same i wouldn't want there jobs as well

guessing same reason a hammer on the space shuttle costs 750 $ lol

It's all about idiot voters and those who complain.....but don't bother to vote!

I believe people are idiots for the most part!

What part of our current police actions, the militarization, home invasions, SWAT serving traffic warrants, killing and terrorizing citizens in their own homes, shooting them and their pets, seems OK with the general public?

It astounds me!

How often do un-armed white people brutally attack a police officer?

I'm sure it happens. And when they do, they are quite likely to get shot dead by the police. Very few protest or rally when this happens.

Police have a right to use deadly force to protect themselves. Anyone who responds to a reasonable request by punching a uniformed cop in the face is just asking to get shot, no matter their race. I'm all for making police work less lethal, and I'm disgusted by all the cops who are too quick to shoot, but if you have *just* been attacked - suddenly, apropos of nothing, physically assaulted by someone - shoot them. Don't let them assault you again.

I've seen much unnecessary police force, and even brutality, and I've met racist police officers, and I've seen racist policing. There is a problem out there with racist policing, and a problem with police brutality, but this is the WRONG incident to protest. This just makes the protesters and the anti-racists look like fools.

The first group of people who publicized this were lying. The people who echoed them were wrong. They had their facts all wrong, and they turned this into a huge deal.

And now they look like fools. Its looking very much like, in this situation, it was absolutely reasonable for the officer to use deadly force. Of course, I may yet be wrong, and there is much more evidence to consider, but this is how things are looking from the facts released so far.


And now we have a massive social problem - millions of idiots (including me!) believed the first versions of the story that came out. I'm angry about this, and I feel ashamed.

What do most people do when they get extremely passionate about something, then discover that they had their facts all wrong?

Do they just say 'oh, oops, we were wrong. We'll just drop it."

No. We rationalize. We cling to cherry picked evidence. We make up excuses to prevent ourselves from admitting we were wrong or that we were tricked, like so many have done in an attempt to invalidate the evidence in the video and in the coroners report.

And if there is an investigation, and if the facts show no wrong done by the officer, the people - the millions! - who were tricked into believing this was a racially motivated execution of an innocent 'child' will just push away all the facts and the evidence and cling to the emotions which have been driving them this whole time; they will say that the evidence is fabricated, that there is a conpsiracy, etc etc.

Civilized thought and discourse, and reasonable conclusion-making, has already been thrown under the bus. It's already too late for our culture to have a reasonable response to this incident. We already have millions deeply emotionally invested in a particular story line here, complete with anti-racist and anti-police ideology mixed in cementing and augmenting the lies they have believed.

You believed the first reports that came out? Come on ... you are way smarter than that!

Again, having been trained, I have to say you lose a MASSIVE edge when your threat closes distance. You could be disarmed and your gun be used against you or you could be beaten to death if the person is larger than you, stronger than you, or manages to get in a lucky shot. A single blow to the head and it becomes difficult to make all the right moves to wrestle an assailant away.

And here is another important fact every hollywood rendition of combat seems to miss. People don't generally just "drop" when you fatally wound them. (Please excuse my graphic example, but I've seen someone take two shots to the torso with a military grade assault rifle, one through the chest, and he ran almost two blocks before collapsing) Get enough adrenaline going and it could take several shots, after the fatal one, in order to render someone "combat ineffective". Either way, time elapses, as does your chances of survival. It's a brutal game of chances. Only a fool, or someone who is has a genuine death wish would allow a threat to get close, without first being in control of the situation.

Training does not turn you into a superhero with x-ray vision. Nor does it give you super strength. Nor is it a true determining factor of who has the advantage.

It takes less than a second to draw a weapon and shoot it.

Typically one would assume that a potential assailant would stop when a gun is pointed at him/her, when the one holding the gun announces him/her to do so. In this case, it would be much safer than pulling a taser on a charging target. On miss-fire, you are finished.

I would say having an upfront confrontation with someone who is trying to get your weapon would be a pretty good reveal of what threat they faced or what advantage they have

and if there is no weapon in the hand and they are not reaching for anything,,,,there really isn't cause to SHOOT THEM DEAD IN THE STREET.

panick may lead to such a choice, but it just cant be justified here with the 'I didn't know what he might do',,, you already fought with him,, you knew EXACTLY what his position was and this BIG kid was hardly gonna be charging too fast with his much repeated size AND weed in his system

Again, training does not make you superhuman. Shooting to kill is not the first option, but neither is tasering. Any WELL-trained person know that different situations call for different methods of defense.

In the case mentioned in the OP the assailant was displaying erratic behavior (increasing threat level), he showed non-compliance (increasing threat level), and turned to charge the person defending a family(who were likely in danger) which increases the threat level into the imminent danger category. He could have been concealing a knife, or be trained himself. He could be on drugs (which is a reasonable assumption) which increase his adrenaline making him deadlier. The gun would allow the most distance be kept, and provides the most reliable method of stopping the threat in this situation. Not to mention the officer off duty was carrying concealed. Pretty hard to conceal both a taser, and a firearm.

If the training you attended (or witnessed) does not support this, somebody lost money to a fraud. I have real world experience in war zones, and have had 1000's of hours of training. I would also be happy to fly out a re-train those classes for $75/hr plus the cost of lodging and travel.

Good post. Some that post here kinda "make it up on the fly". Actual experience, like yours, is well appreciated.

From what I have observed on the news most of the discussion is just racist. If a white cop shoots a black unarmed thug, it is world news. If a white cop shoots a white thug, that's just part of life. If a black cop shoots a white thug, it's not even news. If a black shoots another black, it is just the natural way of things in the black community.

so,a fractured Eyesocket ain't nothing to write home about?
Punch yourself in the Eye,and observe how much sight you'll have left!
Not much I'd venture to say.
Like I said earlier,if someone weighing nearly 300pounds suckerpunched me like that,I'd shoot him Seven times,not six!
'Cause once the Shock of my Injury sets in,I wouldn't know how well I'd be able to continue defend myself!

I believed he was a child-teenager. I believed he was not just unarmed, but posed no real threat. I had heard that he had 'tried to get the officers gun', but that he had failed and had put some distance between himself and the officer at the time of the shooting. It was unthinkable to me, at the time, that a child-teen would then charge at an armed, uniformed officer.

I was unaware of the robbery, of the assault of the old man, and of the assault of the officer, and of the perp's actual adult age or size.

I figured the officer shot him *because* the alleged child-teen had tried to get his gun, with the officer acting in a panic or in anger. I'm cool with shooting someone *while* they are trying to get a cops gun, but not so much *after* they have failed to get the gun. In that hypothetical scenario (child-teen goes for gun, runs away) its understandable for the officer to panic and shoot, but also understandable for the community to be outraged.

But now its clear this brutal adult did in fact attack the officer. It's almost certain that the cop was within his rights to shoot him.




Its worse than that. I've been tricked three times now - with Trayvon, with the Oakland BART shooting, and now with Ferguson. It wasn't until I saw the video of the Oakland BART shooting that I realized that everyone was completely full of ****. There is NO WAY he shot that guy on purpose, in the manner that he did. None. Its insane to think he did it on purpose. These particular liberals, anti-racists, and anti-cop people are totally f'ing insane, and yet they and the media can be so good at weaving deceptive, plausible narratives.

It seems to me that at close distances, having a gun is no longer a clear advantage. It can even be a disadvantage; you now have one usable-for-grappling hand instead of two, and you have to focus on preserving your control of the weapon. And it can be very easy for the stronger person to control the weapon despite it being in the weaker person's grip.


If I had a gun, and someone had just broken my eye socket in an unprovoked attack - then turned to threaten me again, I would shoot them. I think everyone should do this. Otherwise horrible people have their way in the world, and do terrible things.

We don't have all the facts, but so far its looking very much like the police officer did the right thing.

These protesters should be thanking the officer, not protesting.

The anti-racism and anti-police-abuse movements need to pick more appropriate incidents to rally around.

I have several boxers in my family

"MEN" walk away from them all the time alive, and recovered in a few weeks

people don't walk away from two bullets to the head though,,,,


but kudos to you for your deadly retaliation mentality,,,

If they have already broken my eye socket and possibly rendered one of my eyes useless?

If they have already indicated a huge level of aggression and reckless abandon?

There is plenty of cause to shoot them, as a matter of self defence.

Exactly

Honestly I commend you on your peaceful outlook. If the entire world thought as you did there would be no murders.

Problem is, as Massagetrade pointed out, if all good people in the world took to this mentality, there would be no good people left. There is a time and place where deadly force is necessary, and it is a good thing there are those that know this.

Thank you for your appreciation. And on the racial issue, I have to agree. Racism is an issue that stirs up controversy. Controversy sells news. Suppose it's only natural that the news would get hung up on it. Wish more folks would stick to the facts and digest things before letting their emotions go wild. The mob mentality never helped anybody.

Retaliation?
When you draw First Blood,and if I have to expect that you might kill me?

Boxers in the Ring are bound by Rules,besides there is also a Referee!
So,that Boxer-comparison doesn't cut it,especially not on the Street,as you know as well as I do!
All your Obfuscation is not going to change that!