http://edition.cnn.com/2015/04/14/us/arizona-police-run-over-suspect/

Apparently the man was suicidal..


Serious question for any police on here. What is the correct procedure to follow if a person has a gun and is walking away from you?

Quoting mad99 (Thread starter): What is the correct procedure to follow if a person has a gun and is walking away from you?

Plough then down in you'r cruiser.... that's what and that should stop e"m.... as well as the cruiser...

just tax payer $$$$$

Nothing to worry about here

Quoting TheCommodore (Reply 1): Plough then down in you'r cruiser

One option. But seriously, what do you do? He's got a gun and he's walking away. How do you stop him?

1st comment, "he stole the rifle from Wal Mart" When will it dawn on the USA that selling firearms along side groceries and clothing is a bad idea ?

2nd comment. The police driver is a danger to himself as much as to the thief, Obviously as a red mist descended in front of him, he failed to notice that he would end up running into a brick wall once he had run the man over.

Is it not about time that the USA had a national standard of physchometic testing and continual assessment for law officers ?

Quoting Bongodog1964 (Reply 4): Is it not about time that the USA had a national standard of physchometic testing and continual assessment for law officers ?

How about means of upholding justice when it comes to law enforcement? And not let their little "band of brothers" fraternity party continue, shielding them from the law?

In most countries (now primarely speaking of the German situation), a normal armed citizen (e.g. a target shooter, a hunter or an armed security guard) only has the right to use a weapon in direct selfdefence or in the defence of others from death or grave bodily harm. As soon as the threat is gone (e.g. the perpetrator running away) the defence has to stop, or it will be considered taking the law into one's own hands.
Also the violent response has to be matched to the agression. E.g. I would not be allowed to gun down a skinny teenager who gives me a lip or even thinks that he can hit me (e.g. in a situation where I can easily overpower him and hold him down), but if he threatens me with a knife or a gun, I can use deadly force, but, again, I have to stop as soon as the threat is over. E.g. I shot the perp in the chest (center of mass) and he collapsed while dropping his weapon, I'm not allowed to finish him off by putting a bullet into his head from close distance.

Police on the other hand have a much more far reaching authority, as they represent the state and the law. they can use physical force to enforce laws and to take suspects to court. This can range from "come along grips" through baton and chemical mace to firearms. Of course, again the response has to be proportional to the threat and the tactical situation. E.g. here you would rarely see police doing high speed pursuits, as it is considered to be too dangerous for third parties.
Instead they would try to identify the person and get him later, when he doesn't suspect it, or they would radio in for assistance. Also police over here rarely work alone, usually they come in pairs, with one guarding the other's back.

Back to the topic: Let's say police in Germany will see somebody with a firearm in his hands. Even if the person has turned away, they can order him to drop it, and if he doesn't comply, they can use potentially deadly force.

Jan

If he poses a threat to a member of the public, an officer or himself, he is going down. Walking around with a rifle out, having already fired a shot into the air, having stolen the rifle....He is lucky to be alive.

Quoting Bongodog1964 (Reply 4): When will it dawn on the USA that selling firearms along side groceries and clothing is a bad idea ?

Walmart still has to comply with all federal regulations when it comes to gun sales, also they do not sell high powered weapons, frankly my pistol has more stopping power than that rifle, though the rifle will be more accurate at a distance.

Quoting jetwet1 (Reply 8): Quoting Bongodog1964 (Reply 4): When will it dawn on the USA that selling firearms along side groceries and clothing is a bad idea ? Walmart still has to comply with all federal regulations when it comes to gun sales, also they do not sell high powered weapons, frankly my pistol has more stopping power than that rifle, though the rifle will be more accurate at a distance.

Of course Wal Mart will have to comply with all federal regulations, in all likelihood they will adhere to them more rigourously than some specialised gun shops, the problem however is that it gives the perception that a gun is an everyday item bought alongside a bottle of coke and chocolate bar. perhaps this is to an extent true of the USA, but not of the rest of the World

I stood in the pub the other week and showed some photos on my phone of ammunition for sale in Wal Mart. This is so contrary to what goes on in Europe that some of my fellow drinkers couldn't believe what they were seeing.

Back to the original matter, Police here are trained to avoid collisions if at all possible, we see lots of clips however of US police using their cars to force people off the road, , running an armed man down appears to fit in with this policy.

Quoting jetwet1 (Reply 8): also they do not sell high powered weapons, frankly my pistol has more stopping power than that rifle,

Yes, they do. What pistol do you have that is more powerful than a 30-30?

Quoting Bongodog1964 (Reply 10): I stood in the pub the other week and showed some photos on my phone of ammunition for sale in Wal Mart. This is so contrary to what goes on in Europe that some of my fellow drinkers couldn't believe what they were seeing.

I totally understand, I grew up in the New Forest, everyone and their brother had a shotgun, no pistols or rifles though, when friends come over the first place they want to visit is one of the gun ranges so they can fire off a machine gun, I really should video it as some of them are very funny, they have watched way to many movies.

But as you say, back to the original topic

Quoting Bongodog1964 (Reply 10): Back to the original matter, Police here are trained to avoid collisions if at all possible, we see lots of clips however of US police using their cars to force people off the road, , running an armed man down appears to fit in with this policy.

They are doing a pit maneuver, basically pushing on the rear quarter panel to force the car to spin, it beats the heck out of ramming it and lets face facts, 99.999999% of the idiots that run from the police here, really are not that concerned with the outcome, if they happen to hit some poor person driving to the store, oh well.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c0IXTfWdFmk

Quoting johns624 (Reply 11): Yes, they do. What pistol do you have that is more powerful than a 30-30?

Desert Eagle.....

Gluck 17



But your right, around here the biggest thing Walmart sells is a .22, I just looked online and yeah, they do have some heavy stuff.

Quoting Bongodog1964 (Reply 10): I stood in the pub the other week and showed some photos on my phone of ammunition for sale in Wal Mart. This is so contrary to what goes on in Europe that some of my fellow drinkers couldn't believe what they were seeing.

I buy ammunition for my shotgun at Decathlon some times.

If, say, carrefour or tesco really wanted to carry guns and ammunition at their stores they surely would be able to.

It's a matter of perception, not regulations.

Quoting jetwet1 (Reply 12): Desert Eagle..... Gluck 17

What caliber Desert Eagle? Has it broken yet or hasn't it been shot 100 times yet?  
The Glock 17 has capacity but isn't that powerful/.

Quoting Bongodog1964 (Reply 4): 1st comment, "he stole the rifle from Wal Mart" When will it dawn on the USA that selling firearms along side groceries and clothing is a bad idea ? 2nd comment. The police driver is a danger to himself as much as to the thief, Obviously as a red mist descended in front of him, he failed to notice that he would end up running into a brick wall once he had run the man over. Is it not about time that the USA had a national standard of physchometic testing and continual assessment for law officers ?

Walmart was selling guns long before it sold groceries. Groceries are a relatively new thing. They began like a lower scale Sears.

Red mist? you watch too many movies.

The injuries were not fatal. Normal odds say a gun wielding nut job gets his head blown off.

Moving on.

[Edited 2015-04-15 06:05:02]

Quoting Bongodog1964 (Reply 4): 1st comment, "he stole the rifle from Wal Mart" When will it dawn on the USA that selling firearms along side groceries and clothing is a bad idea ?

About the same time you Euro's stop telling us how to change our gun laws, which will be never. So shove off.

Quoting jetwet1 (Reply 8): Walmart still has to comply with all federal regulations when it comes to gun sales, also they do not sell high powered weapons, frankly my pistol has more stopping power than that rifle, though the rifle will be more accurate at a distance.

Sure they do, I looked at a bunch of AR15's at walmart once, just decided I could build one cheaper than buying what they offered at the time. It's a shame they don't sell handguns, but you can't have it all.

-DiamondFlyer

Quoting jetwet1 (Reply 11): Quoting Bongodog1964 (Reply 10): Back to the original matter, Police here are trained to avoid collisions if at all possible, we see lots of clips however of US police using their cars to force people off the road, , running an armed man down appears to fit in with this policy. They are doing a pit maneuver, basically pushing on the rear quarter panel to force the car to spin, it beats the heck out of ramming it and lets face facts, 99.999999% of the idiots that run from the police here, really are not that concerned with the outcome, if they happen to hit some poor person driving to the store, oh well. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c0IXTfWdFmk

Again, I think the difference between European andAmerican police is that the american police seems to think that we need to get the perp RIGHT NOW, damn the consequences, or we will be though of as weak and sissies, while European police will think, wait, my friend, we WILL GET YOU, but on OUR terms. This means letting the perp "escape" from a situation, where innocents might be endangered, but then get him, e.g. with the help of the GSG 9 (in Germany). I have heard of hardcore mobsters wetting their pants when they suddenly get a 4 am visit by the GSG 9, with them blowing in the door, in full tactical gear. And they are not wannabe cops, showing off their gear, but train every day.

Jan

[Edited 2015-04-15 10:30:40]

Quoting jetwet1 (Reply 8): Walmart still has to comply with all federal regulations when it comes to gun sales

Which means there can be straw purchasers. People who have no criminal past who can purchase large numbers of weapons and ammo and sell to those who can not pass a back ground check. Or, those people who can not pass a back ground check can simply go to a gun show. Because America, that's why!

Quoting seb146 (Reply 17): Which means there can be straw purchasers. People who have no criminal past who can purchase large numbers of weapons and ammo and sell to those who can not pass a back ground check. Or, those people who can not pass a back ground check can simply go to a gun show. Because America, that's why!

A straw purchase is illegal period, so why you think Walmart is exclusive to this, I have no idea. If people can't pass a background check, they can't own a gun period. So, why don't we enforce the laws on the books and go after people who are known to be possessing firearms illegal? Instead, you'd rather right more, cumbersome, unenforceable under the current landscape laws, that will do nothing, other than make you lefties feel better.

You do understand that anyone can buy ammo, correct? There is no background check for ammo

-DiamondFlyer

I don't know about this... I read the article but I'd have to analyze it in detail more. I think if it came down to it, hitting an armed suspect with your patrol car may be the only thing to do (or at least the safest) but it definitely shouldn't be the go to.

This case is much different than the ones we have seen... this guy WAS armed. He showed recklessness by firing off a round. It would be very easy for an officer to argue he/she thought the armed suspect was a threat to others.

On the other hand, police should try and deescalate things and solve things nonviolently, if able. That is their job. Again, I'd just have to look into the details more. But bottom line, walking away or not, this guy could have been a deadly threat to others if not stopped so deadly force was probably acceptable

Quoting Bongodog1964 (Reply 4): Obviously as a red mist descended in front of him

Red mist? As in blood? Uh, that's not how bodies/physics works, not even close

Edit: Didn't realize there was a movie. Hmm... not sure how I feel about this whole situation... but definitely no red mist lol

[Edited 2015-04-15 14:03:39]

Quoting Bongodog1964 (Reply 4): 2nd comment. The police driver is a danger to himself as much as to the thief, Obviously as a red mist descended in front of him, he failed to notice that he would end up running into a brick wall once he had run the man over.

I would think a police officer who puts public safety above his own sense of self-preservation to be quite honourable.

At this point, should I mention that VSPO's in Alaska only got the right to carry a firearm this year.

And the Police Department of Hooper Bay, Alaska is unarmed period.

Quoting WestJet747 (Reply 20): I would think a police officer who puts public safety above his own sense of self-preservation to be quite honourable.

Yet the likelihood of him thinking that way to "sacrifice" himself is probably zero. There was one thing on his mind, mowing him down with whatever force or means necessary.

Quoting elite (Reply 22): Yet the likelihood of him thinking that way to "sacrifice" himself is probably zero. There was one thing on his mind, mowing him down with whatever force or means necessary.

Would you rather that he had gotten into a gunfight with the man?

Quoting johns624 (Reply 23): Would you rather that he had gotten into a gunfight with the man?

What would John Wayne have done?

Quoting elite (Reply 22): Yet the likelihood of him thinking that way to "sacrifice" himself is probably zero. There was one thing on his mind, mowing him down with whatever force or means necessary.

Teach me your mind-reading ways, kind sir.

Quoting johns624 (Reply 23): Would you rather that he had gotten into a gunfight with the man?

I would have preferred he stopped the man with a taser or something, but again I understand the choice the officer had to make and that it might not be possible. Unlike some of the other cop videos that have been surfacing, this one isn't on the same level. It's just always shocking to see someone get run over intentionally, despite the circumstances.

Quoting WestJet747 (Reply 25): Teach me your mind-reading ways, kind sir.

Just don't think its likely that the cop knew he was going to hit the wall, thought about the damage it would cause himself, made a decision to take that risk and decided to run the guy over. He probably just wanted to run the guy down to stop him. Just my humble guess  

Quoting elite (Reply 26): I would have preferred he stopped the man with a taser or something, but again I understand the choice the officer had to make and that it might not be possible.

Apparently though, the other officers in the police cars shown in the video, didn't think along the same lines as the officer speeding in a dangerous manner towards the victim did, in fact, he came right out of nowhere at an incredible rate of speed, while the other cops cars had stopped and were accessing the situation while calling out warning to other approaching cop cars responding.

I think this cop was reckless in his actions. not only did ha cause the gunman harm, but he also put himself and others at substantial risk with the actions he didcided to take, as well as damaging a police car in a big way.

Quoting Bongodog1964 (Reply 9): This is so contrary to what goes on in Europe

Why do Europeans think we care what goes on in Europe?

Perhaps threads relating to gun laws should be marked US posters only.

Incidentally not sure why Taser not used.

Also if he was faced away from you, could Cop 1 go forward with his night stick to take the man down, with Cop 2 covering him, in case the guy turned round and threatened Cop 1.

Also not clear if either cop challenged the man.

Quoting elite (Reply 26): I would have preferred he stopped the man with a taser or something

Quoting bennett123 (Reply 29): Incidentally not sure why Taser not used.

Because you have to get within 10-15 feet of a man with a gun that can perforate your ballistic vest?

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 19): Quoting Bongodog1964 (Reply 4): Obviously as a red mist descended in front of him Red mist? As in blood? Uh, that's not how bodies/physics works, not even close

Please find below the definition of the phrase, I think it sums the situation up well


A feeling of extreme competitiveness or anger that temporarily clouds one's judgment.
When that guy cut me off, the red mist washed over and all I could think about was catching him.

Quoting mham001 (Reply 28): Quoting Bongodog1964 (Reply 9): This is so contrary to what goes on in Europe Why do Europeans think we care what goes on in Europe?

We know you don't but feel a duty to point out how a civilised society operates   

Quoting Bongodog1964 (Reply 31): We know you don't but feel a duty to point out how a civilised society operates

You don't have to remind us. We remember the two World Wars...

The questions I have after having watched the video are:
1.What are the standard police procedures for a man firing into the air?
2.How (and or) will they change as a result of this incident?
3.Will the officer be asked to justify his actions?
4.What was the risk posed to the public by the person with the gun?
5.What was the risk posed to the public by the officers actions?
6.If the officer had failed to incapacitate the person with the gunwith his actions what would have been the perceived outcome?
7. Were other officers aware of what that officer was going to do?
8.What other reasonable courses of action could the officer or force in general could have been taken in these circumstances?

Fred

Quoting TheCommodore (Reply 27): Apparently though, the other officers in the police cars shown in the video, didn't think along the same lines as the officer speeding in a dangerous manner towards the victim did, in fact, he came right out of nowhere at an incredible rate of speed, while the other cops cars had stopped and were accessing the situation while calling out warning to other approaching cop cars responding. I think this cop was reckless in his actions. not only did ha cause the gunman harm, but he also put himself and others at substantial risk with the actions he didcided to take, as well as damaging a police car in a big way.

No by running him down he actually saved his life. At some point there would have been a gun battle that would have put the perp, the police and the public at risk. Running him down was the best option at the time. If there was a gun battle on the street, he'd most likely would have been shot dead. The man has a few broken bones, but he's alive. We have the luxury of hindsight, the police officer didn't at the time. He was concerned that the man would shoot someone so he made a split second decision that saved everyone a lot of grief.

Quoting daedaeg (Reply 34): No by running him down he actually saved his life. At some point there would have been a gun battle that would have put the perp, the police and the public at risk. Running him down was the best option at the time. If there was a gun battle on the street, he'd most likely would have been shot dead. The man has a few broken bones, but he's alive. We have the luxury of hindsight, the police officer didn't at the time. He was concerned that the man would shoot someone so he made a split second decision that saved everyone a lot of grief.

Another option would have been to trail the perp, report his position and get re-inforcements in ASAP, possibly cops trained in tackling armed criminals, e.g. a trained SWAT team. Then rumble him by outnumbering him.
Police operations are not supposed to be fair sports contests, and the average copper is not a skilled gunfighter.
Unless they are shooting as a hobby, they'll only get minimum time on the ranges, unlike specialist anti-terror and hostage rescue teams, who also often have more resources.

Jan

Quoting daedaeg (Reply 34): so he made a split second decision

This scenario isn't difficult to predict and so should have had a standard procedure to go with it, there should have been very little split second decisions to be made other than "which procedure do I follow?" of course adapting that to the specifics of the scenario are required but the point remains.

Fred

Quoting md11engineer (Reply 35): Another option would have been to trail the perp, report his position and get re-inforcements in ASAP, possibly cops trained in tackling armed criminals, e.g. a trained SWAT team. Then rumble him by outnumbering him. Police operations are not supposed to be fair sports contests, and the average copper is not a skilled gunfighter. Unless they are shooting as a hobby, they'll only get minimum time on the ranges, unlike specialist anti-terror and hostage rescue teams, who also often have more resources.

How much time would be required for setting up those reinforcements? How many opportunities or situations could arise during that intervening time period where this man with a stolen, loaded gun could make use of that weapon? I do not wish to be disrespectful as your posts are well thought out and intelligent. With what was occurring something bad was going to happen to someone no matter what decision was taken. At least in this case, the actions only resulted in harm to the perp who accepted that risk when he chose to commit the crime.

Quoting Flaps (Reply 37): How much time would be required for setting up those reinforcements? How many opportunities or situations could arise during that intervening time period where this man with a stolen, loaded gun could make use of that weapon? I do not wish to be disrespectful as your posts are well thought out and intelligent. With what was occurring something bad was going to happen to someone no matter what decision was taken. At least in this case, the actions only resulted in harm to the perp who accepted that risk when he chose to commit the crime.

As I can only talk about Germany, in a city it can be as fast as 10 minutes, in the countryside longer.
I don't care about the perp, but I'm considering the danger to innocent bystanders.
As for handling a gun in front of cops, a few years ago a guy pulled a gun in Cologne and stood in front of a whole convoy of police vans and busses coming back from a crowd control operation (political protest march with potential of riots, so think about maybe 200 cops in riot gear). When he did not drop the gun (which later turned out to be a realistic imitation) after being ordered to do so, the cops opened fire. It also turned out that he was suicidical and wanted to commit suicide by cop.

Jan

[Edited 2015-04-16 13:26:51]

The officer, Miguel Marquez, had previously been employed by the NYPD.

He had to "leave" in 2006, after he allegedly chocked a tourist in downtown Manhattan, along with pointing a gun at him and handcuffing him in front of his wife and child. Lawsuit followed, case was settled, he "left".

His nickname, which he encourages and likes to go by, is "Robocop."

Quoting mham001 (Reply 28): Why do Europeans think we care what goes on in Europe?

I care. Why not learn from what they do right and throw out what they do wrong? Their gun violence is WAY lower and in many countries, their cops kill only a handful of people a year. There are obviously differences between the US and Europe but there are things we can learn instead of burying our heads in the sand and ignoring them

Quoting Bongodog1964 (Reply 31): Please find below the definition of the phrase, I think it sums the situation up well

Ha ok, I've just seen so many people on this board take movies/Hollywood so seriously I assumed you thought blood was spraying everywhere when the guy got hit. My apologies

Quoting mham001 (Reply 28): Why do Europeans think we care what goes on in Europe?

Not sure that they do really care....much.

Although it is a sad form of slow motion comedy to sit back and watch, the ridiculous pro gun arguments, back and forth.

Proper gun laws and gun control, has worked very successfully in many countries around the world, without the world ending, or governments overthrowing their citizens, or people rioting in the streets.

Pity the US can't learn from that, and follow suit.

Anyway, its your bed and you made it, so sleep in it !

Quoting bennett123 (Reply 29): Perhaps threads relating to gun laws should be marked US posters only.

I agree.

Any outside talk is meet with shrill's of vitriolic ......"mind your own business" posts.

Sad, that many Americans can't or won't entertain anyone else having an opinion on this topic

Quoting AR385 (Reply 39): His nickname, which he encourages and likes to go by, is "Robocop."

Well there you go.

I suspect there are many many more in US police depts across the country.

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 40): I care. Why not learn from what they do right and throw out what they do wrong? Their gun violence is WAY lower and in many countries, their cops kill only a handful of people a year. There are obviously differences between the US and Europe but there are things we can learn instead of burying our heads in the sand and ignoring them

Unfortunately you seem to be in the minority......well at lest on here that is...a.net

Get back in your box and shut up !         

You will be labeled unpatriotic next         

Quoting daedaeg (Reply 34): No by running him down he actually saved his life. At some point there would have been a gun battle that would have put the perp, the police and the public at risk. Running him down was the best option at the time. If there was a gun battle on the street, he'd most likely would have been shot dead. The man has a few broken bones, but he's alive. We have the luxury of hindsight, the police officer didn't at the time. He was concerned that the man would shoot someone so he made a split second decision that saved everyone a lot of grief.

How do you know at some point there would have been a gun battle? He had a gun, yes, but didn't show any signs of wanting to engage in a gun battle.