Kerrville Police Shooting Caught On Tape

Lessons learned:
-Don't carry a gun in your car and threaten violence, on yourself or others, because you don't like the potential outcome of your criminal court case.
-Don't brandish a weapon infront of the police.
-If you are a criminal and brandish a weapon, expect a violent reaction if you don't comply with a lawful order.
 
Kudo's to the cop that shot him! Officer's don't just yell orders for the fun of it...you need to react and react quickly, not like this idiot. Could of ended up like in that other video where the cop keeps yelling orders and the crook just gets his gun and starts shooting.....
 
Sad story.

The man was wanting to die, probably too chicken to do it himself, now he has to live with longterm side effects.

The police officers acted according to what they were presented with.
Take this guy down or risk him raising the weapon and getting a few shots off.

The mother, is just that, a mother, no mother wants to see their child getting shot, or hit or wants their children hurt in anyway.

She probably wont realize this was a warranted action, doesnt matter what anyone says, the police shot her son, and she hates them now.
 
I'm confused. :confused: I don't necessarily have a problem with what happened after the guy got out of the car, but there must be more to this story. If the guy threatened to kill himself, is that what prompted the officer to pull him over and grab the assault weapon? Or did he threaten police, and/or make it known that he was packing?
 
It was known he was armed, he threatened to kill himself, and before he was stopped, he was contacted by his cell phone where he threatened to kill the Police and a few others.
 
+1 to the cop who shot him, I also was reminded of the officer who ordered the perp drop the gun 7 times before he was shot and killed by the BG. It makes me mad that the cop was subjeted to a grand jury indictment, but of course its better to be tried by 12 than carried by 6.
 
sounds like a possible suicide by cop.But dont you just love the big production
mom is prewired for sound,cameras are focused right on the family for their reaction.Drama,drama like it is TNT or a tv show.There aren't too many parents that wouldn't be upset to watch their children being shot on tape no matter if they deserved it or not.The son made threats,brandished a weapon and disobeyed po's orders.What more does it take before an officer is supposed to feel threatened? My thoughts go out to everyone involved.
 
What was the officer supposed to do, yell at him until he raised his weapon and started killing people? Props to the cops on this one.
 
A little ridiculous if you ask me. The officers didn't even see a weapon before they shot. So now we are congratulating police who kill people without actually even seeing a weapon before they fire? I don't care if he was suppose to be armed or not. Officers should have to actually see a weapon before they fire on someone. I don't care if that means less safety for them or not. Their job is to take risks not gun people down.
 
Looks like a clean shoot to me.

Did the mother say she thought the police should have walked up to him and tried to talk to him? I think that's what she said, anyways though, are you kidding me with that?
 
A little ridiculous if you ask me. The officers didn't even see a weapon before they shot. So now we are congratulating police who kill people without actually even seeing a weapon before they fire? I don't care if he was suppose to be armed or not. Officers should have to actually see a weapon before they fire on someone. I don't care if that means less safety for them or not. Their job is to take risks not gun people down.
Click to expand...
Guess you miss the part where he had a gun in his right hand...... (listen to the reporter audio)

If you look, no gun in his right hand when he gets out. He pulls it from his waste (the "furtive movement" and is shot as soon as he accesses it.

They waited until he pulled a gun, should they have waited until he fired? (there is no "wait until pointing" as action beats reaction. )

Also, who was killed?
ScratchHead.gif
 
You can't see a gun in that video tape. So there's no way the police could have either.
Click to expand...

This is about the most naive thing I have read/heard in a long time. I take it that you assume that the police only viewed the incident as it occurred through the video camera?. So if it isn't clear enough on tape for YOU, tsavo, it isn't real? Naive. Very naive.

And no, the police to not have to actually see a weapon to use lethal force, just like civilians do not either.
 
So, is the best way to prevent a person from committing suicide to shoot him first? I guess that would be an effective technique.

I say it is a bad shooting. The cops had him surrounded, the cops were behind cover, he was armed with a small pistol standing in the open with the gun pointed at the ground, he had not raised the pistol up, much less taken aim. At the point that he was shot, absolutley no danger was presented to the cops. Odds are that if the cops had allowed him to take careful aim and fire he wouldn't have hit a thing at that distance with that pistol. With them behind cover and covering him with rifles, they weren't in danger.

It looks like a cop got trigger happy and now the entire department is forced into protecting a trigger happy cop. The end result is now we have a trigger happy cop running around Texas thinking he acted like a hero and getting positive support from his comrades - will he act even hastier next time?

Bad shooting - I wouldn't have shot him at the point he was shot, and apparently neither would any of the other cops on the scene, since they didn't. Bad shooting. I hope the lawsuits drag the shooter out into the open and show him for what he is, a trigger happy cop.
 
It's pretty obvious by watching the tape that there was no gun visible. If you can't see that then you're blind.
 
Then Tsavo please tell me why the PO told him to DROP IT.

Seems like a rather retarded thing to say if he didn't know he was holding a gun.

Sit down and shutup you have no idea what you are talking about.
 
Quote:

"Odds are that if the cops had allowed him to take careful aim and fire he wouldn't have hit a thing at that distance with that pistol. With them behind cover and covering him with rifles, they weren't in danger."

A very upset man with a gun isn't dangerous? It doesn't matter what the gun or shooter is capable as far as accuraccy goes, that bullet doesn't care about odds.

Would you stand halfway behind a car door while I shot at you with a pistol?

They aren't there to play the odds.


So what if he hadn't pointed the gun at anyone yet? That just leads to "Well, he was aiming it, but he didn't fire it" and then "Well, he fired it, but it didn't hurt anyone" and then to "Well, he shot somebody, but he didn't kill them" :barf: :barf: :barf:

Sure, they should've just sat there and let him shoot all over the place. Because, you know, there's absolutely no possible way that any innocents could have been hurt. :rolleyes:


and to mr. "he didn't have a gun" I have to ask you, Was the dashcam at the same angle as the officer? NO

Does the dashcam's resolution compare to the sharpness of actual vision? NO
 
Would you stand halfway behind a car door while I shot at you with a pistol?

They aren't there to play the odds.
Click to expand...
I would have waited at least until he presented an immedieate threat. Look at that video, at no point did he present an immediate threat. Why didn't all of the other cops also open fire at the same time?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top