The part I find insane is 16 times. Let’s pretend he needed to be shot. The law says to stop a threat. It’s not to kill someone. 16 shots to me is excessive.
2-3 rounds will subdue the average person.
I’m not trying to quarterback here but damn, it just seems the amount of force is excessive.
US cops are actually trained to empty their clips once they open fire. It’s fucking disgusting.
It’s as if they actively panic themselves every time they open fire. It should be grounds for a murder investigation every time they fire more than once without pausing and assessing.
Or just an external investigation every single time they open fire.
US cops are actually trained to empty their clips once they open fire. It’s fucking disgusting.
Training to magdump, in cities, surrounded by people. What could go wrong.
The witness could survive. /s
In contrast, my former colleague who became a UK police detective told me that he learned in training that if they fire their weapon (if they even carry one) they have to fill out a use of force form for each shot fired, justifying why it was needed. He does not carry a firearm, in part because the training talked him out of it.
Dead people are much less likely to sue you for shooting them
Trained to dump the mag huh?
Citation requested. I don’t doubt they do in fact react this way, but trained to do so? That would be an enormous legal liability.
I thought this was universally known.
Why do police shoot so many times? FBI, experts answer on officer-involved shootings https://www.nola.com/news/crime_police/why-do-police-shoot-so-many-times-fbi-experts-answer-on-officer-involved-shootings/article_ae82835c-0212-5e50-a175-85601a1ed8bb.amp.html
You got your cite, but what the trainers say, and what it boils down to is, the bigger legal liability to cops and their families is leaving the witness alive.
Not arguing with you, but police training is to continue shooting until the threat is eliminated. That means on the ground, not moving, Hand off of weapon.
The US military uses pretty much the same logic.
The difference obviously being the US military shoots non-threats less often.
If you consider a perspective of someone fending off a knife-wielding attacker, it is better to shoot until they’re “eliminated”. Of course the US police are also trained to be scared and trigger happy.
The difference is, in the US military you are not allowed to use deadly force without either prior authorization, or at times a direct order from a superior.
That superior must then answer for that use of force, and if they fail, they get in trouble up to and including murder charges.
