[30564U]

Originally Posted by deanmine ↗

simple mathematics really. You divide the number of cops keeping a community safe. (8) by the number of shots fired. (49) . now take that number and shove it up the deads man ass and u get an answer equal to the number of people that shouldnt hold weapons to a cop!.. like i said, simple mathamatics!

That is one of your better one's...I'm going to use it in class.

[Zambini]

Here's a tip: comply with an officers requests

[Oswald2001]

He felt lucky.

[Zambini]

45 bullets x 147 grains ( standard 9mm police load at the time)= 6615 grains/ 7000 grains to the pound means the suspect gained .945 lbs in 5 seconds

[kellyhound]

8 cops hit him 14 times out of 46 shots fired.

Saginaw County Prosecutor Michael Thomas told CNN in 2012 that the squad of police opened fire 'because apparently, at this point in time, he was threatening to assault police.'

According to Saginaw Police Chief Gerald Cliff, Hall was 'known to be an assaultive person' with 'a long history' of involvement with authorities, 'not only with police from our department but with the county.'

wonder why they didn't use tasers as wouldn't that work perfectly in situations like this ?

[Zambini]

Originally Posted by kellyhound ↗

8 cops hit him 14 times out of 46 shots fired.


wonder why they didn't use tasers as wouldn't that work perfectly in situations like this ?

Well shit, my math is off

[mexx]

Originally Posted by jerzpilot ↗

really? so that's the policy shoot to kill, not to immobilize?

I have said this many of times in many videos just like this - goods ole Mexican stand off!

BUT ... Iv been told shooting a moving target from that range apparently its not as accurate as you think and its easier to land shots in the chest, rather than trying to take aim at the knee.

[30564U]

Ok, cop haters, militant Canadians, and Euro Progressives, get ready...here comes my professional take on this shooting. Fire away!

First off, let's look at the number of rounds fired at the hapless and slightly retarded Mr. Hall. There were a total of forty-seven (47) rounds fired by six (6) of the eight (8) officers on scene. Of those forty-seven (47) rounds, the officers only hit Mr. Hall a grand total of eleven (11) times. Now that's certainly sloppy shooting, but not at all uncommon in the circumstances. That's an average of 1.83 rounds per officer...which seems rather reasonable for any officer involved shooting I've seen in thirty years. Remember...officers are trained to "shoot to stop the threat"...if that means one hundred (100) rounds until the bad guy poses no more problems then so be it...it's a non issue.

Second, let's take a close look at poor Mr. Hall's harmless "pen knife" that he was threatening officers with when he was shot. This is the actual lock back, serrated 3.5 inch blade, used by Mr. Hall. http://media.mlive.com/saginawnews/p...8202-large.jpg Yup...not exactly a "pen knife" is it? That knife could easily kill a man sized target...so the whole "pen knife" issue was bullshit on it's face...let's move on.

Third...let's look at the risk Mr. Hall posed to the officers. According to numerous tests and the study of actual combat situations over the years,


When you look at the officer’s distance from Mr. Hill, they look fairly safe. But a bad guy can easily cover this distance faster than most officers can draw and fire their guns. The training standard in law enforcement (US and Canada) is that when a suspect with a knife is less than five (5) feet from an officer, the officer will no longer have time to draw his/her gun, and that at fifteen (15) feet the officer might have a shot at a suspect before he reaches the officer with a knife. Industry tests with hundreds of officers in the US and Canada revealed that in almost all cases, a minimum reactionary gap of twenty-one (21) feet is required to react and deliver at least two rounds and to move out of the attacker’s path.

It looked like the officers did pretty much everything correctly. They gave Mr. Hall untold commands...and Mr. Hall failed to comply. The officers used a police K-9...and Mr. Hall failed to comply. The officers had their firearms drawn and pointed at Mr. Hall...and again Mr. Hall failed to comply. Only when Mr. Hall made an overt lunge toward the K-9 and K-9 officer did officers fire...and even then, not every officer fired. The officers, whether they realized it or not, were well within the twenty-one (21) foot danger zone even as they stood surrounding Mr. Hall. At any point in the incident, Mr. Hall could've stabbed or injured an officer and yet the officers held their fire until they were forced to take action.

Fourth...let's now look at the hapless Mr. Hall and what led up to the shooting. Mr. Hall was a well known nardowell in the community and known for having mental illness, substance abuse issues, assaultive behavior, a transient lifestyle, and a fairly extensive criminal history. What started the incident was that Mr. Hall walked into a business and took a cup of coffee without paying for it. That incident led to a call for service by the business, which led officers to contact Mr. Hall. When contacted by officers, Mr. Hall pulled a knife and threatened an officer. The officer called for backup and the situation escalated from there. So, as usual...Mr. Hall was not a complete innocent and a fine upstanding citizen as we were led to believe.

Several questions arise from Mr. Hall's background.
1.) Why, if his mother lived in the community, was he living with her, but on the streets? Was it his drug use, criminal behavior, or mental illness? When even his own mother and family were unable or unwilling to help him, why would we blame the police? No one's blaming Mrs. Hall for her complete failure to raise her son to be a law abiding citizen. Why? Doesn't she and her family deserve some of the blame?
2.) Why wasn't Mr. Hall being treated for his mental illness and substance abuse? In fact, he refused, in prior court hearings, to adhere to court recommendations and orders for mental health screening and treatment, substance abuse treatment, and to be housed in a transient center and trained for job skills.
3.) Mr. Hall was on active probation at the time of his death. Why didn't the local probation office/court enforce the court orders for Mr. Hall to be treated and receive care?
4.) why didn't the officers on scene deploy less lethal weapons...like a bean bag shotgun, Taser, or even a fire extinguisher? Because the department didn't have them available.

My take...good shoot...bad tactics. They should have used less lethal weapons or even a fishing net. In this situation, all they needed to do was contain the bad guy, set up a horse shoe defensive line (like they did), move everyone back, and see if he's willing to talk after he calms down. In the situation on the video...time was on their side. But the reality is...when you do stupid things and fail to do what the nice policemen say to do...you risk getting shot.

[30564U]

Originally Posted by Zambini ↗

Well shit, my math is off

It's a great question...sometimes, depending on the weather/winds a Taser won't work. Taser does make a self contained shotgun dart that is designed to work outside at greater distances. That would have been the perfect tool. A more common tool would have been a 12 gauge beanbag round would have been the perfect tool for this situation. Hell even a fire hose would have worked. There were other options, but they didn't use them.

[nyazzip]

you don't have to be a "cop hater" to recognize that as clearly being excessive, even cowardly. am i sad about it? no. but did the cops handle it at all well? no they did not