Discussion for article #226466
Cause they are practicing for when you show up.
2 Likes
Other, better question:
Why can’t police measure their response against the crime? No one suspected of grabbing some tiparillos should be shot in the head.
16 Likes
Hey Wolf, “Set your phasers to stun” is from Star Trek, which, if I recall correctly, was not a documentary.
18 Likes
I can’t believe they still allow this guy on CNN posing as a reporter. He’s clueless, generally uninformed, and lazy…Wolf attended the Idiot School of Journalism, LLC.
14 Likes
How about just not pumping 10 bullets into an unarmed kid?
12 Likes
Wolf sure does like to shoot…
Nothing personal, but Blitzer is an ignorant fucking moron!
6 Likes
No. tell me I am not reading this?
3 Likes
I understand Wolf’s point of view here, and I have said so many times. Why shoot someone with deadly force when you don’t have to. I’ve been told since then by friends in the PD that you can aim for an arm or leg and easily miss and then you are far more vulnerable (since presumably you are shooting because you think they are going to shoot you). Deadly force is what they are taught, but the good PD’s also teach not to use Deadly Force unless it is an absolute last resort.
Me? I still think there are ways to shoot someone if you must that will stop them in their tracks and not necessarily kill them. Whenever I hear about more than one shot fired at a person I think of the shooter as not in control of him/herself.
2 Likes
Wolf, you dope, it’s not like in the movies; it’s not feasible to “shoot to injure.” Justified shooting happens when you’re facing the risk of death or severe injury, and you shoot to neutralize your attacker and eliminate that threat. People’s reactions to being shot can vary wildly, so you keep shooting until you know they’re too badly injured to be a threat any more. It’s the only way to survive. That sounds harsh but shooting people is a harsh thing. None of this applies to Michael Brown, of course. But in general, “shooting to injure” is just not a thing you can do in real life.
4 Likes
Arms and legs make smaller, and usually moving, targets and are much harder to hit. If you ARE going to shoot someone, you aim for the body. (the counter to this is if being shot at, reduce your profile by ducking down and zig zag randomly).
And btw, little wolfie, a bullet cutting through the artery in the left leg is going to kill the suspect in minutes as the bleed out. Its doubtful having a trained medic standing right there is going to be able to save them if that happens.
The real point is, that cops are taught numerous non lethal methods of subduing a suspect. None of which were even bothered with in Ferguson.
9 Likes
Shooting a gun at someone is by definition using “deadly force.” Guns are made to kill, not maim. I used to be in law enforcement. If you are in a situation where you have decided you need to pull your gun to shoot, it is because you consider yourself in a life threatening situation. In theory, anyways.
Once you pull your gun you don’t have the luxury of determining whether or not it is a life threatening situation, or whether not to injure or kill. No, once you made your decision to pull your gun you shoot center mass because you have less then a second before you, or an innocent bystander, may be killed. It is standard procedure.
[EDIT] The main point here is “life threatening situation.” Then, and only then, do you pull your gun. From witness accounts of the Ferguson shooting, this was not a life threatening situation. However, the results of the investigation have not been made public yet because it is ongoing.
9 Likes
As usual, Wolfe is in the general proximity of a real question but is too dumb to realize it. The question isn’t “why aren’t cops trained to shoot to maim?” That’s idiotic. No, the real question is “why aren’t they trained to stop firing round after round after the suspect is down?”
It’s a thing they should have added to the training when they started issuing semiautomatics with large clips.
7 Likes
Apparently Wolf believed all those old radio Westerns like The Lone Ranger, when the hero would shoot the gun out of the hand of the bad guy. Why, if the Lone Ranger and Roy and Gene and Hoppy could do it, why can’t the police do it, too? Right?
5 Likes
Wolfie is naive. One should not unholster or brandish a deadly weapon without intent to use it in a deadly manner. The police appear to have escalated unnecessarily to deadly force.
1 Like
“CNN anchor Wolf Blitzer asked guest Jeffrey Toobin on Thursday why
police weren’t instructed to “shoot to injure,” instead of kill.”
why shoot at all? Hey Wolf … is your brain on hold??
2 Likes
As others have said, a gun is, despite what the NRA seems to believe, not a toy. It is a weapon designed to kill. The moment the gun is drawn and fired is the moment where the shooter has determined to kill someone. And the shooter is trained to keep shooting until that person dies.
The reason for that is that arms and legs are harder to hit, and if an officer is shooting and trying to hit an arm, they can miss and hit a bystander or a fellow officer. As I learned playing basketball, the torso is the last part on the human body to move, and is easier to hit.
2 Likes
How about we train them to not escalate things and not consider citizens are enemy combatants.
3 Likes
Thank you! Why shoot at all! He was on the ground!
Book 'em, Dano!
1 Like