got dressed down for it.
And, to be clear, failing to hear or understand the order counts as failing to follow it.
From the NPR link
“I don’t know exactly what the officers were thinking at that point, because I was not there. But they very well could not have heard, you know, everybody yelling, everybody yelling around them.”
Sooooo, yelling makes things hard to hear. So the cops defence is “I couldn’t hear” when they shot a deaf guy…for not hearing.
They sort of did have this scenario with a lady in a bath robe not long ago. Though the officer in question was named Mohammad, so if suddenly that thin blue line snapped in this case, I wouldn’t be surp
Oh, and this shit again too “Some of the department’s officers wear body cameras, but neither of the two police officers at the scene were wearing them at the time.”
You shouldn’t be let out of the briefing room without the camera being on.
It’s getting to the point where we need to have professional witnesses follow cops around.
1990 was only 27 years ago. Your point still stands, but don’t make me feel older than I already do.
Citizens United isn’t all of it, of course. But it’s the most obvious recent bit on that aspect of things.
About that background- Crime Stoppers is the name of a program that encourages people to submit information about criminal investigations. I don’t know about other places, but in Oklahoma City, callers can remain anonymous and may receive a cash reward if the information provided leads to a conviction. It makes sense for a police spokesperson to appear with a reminder of the program in the background.
Why they incorporated a gun in the logo, this former resident of Oklahoma City can’t say. The logo used where I live now replaces the “I” in crime with a fingerprint. That seems less weird.
Welcome to Boing Boing, comrade.
No I said over 10
Clearly what happened here is that the police were in the middle of a battle with a deaf gang, /s
Pardon me as i’ve yet to read the full article, does it mention if the gentleman whose life was taken had any visual reaction to the officers?
He wasn’t white.
That makes sense but is there data to support that hypothesis? Is there any data at all?
It will take any of the “good” cops realizing they need to begin with policing their own order.
