Like Tree2Likes

Man dies after being shot by policeman

Closed Thread
Page 31 of 36 FirstFirst ... 23 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 ... LastLast
  1. #301

    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Discovery Bay
    Posts
    5,016

    Doing his job???

    Quote Originally Posted by Skyhook:
    Why should the officer be punished for doing his job ?
    Not sure it is a cop's job to be taking out citizens, homeless or well-off. Gee, would hate to be in your part of the world if that's the job of the police.
    Posted via Mobile Device
    Last edited by Dreadnought; 09-09-2009 at 04:55 PM.

  2. #302

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    4,025
    Quote Originally Posted by timklip:
    exactly drumbrake...this whole thing has already begun to smell of a whitewashed PR exercise, to try and show that the gov't is really concerned, but in the end, nothing concrete will likely come of it...the question has been raised ad nauseum regarding why the cop responded alone, both here and in the papers...perhaps a guideline for future situations could be drafted (if it isn't already, and simply wasn't followed) regarding how these responses should be handled...at any rate, we all have our opinions about who was at fault; nothing has been raised in these 30 pages that has changed my mind, and I hope for the victim's sake that his family gets some closure when all this is finished
    There would be guidelines in the law as to when a police officer can use deadly force to restrain someone. In simple terms (Canada) a police officer can use deadly force (means just firing his gun into a suspect) if he has reason to believe his life or the lives of others are in danger (kill or be killed to put it simply).

    If he shoots unlawfully the officer can be charged. Of course if he is second guessed or considered a hip shooter who doesn't think, his career will plateau. He will find other officers not wanting to work with him and sometimes refusal by partners to work with him. No one else wants their career affected by a hot shot.

    Those who (and they do it all the time) say why didn't the officer just wound the guy have watched too many movies and know nothing about what a bullet does when it leaves the barrel of a gun. If it hits a bone such as a femur at the right angle bullets have been known to bounce and enter vital organs and kill the guy. An officer might say he meant to fire a warning shot in the air but it hit the guy instead but he cannot say he meant to just wound him as it the act of firing means he has resorted in the use of deadly force irrespective of the part of the body it hits.

    If he shoots and misses, innocent others could be there and killed. This certainly applies to where a bullet exits a body as it misses a bone or is not the hollow point variety that expand on impact maximizing the damage internally and minimizing the risk of exit. Old Canadian police ammunition for .38s always ran the risk of exiting and some friends of mine started using their revolvers and non-authorized hollow points as they feared killing an innocent as the harder ammunition exited the victim too easily.

    I know of only one policeman personally who said he was glad he killed a criminal. He fired lawfully but did not give the crook the benefit of the doubt that he'd drop his weapon. I have known others who said later that they had the trigger squeezed so hard as they feared the crook would not drop his gun on them that they didn't know they didn't fire. Guys who had to shoot were off the job for considerable periods and when they returned were fearful of it ever happening again as it is not a pleasant thought or experience for even the shooter.

    It must be hard too on the family of the person who gets shot.

    Inquests as noted are ancient events to ensure that the victim did not die at the hands of the king or queen or unlawfully by other means. It is a chance to ensure that there is not a conspiracy of silence in high places.

  3. #303

    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Siu Sai Wan
    Posts
    1,661
    Quote Originally Posted by Skyhook:
    Drumbrake,

    Why should the officer be punished for doing his job ?
    Like the officer who lined up cars in front of a street race and used them as a barrier to stop speeding cars? Yes, I believe there are times that officers should be punished for "doing their job", when they do it very wrong. If the investigation shows that procedures were not followed, I believe that there should be repercussions.

    I assume you are talking about Hong Kong police only and not the Chinese police, but we all know it was the journalists fault I suppose.
    HK journos accused of inciting Urumqi crowd - The Standard

    Three Hong Kong journalists beaten and detained by military police in Urumqi last Friday were accused of stirring up the crowd, a Xinjiang official said yesterday.

  4. #304

    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    1,419
    Quote Originally Posted by Football16:
    There ..................................places.
    I'm not talking about guidelines for firing his weapon...I'm talking about guidelines on responding to the call on his own (as I said, been discussed to death about 27 pages ago....) or calling for backup and dealing with the guy WITHOUT PULLING HIS GUN!

    So many have said "Why would he wait for backup In such a straightforward situation...." Well, clearly he couldn't handle things on his own (dropping his baton in a panic is the first clue...). I bet if this guy ever gets out from behind a desk again, he doesn't go Rambo the next time...
    Last edited by timklip; 09-09-2009 at 08:03 PM.

  5. #305

    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    4,905
    Quote Originally Posted by timklip:
    I'm not talking about guidelines for firing his weapon...I'm talking about guidelines on responding to the call on his own (as I said, been discussed to death about 27 pages ago....) or calling for backup and dealing with the guy WITHOUT PULLING HIS GUN!

    So many have said "Why would he wait for backup In such a straightforward situation...." Well, clearly he couldn't handle things on his own (dropping his baton in a panic is the first clue...). I bet if this guy ever gets out from behind a desk again, he doesn't go Rambo the next time...
    So easy to second guess someone's call after the fact because that one time something went wrong...

  6. #306

    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    1,419

    deleted as it's all been said already

    Last edited by timklip; 09-09-2009 at 10:35 PM.

  7. #307

    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    1,846

    Its odd that the policeman shot the guy in the head.
    All proper law enforcement officers are trained to shoot for the largest body mass - that is, the torso, not the head.
    If it wasn't just an accident that he got him in the head, this policeman's actions are not the norm.


  8. #308

    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Veggie, HK
    Posts
    1,032

    very strange !

    a few months ago,
    all newspapers reported that initially there was someone living in a building apartment saw a man urinated up in a hill through the window.

    So, it was this urine case for the police to go up the hill to investigate.

    Now the newspaper said the reason the person reported the man to the police is simply the man has dirty belongings around him, that will attract flies and mosquitoes, not good for nice environment, also wonder if the man was illegal immigrant, so he/she called the police.


  9. #309

    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Veggie, HK
    Posts
    1,032

    >> Its odd that the policeman shot the guy in the head.

    according to newspaper,

    for a man without weapons in hand, gun or knifes

    shoot one bullet is more than enough to scare a human or a lion, why two bullets ?

    plus the policeman asked for more policemen to come for assist only AFTER the gun shot, why not BEFORE ? if he was not skillful to handle the case.

    Last edited by Vrindavan; 10-09-2009 at 08:38 PM.

  10. #310

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    4,025
    Quote Originally Posted by timklip:
    I'm not talking about guidelines for firing his weapon...I'm talking about guidelines on responding to the call on his own (as I said, been discussed to death about 27 pages ago....) or calling for backup and dealing with the guy WITHOUT PULLING HIS GUN!

    So many have said "Why would he wait for backup In such a straightforward situation...." Well, clearly he couldn't handle things on his own (dropping his baton in a panic is the first clue...). I bet if this guy ever gets out from behind a desk again, he doesn't go Rambo the next time...
    To the moron who gave me the red blob for six paragraphs for the copper and one sentence for the family, read it again! I was speaking of the use of deadly force circumstances NOT this incident!

    As to guidelines for responding to calls, in most cases you see the HK police respond in numbers but there are always times when a police officer will have to act alone. In the real world a call like this might simply come out as a routine call that give no one any reason to state that he should wait.

    I am not justifying the shooting as I don't know the exact circumstances and yes there can be a lawful use of deadly force, yet the officer could be said to have created a problem for himself that back up could have prevented. But what gets lost at times is the other party's actions that create the shooting and attacking a police officer can lead to this exact same scenario. Okay, some people are not right in the head and they can create problems. Not sure of this here. I can tell you that I have seen 6 police needed to take down a crazed person on an adrenaline rush with a large stick. I ended up driving one of my colleagues to the hospital and he was the biggest of the group at over 6 feet and 200+ pounds. This crazed guy was very strong. Now that was back mid-70s and today that same guy would have got tasered and quickly with no fight.

Closed Thread
Page 31 of 36 FirstFirst ... 23 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 ... LastLast