Shoot to Disarm Vs. Shoot to kill

Okay; I highly doubt anyone missed the news about the 15 year old boy who was shot by 4 Policemen.

Yes, he was armed with a knife; But I highly doubt his going to be able to do anything with it if they shot him in the leg or arm.
Instead 4 Grown men, against a 15 year old, who obviously needed mental health help, emptied their guns upon him, killing him.

This boy, whilst threatening the Police, was more of a threat to himself than anyone and had not commited any crime. Yesterday on the news I saw a piece about a man who was responsible for child pornography, who was caught. He wasn't shot, He was sentenced to jail, with the ability to post for bail BEFORE the end of next year. Yet the innocent 15 year old gets killed.

In NSW they are trained to Shoot to Disarm. Yet in Victoria its Shoot to Kill.

I think its wrong. Completely and utterly wrong.

Opinions?

werent the police actually trying to shoot him in the leg? thats what i heard anyway. guess they're a crap shot.

They can claim whatever they want really, it doesnt take 4 loaded guns all emptied to shoot some kid in the leg though...

so many things to say, no words to use...

Personally, I think all police should be trained to shoot to disarm.

Although that being said, and related to this particular incident the media does tend to side with a victim, especially if it's anything against authoritative types. Typical "A Current Affair"/"Today Tonight" reporting...

Granted I wasn't there to witness the situation, I wouldn't have any idea of the stress the police were under at the time. But, for four different people to open fire, there must have been something going on that we're not hearing, the distance the kid was at to the police is most likely exhaggerated by the media to make him look like a helpless little boy.

I could be wrong, but I think police are trained to shoot twice, and granted they're not as expert as shooting as everyone/movies say. A lot of police officers will go through their entire lives not firing a gun. But say, for example, if someones running toward you, you're just gunna shoot with a very basic aim, and at the biggest part of the body, the torso.

I dunno, I guess you've gotta put yourself in the shoes of both the victim, and the police.

I refuse to say anything more on the grounds that it will get way too heated.

well first off THIS IS A TASTY PEAR!!!!

and i think its foul that the police are so trigger happy like that case in the us (and yes i know its not the same as over here)
where the same number of police stood around a jeep with a "possibly" armed man and emptyed and reloaded and then emptyed there guns yet agian and is was of there great luck that they didnt hit each other...anyway im getting off point, what i was ment to be saying that most ploice tend to fall back on the "shoot first ask later" idea and the fact that tazers are not in use WHEN THEY SHOULD BE is a crying shame....well im doing a "allan shore" and ranting a bit so *END*

and i will say anything to heat this up rooza cause i will rage at this for quite a while!

I hate the term "trigger happy"...

well you shouldnt cause its not a dam term its the fucking truth and it makes me sick

I dont think thi is nessearily a case of "trigger happy corrupt cops". More so how their trained. Theire told in a situation such as this that they are to shoot to kill.
You make a valid point with the taser item - was this not the reason they were introduced (under much scrutiny)?

It just makes me mad that 4 grown men could be taught to do such a barbaric thing.

so u all know the kid was fucked either way.

shoot him in the leg he cant walk anymore.
shoot to disarm no hands
shoot to kill well his dead

see fucked either way.

but if they had the taser gun he would be on the floor with just a little shock

little is an understatement. those things can do some damage.

Alls I heard was that he got shot, but knife Vs. a gun is a little unfair, and a cops' life isn't any more important than anyone else's.
I don't know the circumstances, so I can't have an input here.

Killing someone in my book is only ok in three situations;
Self defense.
Self defense of someone you hold dear.
And for food.

That is all.

for food made me "lol"

= "BACK AWAY FROM THE CHEESEBURGER"


but yeah, this kid was obviously in need of metal help as he called he cops to kill him bascally... he wasnt going to hurt anyone else other than himself...

Riiiiiiight..

Well fuck, I don't know about you, but we're still animals, and if I'm stuck out on a mountain top after our light plane goes down, I ain't eating snow!!
Natural selection baby, natural selection.


Well, that doesn't give them the right to kill him now, does it?
Did he even power lunge at a cop before he got shot?

Technically its only the cops word now. We'll never know anything more, but i guarentee their use self defense as their purpose.

I personally think the boy needed medical mental assitance, not the bullet from a copper.

Well, nobody needs a bullet from a cop..
But as usual, cops think their above the law..
I wonder how hated I'd be if I were on the police force, because if I saw a cop breaking the law, I would do something..

Mhmm.. This isn't so much about corupt cops though - The men involved in this incident acted how they were taught to act in such a situation. They did what they have been told is right to do.

With proper training they can be taught to aim for targets which can disarm the asilant rather than kill them; and in NSW, for example, the time and money is put into the system so they can be trained as such.

I think we need to re-evaluate the trainign and look at the use of tasers and such.

Well, off you go! Go teach some cops how to disarm instead of killing.

You'll be doing the world a favour..

Lol - It'd be alright to get into government to make changes like that...

I don't know though.. Would people even listen?

See, I'm so lazy, I'd think about doing something to change it, then I'd get up, and then be like 'fuck it, it's too much work.'

First off, sorry but this is going to be a quotation mess.

AshleighANARCHY wrote:Okay; I highly doubt anyone missed the news about the 15 year old boy who was shot by 4 Policemen.

Secondly, yes, I did miss the news. I don't regularly watch news on TV. Possibly because it can be very slanted by the network to make the "victims" of things look like saints.

AshleighANARCHY wrote:They can claim whatever they want really, it doesnt take 4 loaded guns all emptied to shoot some kid in the leg though...
...
Yes, he was armed with a knife; But I highly doubt his going to be able to do anything with it if they shot him in the leg or arm. Instead 4 Grown men, against a 15 year old, who obviously needed mental health help, emptied their guns upon him, killing him.

This is not debating the main idea behind the topic, but I believe facts should always be represented correctly. There were not 4 guns, the were only three.

Herald Sun wrote:When he approached the four officers, two male and two female, retreated but the boy continued to advance.
...
Three of the four officers fired.
...
The three police officers involved had twice used capsicum spray on the boy without success, and fired a warning shot into the ground.
...
TYLER was shot six times, including two shots in the leg.

Source: http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,24789491-661,00.html
Source: http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,24797502-2862,00.html

AshleighANARCHY wrote:This boy, whilst threatening the Police, was more of a threat to himself than anyone and had not commited any crime.

Herald Sun wrote:He confirmed that the youth was in trouble with police for a minor assault.
Police say Tyler had threatened them with kitchen knives stolen from a Kmart store before they were forced to fire.

Source: http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,24789491-661,00.html Source: http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,24789202-661,00.html

Sounds like some crimes to me.

AshleighANARCHY wrote:Yesterday on the news I saw a piece about a man who was responsible for child pornography, who was caught. He wasn't shot, He was sentenced to jail, with the ability to post for bail BEFORE the end of next year. Yet the innocent 15 year old gets killed.

It's amazing how very easy it is for the general public to contrast two completely different situations they barely know anything about. Was this man arrested child pornography threatening the police at the time of arrest with any weapon? Just the first question I'd have. Even then, there are a lot of other things happening in these situations which will determine how things go down. Although I always think it as well, it's still very easy to say "why couldn't you shoot him in the leg?". The thing is, at the time, you don't really know how much time they had to react.

AshleighANARCHY wrote:In NSW they are trained to Shoot to Disarm. Yet in Victoria its Shoot to Kill. I think its wrong. Completely and utterly wrong.

I don't believe they'd call it "Shoot to Kill". I believe they'd probably suggest aiming for the target most likely to get hit, and sadly, the torso is the easiest target. As some other random person said, something along the lines of, I'm not sure they had enough time in this situation to get together and discuss who is the better shot and asked him to hold still.

If you believe they are explicitly trained to "Shoot to Kill", then yes, I agree, it is wrong. Regardless, citation needed?

This threat has officially been ass fucked.

0_0.


LALALALALALALA.

My opinion stands, as that I believe we need to train police to shoot to disarm rather than to kill. =]

All done.

Nonononononooooo.. We don't need guns at all.. Imagine a world where everyone used those ropes on poles instead of guns..

That's what we need!!

Stoo wrote:This threat has officially been ass fucked.

Ha! Assed fucked that threat!......... what?

OH and yeah... rope poles are sweet too.

srsly, wtf? rope poles?