Vegas Free-for-All - Finally, A Good Guy With A Gun

Finally, A Good Guy With A Gun

snidely333

Jul 9, 2016
11:39am

Quote

Originally posted by: lvfritz
two things for mali......one, the videos i've seen all start after the shooting. I'll hold comment until all the facts come in.
Second, the good guys with guns ran TOWARD the gun fire.....the unarmed protesters did the wise thing and ran AWAY from the shots. The good guys with guns didn't know who was being targeted, they put an explosive end to the shooting.

Is it even legal to blow someone up like that? That is a tough legal/moral decision. Does that set a new precedent that any dangerous suspect can be killed by the police? I think there will be repercussions from that.

lvfritz

Jul 9, 2016
12:28pm

Block User

Well, let's see.....suspect kills five....wounds 6 or 7 more and says he has bombs set in multiple locations. After hours of negotiations go nowhere, poor defenseless suspect gets killed. Personally, I have no problems with the results. But then I've never shot a dozen people and threatened more, so my view may be slanted.

alanleroyII

Jul 9, 2016
3:25pm

Block User

Quote

Originally posted by: snidely333

Quote
Originally posted by: lvfritz
two things for mali......one, the videos i've seen all start after the shooting. I'll hold comment until all the facts come in.
Second, the good guys with guns ran TOWARD the gun fire.....the unarmed protesters did the wise thing and ran AWAY from the shots. The good guys with guns didn't know who was being targeted, they put an explosive end to the shooting.

Is it even legal to blow someone up like that? Does that set a new precedent that any dangerous suspect can be killed by the police?

Police can use deadly force whenever they believe the suspect poses a significant threat of death or serious bodily harm to themselves or others....That's not new. It's been that way since we had police. The nature of the deadly force is irrelevant. They could have used those exploding poisoned drone mosquitoes if they wanted.

billryan

Jul 9, 2016
7:26pm

Block User

I'm not so sure about that. Sending in robots to blow up a suspect is new and potentially game changing. I certainly don't want police to be able to have drones dropping missiles on suspects. Do you?
Nor do I want them using artillery. A robot that can be armed with an explosive might just as easily have been armed with tear gas and flash bangs. I'd feel a lot better if this guy was taken alive and interrogated than having relied on what he said in the heat of battle. He lied about bombs. Who is to say he didn't lie about being alone.

hoops2

Jul 9, 2016
9:59pm

Block User

Where is the blm gang when 60+ people, mostly black, were shot in Chicago last weekend?

I am still wondering why the girl chose to make a video with her phone instead of calling 911

I find it interesting that Obama from across the ocean, without knowing all the facts, blamed it on racism, but when the Dallas massacre occurred by a black man, there is no comment on racism

alanleroyII

Jul 9, 2016
10:55pm

Block User

Quote

Originally posted by: billryan
I'm not so sure about that. Sending in robots to blow up a suspect is new and potentially game changing. I certainly don't want police to be able to have drones dropping missiles on suspects. Do you?
Nor do I want them using artillery. A robot that can be armed with an explosive might just as easily have been armed with tear gas and flash bangs. I'd feel a lot better if this guy was taken alive and interrogated than having relied on what he said in the heat of battle. He lied about bombs. Who is to say he didn't lie about being alone.

...They were in a gun battle. It would have been OK to risk cops lives to shoot him, but it's not ok to blow him up? That makes no sense. It's just a different weapon.

snidely333

Jul 10, 2016
12:42am

Block User

Quote

Originally posted by: alanleroyII

Quote
Originally posted by: billryan
I'm not so sure about that. Sending in robots to blow up a suspect is new and potentially game changing. I certainly don't want police to be able to have drones dropping missiles on suspects. Do you?
Nor do I want them using artillery. A robot that can be armed with an explosive might just as easily have been armed with tear gas and flash bangs. I'd feel a lot better if this guy was taken alive and interrogated than having relied on what he said in the heat of battle. He lied about bombs. Who is to say he didn't lie about being alone.

...They were in a gun battle. It would have been OK to risk cops lives to shoot him, but it's not ok to blow him up? That makes no sense. It's just a different weapon.

It's the cops responsibility to stop him and arrest him. I don't know any of the facts about the situation to say if the use of the robot was justified or not. The irony of the use of the robot to blow up the shooter is not lost on many. The protest itself was against excessive force and I'll reach to include the over-militarization of the police and the police use a military weapon to bring an end to the violence.

alanleroyII

Jul 10, 2016
3:12am

Block User

Quote

Originally posted by: snidely333

Quote
Originally posted by: alanleroyII
Quote
Originally posted by: billryan
I'm not so sure about that. Sending in robots to blow up a suspect is new and potentially game changing. I certainly don't want police to be able to have drones dropping missiles on suspects. Do you?
Nor do I want them using artillery. A robot that can be armed with an explosive might just as easily have been armed with tear gas and flash bangs. I'd feel a lot better if this guy was taken alive and interrogated than having relied on what he said in the heat of battle. He lied about bombs. Who is to say he didn't lie about being alone.
...They were in a gun battle. It would have been OK to risk cops lives to shoot him, but it's not ok to blow him up? That makes no sense. It's just a different weapon.

He was given every opportunity to surrender. They negotiated with him for hours. Then he started shooting again. He also claimed he had bombs. What choice did they have? Full assault and risk more cops? Wait him out and give him an opportunity to point his weapon back toward the street...or worse...start throwing the bombs he claimed he had? As far as the cops knew, he could have bombs strapped to his body that he intended to set off when they tried to 'arrest' him.

He was a terrorist cop killer. I'm glad they stopped him without further casualties. The only concern I have about Robot weapons is when they start making their own decisions. Otherwise, he's just as dead as if he'd been shot in the head. They killed him to prevent him from killing others....Robot or Gun...What difference at this point does it make?

How and why Dallas police decided to use a robot bomb to end standoff.

malibber2

Jul 10, 2016
10:00am

Block User

Quote

Here is what I know.

The perp in this case has his lawyer putting out statements that he shot Castile because he had a gun and was displaying it.

This strikes me as odd for a couple of reasons.

1. Given all the laws nowadays that allow people to legally carry firearms, shouldn’t a police officer assume anybody they pull over is likely armed? A police officer can’t shoot someone on sight for legally displaying their gun.
2. That a statement is already being put out by his attorney rather than the police department. Normally, at an early stage like this the PD puts out a statement about not jumping to conclusions and mounts a defense of the officer. Since they aren’t offering one, that tells me there isn’t any plausible set of facts that makes the officer look like he was behaving appropriately. Furthermore, there has been no release by the PD of body camera, dash cam or even dispatch logs. If any of these things provided a smidge of proof the officer was acting appropriately, they would have already released them. The fact that haven’t released anything means what evidence exists makes the officer look bad.
I also can’t fathom a trained police officer would fire four shots into the confined space of an automobile when there is a four-year-old child in the back seat.

surf87

Jul 10, 2016
10:33am

Block User

A black man with concealed glock who survived a police encounter

«‹3 ›

Already a LVA subscriber?
To continue reading, choose an option below:

Diamond Membership

$3 per month

Unlimited access to LVA website

Exclusive subscriber-only content

Limited Member Rewards Online

Join Now

Platinum Membership

$50 per year

Unlimited access to LVA website

Exclusive subscriber-only content

Exclusive Member Rewards Book

Join Now