Grand Jury Deciding If Sheriff Deputies Should Be Indicted

We're trained to stop the threat. Nine officers, each with a standard magazine + 1 in the chamber... yeah, I can see how 133 rounds ended up being fired.
 
sbparkcop said:
We're trained to stop the threat. Nine officers, each with a standard magazine + 1 in the chamber... yeah, I can see how 133 rounds ended up being fired.
Click to expand...
+1 I go through mags pretty quick with a handgun on the range.. I can imagine life safety firing..
 
DAMN!!! Well they stopped him alright!
 
The issue is not that they stopped the shit head, but that some of the shots endded up in near by apartments. If that had happend in..lets say, Bayhill, Heathrow, or Winter Park, the shit would have hit the fan.
 
Can't watch the video right now.... but if the first bullet was justified, then each additional bullet is justified as long as it was fired at the same target in the same time period. In respect to mis-placed shots, if the officers were legally justified to shoot at the suspect, missed rounds that were shot with good faith and due regard will rarely lead to criminal charges.
 
That would be no question in NY. All officers would lose their jobs because department states deadly physical force will never be used against someone when a vehicle is the only means of deadly threat. There must be another means of threat besides the vehicle. The law however is different. So you'd be protected by law but be against department policy.


All officers should be acquitted of any wrong doing. 133 may sound like a lot but when your life is on the line they go quick.
 
UndercoverVLS said:
That would be no question in NY. All officers would lose their jobs because department states deadly physical force will never be used against someone when a vehicle is the only means of deadly threat. There must be another means of threat besides the vehicle. The law however is different. So you'd be protected by law but be against department policy.

All officers should be acquitted of any wrong doing. 133 may sound like a lot but when your life is on the line they go quick.
Click to expand...


I'm thinking that 3+ tons of steel coming at you is a pretty damn deadly threat....
 
UndercoverVLS said:
All officers would lose their jobs because department states deadly physical force will never be used against someone when a vehicle is the only means of deadly threat. There must be another means of threat besides the vehicle.
Click to expand...

Are you sure about that? If you are laying in the middle of the street with a broken leg and some dirtbag is bearing down on you in a vehicle... you can't use deadly force? I can understand a policy stating that you must try to avoid placing yourself into a situation requiring you to use deadly force. I can understand a policy stating you must make every attempt to get out of harms way before resorting to deadly force. I can't understand a policy stating that you cannot ever use deadly force if you are in a situation that requires it...
 
mcpd2025 said:
Are you sure about that? If you are laying in the middle of the street with a broken leg and some dirtbag is bearing down on you in a vehicle... you can't use deadly force? I can understand a policy stating that you must try to avoid placing yourself into a situation requiring you to use deadly force. I can understand a policy stating you must make every attempt to get out of harms way before resorting to deadly force. I can't understand a policy stating that you cannot ever use deadly force if you are in a situation that requires it...
Click to expand...

You gotta remember, VLS is talking about the area where they wanted to ban "shooting to kill." I wouldn't put it past them to have some stupid PC policy that is going to cost officer's lives. :roll: But, then again, I don't have first hand knowledge.


viewtopic.php?f=27&t=361&hilit=+shoot


Not sure, and don't want to MMQB (monday morning Q-back), but did all 9 completely/nearly empty the mags in the gun in the car? 9 x 15 (guess on the rounds, took 15 as an estimate) = 135. Maybe after the first several shots, the DBs foot got stuck on the accelerator. Gonna step out on a limb, but 133 is a bit excessive. You need to be accountable for those rounds considering the backdrop of an apt building. A stray there can be absoluetly horrible.


Then again, I wasn't there. :| So, just my $.02.
 
I asked my sgt a few months ago about shooting at a car after one almost ran me down while directing traffic at a wreck. I do not have to try to move before shooting if I feel my life is in danger due to the speed of a car, its ability to accelerate and maneuver faster than I can move, and the fact that even an accident on the part of the driver (not paying attention, ect) will result in death.
 
I asked my sgt a few months ago about shooting at a car after one almost ran me down while directing traffic at a wreck. I do not have to try to move before shooting if I feel my life is in danger due to the speed of a car, its ability to accelerate and maneuver faster than I can move, and the fact that even an accident on the part of the driver (not paying attention, ect) will result in death.
Click to expand...

Now we are comparing apples to water buffalos. One is a dumb ass not paying attention to the road. (Which I would like to kick in the ass just for being……inset whatever here) The other is justified…period.


Hell…here in Florida…I’d get away with shooting someone if they aimed their vehicle at me an tried to run me down, and I’m not LEO.


The fact that they are looking at is: were innocent civilians at risk. Yes that is a junk yard part of the city…yes maybe it is a s..hole but you know how the public looks at things when….”mamas baby got hit by a stray bullet”


You all get where I’m going
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum Statistics

Threads
54,609
Messages
452,474
Members
19,439
Latest member
Ronald 3072

Share This Page

Share this page
Top Bottom
Back