Thread has been deleted
Last comment
United States TwoFaced_Toledo 
Let me preface this by saying that if you are going post something in this thread, please watch the video and fully read what I am typing first so that I don't have to repeat myself. Video link: Now I will explain in the cop's defense why everything he did was justified. In the beginning of the video, a young man (probably in his teens) is seen walking towards a cop aggressively. The cop is clearly seen giving orders and pointing a weapon at him as he is walking backwards in the same direction as the young man. Because the young man shows no signs of stopping, the cop fires his tazer gun at the aggressor. He continues walking back in hopes of buying time so that the tazer's effects would take place. The tazer had no effect, and the young man had caught up to the cop before he could think of his next move. As a result, the cop was surprised by a punch near his face and his immediate reaction was to wrestle with the young man. Since the cop is strong (as all cops should be) and the young man is just an average skinny teen, he is able to successfully bring the aggressor to the ground. Now if you watch the video closely, the cop is trying to pull something from the front right side of his belt which were probably handcuffs. During this time, he has a firm hold on the young man, but is not watching him closely as he tries to pull his handcuffs. During this time, the young man struggles and reaches for the officer's belt and successfully pulls a hand-sized item from the cop's belt. The young man has already made multiple mistakes in his confrontation with the cop, and now he reached for the cop's belt, which, as an unarmed person, is the worst possible thing you can do. He appears to pull out what is either a magazine or a pocket knife. At this point, you can clearly see the cop notice and start to reach towards the rear-right side of his belt, which has the holster for his handgun. He also begins to back away from the young man. At this point, let me ask you a question. Why would a cop that, for almost a minute now has been dealing with the man while he is right in front of him, decide to back up with a loaded weapon in his hand? The answer is simple. The young man has grabbed an item which has the capability to harm the officer. The young man stands up, firmly gripping whatever item he has in his hand. The officer takes no chance and begins to fire several shots at the young man. This is what happen, and this is my explanation as to why the cop responded in such a manner. Please post if you have something thoughtful to say.
2017-09-25 03:45
Ok I will read your comment later, because it's kinda interesting. I wanna ask you something - where is the cop's partner? As far as I know they always should be in shift together.
2017-09-25 03:50
Actually, most law enforcement officers work alone in the United States.
2017-09-25 03:52
Thats not true.
2017-09-25 03:53
Source? I did a quick google search, looked through a couple links, and only found that cops can work solo, and quite a few said a majority of enforcement officers worked solo.
2017-09-25 03:54
Having multiple friends in agencies and having been around for quite a bit longer than most of you. City police officers tend to work in pairs. In almost EVERY major city. Sheriffs and deputies work alone
2017-09-25 03:58
The key words are "tend to." In this situation, there is no evidence of another cop anywhere else at the scene.
2017-09-25 04:01
You spoke in a absolute. I corrected you. Move on.
2017-09-25 04:02
Sounds fair. Good evening fellow American.
2017-09-25 04:03
He did not speak in an absolute. He also claimed that he did google searches and found that cops can work solo. In fact all cops in my area work solo. You however spoke from some experience, unless you have a source to give. I have no proof that either side is right, just stating that you were wrong in claiming he spoke in an absolute. Either way doesn't matter...their was only one cop on the scene, and as all people should believe, the cops actions were justified.
2017-09-25 05:07
Farrukh Mehmood Farrukh Mehmood Farrukh Mehmood Farrukh Mehmood Farrukh Mehmood Farrukh Mehmood Farrukh Mehmood Farrukh Mehmood Farrukh Mehmood Farrukh Mehmood Farrukh Mehmood Farrukh Mehmood Farrukh Mehmood Farrukh Mehmood Farrukh Mehmood Farrukh Mehmood Farrukh Mehmood Farrukh Mehmood Farrukh Mehmood Farrukh Mehmood Farrukh Mehmood Farrukh Mehmood Farrukh Mehmood Farrukh Mehmood Farrukh Mehmood Farrukh Mehmood Farrukh Mehmood Farrukh Mehmood Farrukh Mehmood Farrukh Mehmood Farrukh Mehmood Farrukh Mehmood Farrukh Mehmood Farrukh Mehmood Farrukh Mehmood Farrukh Mehmood Farrukh Mehmood Farrukh Mehmood Farrukh Mehmood Farrukh Mehmood Farrukh Mehmood Farrukh Mehmood Farrukh Mehmood Farrukh Mehmood Farrukh Mehmood Farrukh Mehmood Farrukh Mehmood Farrukh Mehmood Farrukh Mehmood Farrukh Mehmood Farrukh Mehmood Farrukh Mehmood Farrukh Mehmood Farrukh Mehmood Farrukh Mehmood Farrukh Mehmood Farrukh Mehmood Farrukh Mehmood Farrukh Mehmood Farrukh Mehmood Farrukh Mehmood Farrukh Mehmood Farrukh Mehmood Farrukh Mehmood Farrukh Mehmood Farrukh Mehmood Farrukh Mehmood Farrukh Mehmood Farrukh Mehmood Farrukh Mehmood
2017-09-26 14:16
Why are you spamming my full name many many times?
2017-09-26 14:25
I live in New England, have yet to see Cops work in pairs outside of in Boston :/
2017-09-25 16:43
Ok, but why would he shoot like that at one fucking teenager? Shoot him on the fucking legs, don't fucking aim to kill him. He literally murdered him no second thought. He already had enough space between him and the kid, and he could've shoot once (at his legs probably) and continue to walk backwards until the target surrenders. If not, then he could proceed shooting, but NOT aiming to kill him. That's a stupid decision imo, and there is no other explanation. I did read your comment, but your explanation doesn't answer my question ^^^.
2017-09-25 03:55
1. Cops only use deadly force to kill, not to maim. It's called deadly force for a reason. Injuring and permanently disabling someone for the rest of their life and causing torture is less humane than killing them 2. The cop keeps distance after because the teenager was not harmless anymore because he had grabbed a dangerous item from the officer's belt.
2017-09-25 03:58
Brazil adre221 
Killing someone cold bloodedly is more inhuman than shooting once in the leg. You can actually recover from a leg shot, do you even know what you're saying?
2017-09-25 06:26
United States 0dragoon0 
Actually leg shots are very deadly as there is a very large artery that runs down it, meaning that the kid would've most likely bleed to death instead of when shot in the chest
2017-09-25 08:23
2017-09-26 10:29
ok so next time i see someone shot in the leg ill just finish them off cause they'll bleed out anyways so wtf whats the point ill just finish him thats more humane
2017-09-26 14:08
rain | 
Norway Norsk 
He would bleed to death if the cop doesn't know first aid. It takes less than 30 seconds to stop a bleeding with a tourniquet. If your officers don't know how to do this, you have a bigger problem (lack of training). Shooting that teenager was in no way justified. It would have been justified if he was able to fire the shots while they were still fighting, because that kid was a threat to him, but after he got distance from him, he could have given orders and/or shot him in the legs to disable him. This is something we even learned in the Army. Warning shot in the ground, then one shot in the leg, if he still doesn't go down and is still a threat, two shots in the breast. If he still doesn't go down for whatever reason (armor or something), aim for the head. This teenager was sentenced to death by a cop, unjustified.
2017-09-26 14:41
United States lumpy seal 
If the officer shoots them and they survive, they can sue the city for millions.
2017-09-25 08:24
That's a problem with a dumb legal system. Doesn't justify taking a man's life when it was clearly not necessary
2017-09-25 08:40
United States lumpy seal 
Well yeah, our legal system is fucking retarded. Was it unecessary? Yes. Should the cop be punished for it? Debatable.
2017-09-25 08:48
No probably not.
2017-09-25 09:25
The cop is not safe with shooting hes leg... If he grabbed a gun or whatever and the cop shoot hes leg this guy still can shoot or stab the cop..
2017-09-25 15:09
The cop is holding a fucking gun vs teenager who MIGHT have got something like a pocket knife out of the cop's pocket, and he literally fired 10 bullets in the kid's body. Is that ok for you?
2017-09-25 18:34
I think the 10 bullets are over reacted.. But i think the cop need to do everithing to defend himself so what should u do when they take something from ur belt and he dont know what it is? If he shoot once and the suspect is getting up he can get stabbed or something. I dont say hes act is good but he need to do everithing to defend himself
2017-09-29 01:46
I understand that but if you are holding a gun vs someone who PROBABLY has a knife, you should already have the advantage and not be so scared for your life. There was already enough distance between both of them, so the cop could've backed even more... I think that's enough of a distance.
2017-09-29 01:50
what a dumb comment jesus
2017-09-25 08:17
United Kingdom daneclaw 
In most countries they aim for the legs unless the officer is under threat.
2017-09-25 10:41
FYI, a suspect lying on the ground is still able to point his gun towards the officer and use it...
2017-09-25 11:59
BnTeT | 
Germany cucKing 
2017-09-25 16:50
Brazil MarshalUDT 
Justified. But he took too much time to shoot. Should have shoot in the first seconds of the video.
2017-09-25 03:51
I mean, there are already enough people furious about the fact that the cop even gave so many chances for the young man to keep his distance or surrender before killing him.
2017-09-25 03:53
Brazil MarshalUDT 
Sorry to say that, but I watched the video again and again and the shooting of the teen was a serious mistake. From the very first seconds of the video the cop was facing a serious threat and shooting his legs was a good response, after that, when the fight starts the cop was fighting for his life and a deadly response was a good choice. But when the teen stand up when the fight finish, despite he was holding a magazine clipe in one hand, the other hand was in his hair, he was offering no more threat at the moment, so the cop should have shout more warnings and take action if the teen decide to advance with the bad behavior. He is a professional, he should not take that as a revenge "hey you punched me now im gonna kill you". Im a law enforcement here, so i know what im talking.
2017-09-25 04:13
Your point is completely valid, and because you are a law enforcement official as you claim, I would have to agree with you, but the problem is that the object in his left hand may have been a pocket knife or some other weapon, not necessarily a mag.
2017-09-25 04:19
Brazil MarshalUDT 
Justified. 00:46 of the video the teen point the object towards (when the cop fires) the cop, and the leo can easily allegate that because of the deadly previous behavior of the teen, it could be a gun
2017-09-25 04:45
Brazil adre221 
The cop already had the gun so I don't think it was that. I don't think american cops carries 2 guns. Anyways, it seems that the cop got pissed off he got beaten by a teenager and decided to take revenge. At that distance nothing that the officer had in his belt except the gun could be a threat.
2017-09-25 06:29
Brazil MarshalUDT 
Maybe the teenager had a gun with him. How the cop would know? It happens too fast, and he was under heavy stress. The teenager pointed the black object after the fight, cop had too react fast. Probably the cop did not even notice the young guy took his item from the belt. The teen hostile behavior justified the fast and deadly response by the cop. 100% justified.
2017-09-25 08:13
Brazil adre221 
The guy didn't point the object at him, also you can instantly see it is a non lethal object like a clip or a flashlight, at that distance the cop wasn't under any threat, there is no reason to empty a gun so fast at someone like that, if the guy had a gun there would be plenty of time to see he drawing it and shooting because the officer had him at gunpoint. You should only kill someone when absolutely necessary and considering the circustances, in my opinion, I think the officer clearly acted very wrong here, and a trained professional wouldn't act like that.
2017-09-25 09:01
should shoot at legs !!!
2017-09-25 09:01
Brazil m0n5t3r 
shooting at legs deals less damage. didn't you ever play CS:GO???
2017-09-26 10:44
Nothing to discuss. Easily justified.
2017-09-25 03:53
Thank you for agreement. I am glad I explained it well.
2017-09-25 03:55
just because it's justified, doesn't mean it's a good thing that happened. A kid got killed and it could've been avoided.
2017-09-25 04:22
I never said it was a good thing it happened. It is very sad that a young person had to die. I am just saying that in the moment the officer's actions were justified.
2017-09-25 04:23
So what's the point of this thread? So what if the police didn't break any protocol? He still killed someone in an uneacessary manner. Stop defending killers
2017-09-25 04:25
How was it unnecessary?
2017-09-25 04:26
It could've been avoided. He could've backed off, called for backup, tazed him etc. There are many different things that could've been done in this situation. Do you ever stop and think why USA has a much higher rate of police shootings than any other first world country?
2017-09-25 04:29
>tazed him Did you read the original post or even watch the damn video? "The tazer had no effect" >called for backup His walkie-talkie dropped which you would have seen if you watched the damn video. >backed off He did but if someone is armed, backing off doesn't always help. The last point you made there has little relevance to this specific incident.
2017-09-25 04:32
So if someone has a weapon, shows intent to hurt people as he attacked a fucking police officer the police officer should back off and allow the kid to potentially harm someone else? No, he should neutralise the threat immediately.
2017-09-25 09:03
BnTeT | 
Portugal reNyX 
try to be in the police's position... he is a person too he is under pressure afraid of not going back home to his family
2017-09-25 11:01
Oh, what a shocker that HLTV:s very own swedish antifa vegan tubewoody would show up and make dumb comments. 1. He's not a kid. 2. He already did use his taser on him, with no effect. 3. He did already try the backing off and screaming orders, which almost got him killed the first time. 4. Calling for backup when someone is wresteling you, trying to steal your gun? 5. I would love to see you in his shoes, being all rational and a total hero. You would probably die most of the time tho from bad decisionmaking and poor physique. 6. Get a fucking brain, but we all know that won't happen, so at least try shutting your dumb mouth instead.
2017-09-25 16:51
You don't attack a representative of the law in the first place. I would say after attacking a police man, you deserve everything that's coming your way.
2017-09-25 12:58
it couldve been avoided if the kid wasnt a fucking retard and didnt assault an officer, who in turn was trying to defend himself.
2017-09-25 06:35
Of course. But he was surely mentally unstable or heavily influenced by some drug. This is no excuse, but it's not like the kid was an evil person that deserved to die.
2017-09-25 15:07
I read more about it. The kid was in the navy but got kicked out after getting tested positive for marijuana to 'treat his depression'. I agree with you he didnt deserve to die, but the officer wasnt really given much choice. His taser didnt do anything (which makes me think the guy was on some shit) and hand to hand combat was proven to be worthless. The officer did the only thing I can see so he can return safely home that night and personally i would have done the same. Also, the way the guy tanked the first few bullets probably means he was on some pain killer based drug, but what do i know.
2017-09-25 16:29
Denmark Xipingu 
Easily justified, np.
2017-09-25 03:55
Making a subject with content for "18+" without even being 18, LUL
2017-09-25 03:56
You got me on that one. I do hold myself to be more mature in more serious situations like this. I intended the 18+ to be for others.
2017-09-25 04:03
Brazil m0n5t3r 
is it even legal to sit on hltv when you're under 18???????
2017-09-25 08:41
I think it’s justified but it was brutal to shoot him mutiple times and the shots didn’t have to be fatal
2017-09-25 03:56
You keep pulling the trigger until they fall.
2017-09-25 03:57
That’s why people don’t like Americans
2017-10-05 04:01
And like Alphas. We dont care about their opinions. Lions dont lose sleep over the opinions of sheep.
2017-10-05 22:48
True, and nice metaphor
2017-10-09 15:44
United States lumpy seal 
It doesn't work that way. As an officer, once you shoot the first bullet you've made the decision to shoot to kill. There is no middle ground, because that could lead to hesitation in a really dangerous situation. They're trained to shoot to kill once they fire that first shot. They don't have time to analyze the situation like we do.
2017-09-25 08:26
Almost everyone on earth could take down this kid, cant believe he was like "oh shit my gun a kid heavier than a bird under drug" thanks god he killed him the earth is safer now.
2017-09-25 10:32
That’s why people don’t like Americans, plus it was just a kid
2017-10-05 04:01
United States lumpy seal 
27 = kid?
2017-10-06 04:52
27? He looks like a high 18
2017-10-09 15:43
United States lumpy seal 
I know how he looks but I live in the area and in news articles they're all reporting that he's 27.
2017-10-10 06:09
Norway duffz00r 
A bit harsh. One or two shots in the legs, should do just fine as well. Naughty overkill but justified in some sens as well for some people.
2017-09-25 03:57
I see where you are coming from, but just a shot in the legs may not be enough, while multiple shots in the legs could cause life-long injuries, potentially disabling the person. It is more humane to kill someone in my opinion than it is to have them tortured for life.
2017-09-25 04:02
"It is more humane to kill someone" wtf We are not talking about a run over animal on the streets here, we're talking about a human being. I don't think people should decide whether or not another person should live.
2017-09-25 04:24
Read #30
2017-09-25 04:24
United States lumpy seal 
Someone with a drug addiction like that may as well be a run over animal in the street. I'm not arguing that they deserve to be put down, but they're hardly human anymore. It's really sad.
2017-09-25 08:27
What are you saying? Most drug addicts have the same feelings and aspirations in life as you have, they just all root from the addiction.
2017-09-25 15:06
Norway duffz00r 
2017-09-25 19:59
United States lumpy seal 
You've never met a long time meth addict. Their brains no longer function properly, and they're basically permanently disabled because they've destroyed their dopamine receptors. "When taken repeatedly over time, methamphetamine can produce lasting damage in the nerve cells located in the brain’s pleasure center, as well as nerve cells in other locations. In addition, the drug is known for its damaging effects on support cells in the brain that help protect nerve cells from contagious microorganisms and remove degraded nerve cells from active duty. Known potential consequences of methamphetamine’s impact on brain health include memory impairment, memory loss, a reduced ability to think clearly or logically, a reduced ability to maintain focus and attention, and a reduced ability to regulate violent or aggressive urges. The drug’s brain impact can also lead to the highly debilitating state called psychosis, which commonly includes symptoms such as sensory hallucinations, delusional and paranoid thought processes and the abnormal repetition of certain body movements. Some of the damaging brain effects of chronic methamphetamine use may be permanent, while others may resolve partially or fully if a meth user stops using the drug for extended periods of time."
2017-09-26 05:44
Sweden geo. 
If the taser didnt work, would the leg shot ? No. Any question ?
2017-09-25 14:33
American cops has alot to learn from other countries on how to manage those kind of situations
2017-09-25 04:14
Read #30
2017-09-25 04:23
Not gonna read all that, The fact is that american Police should go on a ride along with Police from other countries so they can learn and get better
2017-09-25 04:28
Oh please, you don't have 2 minutes to spare? If you are going to make an argument, 2 minutes is nothing to ask for. If you read #30, it said read #11 IN the link. It's just a few short paragraphs.
2017-09-25 04:29
Yea i read #11 and I realise that a Gun is for killing and not maiming but no1 can seriously say that this cop did a good job
2017-09-25 04:31
There was no perfect way to respond in this situation. I am not saying what he did should be celebrated. I am simply saying that his actions were justified and he should not be sent to jail for it as many people want.
2017-09-25 04:33
Maybe not jail but he should probably be suspended for a while and take some lessons and as I said, a ride along with Police from other countries so he can learn better ways
2017-09-25 04:37
If his actions were justified, he has no reason to be suspended. Also, you cannot invoke "police form other countries." For other countries, the police is national, while for the United States, police have their own districts. They follow their own state's rulings on things.
2017-09-25 04:41
I dont think what he did was justified i think in General american Police are way to trigger-happy, What i menat with Police from other countries was just a loose idea that i got that i think would help american Police, Will never happen i know but just an idea
2017-09-25 04:47
United States lumpy seal 
??? What are you talking about. If he doesn't shoot him there then the city is liable to be sued for millions if something goes wrong like the druggie attacking someone.
2017-09-25 08:29
hahaha sweden, how is your police doing?
2017-09-25 06:37
Great source. 10/10 Next time history quotes from Goebbels :D
2017-09-26 11:07
Learn from Sweden where in certain areas cops don't dare to enter the place, hehe.
2017-09-25 05:07
Haha i think its so funny that u low iq morons actually believe that this is true
2017-09-25 12:10
It is? Just because its not the case in your city its true, in france and germany aswell, cops backing off from mobs of migrants.
2017-09-25 16:27
Dude, u seriously believe that they will let a killer go because they cant find a translator? Also ive been to Rosengård plenty of times, there is usually alot more police there because of the risk of crime, they drive past there all the time to make sure its peaceful
2017-09-25 18:38
i mean sweden has done some dumb shit in the past in the name of political correctness. i hope you know your own country better than i do though. each country has flaws including both of mine and i dont mind admitting that.
2017-09-25 18:40
Like what? Give some examples
2017-09-25 19:43
As it says in the aeticle, its fake, bracelets exist but Police didnt ditribute them
2017-09-25 20:32
"The story comes from FriaTider" Friatider is an anti-muslim newspaper that spreads lies about Sweden to get stupid people to believe that its true and hate on Sweden, and apparently its worked
2017-09-26 02:11
So are you suggesting this story is made up? Or?
2017-09-26 02:13
Im not taking anything that FriaTider says seriously, they are never right and they always lie or exaggerate
2017-09-26 02:16
Bro all Swedes deny they have a problem with immigration, that's also their main problem. Sweden's borders have been wide open since early 90's and they don't seem to learn.
2017-09-25 19:45
If u look at swedens problems and compare them to tier 3 countries like russia, albania etc then our problems are very small. I live about 200 metres from one of the biggest refugee camps in sweden and The only problem we have experienced is that they occasionaly steal Apples from our trees
2017-09-25 20:35
You can't rate your own problems comparing them to someone that are worse. I'm not denying that there are major problems in Russia. What am I suppose to say? It's worse in South-Sudan and Somalia? I'm not saying Sweden is a bad country, because it's clearly not. I'm just saying that you people are naive af. And you wont maintain your greatness if this keep happening.
2017-09-25 21:06
It's not true that this has been the case in Rinkeby and Rosengaard?
2017-09-25 19:44
No its not true, Police is always present in rosengård, atleast they have been every time ive been there
2017-09-25 20:36
To all those that said "shoot to wound" or disable the aggressor, refer to the following link and in that link go to number 11.
2017-09-25 04:20
Brazil adre221 
You contradict yourself, in your article it says you should shoot to kill if the target has a gun, which in the clip he clearly hadn't. ''If you believe a threat can be neutralized without the use of deadly force, then you just lost your legal justification for discharging deadly force — in this case, firing a gun.'' In that case the threat could be neutralized without the use of deadly force, he was at a safe distance and the target was unarmed of firearms, a trained officer would be able to take care of the situation pretty easily, especially since the guy seemed to be pretty young.
2017-09-25 06:39
United States lumpy seal 
Did you not watch him try to neutralize him? PCP and drugs like that turn you into a fucking zombie that's immune to pain. Did you see the guy just eat bullets like that and stay standing? There's no neutralizing that without a gun.
2017-09-25 08:30
Brazil adre221 
Officers should be prepared for situations like these, considering the officer had him at gunpoint and was at a pretty safe distance there was no need to kill, especially with 7 shots at the chest. Drugs or not you should be fit to immobilize and arrest an average person, someone shouldn't die because of a cop's incompetence.
2017-09-25 09:05
So cops can follow rules damn
2017-09-25 10:26
I am happy I was right about this specific situation.
2017-09-25 04:28
United States TruthEmbargo 
Blue Lives Matter.
2017-09-25 04:29
All Lives Matter That includes Blue Lives and Black Lives and "All Lives"
2017-09-25 04:34
He was not a teenager, he was 27. Also, the cop clearly must have known what the bloke could have pulled from his belt - it is his own belt. And why the fuck would a cop carry a pocket knife on his belt? There are no two ways about this - it is yet another instance of police brutality. Imagine this incident was an altercation between two civilians: the shooter would be prosecuted for murder no questions asked. Self defence, my arse.
2017-09-25 04:55
United States lumpy seal 
Actually no, the civilian would have been let go because it was clearly self defense.
2017-09-25 08:31
Nice try, but no lol
2017-09-25 08:49
Brazil adre221 
Emptying an entire clip at someone from a safe distance from you is self defence?
2017-09-25 09:06
United States lumpy seal 
2017-09-26 05:45
Non-justified at all. Cop should not have used the gun to kill the subject, he was obviously not fighting for his life at the moment. He should've been prepared to defend himself and the people. So sad to read all these comments here, no one can say the kid deserved to die. No one knows what he was going through or if he had any mental illness. A little empathy will serve you well.
2017-09-25 04:56
2017-09-25 05:00
thats kinda change the view. but still should shoot in legs not to kill
2017-09-25 05:02
He shouldn't fired shots at all, and at least not 7. It's pretty difficult to hit legs btw.
2017-09-25 05:05
Who cares, honestly. The kid is fucking begging to be killed. 100% of police brutality (or whatever you want to call this) can be solved easily: "Okay, yes sir", and wow an entire national issue is solved.
2017-09-25 05:16
2017-09-25 05:32
Brazil adre221 
The kid was wrong, but that doesn't excuse murder.
2017-09-25 06:40
Canada josef733 
Self-Defense =/= murder. What would you do if someone was gonna kill you with a knife and you had a gun to shoot?
2017-09-25 09:18
Brazil adre221 
I'm pretty sure someone from a safe distance at my gunpoint isn't going to kill me with a knife, especially when they don't have a knife at all and have a non lethal object instead.
2017-09-25 09:20
United States Benjii92 
2017-09-25 11:30
zqkS | 
Canada PwnNewb 
BLA7AR thinks it is justified because he is a 17 year old who is actually scared of that crackhead. Any grown many here with some life experience, and mass, would never be afraid of tackling, wrestling, punching, batoning, or any other way of stopping this. I am not insulting BLA7AR, he has made a very logical thought out argument. But 17 year olds act tough but are scared shitless often. Any grown man in here who has brawled with ppl IRL would NOT be scared. Any fellow bar fighters in here now what I am saying?
2017-09-25 08:47
There was nothing to justify. The policeman ain't done wrong, those silly teens become sillier and sillier, but again NA schools are infamous for their effective teaching. Circle in which you teach kids so that they go messing with the cops and a mature woman at the scene shakes her head and agrees but then sends her child to school and in the very next day finds out he was killed by the police and once again.
2017-09-25 08:56
he should shoot him at legs !!!
2017-09-25 09:00
Czech Republic The_Czech_One 
Nothing wrong with cop.
2017-09-25 09:13
Canada josef733 
Its justified, what I dont understand is why cops tend to fire half the mag into someone at 2 meters away, isn't that a bit excessive?
2017-09-25 09:17
Shoot someone 3 times and have them die slowly by bloodloss, shoot someone 6 times and have them die instantly. I know which I would rather have done to me. Also it's because the kid resisted going down, if he would have fell to the floor the police officer wouldn't have continued to shoot, it's not like the movies where when someone gets shot blood comes flying out of them, it's hard to know you've actually hit your target unless they show signs of being hit, this kid continuing to stand could make the officer think that he's either missed or his shots only glanced the kid, making it so he could still continue fighting.
2017-09-25 10:20
+1 cant wait for cops to walk down streets and shoot everyone under drug or alcohol influence
2017-09-25 10:25
Because that's clearly what happened right? Lets ignore the fact that the kid assaulted the police officer, let's ignore the fact that the kid grabbed something from the officers belt and brandished it as a weapon, let's ignore the fact that after getting tased and shot at the kid had no reaction due to the drugs he was on making him not feel pain. So many people on this website are so incredibly dumb that I can't understand it. Why are so many of you people completely blind to facts and form comments purely based on your feelings.
2017-09-25 10:30
Bro pls everyone could take down this kid heavier than a bird. bro pls dont tell me you feel like earth is a better place if its ok for cops to empty a mag on someone at safe distance clearly not sober enough to act propelly "let's ignore the fact that the kid grabbed something from the officers belt" If this happen then he is a bad cops. " let's ignore the fact that after getting tased and shot at the kid had no reaction due to the drugs" Thanks god cops have handcuff that work when you are under drugs Bro anyone could take down this kid, and handcuff him.
2017-09-25 10:40
Slovakia DRUGI 
Why did he not shoot to his legs?
2017-09-25 09:26
To all the people saying "why not just shoot him in the leg" In America a police officer is only supposed to discharge his weapon in a shoot to kill scenario, shoot to incapacitate is not an opinion due to a number of reasons, these being: 1. To discourage the use of fire arms in situations that are not life and death. 2. A shot to the leg is a smaller target, larger chance to miss and increase the chances of a bystander being hit by a bullet. 3. A shot to the leg isn't guaranteed to stop an attacker, especially one on hard drugs as this kid appeared to be on. 4. The real world isn't a fucking movie, a shot to the leg isn't none lethal, your leg has so many veins and arteries that getting shot in the leg gives you quite a high chance of painfully dying due to bleeding out. I hope you are all now more informed and stop making uninformed comments.
2017-09-25 10:17
This is pure bullshit, that's a profesionally trained cop, not some random guy with a gun, if he fired 2,3 bullets in kids legs and just backed off a bit i bet the junkie would fall down. However you turn it around, shooting an unarmed, skinny kid 5,6 times in his torso was absolutely unnecessary.
2017-09-25 10:21
You're so dumb, you try to hit a shot in a high adrenaline scenario on someone's moving legs. You have never been in a scenario like this, you don't know how hard it is and like I said you don't even know the fucking law in America which does not allow cops to fire to incapacitate.
2017-09-25 10:25
Doesn't matter, shooting 6 bullets into an unarmed, skinny teenage kid can't be justified no matter what.
2017-09-25 10:28
Please explain to me how the officer knew that his bullets hit the kid? Like I've said, it's not a movie or a video game where a big blood splatter or hit marker comes out, the only way officers know if they hit their target is when the target falls to the ground, his shots could have easily missed or landed only glancing shots which would not stop a person high as fuck on hard drugs. Keep making your uninformed comments, keep ignoring the fact that the officer attempted a none lethal takedown with the taser and then grappling him to the ground and had to turn to his fire arm as a last resort after he had an item taken from his belt. Please explain to me what the officer should have done without saying "hur shoot him in the leg" as I have already explained is a bad idea and one not allowed by US law.
2017-09-25 10:34
That's not the point, he had no right to shoot a single bullet into an unarmed kid. Even if one shot didn't stop the kid, he could have taken him down.
2017-09-25 10:37
Of course he has the right, he attempted none lethal takedown with the taser and grappling, both did not work and the kid continued to attack, this gives the officer every right to shoot at him. You're just blatantly wrong. So many idiots on this website like you are impossible to argue with because your always going to think you're right no matter how much proof that you're not is presented to you.
2017-09-25 10:48
He didn't. bla bla bla
2017-09-25 10:49
Sick argument, clearly shows you know exactly what you're talking about.
2017-09-25 10:54
I don't need an argument on this subject, police officer has no right to shoot 6 bullets into phisically weak, unarmed civilian.
2017-09-25 12:46
He has many rights, there are plenty of laws that back him up and not one that proves he's guilty. You don't have an argument, you aren't smart enough to make one to prove your point.
2017-09-25 13:16
Seriously? Cop couldn't take down a skinny, unarmed teenage boy? He had to shoot 5,6 bullets in his body to make sure kid wouldn't attack him again? A profesionally trained cop couldn't just aim at his legs and shoot a bullet or two and just back off?
2017-09-25 10:19
Sometime i feel like cops can go on mass shooting people will try to justify.
2017-09-25 10:23
World memyselfandI 
Such a lengthy explanation for murdering an unarmed civilian. There is no definition, except in a corrupt court or corrupt (non)independent police investigation, which would call it anything but murder.
2017-09-25 10:23
Unarmed? So either you're uninformed and making a crap comment or you ignore the fact that the kid took something from the police officers belt and was brandishing it like a weapon. What was the police officer supposed to do? Run away?
2017-09-25 10:27
World memyselfandI 
A magazine is indeed very very dangerous in itself. He might hold it in his hand, tapping it so hard that it fires directly into the crotch of the policeman. He was supposed to back off, and get an overview before taking further action, instead of panicking because of a magazine. By excusing this murder, you are helping lowering the bar for when it is ok to murder a civilian.
2017-09-25 10:30
He was supposed to back away? How when the kid was continuously attempting to rush him. Also let's say the officer backs away, that gives the kid the opportunity to rush into the shop behind him and that now makes the situation 10x worse, he can now harm / use an innocent person as a shield and the danger of bystanders being hit by a stray bullet goes up drastically.
2017-09-25 10:46
World memyselfandI 
The kid really posed great danger. It's clear that the next thing he was about to do, was killing someone himself. Get fucking real, police murder supporter. I can't take you seriously when your imagination is all up the ass of the establishment, which rarely includes using logic.
2017-09-25 10:49
Have you ever been around someone under the influence of heavy drugs? He was attacking the police officer how can you think he wouldn't attack an innocent civilian? I'm not a police murder supporter, there have been many times I have called for police to be charged with crimes because their actions could not be explained away rationally but these actions can, you just clearly have such a hate boner for police that you are blind to facts. Try and make a single argument as to why his actions were wrong and unlawful, try to explain what a better thing to do would have been. The fact is you can't and only rely on your feelings which are shit.
2017-09-25 10:57
World memyselfandI 
The attack wasn't using anything which remotely resembles deadly force. You can keep coming up with excuses like this. I will dismiss them all as a madman's ramble. I am not relying on feelings. Once again you attack me directly, which is, as I always have said, and many others before me, a clear indication that you believe your argumentation in itself is weak in itself.
2017-09-25 11:19
How is saying you rely on feeling me personally attacking you? You haven't given a single piece of evidence as to why what he did is wrong other than your feelings, state a single law that the officer broke, state a single thing that should have been done instead which minimises risk to other civilians. Also throwing a punch is deadly force, all it takes is one punch to kill someone.
2017-09-25 11:37
Liechtenstein idiynahuyi 
Listen here buddy. Don't make claims you cannot back up. Proof is not something to be taken lightly, the law of evidence regulates the process of proof. The rule of civil and criminal evidence, in conjunction with the rules of procedure, establish the frame work for the process of proof and the conduct of litigation, so that a person claiming something will know what the burden of proof his claims require in order to succeed. It reflects a powerful tool in bringing the guilty to justice, whilst allowing the innocent to go free. In some cases the rules of evidence may actually prevent the truth from being discovered in the wider public interest however we know that is not the case here. Moreover the general rule is that evidence of the defendant's character and previous convictions will not be admitted at trial (see Art 138 of cr.p.c and Rule-145 of DER). As we shall see a number of rules relating to admissibility and use of evidence are directed towards minimizing the risk of wrongful convictions. And the main risks of error stem largely from the admission of unreliable or prejudicial evidence. Thus this concept of free proof may allow people on twitter to portray unreliable or prejudicial evidence, which lead to a hasty conclusion. The burden on proof is on your side while you make these claims. When a dispute, whether relating to a civil or criminal matter, reaches the court there will always be a number of issues which one party will have to prove in order to persuade the court to find in his or her favour. The law must ensure certain guidelines are set out in order to ensure that evidence presented to the court can be regarded as trustworthy. If you cannot do that punishment is more often than not swift in nature. You can also not count on the party to let you walk off freely as being an unreliable witness or claimant may result in legal and perhaps lethal repercussions out of court the likes of which you've never seen before for which you cannot claim amnesty or protection if your claim is proven to be unlawful or slander. I as KNG will exercise my right of self deference to the fullest and you will seize to exist on this earth morally, legally and most importantly physically. TL:DR; Prove it or I'll kill you
2017-09-25 10:26
In this thread: People who think being in a life or death situation does not trigger your fight or flight response. People who think being in a life or death situation you have the time to rationally think every course of action through. People who panic as soon as they're in clutch situation in CS:GO, but somehow think they have the mental fortitude do a cops job.
2017-09-25 10:28
World memyselfandI 
It wasn't about life or death for the police officer. It was merely a highly embarrassing moment, which he resolved by committing murder. 7 bullets is excessive force. He was supposed to pacify the perpetrator, using as little force as possible. This you can barely claim is what you see in this video..
2017-09-25 10:34
Using as little force as possible? He attempted to taser him, he attempted to grapple him but the kid continued to fight. This police officer will not get charged because luckily these matters are dealt with by people a lot more intelligent and informed than you.
2017-09-25 10:41
World memyselfandI 
Whatever dude. You are supporting excessive violence, I am not. Police officers intelligent? I can assure that the IQ of an average police officer is a lot lower than mine, and a bit lower than average. But nice childish attempt to say "if you think this, you are that" so fucking childish....Go back to kindergarden.
2017-09-25 10:46
I can assure you that you are not more intelligent than anyone, you ignore the law, you ignore the facts and don't bring forward a single argument that backs up your statement. Literally everything you've said I've countered but you haven't put a single counter through to anything I've said? I wonder why.
2017-09-25 10:51
World memyselfandI 
You can't assure me of anything about my intelligence. Stick to the case, instead of trying to attack the messenger, which, as I already pointed out in another post, is a clear indication your argumentation is weak in itself. This is basic psychology.
2017-09-25 11:20
So calling an idiot an idiot when he's being an idiot means my argument is completely wrong? Shocking how again you do not counter anything I've said and instead say something completely irrelevant because you have nothing to say to backup your case other than your feelings.
2017-09-25 11:54
World memyselfandI 
Values are not the same as feelings. I may value human life a lot higher than you do. And for that difference I apologize. I should be ashamed of myself.
2017-09-26 10:17
Yet again you make no valid points, no explanation to what is wrong, give no advice on what should have happend instead which would minimise risk to innocent civilians. I value innocent life, not the life of violent law breakers. If you want to do drugs then go for it, I've done them myself in the past and am friends with people who continue to do so but if they or I decided to attack a police officer and reach for weapons on his belt then we would forfeit our lives due to stupidity. I do not value the life of violent criminals, we have far too many reprobates in this world.
2017-09-26 11:14
So if someone is under some sort of painkiller the rules is to shoot them ? ", he attempted to grapple him but the kid continued to fight." My ass bro he tried, this kid could loose a fight against a bird. "This police officer will not get charged because luckily these matters are dealt with by people a lot more intelligent and informed than you." He will not get charged because he is a cop, any civilian doing this would end up in jail.
2017-09-25 10:47
Yes because clearly painkillers make you not feel gunshots. Also what even is that argument? The kid attacked the police officer multiple times while under the influence of a hard drug and you compare that to simply someone having taken a painkiller? Why are you all so shit at arguing, you make comparisons that aren't comparable at all. Also no, a civilian would not go to jail for it, you are allowed in many states to shoot and kill someone who is physically attacking you, it's called self defence you idiot.
2017-09-25 10:53
"you are allowed in many states to shoot and kill someone who is physically attacking you, it's called self defence you idiot." Yes if you risk your life bro pls tell me where this cops was close to die ? If a cop cant 1vs1 a bird then he is a bad cops. I do have more respect for cops that u have, and that is why i do believe that most cops, so good cops would take this kid down without a gun.
2017-09-25 11:01
If someone attacks police and then police are allowed to use deadly force, if someone attack police they have shown they are willing to kill or be killed. You do know that a single punch can kill if it lands in the right place right? A temple punch made even by "weak" people can be enough to kill someone. Also the officer didn't know if the kid had a knife in his back pocket or a gun in his waste band, all he knew is the kid was attacking him and wouldn't stop even after being given multiple chances to give up. You're just blatantly wrong and every court in the world would agree with me.
2017-09-25 11:03
I do have more respect for cops that u have, and that is why i do believe that most cops, so good cops would take this kid down without a gun. #139 dont try to make believe that it was a pretty good cop, show respect to the good one. "if someone attack police they have shown they are willing to kill or be killed." If we follow this logic then abuse of someone under alcohol is ok. He is under drug HE CANT act propelly AND cops are not supposed to give death sentence
2017-09-25 11:08
I really don't think your understanding of English is helping you here, how does what I say mean that abusing people under the influence of alcohol is okay? Also there is a big difference between being under the influence of alcohol and being under the influence of hard drugs, there is a reason one is illegal and the other is not, alcohol makes you stupid but also makes you slow, unbalanced and easy to subdue. Hard drugs however make you not feel pain, give you more strength as they unblock the inhibitors which are on your muscles which stop you from over exerting yourself and tearing muscle and they can in a lot of circumstances make you only think about killing. Stop comparing alcohol to hard drugs, people drinking haven't made the decision to break the law, people doing hard drugs have.
2017-09-25 11:24
So because he was under something illegal its ok to shoot him ? " they can in a lot of circumstances make you only think about killing." Are you telling me that this cops was also under drugs ? Bro lets suppose u right about this drug cuz both of us dont know what it was exactly, its just a list of good reason to dont kill him, cuz he isnt really acting like this but under INFLUENCE
2017-09-25 11:31
If someone is attacking police then yes it's okay to shoot them, being under the influence of hard drugs only adds to this. Stop ignoring the fact that he was attacking the police officer. The officer attempted twice to subdue the kid in none lethal ways, stop ignoring this fact also. Those ways didn't work and as a last resort he turned to deadly force.
2017-09-25 11:42
I m not going to insult every cops saying that cops cant arrest someone under drugs, and the best thing they can do in this case is shooting.
2017-09-25 12:13
Nice, completely ignore what I said and say more bullshit. He attempted twice to subdue him, both times failed due to the drugs, when pinning someone on the floor one of the things that keeps them down is the pain they feel from struggling against you, a person high on hard drugs does not feel this pain so is harder to subdue. Sure a different officer may have been able to keep the kid down but plenty of others wouldn't have, what about a female police officer? The rules are across the board, if a person continues to attempt to attack you even after being given full warning and other options of subdue have been taken then the officer is allowed to open fire. It's the law and it works.
2017-09-25 12:27
+1 no one ever arrested someone on drugs, its almost impossible if u brave enough like this cop u can fight him 20s but after that its done sadly u can only shoot him. bro cops isnt an easy job and faggot like him are not made for this job.
2017-09-25 13:55
You're so shit at arguing, you take everything to the extreme and then mock the extreme. You argue like a child, how old are you? By the fact you keep saying "bro" you've got to be young.
2017-09-25 13:58
bro whats the issue with saying that this cops is by far one of the worst and he is a shame to the profession ? and sadly the most dangerous thing in this video isnt the drug he was on but the cop.
2017-09-25 14:02
World memyselfandI 
I think the major difference between Offensivfarmer and others, is that he let the law shape his morale. Most people believe the law should resemble morale. Good or bad, this is how I see it,
2017-09-26 10:22
Am I the only one that was taught to do exactly what cops say even if it's wrong just so you don't get in trouble.
2017-09-25 10:46
He was under drug, i m not even sure he could tell sky color or spell hid name. "Am I the only one that was taught to do exactly what cops say even if it's wrong just so you don't get in trouble" Mainly true in north korea
2017-09-25 10:49
oh shit this is why u don't do drugs then kids also in North Korea they don't have a choice but here where I live they take police brutality very very seriously unlike some other countries (AH HEM America)
2017-09-25 10:52
"oh shit this is why u don't do drugs then kids" Bro cops are not supposed to give death sentence, anyway lets show this as an example of a bad cop.
2017-09-25 10:55
Yeah reminds me of this : That ^ had a lot of controversy but what really fucking triggered me was this motherfucker trying to handcuff a teen after he just fucking shot him. Like what do you think he's gonna do fly up to space?
2017-09-25 11:03
This is true. Even if what the cop is telling you can do is wrong, you can bring it to court later when you are alive and not shot dead by a police officer. In this case however, the cop was not in the wrong.
2017-09-26 14:44
apEX | 
Brazil raigor 
This was overreacting. The druggy was fixing his fucking hair. If he had a weapon he already would have used. He was fucking fixing his hair and this happened. If he made a movement to try reach his pocket or something like that, i would agree shooting. You don't have to be a fucking alpha viking to not be afraid of him. He was a skinny crackhead, without weapons, fixing his fucking hair. A police officer should have a decent physical to handle this situations.
2017-09-25 10:46
India nicebaitm8 
How did the media and rights' groups responded to this and was an investigation ordered into this ?
2017-09-25 10:49
minet | 
Russia r0lin 
i fuckin cant believe what he just kill em is he understand what that guy can die??? what he is never will live anymore shiiiet
2017-09-25 10:52
Germany liddeb0b 
cop cant even defend himself against a frail teen. Thats the only thing that matters here.
2017-09-25 10:53
all those kids with "why he kill him? he could shoot in legs" and etc, you are fucking braindeads this kiddo just attacked cop (everyone here, in this situation would shot much more than this cop, just to save their ass).
2017-09-25 11:04
World memyselfandI 
Attention. Anyone who doesn't agree with Paketik is braindead. He has said so himself, so it must be the truth. Ridicule tactics belong in kindergarten.
2017-09-25 11:50
In Norway police men never shoot to kill, they shoot in the leg or another not deadly place to be sure that the target do not die. All trained up due to our 3 year police practice before going out on duty. Wish they would make police practice more then 3 weeks in USA. Honestly overreacting by shooting him several times just cuz the kid reached towards his pockets. But thats me and my opinion
2017-09-25 11:07
World memyselfandI 
3 weeks is a bit low. But so is 21, which is the number I keep getting when google it. It's insane that you give weapons to people after 21 weeks of training. No wonder this dude has no clue how to react properly. Police officers should have at least X (let the experts decide her) months of intense psychology training. It would properly save a lot of lives if they knew how to read and handle a situation, without having to resort to the use of deadly force
2017-09-25 11:47
United States Benjii92 
shooting to wound is dangerous. first off it doesnt usually neutralize the threat immediately, giving the assailant time to fire back or lunge at you. if you're shooting a gun at someone it should mean your life is in danger, so your first priority should always be neutralizing the person. if the man in the video dropped to the ground after the first couple shots, maybe he would still be alive. also it is hard to hit a moving arm or leg, increasing the chances of a stray bullet hitting a bystander. it might be plausible to shoot to would in norway where most average citizens don't have guns but in the US we have very loose gun laws and a lot of citizens own and carry guns. i just think it's a little ignorant of you to criticize the officer and his training, he was in a very dangerous situation on his own. it varies state to state but most police are trained for at least a few months, with the average training time being around 19 weeks. i'm not sure where you heard 3 weeks but it is most likely a myth.
2017-09-25 11:49
True. I guess i did not really think over it. But police in america for sure need more training.
2017-09-25 12:03
World memyselfandI 
19 weeks is still a ridiculously low amount of training for someone who is given potential to kill.
2017-09-26 10:25
its never justified to kill someone that is unarmed, u can easily shoot in his leg once and its all good police just abuse their authority since day1 they are the real pigs pretty sure we would have a better place in this world without certain cops
2017-09-25 12:02
well. the little shit could have just fucking done what he said. easy as that. things like that dont even bother me two seconds. there are worse things cops do in ur shit country. i saw a video of a black man telling this retard of a cop he has a gun. and the cop just fucking shoots him in the car next to his wife. cops like that have to be stoned. the partner was just standing at the back of the car watching like a full moron. complete idiotic what can work as a cop in your country
2017-09-25 12:01
Sweden OrNah 
Just a retarded white boi murican tryin to justify their brutal cops actions, everyone knows that murican cops are some half retarded fags who got dropped outta school that's why they are cop... the guy was unarmed and the cop could shoot on the leg just like others says so too, he shot the guy to kill him not to stop him there is big difference i hope u understand this u jelly brain. i hope some cop shoots ur brother like that and we'll see what ur reaction will be on that.
2017-09-25 12:08
So while others are having civil discussions on an important issue, you call me names such as "white boi murican." Firstly, I'll have you know that I am not white at all, I am an immigrant from Pakistan.. Second, there are many explanations in this thread as to why shooting to maim is a terrible idea. Maybe if you had the maturity to engage in a civil discussion, you would actually read them. Wishing for my brother to die at the hands of a cop is no way to force your unsupported opinion on someone. My brother is not stupid enough to show aggressive behavior towards an armed LEO and reach for his belt.
2017-09-25 13:28
Sweden OrNah 
yeah killing him would be a better idea... stfu do u know how precious life is ? now imagine some retarded cop takes it away from you and here we are with some 15 yo cop wanna be paki/muricans discussing how cop was right, get the hell outta here if u have no idea about how brutal murican cops are.
2017-09-25 14:23
I am not 15, I am 17, soon to be 18. Yes there are terrible American cops, but what do you know about how cop training works in the United States? Do you even know that cop training differs from state? Normal police for other countries would be national police. The United States has seperate police for each state which have training based on their state. I know how precious life is. Never in my explanation did I say it was necessary, nor did I say I was happy. It hurts me to see someone killed in a situation where they could have been saved. My post has been simply to show others why he should not be charged with murder in that situation.
2017-09-25 14:26
Nisei | 
United States kooster 
... in no situation is that murder, murder is premeditated lmfao. if the teen killed the officer all of the sudden that wouldn't even be murder if there was no evidence of it being premeditated. just because it's not murder doesn't mean the cop isn't in the wrong. 9 bullets is a lot man, literally 1 or 2 would've stopped the teen in his tracks, any human being should know that.
2017-09-25 16:58
World memyselfandI 
I think the point is that in most other Western countries the training of a police officer is at least 5 times longer.
2017-09-26 10:29
Just tell me why he shot him 7 times? Couldnt he just shoot him once in leg or shoulder and call for backup and ambulance
2017-09-25 16:33
Nisei | 
United States kooster 
9 times* yeah he couldve just shot once but this is america man, cops get like no training
2017-09-25 16:56
lol i love how people ask why police kill people who attack them and resist arrest. rather than why criminals behave like criminals and force police to defend themselves by shooting them. if a police tells you you are under arrest or to stop. then... how about not resisting? that way we can reduce police gun deaths! good idea? leftism is poisoning the minds of the youth.
2017-09-25 18:45
cops are supposed to protect citizen, i dont see where this cops did is duty yes he was probably a junky but the most dangerous thing in this video is the cop and not the drug he was on
2017-09-26 10:25
World memyselfandI 
Right / Left is one big lie. It's hell of a lot more complicated than that. But probably not in US where politics and the election process only serves the filthy few.
2017-09-26 10:31
rain | 
African Union Bruce U 
you can't justify pulling the trigger 7 times from that distance...
2017-09-25 19:46
Sweden 4Sweeeden 
It doesnt matter retard. The officer shouldnt have put 7 bullets in the guy lol.
2017-09-25 20:37
Norway LokeNnNnN 
The officer was clearly in the right here. The offending party was obviously meth'd out of his skull, or just some asshole wanting to become a martyr as they commit suicide by cop.
2017-09-26 10:23
as a cop he is supposed to protect him u know it right ? and i believe that we can both agree that this junky wouldnt hurt this cops so much...
2017-09-26 10:25
Norway LokeNnNnN 
All that was out of the window when it became obvious that the guy had malicious intent. The cop didn't shoot until he feared for his own life. This is not a good video to tout as police brutality, there are plenty of other good videos to make that point like and many more. Please don't use the video linked in the OP to make the point that cops in the are largely bloodthirsty brutes who lack training, because it's not really ideal for that.
2017-09-26 10:30
"The cop didn't shoot until he feared for his own life." my bad his life was clearly in danger. Bro the most dangerous thing in this video is not he kid, not the drug he was not but this cop one of the worst.
2017-09-26 10:32
Norway LokeNnNnN 
The kid reached for the cop's belt. I'd like to see you stay calm in that scenario.
2017-09-26 10:32
"The kid reached for the cop's belt." this happen when u are a bad cops. Thats my point if this kid died its because this cops is a BAD one, and lets not insult every cops by saying that they cant arrest a junky heavier than a bird without killing him pls.
2017-09-26 10:34
Norway LokeNnNnN 
What should he have done differently? Should he not have attempted to cuff him? The weight of the junkie doesn't really matter when he gets a hold of a knife, or even worse, a gun from the cop's belt.
2017-09-26 10:36
Ok i m not going to insult every good cops by saying that this video is the footage of a GOOD cops and most cops would not do better than him, and maybe achieve his real duty protect citizen including junky against drug.
2017-09-26 10:37
Norway LokeNnNnN 
What would a good cop do? Smile at the DMT junkie until the junkie cuffs himself and walks straight down to the station?
2017-09-26 10:39
bro i m not going to do it, and say as you think?? that : Cops cant cant arrest a drug addict heavier than a bird without gun, the best thing they can do is shooting 10 bullets in his belly, and end up in a situation where the most dangerous thing with drug isnt the drug itself.
2017-09-26 10:43
Norway LokeNnNnN 
So answer my question, what would a good cop do in the exact same scenario? Keep in mind that he has to wear that belt due to uniform regulations and the expectation to be prepared under any given circumstance. The gun on his hip is necessary, because in a country flush with handguns, a billy club isn't going to be very effective at keeping the peace.
2017-09-26 10:44
2017-09-26 10:46
Norway LokeNnNnN 
Pretty much all those examples include suspects on the retreat. The thing that separates someone tripping on an inhuman amount of DMT or whatever from the suspects in the video is the fact that the DMT junkie is completely unreasonable, may act aggressively, and won't think twice about killing (tbh they probably don't even think once about anything really, DMT and shit like that is fucking scary).
2017-09-26 10:48
ok at this point you are out of argument, but pls stop insulting cops by supposing that they cant arrest a kiddo heavier than a bird PLS. have a good day.
2017-09-26 10:50
Norway LokeNnNnN 
I think you'll find that you're the one lacking arguments when you start replying with the same disproved points over and over again.
2017-09-26 10:51
y u right most cops are not enough to arrest him
2017-09-26 10:52
Norway LokeNnNnN 
In the given scenario, a cop with the same belt, and a junkie tripping on the same shit, there's literally no way to arrest the guy consistently. Weight doesn't matter at all if you're tripping on DMT and get a hold of a gun/knife.
2017-09-26 10:53
2017-09-26 10:55
Norway LokeNnNnN 
I think you might have run out of arguments my froggy friend ;)
2017-09-26 10:55
Well we reach a point where i believe that out of 100 cops 80+ would arrest him without killing him. and you out of 100, 80+ (maybe more) would shoot him. You also completly forgot that cops duty is PROTECT citizen even against themself.
2017-09-26 14:33
If you watched the video, the cop was attempting to arrest him. He was pulling handcuffs from the front-right side of his duty belt, but as soon as he noticed the man had pulled something from his belt, he stopped arresting him and backed off to neutralize the threat.
2017-09-26 14:43
"but as soon as he noticed the man had pulled something from his belt," if this happen its cops mistake, so we comeback to my point that if this kiddo died its because this cop is one of the worst
2017-09-26 21:21
There are cops way worse...
2017-09-26 23:02
es3tag | 
Denmark megz 
First of all - I know there are big differences between the paragraphs which expands on the use of force towards threats. In Denmark, the episode in the video would result in the officer getting convicted of either manslaughter or involuntary manslaughter, which is 16 and 8 years respectively. I don't agree on the liberal use and ownership of firearms in the states. I know you will most likely get offended by this, but I think it belongs in a time which has passed. Guns are for law enforcement, hunting and warfare. Nothing else. And the way the cop uses his gun is manslaughter. Yeah, he might have felt threated, but as far as I'm concerned, emptying the gun like he does, instead of maybe shooting him once in the leg to pacify implies that the intent is to kill the target.
2017-09-26 10:41
Norway LokeNnNnN 
When the target's intent is unclear at best, the cop can only assume that he's going to get killed if he doesn't deal with the threat. If the junkie isn't stopped by a taser, and he reaches for the officer's weapons, the cop is definitely allowed to defend himself by any means necessary. This isn't CS, you can't really remain cool when some dude who lost all grip on reality and just tanked 1 million volts is going for your belt. Obviously the problem lies with the fact that a cop can't safely engage in grappling a suspect due to the weapons he carries in his belt, but the individual cop is not at fault there, he didn't choose his loadout, and you can't really expect cops to just carry batons and pepper spray in a country where a large part of the population owns easily concealable handguns.
2017-09-26 11:00
es3tag | 
Denmark megz 
I don't know if you are fakeflagging, but in Norway and Denmark both, the cop would get convicted in a case like this. If not for manslaughter, then for bad judgement concerned the execution of his office. I agree that there might have been a threat to the officer, which in the case of prosecution might result in a slightly reduced punishment. But I don't buy what you are selling. He is an officer of the law. He is trained to remain calm in stressful situations and while he might be in some degree of danger, the danger ain't immediate. He is still unarmed and is not being threatened with a firearm or similar and he was several meters away from the victim. He shot with the intent to kill, there is no question, and that is all the evidence needed to convict him.
2017-09-26 12:23
Norway LokeNnNnN 
The officer didn't know if the suspect had armed himself, and wasn't willing to take any chances.
2017-09-26 12:27
es3tag | 
Denmark megz 
Armed himself with what? A knife? To do what at plus 4-5 meters distance? And it still doesn't explain why he emptied the clip.
2017-09-26 12:28
Norway LokeNnNnN 
The officer's taser/pepper spray for instance
2017-09-26 12:30
es3tag | 
Denmark megz 
Okay? So what? The officer had the gun trained at him and he wasn't moving towards him. If you ask me it was pure execution. As in murder. Yes, the guy was a moron and most likely high as a kite. But that shouldn't and doesn't give the officer the right to act both judge and executioner.
2017-09-26 12:36
exactly. cops in america have horrible training apparently. its just: "is there a tiny chance the person might carry a concealed handgun? shoot to fucking kill!".
2017-09-26 12:52
es3tag | 
Denmark megz 
Which makes absolutely no sense in this case, since he already tried to manhandle him and he is holding his only handgun...
2017-09-26 13:26
maybe he thought the guy had a derringer? or maybe he was afraid of getting stabbed from 10m away justified dude
2017-09-26 13:37
World memyselfandI 
An officer will never know if anyone is armed or not until a thorough search. This does not validate them going rampant in the city, shooting everyone at sight, does it? The police officer clearly isn't fit for having a job where stressful situations can result in unnecessary life loss. Police officers (even where I come from, having a much longer education) haven't had their psyche screened enough. It's no good when someone panics over something which isn't life threatening, resulting in something which could easily be classified as manslaughter.
2017-09-26 13:32 If I was an officer, I would not want to take any chances. It's best to not be stupid when approaching a law enforcement officer.
2017-09-26 14:39
First, I would like to thank you for responding respectfully. Second, no I do not get offended when someone talks about gun-control even though I am pro-2nd amendment, however that is a separate issue. Whether or not he would get time in prison in Denmark has no affect to what happens in the states. Danish laws have no jurisdiction over US laws in the United States, just as US laws have no jurisdiction over Danish citizens in Denmark.
2017-09-26 14:42
es3tag | 
Denmark megz 
Ill reply to both your comments here. First of all - i get the video i really do. My main problem is that there wouldn't be a use for a video introduction on how to behave when pulled over if handguns weren't as common as they are. I Know, its a different issue, but when it comes down to how to react in a given situation, whether or not a suspect statistically would be suspected to carry a handgun or not will definitely have an impact on the descionmaking of the officer. For the situation in question, and regarding the video which you posted in your post, yes, there was definitely a time where you could make the argument that the officer could have to put him down - BUT, that time was when the guy charged him, not after they wrestled.... Jurisdiction has nothing to do with what I'm trying to say. I'm implying that there is a difference between the value the different nations put on human life. And i think you must be very naive if you think that the problems with abusive and even murderous law enforcement officers only is due to race and social problems. It has as much to do with your far too liberal culture towards weapons as it has with the rest. Now I'm not saying that this is the best example of wrongful use of force, we've all seen videos a lot worse. And Yes, the guy was an idiot. But he was still shot down on the street like a dog, and no human deserves that. As said, an arguemnt could be made to shoot him earlier when he charged, but not at that point in time.
2017-09-26 17:10
Your explanation is in vain. Everyone can see what you explained already, you added nothing new to the table. Where is the risk for the police officer? Its clear the kid does not have a gun and the cop backed up at least 3 to 5 meters. The kid made no further attempt to attack, just stood still. Then, the next move would have been to shoot at the legs to immobilize the person, not fucking the whole magazine into the body like a fucking braindead savage. And you americans justify this? truly brainwashed. Feels good not having to worry about getting shot by cops for pulling out your driver license too fast.
2017-09-26 12:49
For me this is stupid, how can Americans justify this? A Police Officer shot a teenager? Wouldn't have happened in England whatsoever.
2017-09-26 14:16
I explained it because some people apparently do not know how to watch the video. The kid may not have a gun, but he did pull something from the officer's belt. In the heat of the moment, the officer is trained to shoot to neutralize. You don't shoot at the foot because that wont stop the attacker, especially if they have a weapon in their hand. Cops are trained to shoot until the threat is neutralized. He was not on the ground after 6 shots, even when he paused before taking the 7th shot. After the 7th shot, the attacker finally was neutralized.
2017-09-26 14:37
i dont see a threat, nor do i see anything normal or sane with your "shoot to kill" policy. your life has no value to american cops.
2017-09-26 17:03
It's not my policy. It is just how police functions here in the states..
2017-09-26 17:04
your = american, yes. "functions" may not be the correct term. police is supposed to protect its citizen, right? not KILL them at the slightest possible SUSPICION of danger.
2017-09-26 17:09
Yes, police are supposed to protect citizens, if they killed civilians at the slightest suspicion of danger, then there would be many more dead Americans. Even if this was not justified, this is one example of police brutality. That is assuming it was not justified.
2017-09-26 17:13
Which is what we are debating. Maybe americans think its justfied because they are used to pulling out their drivers licenses slowly and in fear of their lives, but to everyone else in the world this is police brutality. The cop CLEARLY could have preserved a life here - no sign of a firearm and well out of reach of stabbing.
2017-09-26 17:22
if the fuckhead in the car recording just went out and help like a normal person there would be no trouble, what is wrong with people these days smh inb4 he was a crippled old man in without legs xD
2017-09-26 14:10
"if the fuckhead in the car recording just went out and help like a normal person there would be no trouble, what is wrong with people these days smh" would have been shot
2017-09-26 14:31
if the fuckhead in the car recording just went out and help like a normal person there would be no trouble, what is wrong with people these days smh inb4 he was a crippled old man in without legs
2017-09-26 14:10
If i was a cop i would radiocall an airstrike and 3 swatteams to be extra secure that the tango is not endangering the public. Overall i would say he acted in a rational manner, have a good day boiz
2017-09-26 14:13
one predator missile to seal the deal instead
2017-09-26 17:23
Brazil chuckdam 
It's unbelievable that are people trying to explain this in 20fucking17. Why do you need a brazillian like me to say to you that there is no motive for a police officer to shoot to kill an unarmed civilian? "But he took something from the officer's pocket!". And what was that? A Knife? A Baton? A clip? A flashlight? Well, it doesn't matter wich one of those were, because the policeman had the situation under control! On 00:44 he pulled his handgun out of the belt and pointed to the offender while fastly goes backward making some distance. At that time, pay attention, does the guy tried to chase him or he stopped after seeing the gun? Of course he stopped! He's not a suicidal, he's just a stupid punk who decided to challenge the law and order. Then, what the police officer do? Shoot 7 times in the middle of the guy's body. Without any surrender order, without any seccond tought, just executed a civilian in front of other people. This is not self defense at all, this is a poorly trained policeman who let his feelings comes out first than logic. He should be arrested and answer for his crime while lose his job in the police. A person like that should not enforce the Law in the name of the State.
2017-09-26 15:24
yes, exactly. but americans view this as justified, because they are already used to fear for their lives when pulling out their drivers license
2017-09-26 17:24
2017-09-26 17:25
shroud | 
Finland juizyy 
Great aim, better than f0rest with USP-S.
2017-09-29 01:50
Europe EUR0PE 
The Cop did a great job.
2017-10-05 04:04
natural selection
2017-10-05 04:05
This silly kid just acted like he wanted it or just cant see difference between his mum and Police , anyway theres some videos more debatable about police mistakes
2017-10-05 04:50
Norway sparta92 
Muricans sooooooo weak
2017-10-10 06:23
Cops ain't gotta shoot to kill always what happens to aim at the legs ? This isn't iraq. The kid was wrong in so many ways maybe he was high we will never know but cops be tryna get that body count up.
2017-10-10 06:35
Login or register to add your comment to the discussion.