scrubbedexpat099

One of mine did involve a weapon. But that was in the UK.

However I think you may be asking for more than is likely.

Octang Frye

I don't know if I would survive that. I could see myself making a subconscious gesture like pulling my pants up. Those commands were confusing and threatening.

lansbury

Doesn't make sense why they had him crawl towards them. Face down where he was with hands behind back, walk up and handcuff him.

md95065

What I hope that we are trying to decide is what to do about the fact that we are living in a country where a police officer can justify shooting an unarmed suspect, without the police officer having seen a weapon, with the statement “I believed 100 percent that he was reaching for a gun.” and have this explanation accepted by a jury and being both reasonable and sufficient to justify the officer shooting and killing the suspect.

scrubbedexpat099

Some sort of strict liability law, you injured/killed someone so you must take the consequences?

lansbury

Having now done two courses on the local police firearms simulator, waiting to see the gun will get you killed. If you don't like the law get it changed. A reasonable belief that your life is in danger allows the use of deadly force same here as in the UK. The jury who heard all the evidence made a decision. I wouldn't have waited to see the gun.

What should be being asked is why they had him crawl towards them.

steveq

And your training was with an AR-15 pre-aimed at the putative target, safeties off, and your finger on the trigger ?
I think that the rules of engagement are rather different.

zzrmark

There are always consequences if you kill someone, be it with a gun, car, bottle, etc. The officer who shot Shaver might be a right twat for all we know but I'll bet he wishes things had worked out differently at the time. The ones who don't feel remorse are those who will give us something to worry about...

lansbury

You clearly don't.

scrubbedexpat099

That would be outside of any criminal trial and I am sure is often the case.

zargof

Ultimately it comes down to the fact that this is a consequence of the proliferation of guns in the country. Like you say cops are taught to look for a gun anywhere, because there is a good chance there could be a gun as there are so many. It just becomes an acceptable loss, just like with mass shootings it's the price of freedom.

As for the crawling part, you would know better than me, but I guess there is some sort of tactical justification in that there a heightened risk of a cop walking over there, and they want to eliminate every possible risk they can. But when the number one priority for the police is for them to go home safe and is no longer to serve and protect, then it's a serious issue.

scrubbedexpat099

Not sure why go home and serve and protect conflict, who does a job and does not want to go home safe?

dc koop

I'm no expert on police procedures but I would have thought that the man should have been told to walk backwards towards the police officer with both hands in the air.

chawkins99

Update on this story:

zzrmark

Mebbe not Florida but I reckon they'd have upped sticks and moved here in just a few short years....