Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 2
and then

When Is It Excessive Force Anymore?

96 posts in this topic

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/07/gil-collar-naked-shot-killed-by-alabama-officer_n_1946100.html

The title may seem extreme but I don't think so. Since when is it necessary for a (presumably) trained law enforcement officer to fire a shot into the CHEST of a kid who weigh less than 200 lbs who was demonstrably unarmed since he was NAKED? What happened to non lethal force? This student was almost certainly high on something and could have been taken down without killing him. Even if the officer had no other choice than to discharge his sidearm - what ever happened to shooting the legs?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Have you ever shot a pistol, and then?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MOBILE, Ala. — A police officer at the University of South Alabama has fatally shot a naked student whom authorities said repeatedly charged the officer.

There's your answer. Just because someone is naked, doesn't make them any less dangerous. ;)

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the kind was on something like PCP or bath salts then shooting him in the chest is the only thing that was going to stop him, also shooting him in the leg would be rather difficult. It is hard enough to hit a target with a pistol let alone a moving target that is charging at you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While I am totally against excessive force sometimes that is the only answer. Look what others have done on PCP and bath salts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the kind was on something like PCP or bath salts then shooting him in the chest is the only thing that was going to stop him, also shooting him in the leg would be rather difficult. It is hard enough to hit a target with a pistol let alone a moving target that is charging at you.

You find it difficult therefor it can't be done....even by someone trained to use a weapon? It says the officer retreated several times....so.... why didn't he retreat back into the building and call for backup? Why is shooting someone in the chest always the first resort? Did the officer panic? If so, should he even be an officer?

There are non-lethal means to take someone down if necessary.....

I would like to see the campus video.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You find it difficult therefor it can't be done....even by someone trained to use a weapon? It says the officer retreated several times....so.... why didn't he retreat back into the building and call for backup? Why is shooting someone in the chest always the first resort? Did the officer panic? If so, should he even be an officer?

There are non-lethal means to take someone down if necessary.....

I would like to see the campus video.

Well obviously it wasnt his first choice, since his first choice was to try and defuse the situation. However apparently the student kept charging the officer.

~Thanato

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You find it difficult therefor it can't be done....even by someone trained to use a weapon? It says the officer retreated several times....so.... why didn't he retreat back into the building and call for backup? Why is shooting someone in the chest always the first resort? Did the officer panic? If so, should he even be an officer?

There are non-lethal means to take someone down if necessary.....

I would like to see the campus video.

Shooting a handgun accurately is extremely difficult even for skilled marksman, due to the short barrel length the slightest twitch can affect your aim greatly. Once you add in the other factors such as a moving target, adrenaline, potentially the shooter was moving, with all those factors added in hitting the leg would be extremely difficult for anyone and it is only logical to aim for a larger area that relatively doesn't move much. It also seems you are putting far to much credit into the handgun training officers retrieve, shooting a stationary cutout of a person is far different then shooting someone charging at you, even then they are trained to shoot center mass, not at legs or arms, which is exactly what this officer did.

The articles mentions how the officer attempted retreating multiple times and it is possible that retreating back into the building was not an option.

In this case shooting him was the best option available at the time. The person was moving around erratically, naked, and not listening or responding to the officer, all of which are indicators of PCP use. I am not sure of your knowledge of drugs but with PCP unless you got multiple people to help restrain a person on PCP there is little to nothing you can do to stop them short of shooting them. It is also possible that he was on bath salts instead since his characteristics could also fall under using bath salts instead.

I highly doubt the officer panicked since he first tried disarming the situation then did what he was trained to do.

What non lethal means are you suggesting be used, if he was on bath salts or PCP then restraining him alone would be highly dangerous, taseing may or may not have stopped him, pepper spray would of had little affect. If he wasn't on drugs then why didn't he listen to the police officer or at least stop charging him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have had quite a bit of handgun practice - none formal. I realize the difficulty. I even factored in the possibility of missing and unintentionally striking a bystander. This young man was NAKED. He was holding no weapon. It's easy enough to discount that pepper spray or tazing might not work but if he had been your child I think you might have wanted someone to at least try. What of the training of this "force"? If ever there was a time for non lethal action - this was it. This is my hometown and I find it sickening that a life was lost just because a young person was stupid enough to try a drug (unconfirmed supposition on my part) and he had an unexpected reaction to it. If he had been armed - even with a knife - then I'd say no problem. This young man was shot dead because of the lack of training of the "officer" and I expect some local attorney's are going to make his family very comfortable in the next couple of years. There is NO excuse for executing an unarmed person whether they are violently high or not. Non lethal means exist and in a campus setting should be the first option by training.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

did the officer have a tazer? did the officer feel he was a physical risk? did the officer call for back up and during that time the weapon was discharged due to the risk posed?

Some one who is acting in a threatening way does not need a weapon. if the are on mind altering drugs they are the weapon.

Edited by Thanato

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't they teach hand to hand techniques to police?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't they teach hand to hand techniques to police?

This is my main beef....it seems to me that if non lethal force can ever be used then THIS was such a situation. Suspect was NAKED and had no weapons. A campus police officer should absolutely have non lethal means at hand to subdue a suspect.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Our government does not torture, and it does not use excessive force. It does not do anything wrong. The police are ONLY serving and protecting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I always wonder about these types of discussions in that I have a strong feeling that the same folks talking about non-lethal options would be the some ones screaming if the kid had been tazered.

As far as the kid being naked, I seem to recall that the "face eater" down in Miami was naked and took multiple rounds before he stopped eating the other guy.

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Speaking as some one in the law enforcement/security arena... I can tell you that we are not trained to shoot for limbs for various and some obvious reasons... but the main reason it comes down to these days would be Law Suit. An officer disfiguring / maiming a suspect would be pretty much a legal blood bath for the officer and his department. Millions of dollars would end up being paid out to the suspect and his family because of damages. Beyond that, any training you take for the military, police force, Armed Security... you are trained to fire at center mass. It is supposed to be understood that if you have to discharge that weapon you must feel that you or others safety/life are in danger.

PCP and Bathsalts are hella drugs... in some cases they essentially turn you into the incredible hulk. Ive seen instances where the suspect was shot multiple times, or tased multiple times to accomplish little to nothing... and where up to 6 officers were unable to subdue the suspect. Its a dangerous situation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't they teach hand to hand techniques to police?

Cause I'd totally go toe to toe with a nude man who may be high out of his mind and let him get within range to bite, scratch or spit in my face. Good thing cops are immune to any sexually transmitted diseases or any disease for that matter, eh?

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Speaking as some one in the law enforcement/security arena... I can tell you that we are not trained to shoot for limbs for various and some obvious reasons... but the main reason it comes down to these days would be Law Suit. An officer disfiguring / maiming a suspect would be pretty much a legal blood bath for the officer and his department. Millions of dollars would end up being paid out to the suspect and his family because of damages. Beyond that, any training you take for the military, police force, Armed Security... you are trained to fire at center mass. It is supposed to be understood that if you have to discharge that weapon you must feel that you or others safety/life are in danger.

PCP and Bathsalts are hella drugs... in some cases they essentially turn you into the incredible hulk. Ive seen instances where the suspect was shot multiple times, or tased multiple times to accomplish little to nothing... and where up to 6 officers were unable to subdue the suspect. Its a dangerous situation.

So, you're afraid of a lawsuit for maiming someone so the obvious solution is to shoot to kill.......yeah, makes perfect sense....

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Regarding the question about pepper spray or Tasers - I know of SEVEN law enforcement jurisdictions here in Alabama that got rid of both of those tools because of possible lawsuits - the students getting sprayed in the Occupy debacle in NY, and several people dying from complications after being Tased.

They went back to the tried and true - if an officer is in fear for their life - or to prevent the possible loss of life of another - they pull their pistols. A pistol is considered DEADLY FORCE every time you shoot it - there are no "wounding shots", so no aiming at arms or legs. They aim center-mass and after repeated warnings about what's to come, they fire - and they fire to stop whatever aggressive behavior they are encountering. If it takes one shot, then it takes one shot. If it takes numerous shots, then it took numerous shots - it doesn't matter!

Wait for the toxicology reports to come out about this kid - and you will find that he was either REALLY drunk, stoned - or both.

Then, perhaps we can have some apologies from those jumping on the, "Cops are wrong," bandwagon. I won't hold my breath, though.

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

did the officer have a tazer? did the officer feel he was a physical risk? did the officer call for back up and during that time the weapon was discharged due to the risk posed?

Some one who is acting in a threatening way does not need a weapon. if the are on mind altering drugs they are the weapon.

Someone who is naked, unarmed and high should also not be a threat for a trained, armed and sober police officer.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Someone who is naked, unarmed and high should also not be a threat for a trained, armed and sober police officer.

Why is that? This coming from your numerous years employed as an LEO conducting felony arrests on violent suspects?

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why so much sympathy for the lunatic who repeatedly charged an armed man and paid the price for his lunacy?

Would the reaction be the same if this man was on top of your child? Or spouse? Or elderly parent/grandparent?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, you're afraid of a lawsuit for maiming someone so the obvious solution is to shoot to kill.......yeah, makes perfect sense....

Or you could have paid attention to the whole post instead of picking your own lil tid bit out of it to comment on and yet still bring nothing useful to the conversation. Congrats on that. And yes, shoot to kill is always the best option when confronted with an attacker who would love nothing more than to dispose of you, even if its with his bare hands. Why would I, as an officer, shoot you in the leg to stop you (which btw, some one on PCP probably wouldnt even notice) only to have you go to the hospital, get patched up, then go to jail just so you can turn around and sue me for damages... Ruining MY life because you were a drug addict who decided to be in public threatening people....

On another note, Technically its not "Shoot to Kill" its Shoot until the threat stops. Someone on PCP more than likely isnt gonna stop because you shot them in the arm or leg, and some may not even stop with a lung shot... there are multiple officer training sessions that use various videos of these incidents for training purposes. as I stated in the previous post... ive seen them pepper sprayed and tased with little to no effect.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why so much sympathy for the lunatic who repeatedly charged an armed man and paid the price for his lunacy?

Would the reaction be the same if this man was on top of your child? Or spouse? Or elderly parent/grandparent?

Maybe because he was a human being! Without a toxicology report we don't know what or if he was on anything. Again, why shoot to kill? This is just another story as to why law enforcement is dealing with a lot of scrutiny these days. Cops that use excessive force are being videotaped all of the time and many cops are getting fired for it. If the campus video proves that this was his only option then so be it, but I haven't seen it and I don't know if the video has even been released to the public....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Or you could have paid attention to the whole post instead of picking your own lil tid bit out of it to comment on and yet still bring nothing useful to the conversation. Congrats on that. And yes, shoot to kill is always the best option when confronted with an attacker who would love nothing more than to dispose of you, even if its with his bare hands. Why would I, as an officer, shoot you in the leg to stop you (which btw, some one on PCP probably wouldnt even notice) only to have you go to the hospital, get patched up, then go to jail just so you can turn around and sue me for damages... Ruining MY life because you were a drug addict who decided to be in public threatening people....

On another note, Technically its not "Shoot to Kill" its Shoot until the threat stops. Someone on PCP more than likely isnt gonna stop because you shot them in the arm or leg, and some may not even stop with a lung shot... there are multiple officer training sessions that use various videos of these incidents for training purposes. as I stated in the previous post... ive seen them pepper sprayed and tased with little to no effect.

I did pay attention to your whole post! Have you seen a toxicology report yet? I didn't think so, so you're making some assumptions here.

I believe police officers are ill-trained if excessive force is used. If I had to fire my weapon, I personally would have fired a warning shot first, then tried for a leg shot, then the chest as a last resort. Again, I would like to see the campus security video.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seems the student was shoot, got up and charged the officer again, before getting shoot again. I'm guessing he was on some powerful drugs to do that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 2

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.