This is my ideal of an officer-involved shooting:
Quick summary: police in Iron County, Utah responded to a couple suspected thieves in a parking lot. The female was brandishing a screwdriver. The morons repeatedly refused to obey police orders to disarm(her) and step out of the way for safety’s sake(him).
One officer eventually pulled out his taser and deployed it on the female. Didn’t work. The officer sighed, switched to his pistol and kneecapped the female in cold blood.
What makes this incident more than the usual dopamine hit of watching idiots get hurt is that it represents the flip side of police/civilian interaction.
On the one hand, innocence must protect the civilian; otherwise, he has no incentive to be innocent and society unravels. On the other hand, when a civilian refuses the protection of innocence then he refuses the protection of law. The officer must still follow established procedures but that’s it. Here, Barbie brandished a deadly (if improvised) weapon despite police repeatedly making the reasonable request to put it down, a weapon that probably doubled as a burglary tool, and insulted the officers. At that point, the officer’s concern properly switched to the bystanders instead of the suspect and he dropped her before she could make an attack.
No bystanders were endangered.
No police were endangered.
And Barbie survived. That would probably not have happened had the police waited for her to rush them or something. This is an ideal outcome. The innocent were protected and the guilty were harmed.
The investigating DA said the officer was unjustified but charges wouldn’t be filed. I believe the shoot was justified because the cop protected society from a potential threat. “Society” would have included the female had she chosen to abide by the law when the law was threatening to shoot her.
We don’t need police brutality but we also don’t need police who assume verbally abusive, disobedient suspects with shivs are law-abiding citizens until a jury says otherwise.
I recall my leathal force course / training and discussion in the US Navy back in the late late 80’s.
I’d already been a ccw permit holder in the state of Alabama before that training.
Granted we mostly had to deal with green-peace trying to board or attack our submarine .. but they practically had to be hacking up a Sailor before you could justify deadly force .. and on top of that non-sense .. we weren’t allowed to use non-leathal foece with a leathal weapon .. say what?!?
So we used the shitter connections and firehoses .. pressurized the shitters and hosed’em down if they got close.
Never had a 2nd pass or attempt after that .. they got the message. A very SHITTY message .. HEH!
This DA should be ashamed of himself .. for being a Poly-Tician (latin for Many-Leeches) .. he just put that officer in the crosshairs (publicly) to virtue signal to voters. Very sad! He (the DA) must’ta recieved his training in the (idiotic) US Navy.
‘We don.t need police brutality but we also don.t need police who assume verbally abusive, disobedient suspects with shivs are law-abiding citizens until a jury says otherwise.’
Correct.
One story that got the blacks all worked up about police brutality back in the day was Eula May Love.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Eula_Love
‘They were at her home in response to a disputed gas bill where she threatened and attacked a Postal carrier with a knife for delivering a bill to her that she could not afford to pay (although it was also reported that she attacked a gas man for trying to collect on the overdue bill or turn off her gas). They allegedly shot her in self-defense as she was wielding a knife and was ready to throw it at them’
How much of an IQ do you need to get you can’t go after a cop with a knife and not expect retaliation? Do the majority of blacks have this hivemind think that they can do anything they want without consequence?