[TheUrinator]

If it was obvious that the guy has a gun, I would say absolutely, shoot him. But that is not what is shown in the video. It is not clear that he was armed. It was not clear that he was even going for a weapon. What I have said is what harm would have been done for the officer take up defensive positions to better evaluate the situation. If a gun was shown, sure, open fire. If not, there should have been an effort to resolve without the use of deadly force. The cop reacted to the movement with deadly force when there was no clear need for deadly force and that is my point. Do I think the cop is guilty of murder? No. Is he guilty of a poor decision in an uncertain situation? Absolutely. Deadly force is to be used as a last resort, and this does not show that is was a last resort. The officers should have went into defensive positions until the situation was better evaluated, then if necessary, open fire. What is clear to me is that there was no attempt made for any other outcome other than use of deadly force. If there was clearly a weapon involved, I would say the shooting was justified. But that is not the case here.

[Sandbwoy]

Cops can be real arseholes. I realise that not all cops are the same, but the majority of em abuse their powers.

[ColonelVile]

Hmmm, the knife the cop used to cut his shirt off conveniantly placed itself at the truck.

[Lion-hearted Girl]

Even if he *did* have a knife, does it warrant that force? Surely they could shoot an arm or leg to knock him down.

[ColonelVile]

Originally Posted by Lion-hearted Girl ↗

Even if he *did* have a knife, does it warrant that force? Surely they could shoot an arm or leg to knock him down.

The way that cop was shooting looked as if he was confronting a bear or someone holding a katana going all samurai on the cops ass.
Definitely excessive force. Oh I'm sure all of the police are pressured to be more vigilant in light of the controversial school shooting and such, but one must act professionally even in extreme situations of stress. 1 or 2 shots would be efficient, but in such a situation you have no time to aim at those specific limbs which are small targets as it is especially when hyped up on adrenaline. Even shot the guy in the back when it was obvious he was no longer a threat. I think there is a law against that. If you shoot someone in the back that means they are running away/surrendering/ect, in this case. The guy floppin like a fish from the first barrage of ten shots.

[Desensitisation]

The guy who got shot is still a fucking idiot. There's a cop screaming at you. You can see it's a cop car behind you. Here were the two options:

Intelligent white person: Damn. I better freeze with my hands up in the air. I won't jump out of my car and then turn around and attempt to reach for something so it looks like I'm reaching for a weapon. No, I shall simply stay still with my hands visible, not say anything, and just do what the cop says. Chance of death? Maybe 10% is the cop is an absolute cunt, which about 10% of cops are, but that still means a 90% chance of survival.

Black monkey fucker: Fuck! Gotta jump around like a monkey and flail my arms around! Gotta dodge dem bullets good and reach for my bucket of fried chicken on the seat next to me because I love me some fried chicken! Ow. Wait. Holes? I have holes in me? When did that happen?

[donkeydong]

Originally Posted by AmericanIllusions ↗

Its justified I say. Cops tell you not to move, you freeze on the spot. Read a little of the report and they say he lunged at the cop. That's bullshit but hey. shouldn't of moved

Ernest Duenez Jr was his name

Bullshit. What if it's a deaf person? That idiot cop should have tazed the guy if anything. What justifies putting round after round into the guys body?

[AnaleFaust]

That was clearly murder. You're telling me they couldn't have incapacitated him, even if he was reaching for a gun or knife? They could have charged and tackled him before he posted a threat to them. And the amount of shots fired was clearly overkill

[AnaleFaust]

posed^

[xandrespop]

This is my last pot on this topic.I see so many replies from the un trained.
(A)-Police are not trained to shoot to wound.Its shoot to kill
(B)- Even at this distance a person with a knife could be a danger
(C)- If he was deaf A police officer pointing a gun at you say enough
(D)- Take cover and see if he has a gun..ok right.The guy fires at the cop, bullet goes high and kills the kid across the street.
(E)- They call the guy by name.They knew this guy, and had reason to beleive him a threat.
(F)- Over kill,The guy tried to get up after being shot.PCP,Meth? the cop could not know. I have seen Haji keep moving after taking more than one hit.