SWAT are not amateurs you have to go through 7 years police duty about 6 on patrol duty and then a rigourous retraining program so noot amateurs... maybe the government *duh dun dah*Haakong said:
i kid but serousl
Poll: Ex-marine shot at 70 times hit atleast 60 bleeds out because SWAT team wouldn't let paramedic's in
- Thread starter Matt Oliver
- Start date
i kid but serousl
This seems fishy, aren't law enforcement supposed to yell "lay down you weapons or we will engage!" or something and then flash-bang you and cuff you not shoot first and try to hide the info. This is just terrible.
Welcome!Bethany Vreeland said:
This is tragic. I understand why they fired at him, they entered a house they thought to be trafficking drugs and they run into a guy with an assault rifle at the end of the hall, I think I'd open fire too, regardless of what he starts shouting. It's a bad case of wrong place and...well not wrong time, just wrong place. However, not letting him get medical attention or at least see his family was totally uncalled for, once they realized it was not a drug trafficking house, they should have done whatever they could to fix that.
So just because the guy was had a gun it means it was just a mix up right? Fuck no he had the sense enough to try and check to see who it was the police shot him on sight. If our soldiers have to be trained not to fire in less engaged then why aren't the police? I mean it makes even more sense for the police not go into any situation firing at anything they see. To top it all off it was because of weed. Hell I thought that was decriminalized by now.
Okay, third time that intro gets used means creativity is bankrupt and we need a knew way to get the ball rolling. I, for example, opened with that because the initial statement was one of smug superiority. Repeating it to me just feels like a baseball bat to the face. And not in a good way.Smagmuck_ said:
Anyway.
Yes, I know that they were trained very thoroughly to go legally murder. I know. I understand how police work. I shockingly live in the US and have been exposed to police and how they are trained beyond movies. It's pretty surprising, I know.
What bothers me is how frantically you want to defend their actions.
They did not have solid proof to back up their warrant, seeing as how they were wrong about each house that they busted into to try and find pot. Which is sadly comical when you think about it, being so wrong about a drug that kids tend to use in college. I wonder if you would still defend them if they flew into a college dorm and nuked a couple kids for being stoned and holding an X-acto knife in a really threatening manner.
In the video, they kick in the door and idly stand about for a few seconds, then decide to just wildly shoot. One guy waits a bit, then starts shooting with a pistol as well. When they discover that his safety was on and that there is no pot, they then refuse to allow paramedics in for over an hour. Was that the right way to handle the situation?
The Ex-marine saw people break down his door and he wanted to protect his wife and child. He had a, as you put it, civilian legal weapon. But because he had a civilian legal weapon, he was cleared to be shot 70 times. Because the SWAT had a hunch. A hunch that was completely wrong.
So, let's recap:
Ex-marine serves to protect the country.
Ex-marine owns legal gun for protection.
Cops gather bad intel on possible pot.
Cops send SWAT to house.
Ex-marine wants to protect wife and son.
SWAT breaks down door with minimal effort to make their presence known.
SWAT kills ex-marine.
SWAT refuses to let the ex-marine get medical attention.
Cops seal documents once the press gets the story.
Cops begin changing story.
Yeah, they totally handled the situation well, and there are no problems with our law or how we handle everything. I bow to your infinitely superior wisdom and remind myself that the police are infallible wise beings that must always be respected, and that when they fuck up it is never their fault.
Remember: if they were forced to have solid proof of what they were breaking and entering over, this wouldn't have happened.
This is a sad story. Things did not have to happen the way it did. The man was just trying to protect his home. Had they announced that they were police before they started shooting Guerena probably would have dropped his weapon and things would've been solved peacefully. His safety was still on. He had no intent to fire his weapon when he confronted the men in his house. People who are well trained and disiplined in gun control, as soldiers and marines are, don't release their safety until they are ready to fire.
Most modern *say within the last 15 years* tazers do not need skin penetration and the wattage is more then enough to arc through clothing. the range on most modern pistol tazers would be 15-25 feet. Out of being used by the police force I believe only 50 people have died from tazers in the past 15 years...thats with thousands of uses.Kopikatsu said:
Your instructors must be giving you shitty old tazers if they don't work and dont have good range...
Not possible. See 3 http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/18.257862-Things-You-Might-Incorrectly-Believe-About-Guns?page=1Summerstorm said:
This entire story is just fucked. The police thought he was a danger because he had a freaking assault rifle, and he thought they were burglars or something because they didn't announce themselves. Entire thing is just weak.
Nor does more guns make a country more dangerous. Guns do not have the ability, nor the will to cause crime. They are TOOLS, and can only do what the operator of said gun wants them to. The hammer sitting in your toolbox is not going to randomly start building you a shed one day, nor is it going to bash an innocents skull in. It is an inanimate object, and will sit where it drops until someone picks it up again.thelonewolf266 said:
I may be wrong, but I could swear I heard them yell at least once, police open the door, or step back from the door, right between 24 and 31 seconds after the officer knocks. I'm no analyst but it sounds like it. However once the door is open, there is no attempt at communication at all, they just stand there for a few seconds saying nothing then start firing.
Very very sad story with the local station taking the worst approach possible to resolving the situation. If they truly believe they are in the right, they should have no reason to lock down or try to hide anything. It'll be interesting to see how this turns out.
Very very sad story with the local station taking the worst approach possible to resolving the situation. If they truly believe they are in the right, they should have no reason to lock down or try to hide anything. It'll be interesting to see how this turns out.
Drugs ran by drug traffickers. Probably from Mexico. People known for being heavily armed, and heavily dangerous.Summerstorm said:
Yes it is pretty excessive, but in a VERY high risk operation like this, you can't afford to take chances. More people firing more bullets = target(s) get downed faster.Summerstorm said:
A taser wouldn't have done much, since he was apparently behind something. A table I think, I don't know. Point is, a taser wouldn't have done much.
Same with shooting him in the legs. Plus, shooting people in the legs is one of the WORST things you could do if you want to take someone alive. A leg-shot is one of the least survivable gunshot wounds.
He's an ex-marine. Probably a souvenir from his time in the military. Very few people outside of collectors/former military personnel have Assault Rifles.Summerstorm said:
Yeah, that is pretty fucked up. They lie about the story, then get pissed at the media for drawing attention to the fact that they're lying. And now they refuse to comment at all. The fact that nobody has been held accountable for this massive fuck-up yet is just disgusting.Summerstorm said:
Canada essentially elected their version of George Bush as their Prime Minister. Not to mention that G20 incident last year...Bethany Vreeland said:
Canada ain't much better than the US to be honest.
This is a clusterfuck from start to finish.
Not only did the marine not fire any shots, he had the safety on, and was waiting to identify his targets.
The police on the other hand went in guns blazing, and from the report it seems one of these "highly trained" killers actually discharged his own weapon first, which may have lead to the others opening fire assuming the marine had fired.If this is demonstrable of their level of training then I humbly suggest they get better bloody training!
Then the police force released several different versions of the event.
Why was this?
Covering their asses!
Further evidence of this:
"The problem with that explanation is that the search warrants and affidavits weren't sealed until four days after the raids were executed".
Why was it necessary to do so AFTER the raid?
Now if they actually entered the house, are you telling me that these "highly trained" officers after shooting did not continue to search the house?
They let the guy they shot bleed to death, while if there were more actual bad guys in the house they had a whole hour to destroy evidence.
That makes no sense!
They are using the "Wookies on Endor" defence!!
I would be VERY worried if I lived in that area, and it's not the criminals I would fear
.
Not only did the marine not fire any shots, he had the safety on, and was waiting to identify his targets.
The police on the other hand went in guns blazing, and from the report it seems one of these "highly trained" killers actually discharged his own weapon first, which may have lead to the others opening fire assuming the marine had fired.If this is demonstrable of their level of training then I humbly suggest they get better bloody training!
Then the police force released several different versions of the event.
Why was this?
Covering their asses!
Further evidence of this:
"The problem with that explanation is that the search warrants and affidavits weren't sealed until four days after the raids were executed".
Why was it necessary to do so AFTER the raid?
Now if they actually entered the house, are you telling me that these "highly trained" officers after shooting did not continue to search the house?
They let the guy they shot bleed to death, while if there were more actual bad guys in the house they had a whole hour to destroy evidence.
That makes no sense!
They are using the "Wookies on Endor" defence!!
I would be VERY worried if I lived in that area, and it's not the criminals I would fear
.
Okay, the SWAT officers definitely overdid it on this one, but on the other hand I see why. As a police officer, particularly SWAT, if a suspect has a weapon you treat them as hostile. My dad was an officer for 30+ years, and I would've wanted him to open fire on some guy waving a gun in his direction. Thankfully, he never had to fire his gun once in all that time.
That said, I can understand the order to open fire. You're confronting a suspect and said suspect has a high-powered weapon. Keep yourself and your teammates safe, fair enough. But it makes no sense to not have allowed medics access for more than an hour!! That's where this falls into the realm of ridiculous.
That said, I can understand the order to open fire. You're confronting a suspect and said suspect has a high-powered weapon. Keep yourself and your teammates safe, fair enough. But it makes no sense to not have allowed medics access for more than an hour!! That's where this falls into the realm of ridiculous.
I can understand the cops screwing up an investigation and getting the wrong house.
I can understand them shooting at a man in a dark hallway holding an automatic weapon.
What I CANNOT understand or condone is all of this:
1) Denying paramedics access to him for over an hour. Yes, he was probably as good as dead anyway, but at least then you TRIED to save him! Plus, you'd think that they would realize they goofed up when they found the wife and kid in the closet and probably heard from them that it was their husband (not a drug dealer) they shot up.
2) Sealing all the records and evidence only when people start asking hard questions, and saying they're doing it to protect people. And then allowing information that's GOOD for them to be released, but not anything negative for them.
3) Outright LYING (his safety was on, so he COULDN'T have fired!), then backing up and telling MORE lies (...why would they use sirens for a drug raid? The whole point of a raid is the element of surprise!), and then accusing the media and people of spreading misinformation!
What happened here was a terrible mistake, and a terrible tragedy...And some douchy superiors are afraid of bad publicity so they outright lie and try to take advantage of the victim so they don't look bad. I hope the truth comes out and every damn person in management who was involved in the cover up gets AXED. We are supposed to TRUST the damn police. How can anyone in that community trust the cops now?
I can understand them shooting at a man in a dark hallway holding an automatic weapon.
What I CANNOT understand or condone is all of this:
1) Denying paramedics access to him for over an hour. Yes, he was probably as good as dead anyway, but at least then you TRIED to save him! Plus, you'd think that they would realize they goofed up when they found the wife and kid in the closet and probably heard from them that it was their husband (not a drug dealer) they shot up.
2) Sealing all the records and evidence only when people start asking hard questions, and saying they're doing it to protect people. And then allowing information that's GOOD for them to be released, but not anything negative for them.
3) Outright LYING (his safety was on, so he COULDN'T have fired!), then backing up and telling MORE lies (...why would they use sirens for a drug raid? The whole point of a raid is the element of surprise!), and then accusing the media and people of spreading misinformation!
What happened here was a terrible mistake, and a terrible tragedy...And some douchy superiors are afraid of bad publicity so they outright lie and try to take advantage of the victim so they don't look bad. I hope the truth comes out and every damn person in management who was involved in the cover up gets AXED. We are supposed to TRUST the damn police. How can anyone in that community trust the cops now?
the AR-15 is the legal semi-auto civilian variant of the m-16 series, i have a teacher who goes hunting with one, and displayed some of his targets from the range. (he's the legal studies teacher)
I agree that the gun isn't to blame its the person using it.However a hammer can be used for fixing things D.I.Y or whatever yes it can also be used to kill someone but a gun is specifically designed to kill or maim livings things and I personally don't think that they should be available so some people can use them for sport or recreation at the expense of everyone having unlimited access to a deadly weapon.If the people that carried out the attacks at Virginia Tech or the more recent Tuscon Shootings had only been able to get their hands on hammers or knives I think at lot less people would have been hurt and killed.That is why I believe a gun free country is a lot safer and the homicide rates I have seen tend to support this.Malyc said: