First 90 then 45 degrees, seems alot for stability/recoil handling. But that cop seems to do stuff "over the top". Looking out from inside the medical field, there is no way to fix 10 shots to the thorax (or rather, extremely hard even if the shot guy ends up in the trauma room 5 mins after the shots and doesn't have any heart or lung damage).
I thought that your cops should be working with reasonable force and that wasn't reasonable, just disgusting.
A crowbar is a deadly weapon, preparing to swing a crowbar at someone's head is displaying the intent to use deadly force. To stop a threat intending on using deadly force, you shoot the threat to the ground, exactly what this officer did.
Suspect armed with deadly weapon.
1. Verbal commands given. Subject did not comply.
2. Nonlethal force applied. Had little effect.
3. More verbal commands given. Subject did not comply.
4. Suspect makes threatening move toward officer with deadly weapon.
5. Suspect threat is neutralized.
Deadly force is generally authorized to be used if an individual is threatening, and is close enough to use, any device that if implemented could render the officer dead, incapacitated, or unable to defend himself against further harm. I think the battle axe, or whatever it was would certainly qualify. This was a legally and procedurally justified kill. And depending upon the motions of the perpetrator when out of sight of the camera (sticking his hand in his jacket, or continuing to wield the axe perhaps) the officer was justified in continuing until there was no perception threat remaining.
Why so many shots you ask? In each volley it is standard procedure to fire several rounds. If someone needs shooting, you are expected to apply ample shots to neutralize them, in case some are "in-and-out" of soft tissue or just "wing him" or miss entirely. They are taught that under stress you will likely not hit center mass with 50% or your shots so you apply several. If someone needs shooting, they need to be shot thoroughly. The biggest mistake you can make in shooting someone is not neutralizing them as a threat and allowing them to return harm. You cannot shoot someone too much but you can certainly not shoot them enough and receive harm in return. This is how officers are trained and certainly is not errant behavior on their part.
If he had dropped the axe when first instructed I'm certain he would have been referred to as "the defendant" shortly thereafter instead of "the deceased."
And no matter what your assessment of the ending of the situation might be, the terrified employees of Carl's Jr. might have 99 problems next week but that guy coming back in with an axe and threatening their lives ain't one.
The attempt to solve a problem by the means of physical force, in this case death, is what a civilized society is established to prevent...I'm all for the use of retaliatory force, but we are too quick to pull the trigger...ten times, from 10 feet away.
I was just thinking the same thing. Too much political tall, not enough random pictures.
So, in the spirit of whatever the hell everyone was arguing about above, may I preset the winner of the 2011 Saxxy Awards, in the category of "Biggest Massacre"
Just occurred to me how amusing it would be to put together a PLR team consisting entirely of engineers (and one scout), ringing the periphery of enemy spawn with sentries, and then just let the scout walk the payload through the map at a leisurely pace.