Kerrville Police Shooting Caught On Tape

Waiting for the BG to point his weapon at the officer is not their job. Yes, if they do it your way it would be risky. Why would they take that risk?
Only BG's would want the police to wait until said BG has, "THE DROP ON EM'", before reacting to that threat.
Of course, being that I am "rifleman" fast, :) I would wait until he had the first bullet on the way, dodge it, and then let him have it. You know, gotta make it "RISKY" or it would't be "THE JOB".
 
Maybe the Kerrville police department should look at their policies regarding apprehending obviously unbalanced individuals. Does anyone seriously believe the actions the police took up until the shooting could possibly have ended in any other result?

Yeah, a rational individual probably will put their hands up, or drop their gun immediately when ordered to by the police. This guy clearly wasn't rational, and it appears they had a pretty good idea of that before they pulled him over. If they didn't have some less than lethal options like a Taser available, the shooting was inevitable.
 
yeah, mr.BG please hold on while I run up and taser you, jeez i hope one of the progs doesent hit a shirt button or something. Or wait maybe i should just stand here and wait for the BG to take some action before I do anything, I might get killed but at least the liberal media wont call me a child murderer or something.

sorry guys, im tired, its been a long day and I hate people who have never been in these situations saying someone who acted to save their life was wrong. That cop is a hero period. he was a hero as soon as he put on that badge and started going TOWARD the danger rather than away from it and he still is one now. That all the "risk" he need to take, and god bless him for doing it. What if that cop was your brother or father?
 
I hate people who have never been in these situations

Amen, Brother.

I too am weary of those judging never have tread in harm's way, never been in a situation where it called for split second judgements, based on life and limb, never had to pick up the pieces of human wreckage, never had to watch their buddies "by the farm, etc, etc, etc...................

Just STFU and plop yourselves back in front of CNN and discuss it with your FU"d bros on your $400 cellphone and stay the hell out of my airspace.

Thanks for the rant time.

:barf:
 
good.gif
good.gif
 
I'll start off by saying that its hard to know everything that was going on based on the video alone. What I have to say here is more in the form of questions than statements, because we really don't know all the details from just a dash cam.

Yes, the police were behind cover, but what was behind the police? Bullets have a habit of travelling a long way and hitting whatever shows up. If there were residential units behind the police would it be responsible for the police to wait until the man started shooting since they were behind cover and just let the bullets fly towards houses?

Regardless of the area where the shooting took place, I have little if any sympathy for anybody who gets out of their car to confront the police holding a gun. As has already been mentioned we've seen the Poor Tactics thread where a police officer waiting until there was a direct and immediate threat got him killed. Not only was the officer unfortunately killed, but how much danger transpired to traffic on that road and the surrounding area with multiple carbine shots being fired?

My only real criticism of things is the performance/training of the officer who fired the shot. You're at pistol range with an AR and hit somebody in the mouth? Having never (thankfully) been involved in a shooting I don't know what the adrenaline does to you, but I'd expect somebody at close range with a rifle to make a more sensible shot.
 
Just STFU and plop yourselves back in front of CNN and discuss it with your FU"d bros on your $400 cellphone and stay the hell out of my airspace.
Click to expand...
Very very nice. :)

yeah, mr.BG please hold on while I run up and taser you,
Click to expand...
I wouldn't recommend that or anything approaching that. But when a cop is dispatched to try and stop a suicide from occurring, and they chase him down on the road, and he steps out of his car moving very slowly, and he is armed with a small pistol, and the cops are behind cover and have at least four guns on him, and he has his hands at his waist, and he hasn't responded to their shouting for 5 seconds - it isn't time to shoot yet.

The first time you watched the video you were probably surprised at how fast he was shot. That initial reaction I believe is the correct one, suprise at how soon the cop shot.
BAD SHOOTING.
 
"Fast" is relative.

If you've ever actually been in a situation like this, you'll realize that all the really, really BAD things happen in the wink of an eye. Failing to do so usually gets your wife a nicely folded flag and a pension.


Larry
 
Well said Dt Guy, very well said. After reviewing the video I now believe all the officers should have shot him as he opened the car door, double and triple taps each and every one.
All humor aside, justice did prevail.
 
Hopefully that cop will get a taste of his own medicine one day. In my book he's just as bad as the guy in the car.
 
By him getting out of the car and NOT COMPLYING with the LEO's instructions presents him as dangerous. Police should not have to tell a subject more than once to comply. Wouldn't you think that if the police were yelling at you to do something and had their guns drawn that you should probably comply and not get needlessly shot at? How can the police officer be "trigger happy"? From what I saw he only fired 1 SHOT and made it count. As far as not being able to see the gun, no i didn't see it, but as a previous poster said "the camera is at a different angle". Yes it is at a different angle. Now imagine in you mind's eye the perspective from the leo's eyes. THEY COULD VERY CLEARLY SEE THE WEAPON!! And yes I believe the officer was justified in shooting the suspect. His actions saved his life and that of his fellow officers. He may have saved innocent bystanders to. (Don't know, I didn't see any in the video clip, that or I was to busy watching for the perp to go down). I feel the officer made it clear he was serious and used what he thought was justifiable force. LEO's are trained to react to a situation through their training, not negotiate with someone intent on doing bodily harm to himslef or others. THEY MUST BE PROACTIVE AND NOT REACTIVE!!!!! My 2 cents worth.
 
I don't know what everyone is arguing about here...

I just watched the video for the 3rd time. They pulled him over because he was planning on comitting suicide because of a case that was pending against him. Not for threatening anyone. They told him to "Get your hands up" three times, and to "Drop it" twice. That's ignoring the Police Officer's direct commands, especially since he WAS holding a gun in his right hand. You hold a gun, disobey multiple commands from the Police, you get shot. End of story. When he put his hands in front of him right before he was shot, I can see where the Police Officer thought he was raising the gun. Whether he was raising the gun or not, he was armed, and ignored 5 commands from the Police. There should be no surprise that the Officer shot him. I would have, too. How long should the police wait until their lives are in danger? The kid was a threat. The Police Officer stopped the threat.

His mother is clueless about the laws here. She thinks her son didn't have any time to obey. He had 5 commands to obey, and ignored them all. I think he was disoriented (or acting like it). Or maybe there was a language barrier? I don't know. But anyone would know you don't keep your gun in your hand after the cops stop you and are yelling at you. His Mother should blame only her own son for getting shot. It was HIS choice.

And all this just because he wanted to kill HIMSELF? Geez, they should have let him. Then this whole mess wouldn't have happened. Suicide should be legal, then we wouldn't have problems like this. Your life is that bad that you need to kill yourself? OK. Bye. Nice knowing you. Sounds cold? Maybe. But why involve the Police, and anyone else, if you want to die? You should just do it yourself, instead of choosing suicide by cop. Cowardly. Suicide shouldn't be illegal (your life, your choice). Involving and/or endangering others in your suicide should be illegal.

My 2¢, like it or not. Besides, the kid survived and gets to eat through a tube now. His choice, he should have done it himself the right way.
 
It is not the critic who counts, not the man who points out how the strong man stumbled, or where the doer of deeds could have done better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena; whose face is marred by the dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs and comes short again and again; who knows the great enthusiasms, the great devotions and spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best, knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who, at worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly; so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who know neither victory or defeat."

THEODORE ROOSEVELT
(Paris Sorbonne,1910)
 
The cops that didn't shoot, why not? Three out of four voted with their trigger fingers differently than one out of four, and they were all there seeing the same thing. They weren't watching a two dimensional video, they were there in real time, they weren't Monday morning quarterbacking, they had their guns pointed, fingers on the trigger, and yet 3 of 4 did not fire.

Hmmmmmm

BAD SHOOTING
 
Now that is one of the most ridiculous things I've ever read. Clearly the product of both:

-Unfamiliarity with the subject at hand (lack of knowledge regarding Deadly Force situations/tactics/realities)

-Bias
 
I agree with butch. If it was such a clean shooting nobody here would be questioning it, and all of the officers would have fired. I find it funny how dave_in_delaware says that he can see how the officer "thought he was raising a gun". So lets just give officers the right to kill people anytime they "think" something might be happening, without actually witnessing it first :rolleyes:

The problem here is a lot of people in this thread seem to be looking for opportunities to play cop with their ccw license, based on a lot of posts I've read. Therefore, any situation like this they are going to support law enforecement regardless of how bad the shooting was. They apparently think like I did when I was 6 years old that all cops are completely honest people and never do anything wrong :rolleyes:
 
....and then you have the Diallo shooting in which ALL the officers fired, causing people to wonder why....now you have ONE officer shooting and that's bad?
 
I'm NOT a cheerleading, flag-waving police supporter-check on other threads and you'll see that I have many questions about current police doctrine, some of it from first hand experience.

That said, it never ceases to amaze me that people who wouldn't dare to second-guess a doctor, a brick layer or a carpenter without some experience in those fields will all judge a police officer's actions without the slightest grasp of use-of-force law, tactics or even common firearms handling.

Fact of the matter is that the only way you get a 'smoking gun' for proof if you've ALREADY BEEN SHOT AT. Imagine the scenario this way: your son/daughter is playing in a house behind where this scene played out. The cops hesitate and let the guy get off one round before doing what he was OBVIOUSLY insisting they do. Imagine that round entered your family room window and struck your child. Now imagine the anger-the righteous anger- when you learn the police had this joker at gunpoint when he fired the round that killed your child.

Life is hard. Being stupid makes it harder-sometimes, being really, really stupid makes it shorter. These police were the place where this jokers' problems interfaced with the reality of living in a relatively civil society.

And everybody who's shouting 'bad shoot'--would YOU refuse to drop the gun? Would you counsel your wife or husband to do so? If not, then you're tacitly admitting the offender was the cause of this shooting.

Soapbox mode:off.

Larry
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top