Did the cop have to kill the unarmed kid in Ferg?

Lee Rigby was attacked and killed by two loons with knifes in the UK.

The loons then charge the police, covered in blood and with big butcher knifes, and the police just shot them in the legs etc.

'Two men, one brandishing a cleaver and the other a revolver, charged at the police. Armed police fired eight times and both men were wounded. They were arrested and taken to separate hospitals. A revolver, knives, and a cleaver were seized at the scene.' Phone Post 3.0

Yes but we're the home a litigation. And shooting at the legs leaves the city open for lawsuits from very much a alive cripple.

...not to mention God forbid that any of those bullets fired towards the legs go skipping off the pavement and hit and cripple or kill a bystander.

I have a better idea...don't attack cops with a cleaver. How's that sound for solid and logical advice? At least if you like living.

Or, to boil it down to its most basic...don't attack anyone, in any fashion, because it puts lives at risk including your own...and especially don't attack people wearing guns on their hip. Personally I would think that is self-evident, but to some it's apparently not. And if it's not, then Darwin will come to collect your life sooner or later, it's just a matter of time.

Civil lawsuit or ongoing riots with millions of dollars worth of damage.

Hmmmmm......

Tough call.

I cited an example of two murders being wounded.

And the police are still open to a civil suit from the family anyway.

Shoot him the leg and it's not nearly as bad as it is now. Phone Post 3.0

Life isn't an episode of top shot. That brotha was huge. Depending on what happened he may or may not have.

The cop didn't have the ability to shot him in the leg?

The kid had chunky legs. Phone Post 3.0

The possibility of crippling or killing an innocent bystander is way worse than any civil suit. Phone Post 3.0

And a shot in the leg from that distance weren't be considered a 'top shot'. Phone Post 3.0

Its a very bad idea to rely on shooting someone in the legs. You aim for the torso and keep shooting until they're down.

It might sound harsh, but you shouldn't be shooting unless you intend to kill.

Also, you might have only 1 or 2 seconds to stop them and you can't risk missing or even them not being bothered by a shot in the leg, depending on what they've taken.

Ultimately, and not referring to any individual cases, people should respect law enforcement and realise that if you put yourself in a position where you are threatening a police officer then you are putting your life in their judgement of how threatened they feel. Phone Post 3.0

It was white culture of being a yank trigger happy gun nut what killed the black guy.

Fucking hell.

That is some scary shit.

A cop in the US just has to feel 'threatened' and he can kill someone.

That's a power most State's in the US don't have anymore. Phone Post 3.0

WALES1 - The cop didn't have the ability to shot him in the leg?

The kid had chunky legs. Phone Post 3.0

Just a wild guess; you have not fired many guns?

Shit happens too quick to not just aim for center mass, especially when some guy is fighting you (if that is indeed what happened).

TryhardNobody - If WALES becomes a cop, sales of bullet proof pants will go through the roof
Or I just follow the lead of the example in the OP and shoot people in the leg.

Or I'd be throwing down.

I'm 6'2 and 260lbs.

Fatty is having it. Phone Post 3.0

WALES1 - Fucking hell.

That is some scary shit.

A cop in the US just has to feel 'threatened' and he can kill someone.

That's a power most State's in the US don't have anymore. Phone Post 3.0


ShanTheMan -
WALES1 - The cop didn't have the ability to shot him in the leg?

The kid had chunky legs. Phone Post 3.0

Just a wild guess; you have not fired many guns?

Shit happens too quick to not just aim for center mass, especially when some guy is fighting you (if that is indeed what happened).
I have you an example in the OP.

Two mad men had just killed a guy and almost cut his head off.

Two men - not some chubby fat fuck - covered in the victims blood and with weapons in hand charged the police and the police wounded them. Phone Post 3.0

Shooting the legs of someone while they are running at you is a dumb idea IMO. It is a smaller and moving target. The safest spot is the torso since it is the largest and in a running situation has the least movement. When it comes time to shoot someone then that means yours or someone elses life is in danger. Sure it looks great on a movie set but not in reality.

I understand the example, and that risk paid off for him. This sounds as if it was a very close quarters thing. If he hesitated aiming for a leg who knows if he would still have even gotten a shot off. I am not trying to be a jerk, I just think they were two different scenarios as far as attacks go.

Again, let's be clear.

I never said the cop should off.....

I asked why he didn't and cited an example of what happened in the UK. Phone Post 3.0

WALES1 - Fucking hell.

That is some scary shit.

A cop in the US just has to feel 'threatened' and he can kill someone.

That's a power most State's in the US don't have anymore. Phone Post 3.0
If the cop feels that someone is an immediate threat to their life then they may use deadly force.

My point is that if you act in an aggressive manner and run at a cop and they think that you're going to try to kill them then you very well might be shot.

Maybe we need to train cops to have better judgement, but if they draw their gun to shoot because they feel threatened then we shouldn't be telling them to shoot to injure. Phone Post 3.0

The cops are shooting him because ther are paranoid (rightly so) that everybody has a gun. To many guns thats the problem.

Op plays to many video games.

Go shoot a gun and come back and tell me its the logical thing to do to aim for the leg in the heat of the moment. Phone Post 3.0