If the Ohio shooting of the teenage girl is not justified, then no shooting is justified...

[ExciteBike66]

One could argue that cops should not have guns, fine.

However, if you think cops should have guns, then using them in a situation where one girl is trying to murder another girl seems justified to me.

[WhiskeyGrinder]

1. Just because it can be justified legally doesn't mean it was just and that there isn't a better way.

[TreasonousBastard]

2. Fine. Just what is that better way?

[WhiskeyGrinder]

3. Abolish the police and invest the bloated budgets into systems that actually help people.

[Kaleva]

31. You have to demilitarize the populace first.

[WhiskeyGrinder]

37. That's an excellent way to ensure it never happens, lol.

[Kaleva]

56. There isn't enough support to do that though.

Polls show a majority support for sensible gun control laws but these polls don't show how strongly they feel about it.

[Happy Hoosier]

89. I mean, that sounds great and all....

but is there any evidence that that would work? Without ANY police, is there any recourse for someone who is a victim of ongoing crime other than taking the law into their own hands?

This position strikes me as absurdly utopian.

[WhiskeyGrinder]

98. Meeting people's needs goes a long way toward decreasing crime.

We could also develop victim-response teams that better serve victims of crime than the often-retraumatizing experiences people have with cops now.

[Happy Hoosier]

102. Of course it does....but...

There are most definitely cases where simply helping the victims post-crime isn't enough. Cops resort to the use of violence way too much in this country. But there are most definitely cases that demand the application of violence to ensure the safety of others.

Despite our best efforts, we cannot create a society where stuff like this never happens.

Do we need policing reform? Absolutely. Do we need alternative resolution strategies? Yup. But the complete elimination of police is a terrible idea and frankly, one that very few people would support.

[WhiskeyGrinder]

124. ok I'll put you down for a no

[Happy Hoosier]

137. A no for what?

I advocate dramatic police reform. But not its elimination.

[WhiskeyGrinder]

144. For abolition, as you said.

[DontBelieveEastisEas]

161. ACTIVE SHOOTER

What system would help people in that situation?

[WhiskeyGrinder]

175. Cops generally don't help them now, so we fund the things that do help people.

[DontBelieveEastisEas]

177. Who helps them now?

Now!

The call comes to you.
What do you do?
Do you send someone to the active situation?


So you funded some things that help people.

That is great.
Now you get this emergency call.
What do you do Captain?

[phylny]

4. What should have been done in this particular case?

I'm not being snarky and I don't know the answer. I saw a slowed-down version of the cop cam and the girl who was shot and killed was wielding her knife in close proximity to another girl. What should the officer have done?

[AndyS]

5. Taser?

[phylny]

9. Maybe so.

[FarPoint]

14. I think a Taser was a good option...

The mind set is not always about protect and serve....

[Happy Hoosier]

91. A Taser may or may not be effective.

There are plenty of documented cases of people ignoring tasers in the heat of the moment.

In this case, another person was in immediate mortal danger. As tragic as it was, the shooting was not only justified, but the right thing to do.

Where things broke down for this young woman is in a system that failed her long before this incident. That's where this could have been prevented, and wasn't.

[WhiskeyGrinder]

6. If we're talking about hypotheticals about what should have been done, we should have abolished

the police before it ever came to this and invested it in programs and community that would have:

* kept Ma'Khia with her mother, if that's what her mother wanted, and given her family the tools it needed to thrive.
* supported strong housing and schools in Ma'Khia's community that would have given everyone involved in that incident the tools they need to resolve conflict without violence.
* provided opportunities for care, restitution and accountability.
* divested themselves of white supremacy in a way that the other systems of support didn't replicate the racist patterns that uphold the kind of thinking that shooting a teenager is the only possible outcome.

[phylny]

8. I don't disagree.

In this particular incident, in the world we live in right now, what should the cop have done? Would it have been better if Ma'Khia killed the other girl with the knife and then was shot and there would be two dead teens?

I don't know much about tasers, I think as stated above, I wonder if it would have been a better option?

[WhiskeyGrinder]

17. .

In this particular incident, in the world we live in right now, what should the cop have done?

If we can't play four-years-before-the-shooting hypotheticals, I see little use in playing four-seconds-before-the-shooting hypoetheticals. What I do know is we can start working now to abolish the police before people are killed in the future.

[phylny]

19. Okay, fair enough.

I thought perhaps you had a solution regarding what the cop should have done. I'm always interested in learning.

[WhiskeyGrinder]

29. The only solution to police violence is to not have police at all.

Knowing what happened to George Floyd, do you really think tasing her and then leaving her to the tender mercies of the Columbus PD would have been a clean, quiet takedown? The problem with imagining cop solutions without violence is that the system itself is violent. That cop was taught that she was a threat to be contained at any cost. If he tases her and she's still writhing around holding a knife (because, you know, she has electricity coursing through her body), we can't assume that either he or his partners will make the "right" choice after that. There is no solution; the system we have is violent. And many people have accepted that.

[DontBelieveEastisEas]

180. The only solution to police violence is to not have violence at all

The problem with imagining solutions without violence is that humans are, within themselves, violent.

[WhiskeyGrinder]

184. We actually know a lot of the reasons why people become violent, and many of them are preventable.

[DontBelieveEastisEas]

186. many of them are preventable.

Your point is well taken. I believe in making things better.

The question I have for you is, what do you do when the violence is occurring and the call comes in?

[WhiskeyGrinder]

187. Your question isn't clear. What kind of violence, and is the call coming to me, or do I see it?

[DontBelieveEastisEas]

188. Active Shooter, you are getting the call and you are the leader. nt

[BradAllison]

46. They could have not shot Ma'Khia.

Let her live. But then we could ring our hands if a fifteen year old girl should even be punished because the "system" is wrong, and just chalk it up to kids scrappin' and in the meantime what were these cops doin' not saving the life of that other girl they must not care because it's all institutional so abolish them......and see how all this naval gazing on a message board goes round and round?

Spoiler: No one has good answers as long as human beings are gonna be human. No one is as smart as they think they are.

[DontBelieveEastisEas]

162. it is not one or the other

You do not have to abolish the police in order to invest in programs and community.

[ChicagoRonin]

30. What about a warning shot?

Seriously. I rarely read in any news reports about officer-involved shootings that the cops fired a warning shot in the air first.
I have friends with guns and have been shooting myself (though I'm thoroughly pro gun-control). If you're not accustomed to the sound, it's not like an action movie. It's disturbingly loud. It would stop most people cold.

And though I can understand there might be concerns that a warning shot might be followed by retaliatory fire from a suspect, keep in mind even when dealing with an armed criminal, they're usually not someone who has had any kind of formal firearms or crisis training. Training helps cops and soldiers become inurred to the noise. Without it, the noise can really freak you out. In fact, even with training it can freak you out. A Vietnam vet told me that on his first rotation, when shots rang out, the noise alone made him drop and check his body even though he hand't been hit.

[greenjar_01]

32. I agree that a warning shot would have been useful here

And would have deescalated the situation quickly and saved Ms. Bryant's life.

[Straw Man]

147. "Warning shots" do absolutely nothing.

"Oh, wow -- he just shot in the air." Stab, stab, stab.

[greenjar_01]

149. Who said anything about shooting in the air?

Put a few rounds into the car. I know you can come up with a thousand reasons why that wouldn't work or be prudent either, but I can come up with one reason it might be better.

[Straw Man]

151. Same thing.

"Oh, he's shooting into the car." Stab, stab, stab.

[greenjar_01]

152. Yeah, I doubt it

The idea that she would have no reaction to shots fired is pretty silly and uncompelling, I have to say.

[Straw Man]

155. Doubt away.

The idea that she would have no reaction to shots fired is pretty silly and uncompelling, I have to say.

Who said "no reaction"? She might have flinched from the noise. The idea that a loud noise would have caused her to break off the attack is what is "silly and uncompelling."

Warning shots have no place in police training, and for good reason: they fail a basic risk/reward analysis.

[yagotme]

174. The girl that was killed was already pumped with adrenaline.

The fight was going on well before the police got there. Know what adrenaline in a fight does? Gives you tunnel vision. Sounds are muted, as your body is focused on your target. Gunshots sound like faint firecrackers. Yes, I know this first hand. Responding to a fight call, in a maximum security prison. Approaching the front of the gallery from the back, the front gate opens, and 20-30 inmates spill out on the gallery, broomsticks being swung. Called for the tower to fire a shot (Mini-14, .223 Rem, very loud, esp. in a concrete room), and it sounded like a lady finger firecracker. That rifle, at that distance, (about 20 ft away) would normally ring your ears for awhile. He fired a 2d shot, no louder than first one. Still sounded like a low powered round. It wasn't. And, in the video I saw, she was already swinging the knife toward the other girl. IMO, it was too late for a warning shot (which the officer is still legally responsible for).

[WhiskeyGrinder]

35. Warning shots go against several rules of firearm safety.

[sop]

57. So does firing four times at the two women fighting by a car.

From the body cam's viewpoint, both women were in the line of fire. He could have struck the other woman, or both. There were also bystanders, he could have struck one of them. That's not exactly firearm safety.

Also...Is a small knife wound potentially more lethal than four rounds in the chest? And if the cop was so concerned about a woman's safety, why not shoot the large man who launched a mighty kick at the head of the young woman on the ground?

[WhiskeyGrinder]

59. Indeed.

[Happy Hoosier]

120. That was a decent sized knife...

But I think expecting a cop to make the assessment of who is at a greater risk of dying in that kind of a situation is not very reasonable. The potential victim was in immediate mortal danger. The cop acted to protect her. I wonder what the conversation here would be like if the cop had allowed her to stab the victim. The cop had a duty to decisively intervene IMO.

[sop]

132. One might argue Ma'Khia Bryant was "standing her ground" and the cop shot her while she was

defending herself from her two attackers. Reportedly Bryant called 911 to report the attack, and she had the right under Ohio's Castle Doctrine to use deadly force when threatened in her own home. (Admittedly, this is a pretty far-fetched argument.)

[Happy Hoosier]

138. One could argue that, I guess, but the video does not support that argument.

It's odd to me that people seem to be arguing FOR letting her stab the other woman. I eman, I don't know why they were fighting, and maybe the woman in pink was in the wrong. But none of that translates into "yeah, go ahead and stab her." It seems to me that many are letting their fully justified anger and mistrust of the police to color their judgement in this case.

[sop]

141. Yeah, it was an ugly, chaotic, no win situation. Family dispute police calls usually are. That's

why cops hate them.

[Happy Hoosier]

142. Yup. Good observation.

That was a shitty situation, and I can't but feel the child welfare system could have prevented this tragedy long before it got to this point.

[Straw Man]

148. He didn't fire "at the two women."

He fired at the woman holding the deadly weapon. He hit her and no one else.

[greenjar_01]

150. Agree on this

Ironic that all the people arguing he should shoot her one time in the leg are the same saying he could have shot them both with his actual shot pattern. I mean, is he assumed to be a good shot or a bad shot? Pick one.

[sop]

159. Look at the body cam video again.

Bryant and the other woman were both in the officer's line of fire as he discharged his weapon. Bryant's right side was partially obscuring the view of the second woman, Bryant was almost on top of her when she was shot. He could easily have struck the other woman if he hadn't been a good shot.

[Straw Man]

166. I have.

Bryant and the other woman were both in the officer's line of fire as he discharged his weapon.

"Line of fire" does not mean "anything in front of the gun." It refers to the expected or intended trajectory of the bullet.

He could easily have struck the other woman if he hadn't been a good shot.

And I could have been a pro hockey player if I had been a better skater.

[sarisataka]

38. Bullets do not evaporate after a certain time

And will inevitably land somewhere. There is a real chance that a person a mile away could be injured or killed by that warning shot.

[ChicagoRonin]

43. Can you shoot into the ground?

Serious question. I'm guessing there could be a ricochet on solid ground.
I'm no expert. Just been a guest at gun ranges with a friend.

[sarisataka]

68. On a hard surface there is risk

If the angle is close to perpendicular the bullet may just shatter, any injuries would be minor. At lesser angle it would likely ricochet. Soft ground usually absorbs a bullet.

There is the hazard of hitting yourself in the foot. In this case, I don't know if the girl was still on the ground near him which would have been another risk.

[Ms. Toad]

52. The shots were fired as the knife-swinging arm was in motion

toward the girl in pink.

She could not have stopped her motion in response to the soun of gunfire.

[Treefrog]

90. You realize that a bullet shot into the air comes down somewhere?

He can’t do that. Barney Fife has long since retired.

[Happy Hoosier]

92. And if she had stabbed the other girl anyway?

I mean, I get people wishing there had been another outcome. But there was another person in IMMEDIATE MORTAL DANGER. The cop made the right call, however tragic it was.

[whistler162]

96. Falling bullet injuries

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Celebratory_gunfire#Falling-bullet_injuries

[hack89]

39. He was too far away for a taser

they are not very accurate and the further away you are, the less likely it is the barbs will embed themselves.

[Ms. Toad]

73. If he had drawn his taser, rather than the gun,

He could likely have tased the girl when she tackled/tried to knife the first girl (which happened very close to him), and/or when she pivoted to run after the second one.

[hack89]

75. The point is that tasers are not very effective for life and death situations

They fail way to often. The barbs don't always embed and are easy to pull out especially if the subject is moving like this girl was. They are also extremely inaccurate- he would have just likely missed at that range.

If you think you need to save someone's life a taser is not your first choice.

[Ms. Toad]

76. I still think it should have been used in this circumstance.

There was a window of opportunity between the two attacks, when the threat to the second girl was less immediate. The officer had his gun pointed at her through both attacks. The moment he recognized she had a knife in her hand and yelled at her to stop as she was pivoting to go after the second girl, he could have used his taser - had he drawn it rather than his gun.

It isn't clear to me that when he arrived on the scene he knew he would need to save someone's life - yet he emerged from his car with his gun, rather than his taser, drawn.

[hack89]

82. He was told that someone was assaulting people with a knife.

Last edited Wed Apr 21, 2021, 12:58 PM - Edit history (1)

So it seems perfect reasonable for him to assume someone would need saving. It also seems reasonable to draw his gun first expecting a worse case scenario - to do otherwise would have potentially endangered the lives of innocent people.

[Ms. Toad]

103. Fifteen minutes later?

Firing his gun did endanger the lives of innocent people (including the person he shot her to save). They were both in the line of fire.

In addition, since a knife fight is inherently close contact between victim and aggressor, if that is what he expected to walk into the middle of 15 minutes after receiving the call, less lethal means of interrupting it (even if the innocent person also gets a shock) is better than firing a gun at two wrestling bodies that could shift in a fraction of a second.

[hack89]

105. Except that girl was a fraction of a second away from stabbing someone

So it would appear his assumption was valid.

[Ms. Toad]

108. My point is that had he drawn his taser, rather than his gun

he could have tased her as she pivoted directly in front of him - several feet away from the second girl.

AND - if what he expected was an active knife fight it is far more deadly (and more likely deadly to the innocent party) to anticipate using a gun to stop it than to anticipate stopping it with a taser (which, even if it hits the wrong person - or both people - is less likely to end up with one or both dead).

Looking at it another way - just because a gun effectively saved the girl in pink doesn't mean there wasn't a better, less deadly, less risky to innocent people way to achieve the same goal.

[hack89]

131. He probably put more emphasis on saving the girl in pink's life

If that was my daughter and she died because the cop was more concerned about her attackers life, I would be furious. She was committing a violent assault - stopping it as quickly as possible to save the victim should have been his
only thought.

[Ms. Toad]

139. Using a gun threatens the lives of both girls.

Do you really think that it is safer for the innocent girl to fire a gun at two individuals who are close enough to do harm to one another with a knife and who are struggling to both stab and get away from stabbing is less likely to bet fatal to the innocent girl?

Yes, she got away alive, BUT, it could easily have been fatal for her.

Guns - Lethal - capable of doing damage at a distance (to both the police officer and the officer). That makes it safer to fire at the dangerous person (who is less likely to be near either the officer or the victim), and makes the taser less likely to be effective (because of the distances involved).

Knives - Lethal, but only in close quarters. That means, as to the innocent victim, if there is a threat to her life she will be n close proximity to the person wielding the knife. Further, both will be likely to be struggling. Both the proximity AND the struggle make it likely that whatever weapon is used by the police will just as easily hit the perpetrator as the victim. That makes a taser a better choice. If it misses, it is less likely to kill the innocent person.

So the call alerted to a knife fight - making a taser a better weapon to draw when you arrive on the scene.

[hack89]

140. Using a taser endangered the girl in pink's life nt

[Ms. Toad]

146. Far less than the gun. n/t

[Demsrule86]

182. I doubt he could have hit the girl with a taser at that distance...he save the girl in pink's life.

I saw the video...this is not a bad cop situation.

[Happy Hoosier]

95. Hindsight is 20/20, of course.

In my view, this was clearly a case where deadly force was not only acceptable, but necessary.

The loss of that young woman's life is tragic. But what of her potential victim there? Isn't her life and safety a matter of concern to people? What if she'd been stabbed and died? Would the cop have any culpability for her death if he had not prevented that injury?

[Thrill]

100. Try talking her? Or if you must use a gun, how about firing a shot in the air

To stop the fight.

[Demsrule86]

183. You can't shoot a gun in the air...bullet comes down somewhere...

And there is no time for talk when a stabbing is about to happen in seconds.

[Skittles]

172. fine if you have all the time in the world to think about it

ya know?

[CrackityJones75]

7. How do they do it in the UK?

Excusing police shoot first ask questions later is disgusting.

We are conditioned to believe that of course police must kill people.

And the best part is that sometimes some white kid will gun people down and the cops don’t kill him. They take him to get a hamburger.

[greenjar_01]

11. Police in the UK shoot people who are trying to stab cops and others

Not always, but it certainly happens.

[unblock]

18. but not all cops carry guns. there's usually an assessment and decision to bring guns to a scene

i don't know the protocol, but i would think typically the first police responders wouldn't carry guns and when they assess the scene and see the need for guns, they call for armed police to join the scene.

it's possible that some calls automatically trigger sending armed police to the scene, and it's possible that a known knife attack could be one of them; again, i don't know the protocols.

but the point is that there is typically a judgment call as to whether or not guns are appropriate for the situation. so the first instinct is to find a solution that doesn't involved guns and even when guns are brought to the scene, there is at least a little bit of time to try non-gun solutions.

in the united state, guns are brought into virtually all situations, thus allowing any situation to go from completely calm to dead people in a second or two, without time to reflect. all instinct, fear, muscle memory, lizard brain. one hopes training helps, but the reality is that cops are trained to use guns much more than they are trained to avoid using them.

[greenjar_01]

24. Yes, all that is true

[rgbecker]

23. I'm sure you could find one in this vast list of UK police shootings.

Note: US police shooting deaths: 1000/year. About 3 a day. We'll be reading about a few more unarmed people being shot dead before next Sunday.

[link:https://www.inquest.org.uk/fatal-police-shootings|

[greenjar_01]

26. Didn't need to look

The Metropolitan police shot three men who were stabbing people during the London Bridge attacks of 2017.

[rgbecker]

63. Because Terrorists??!!?

How many of the 1000 killed in 2020 were Terrorists?

Thanks for the update...lots to learn on the DU.

[greenjar_01]

64. Probably not a lot, but I'm not sure how we categorize somebody stabbing people

is all that important.

[CrackityJones75]

133. Check the stas on how many people are shot by police.

Even lercentafe based ot is night and day different.

[greenjar_01]

135. Yes, everybody knows that

The claim is that it does happen, even in other countries, not that the lercentafe is the same.

[sop]

67. Here's how two UK police take down a man wielding a knife, and in the US:

[marie999]

78. He was attacking them.

This girl was right next to the girl she wanted to stab.

[wnylib]

143. Yes, quite a difference in the two situations.

OTOH, could the cop have tried de-escalation and disarming the girl before she went after the one in pink?

[Straw Man]

153. Yes.

OTOH, could the cop have tried de-escalation and disarming the girl before she went after the one in pink?

She was already going after her.

[CrackityJones75]

136. Thank you

[malaise]

10. You think cops in other countries don't intervene

when youngsters are stabbing one another?

FFS! There are many other ways to stops teenage girls from fighting.

[phylny]

21. What are the ways?

Again, not being snarky. What else could have been done to keep all the girls safe in this instance?

[marble falls]

12. Never thought I'd read something like this here. There are no justified shootings, ever.

[USALiberal]

28. So, no police shootings are justified?? Really? Nt

[marble falls]

36. 'bye.

[USALiberal]

44. Yep, I assumed! Lol! Nt

[phylny]

58. If my life is being threatened by another individual, I can't imagine thinking that

no police shootings are justified.

[BradAllison]

33. Charles Whitman wasn't a justfied shooting

Ok, got it. Amazing take but ok.

[Ace Rothstein]

45. This isn't going to win any arguments.

It is something that probably less than 10% of the country would get behind.

[marble falls]

157. bye.

[Ace Rothstein]

160. LOL

You do you and live in your echo chamber.

[TwilightZone]

60. UK police shot the attackers in the 2017 London Bridge stabbing attacks.

It would be pretty difficult to argue that those weren't justified.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_London_Bridge_attack

"Ever" is a very long time, and blanket statements are rarely accurate.

[marble falls]

158. bye.

[BusterMove]

84. Well that sucks. People should stop trying to murder other people then.

Self defense. yep. VERY justifiable.,

Saving the life of another would-be victim. Yep.

[ExciteBike66]

106. Was the stabbing justified then?

Is society just supposed to turn the other cheek, Christ-like?

[EX500rider]

190. "There are no justified shootings, ever."

So if terrorists take over a plane or bank and line up the hostages and start shooting them one by one in a row and a SWAT sniper has a bead on the shooter you think he should do nothing?

[marble falls]

194. bye.

[EX500rider]

200. Right what else could you say?

No way to defend your statement

[rgbecker]

13. By this logic, the Capital Police should have gunned down 30 or 40 people on Jan 6, 2021.

I suggest a "Police leave their guns at home day" for starters and see if they couldn't improvise other ways to defuse these volatile "Life and Death" situations. This could be expanded to a week and then finally the police would realize their authority comes from other sources rather than their guns.

In this case, as suggested by others, the policeman had a taser right next to his gun. A baton is very effective in batting a object from a person's hand. I've seen articles showing plastic nets which when thrown over a person, incapacitates them.

As long people think it is alright for the state to kill as they please on the streets, we have a problem. The reason we have the courts and a justice system is to bring some civility to the world.

In this case, if the cops never had showed up at all but rather the paramedics had come to clean up after the fight, I'd argue the outcome would probably been better.

[rso]

20. RSO

Yes indeed, the Capitol Police and the DC Police could have and should have shot terrorists on 1/6. The attackers were beating and assaulting police, any existing police rules of engagement would have fully justified it.

[ExciteBike66]

107. The knife would have been in the other girl before any other weapon was brought out.

She was literally in the act of stabbing when she was shot.

[cinematicdiversions]

156. Honestly they probably should have. NT

[Voltaire2]

15. sigh...

[ExciteBike66]

109. Ironic, considering that character probably would have no problem with deadly force...

[colsohlibgal]

16. A Taser Would Have Worked

Dead is permanent. Who knows what caused that situation and what life that young girl may have gone on to.

It’s just wrong, especially if you’re not being threatened, to just terminate someone.

[phylny]

22. I wonder if officers should switch sides - taser on their dominant-hand side,

gun on the non-dominant hand. Would that cut down on these shootings?

[USALiberal]

25. And inaccurate shooting! Nt

[phylny]

61. True.

[hack89]

47. Do you understand how a taser works?

He was pretty far away and had no time to get closer - she was swinging that knife towards the victim. Tasers have an effective range of 10 feet and even that is iffy - they are very inaccurate and the further away you are, the less likely the barbs will embed in the suspect. And if the barbs embed in the clothing instead of skin, it will slow down the suspect much.

[Happy Hoosier]

99. Indeed, Dead is permanent. But...

Given that she was poised to potentially mortally wound someone else, I think people are not applying a reasonable standard here. While cops need to minimiz eth euse of deadly force, they also have the duty to protect the potential victim when they are in imminent danger, as was clearly the case here.

[ExciteBike66]

111. Come on now

"It’s just wrong, especially if you’re not being threatened, to just terminate someone."

SOMEONE was being threatened, who cares whether it was the cop or not.

My question to you is whether the girl with the knife would have been wrong to "terminate" the other girl...

[stillcool]

27. first post I clicked on today...

I'm going to try really hard to make it my last. As one who grew up in foster care, I can't deal with this shit.

[StarfishSaver]

42. It's disgusting

[ExciteBike66]

113. You're the one who thinks the other girl should have been stabbed.

[Marthe48]

34. I want everyone to have the same quality of justice

From law enforcement up to a day in court. Regardless of skin color.

I don't want police to be judge, jury and executioners.

What I want to see is all people facing police to be treated just like rittenhouse was treated. I don't want anyone else treated like Mr. Floyd was treated, or Ma'Khia.

We have a long way to go. We have a vicious circle where bad people can get guns. Stupid people can get guns. People who enter law enforcement need to be able to protect themselves. So we need gun laws that truly do the job of limiting who gets a gun. Right now, we are an anything goes nation. Cowardly people arm themselves, use their weapons or the power that comes from wearing a uniform, rather than courage and people die.

Police need to be trained to better spot threats that might be lethal to them. I watched movies where law enforcement trainees went through a mock town and figures popped up, giving the trainees a split second to decide if the pop-up was a threat or not. They got points off if they shot an innocent bystander. I think that part of the training depicted was fictional, or set aside since I saw those movies, especially if police face anyone with dark skin. Right now, with a general trend toward authoritarianism and militarizing police forces, shooting to kill is the norm. We have to find a way to stop being such chickens that every person we meet, every situation we face is seen as a threat to our lives.

I can see the problems. I don't see the solutions.

[ripcord]

40. The cop saved a life

[Marthe48]

48. And took one

There has to be a better way

[ripcord]

50. He was 10 feet away

She was actually stabbing at the girl in pink's neck when he fired, what should he have done waited until she finished what she was doing so they could calmly discuss things?

[AZSkiffyGeek]

72. Not trying to stab a bystander is a good way to not get shot

[unblock]

55. the cop may have prevented a knife wound, but knife wounds usually aren't lethal.

stats vary, but i've seen that fewer than 4% of knife wounds are lethal.

one could still argue the shooting is justified to prevent a knife attack, but saying that it saved a life is making a big assumption as to the lethality of the injury prevented.

and even that is assuming that the knife-wielder would have actually inflicted a wound, as opposed to merely trying to scare the crap out of the other person. it's impossible to assess such things in mere seconds.

[ripcord]

62. And if a stab to the neck turned out to be fatal then what?

Oh well, tough luck at least the killer lived?

[unblock]

69. fine, shoot first and cover up questions later. great protocol.

there's really no room to even *try* something less lethal first?

we don't even know if the "killer" was actually going to use the knife or was merely threatening with it.

but hey, situation with many unknowns, people fill in all the blanks they need to justify a killing sometimes.


seems to me that the cops were called and later arrived and a whole lot of stuff happened before the cops arrived that we didn't see but that didn't involve actual knife use. remarkable coincidence that the moment the cops arrive was the exact moment that the knife was actually about to be used when for quite some time it was only used as a threat.

as long as we're going with hypotheticals, what about if the "killer" was actually the victim who had just grabbed the knife from the real assailant? or if it was all just for a movie? or if the "killer" had been bullied for years?

oh well, tough luck at least the bully lived?

i don't think the first intervention of the police should be something highly likely to result in a death with only seconds to assess the situation.

[ripcord]

70. She had already stabbed another girl

But of course the attackers rights are more important than the victims.

[Bayard]

77. I had not heard that previously in any coverage

That does make a difference.

A thought popped into my head when I started reading this thread. What if, instead of a gun, cops started carrying anesthesia dart guns? It could either drop someone in their tracks, or at least slow them down, and be just as quick as shooting them with a gun.

[superpatriotman]

88. This is the correct answer

DU (and society in general) is rife with that philosophy.

[unblock]

97. sorry i'm just not keen on anyone delivering death based on two seconds of information.

growing up, my younger brother used to needle my older brother, typically by poking him in the shoulder repeatedly despite many requests to stop. eventually my older brother would have enough and smack my younger brother.

then, of course, my younger brother would instantly cry to mom and dad and my older brother would get in trouble.

there are many situations where cops can walk in at the wrong time, not knowing the whole story, and get a picture that's off, either in some small degree or wildly so, possibly even completely opposite to what it initially appears.

today my older brother is a good person, a popular teacher, many friends and a pillar of the community. my younger brother has since been diagnosed with a laundry list of mental illnesses, tried to kill an emt, and is known to the secret service for other things he's done. yet, had the police walked into our house at the wrong moment, they might well have killed my older brother.


there's just got to be a better way than to go from arriving on scene to killing someone in a matter of seconds. little to no warning, no attempt to use anything even slightly less lethal, just an instant solution that is highly likely to result in someone's death when they entire situation could be a misunderstanding or an act or just one person having a bad moment in a bad day.

the police should be trained to diffuse situations, or at least to try, so that one person having one bad moment doesn't result in someone's death.


killing someone wielding a knife can't be the only way to resolve this sort of situation, or many others.


what we have simply isn't working if it results in the police unable to resolve situations without killing people.

by and large, the african-american community *fears* police more than they look to them to secure the peace and safety, and if that's the case, the police have failed.

there's got to be a better way.

[StarfishSaver]

101. This isn't a training problem

Police are highly trained to diffuse these situations. And they do it very well - when it involves white people.

The problem isn't that they don't know how. The problem is they too often base their decisions and actions on racial biases that lead them to believe that Black and Brown people are far more dangerous and, thus, are more deserving of lethal force, than white people.

[unblock]

116. Agreed, that's certainly a big part of it

And the fact that they all carry guns at the ready and are permitted to use them without time for reflection means that they can and do act on these biases and instincts, even if they're only subconscious.

And the more there's public talk reinforcing such biases, the more these things get etched into the subconscious/instincts of the police. To the point that even officers who don't think of themselves as bigoted nevertheless may react in a split-second situation on the biases acquired from bigoted public speech they've been exposed to.

[StarfishSaver]

119. Exactly

Like the cops chanting "Blue Lives Matter" at the Black onlookers shortly after the shooting.

And the people here who insist that this attitude and behavior is a separate and distinct issue from the shooting itself.

[Marthe48]

127. I was trying to get at that

All of the fear-mongering, which makes 'Different' or 'Other' not only the bad guy, but a terribly dangerous monster, has people who were supposedly trained to deal with people, turn into the terribly dangerous monsters. How do we defuse that? When the people getting trained to serve and protect got home and watch faux and get huge doses of fear-mongering that ruins any training they might have gotten? (And I don't calling fear-mongering hate speech.)

[wnylib]

168. Source? What source says that she had already stabbed another person?

[ExciteBike66]

114. You just want to wait and find out, huh?

"we don't even know if the "killer" was actually going to use the knife or was merely threatening with it."

[EX500rider]

191. "but i've seen that fewer than 4% of knife wounds are lethal."

Link for that stat?
And all knife wounds including oppsies in the kitchen or actual assailants trying to knife and kill some one?

Knives kill over 4x times more Americans then all rifles do including the scary AR-15's.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/195325/murder-victims-in-the-us-by-weapon-used/

[unblock]

192. Plenty of links on the googles, here's one; see the chart

https://scienceblogs.com/deltoid/1993/10/05/knives-00000

[TheProle]

94. The amount of magical thinking required

to believe that a taser, baton, soothing words from a social worker or any other attempt to de-escalate would have spared the young lady in pink from having a 6" blade stuck into her is mind-boggling.

[greenjar_01]

123. Looks closer to an 8" kitchen knife to me

The idea that this would have been a "small stab wound" (as someone said upthread!) had she connected at the force with which she was thrusting that knife is completely bonkers.

[unblock]

41. if this case is the best justification for shooting, then yeah, no shooting is justified.

even if the knife-wielder was the rottenest person on earth, the protocol of police walking up and going from quick visual to lethal shooting in two or three seconds is a horrible protocol guaranteed to result in unnecessary deaths even if they got the right person this time.

the reality is that the cop decided unilaterally to take action that was maybe 90+% likely to result in the death of someone. not sure why *4* shots were called for in this situation. i know police are trained to shoot multiple times, and i know there are situations where maybe that's appropriate. but i'm not sure this was one of them. was it really out of the question to fire a warning shot? or to fire a single shot and reassess?

more fundamentally, the cop couldn't possible know the whole story, but nevertheless decided to end the one person. the cop couldn't possible know if the apparent target of the knife-wielder might actually have been the instigator. maybe the person holding the knife at the moment the cops arrived was actually the original victim and had just wrestled the knife from the original assailant's hands.

or maybe the whole thing was an indie film project and the knife was just a prop.

maybe the knife-wielder had been bullied for years and finally tried to get revenge. not in the right way, but does that really warrant instant death?


so even if the cops did get it right *this time*, there was at best a certain amount of luck in the way the got it right. next time it won't work out as well.

also keep in mind that knife attacks aren't always lethal. i'm not sure it's appropriate for the police to kill someone to prevent an injury that's rather less likely to result in anyone dying.

finally, one of the big problems is that police have few tools, but they all have an nearly instantly lethal one. is there no choice?

taser? net? riot shield? nightstick? one of those longer stick weapons? the problem is that the police aren't trained in and don't have ready access to a good variety of offensive and defensive weapons to choose from, but they do have super fast access to quick killing devices.

[hack89]

51. He saw her in the act of stabbing someone

look at the pictures - she was a fraction of a second away from stabbing that girl. Just how much time do you think he had to decide?

Guns aren't always lethal - a lot more people survive gunshots then die. If she had a gun, are you also suggesting he let her shoot the other girl?

[unblock]

66. four shots at close range by someone trained to aim well and at center mass?

yeah, people do survive gunshot wounds, but in that particular situation i would put it at easily more than 90% likely to result in her death.

and how likely was the possible knife wound to be fatal? many variables, but in general, knife wounds are under 4% lethal.

and that's assuming we know the whole situation. people threaten with knifes more than they actually use them to stab people (same with guns, for that matter). we don't know if she was actually going to use the knife at all or just was trying to scare the other person.

the cops couldn't have even known if the whole scene was a part of a movie for that matter. not a likely scenario, but still, possible.


my frustration is largely because when all you have is a hammer, the world is a nail. the police should have many more tools than just guns, and to an extent they do, but it seems so often that the gun is the go-to solution to everything.

intervening was certainly appropriate. but four shots with no warning and no real attempt to try anything else? i'm not liking that protocol.

[marie999]

170. If the person is armed, you shoot until they are down.

[unblock]

171. Yeah I know the party line

Make dead first, then reassess.

Maybe necessary in some situations.

I have a tough time believing that a warning shot or literally anything else is completely out of the question.

[marie999]

173. You don't give a warning shot to someone who is about to kill someone.

[unblock]

185. Probably about to stab someone. "Kill" is greatly overstating it

People overwhelmingly survive stab knife wounds, especially when there are first responders right there.

One can argue the shooting is justified based on an apparently imminent violent and potentially lethal attack, but it's really stretching it to say she was about to kill someone. Probably she was about to stab and then there's a small chance it would have killed the victim, but it's all statistically very unlikely.


And this ignored whether there's anything the police ought to be able to do to resolve such situations that doesn't involve more like a 90% chance of a death.

[marie999]

193. So the officer is supposed to take the chance that the victim will only be wounded?

[ExciteBike66]

115. She was murdering someone else...

[unblock]

118. Not likely.

Stabbing someone, maybe.

Could it have been stopped by a warning shot? Or even just, "armed police! Stop or I will fire"? Would any knife wound have been lethal, with police right there ready to transport and render aid? Could a riot shield or something less lethal been enough?

Morality and policy are easy when you reduce an entire situation to a single moment and single conclusion and decide that death is just fine as a solution.

I'd like to think we can do better.

[ExciteBike66]

125. LOL "not likely". Glad you are willing to take that risk...

but I wonder if the girl in pink was willing...

[unblock]

145. just going with the statistics.

the cop's 4 bullets were highly likely to result in a death.

the possible knife wound was highly likely not to result in a death. certainly it seems likely that a knife wound would have happened had police not intervened in some way (not that shooting was the only way), but it's pure speculation that the knife wound would have struck an artery or otherwise caused lethal damage.

all i'm saying is that it's very much overstating the point to say the police saved a life. they most assuredly took one, and they *may* have saved a life, though the most likely outcome would have been that no one would have died.


off topic, but can the police shoot people who refuse to wear masks? i mean, their actions could result in other people dying given that they're likely to be catching and spreading a potentially lethal disease....

[ExciteBike66]

164. My comment stands, glad you are willing to take such chances.

I would not be willing to do so.

"off topic, but can the police shoot people who refuse to wear masks? i mean, their actions could result in other people dying given that they're likely to be catching and spreading a potentially lethal disease...."

This is really really off topic, yes. I am sure you already know that cops can shoot to prevent "immanent" harm. Possible infection is probably not "immanent", unless maybe the cop knows that the unmasked person has Ebola or the Plague?

[Sympthsical]

49. And this is why we don't create The Narrative before knowing facts

God, did people get this story wrong in the first two hours. We ended up with a completely fabricated narrative. Twitter was aflame with, "Cop murders a 15 year-old child!" Twitter itself had this ridiculous banner up with the girl's mother.

This has to be the fastest I've ever seen body cam footage released. Because the story in the media was so desperately, heinously wrong.

"Cop saves black girl's life" became that he murdered a black girl.

Now we have three sets of people. (I'm leaving out the fourth set who waited for facts and evidence, because as awesome as they are, the Internet dislikes those).

One set - a sadly smaller one - retracted what they'd said when they realized they had it wrong.

One set - a much, much larger one - when real fucking quiet when they realized how wrong they were.

A last set - and more annoying - doubled down and just went to absolute town because admitting all the egg they had on their face is embarrassing. This is the dangerous set, people who need the Narrative because their egos are attached to it. They don't care how much damage is done. "The Narrative, you guys."

This cop is already having the worst day of his life. Nah, we can make it a lot worse. Because of the Narrative. Like a bad IASIP skit.

[MarineCombatEngineer]

54. +100. nt

[Devil Child]

154. +1 to a thoughtful and well written post n/t

[Johnny2X2X]

53. 1/2 second later and the girl in the pink was going to be stabbed in the chest/stomach

I want the officer pulling the trigger on something like this. He saved a life, unfortunately, the only way to do so was to take a life. Gives you an idea of how quickly police sometimes have to react and use deadly force. That girl in the pink is home with her family and not at the hospital or dead because the officer made the right choice in this instance.

[Watchfoxheadexplodes]

65. Won't see crump parade on this one

Justified

[Disaffected]

71. This thread is

taking armchair quarterbacking to a whole new level.

Maybe the cop should have shot the knife out of the attacker's hand - happy ending, only the knife was harmed.

[Sympthsical]

93. I sometimes wonder what Steven Seagal movie some people are living in n/t

[Wingus Dingus]

74. If someone is committing attempted murder, weapon in hand--

I don't have a problem with it. That's what the images seem to show--an out-of control fight that is escalating even in the presence of police. The police have mere seconds to react. If this was a white dude attempting to stab someone, I'd feel no different.

[RegularJam]

79. Justified and necessary do not mean the same thing.

When we talk about police shootings today the word justified has almost become synonymous with the thought of it being a necessity.

I agree with your op as worded. But in society that seems to be the end of the conversation. The conversation should then flow to 1) was it necessary(not the same as it being justified), and 2) are their policies or societal changes that can be put in place to stop things like this before they happen.

[PTWB]

80. Of course it's justified.

The problem is that we failed these kids long before we got to the point where the shooting victim created this situation. If our society had taken better care of her from the beginning, this entire situation could have been avoided.

[MarineCombatEngineer]

81. Best post yet.

[In It to Win It]

134. +1

[wnylib]

167. +1

[Jirel]

83. That's ridiculous.

1) No attempt at deescalation. Funny, that's done successfully in (white) domestic disputes and brawls all the time.

2) He actually endangered the woman he was trying to "save" (and other bystanders) far more than the knife would have done, by shooting in close quarters. Shooting MULTIPLE TIMES. A stab wound can often be treated without much incident unless the wielder gets lucky and hits a critical spot, which is harder to do than most people think.

3) Never heard of proportional use of force? Emptying a full clip into the chest of a little teen? Sounds like a taser would've been safer for everyone, assuming ANY force was needed.

She was not "trying to murder another girl." She had CALLED FOR HELP. Holding a knife in a self-defense situation is not "trying to murder another girl." Or if someone tried to harm you, and you grabbed a knife or a baseball bat to defend YOURSELF, should YOU be blown away as the real aggressor and danger to everyone around you?

[ExciteBike66]

126. "3) Never heard of proportional use of force? Emptying a full clip into the chest of a little teen?

So the cop should have taken out his knife, eh?

[Bettie]

85. They all carry tasers

why not use that? Why go immediately to lethal means?

Or was it another "Oops!"

[Happy Hoosier]

104. Question for you....

What if the taser didn't stop her? She was about to stab another girl. If she had done so despite being tased, I think the victim, if she had lived, would have legitimate reason to ask why the cop valued the life of the assailant over the life of the victim.

[Bettie]

112. So, what? She's superhuman?

somehow, she'd have shrugged off a taser? Doubtful.

Well, I guess lethal force is the only possible action now, since apparently, Black people are immune to tasers (I was not aware of this) and the only option is to kill them as quickly as possible.

[Happy Hoosier]

117. It does happen. Absolutely, and more than you would think.

It can happen for a number of reason. But there are MANY times when multiple uses of tasers are necessary to subdue someone (anyone, regardless of skin color) who is in the midst of a fight. A Taser is appropriate when the threat of immediate harm to another is not on the line. That was not this situation.

But I noticed you carefully avoided the question. What about the victim? Doesn't she (and she was also black) deserve protection?

[ExciteBike66]

128. Tasers work sometimes and don't work sometimes...

Bet the girl in pink wouldn't have wanted him to take that chance.

[Xoan]

86. If she was white?

[IamHappy]

87. The cop should have yelled "drop the knife" first, then shoot.

[ibegurpard]

110. Nonsense

While this might not be as clear-cut as the George Floyd video, blanket statements about the justification of police shootings are unacceptable.

[ExciteBike66]

130. I made no "blanket statement"

My post is about a single shooting.

[LexVegas]

129. I appears justified to me. I wasn't there, though. nt

[IcyPeas]

163. 4 shots to the chest though?

can't they shoot for the leg or the arm. why is it always shoot to kill? wouldn't one shot to the arm or leg have stopped her enough? why is it always shoot to kill?

[ExciteBike66]

165. It isn't easy to hit a limb

And anyway, the one arm that mattered had the victim behind it, and the cop could easily have hit the victim (the girl in pink) if he missed that arm.

No one is trained to shoot for arms and legs because it is difficult to hit smaller targets. In this case, the suspect was about to murder someone else, and shooting and missing a limb would just waste time.

[ARandomPerson]

169. Have people really never shot a gun?

Real life is not the movies. In fact, the movies nowadays, in an attempt at realism, don't show stuff like this.

ETA: Also, if someone is within seconds of plunging a knife into another person, shooting them in the leg (even if you could do it) probably won't change anything.

[IcyPeas]

181. I have never shot a gun.

[greenjar_01]

195. You should then forgive people if they don't find your opinion about how to operate

a firearm in a high stress situation very compelling.

[MarineCombatEngineer]

198. You are aware that a shot to the leg or arm can be fatal also.

if the Femoral Artery or Brachial Artery are hit, you will bleed out in seconds.

[beaglelover]

176. Agree.

[Stinky The Clown]

178. It is not possible for me to more strongly disagree with you than I do.

You are DEAD wrong.

Tell ya what. That cop is supposed to be trained at hand to hand fighting. And even if he were not, it is his FUCKING JOB to take risks on our behalf.

And if he can't d that, let him deliver pizzas or mow lawns or some other job that won't "endanger" him.

Teachers in elementary schools often deal with more danger than he faced.

[StarfishSaver]

179. Thank you for this

On the one hand people expect cops to be given extraordinary leeway because their job is so unique and special and beyond average human comprehension while on the other, they defend them when they screw up because "they're only human and I would have done the same thing in their position."

[DontBelieveEastisEas]

189. No time for hand to hand. Or even hand to hand with knife

OP Said, using them in a situation where one girl is trying to murder another girl seems justified to me.

I don't want to see the innocent woman/girl, (no time for ID check), killed by another person armed with a knife and in a rage.

The innocent person should be protected a hundred times more that the person threatening to commit a murder in the next moment of time.


using them in a situation where one girl is trying to murder another girl

How can that be a thing of which you would disagree at your strongest possible.

[greenjar_01]

196. I don't see how he could have closed that distance in time to prevent the stabbing

She was literally slashing and thrusting at the unarmed girl 10-15 feet away.

[Devil Child]

197. I don't think there are enough John Wicks available to staff your fantasy police departments n/t

[BannonsLiver]

199. I agree.

Though not surprised at some of the responses in the thread.some folks are just completely out of touch with reality.