https://www.yahoo.com/news/lapd-chief-officers-kill-hostages-1st-time-13-201845051.html For the second time in less than 2 months, Los Angeles Police officers have killed a hostage. The first was the Trader Joe incident, which is maybe explainable. This time not so much. A man with a knife took a woman hostage outside a church. After police arrived, holding her in front of him, he began cutting her throat, so they fire 20 shots through her in order to kill him. Did they even think about trying to save her?
My webz stinks at the moment. Had trouble attempting to get the vid to play. Reading the story, he had stabbed his x girl friend already, they did make an effort to shoot him with bean bags. It does seem to make a case that they were trying to subdue the bad guy. Where the story goes off the rails is that the print story gives the impression that they fired only after the prep had cut her throat. Nowhere did I see that they "Shot through her to kill him" in the print story. Was that something that was in the video, of conjecture on your part?
They fired 20 rounds or which 3 hit the woman. It was a tragedy, but the officers were not at fault in my opinion. I think they just need to spend more time on the range.
That is enlightening..3 of 20. More range time is always a good thing, I suppose. There are certain places that to qualify, one must be able to pull a trigger 60 times a minuet. In an adrenaline intense situation, even the best range shooters will miss entirely, so often the thinking is to shoot till the bad guy is down.
20 shots by how many different cops? Why not have *1* officer, hopefully your best available marksman, take the shot? Was this a breakdown in command?
"A man held a knife to a woman's throat outside a church last month and witnesses said he began cutting her when officers shot at the pair nearly 20 times, killing them both, authorities say." They shot at her too. She was in front of him. "The police chief said Tuesday that he was concerned because the average number of rounds fired by officers during shootings had increased last year and the average number of officers involved in those shootings also increased." "Moore told reporters that hostages' lives are a priority and recruits are generally taught to use a "precise head shot." He said an investigation will look at whether the officers' actions align with hostage training" The officers panicked and opened fire shooting an unneccessary amount of rounds. The closest or best shooter should have been in place to take a head shot. A single shot.
If someone begins sawing into my throat I'm willing to take the chance of the police firing on him. It's a slim chance, but most people don't survive getting their heads lopped off either. Can't really blame the cops on this one, its just a terrible situation any way you look at it.
Sure, I would concede that in the best case scenario, would to get a swat sniper out there to take the shot. Considering how quickly this situation developed, that was not practical. Seems that they responded to a knife attack against his X. They attempt to get the guy to guy to commands to no avail. Guy takes a hostage, cops try to bean bag him, that also fails..situation escalates as the guy starts cutting the hostages neck..I have to figure that thinking at that point is to remove any further threat. I am not defending the shooting of a hostage, rather stating that I can understand how it could happen. Where there were twenty shots fired and three rounds hit the hostage, that seems to invalidate your statement tat they deliberately shot the hostage to kill the bad guy.
I'm pretty sure I saw this strategy in a movie. It's legit. The hostage and the cop give each other a nod and then you shoot the bad guy through the hostage's shoulder. If it can work in the movies, why can't it work here???
I get where your coming from but shit just doesn't work out like that in an unplanned, fluid situation. Sounds good in theory but no amount of training wields a high success rate in making head shots on a moving target with a human shield. Pistols aren't the most accurate weapons. Think of the height of two people. His head was undoubtedly right next to hers. Do you take that risk? One misplaced head shot and the hostage is the one dead, which unfortunately ended up being the case anyway. There's just no sure fire way to eliminate a threat like that 100% of the time.
Ohio police chief fatally overdosed on drugs taken from evidence room, investigators say http://www.foxnews.com/us/2018/08/0...ken-from-evidence-room-investigators-say.html
The GoFundMe is just sad. https://www.gofundme.com/James-Hughes-Police-Cheif. His wife spells it Cheif, lol. And then there is this... https://www.newarkadvocate.com/stor...l-investigations-discipline-issues/427336002/
I have to believe the Nate is kidding with the "I saw it in a movie" line...What was that in? One of the Mel Gibson movies?? Sure, those are realistic..
Yeah..clean shot through the shoulder..In real life a 45 ACP or a 40 cal, like a lot of cops now carry, makes a pretty damn big mess.
I get the other side of the argument. My concern is that if there are a group of cops, amd one starts shooting, they all start shooting. Reaction rather than action.
I don't see what the issue is about? If the dude "started" to cut the woman's throat, then shooting and hoping for the best was all the officers could do. Cut her throat would take but about .2 seconds, you are not going to check the records of the hands on deck to find the best marksman. Or even designate one. Shoot or do nothing was the choice these guys faced. I can't tell from the video, but perhaps they already knew the woman was all but dead anyway.
