Worked law enforcement for almost 30 years and would not dream of shooting a guy as this situation describes. I may have been ready to shot, but would have needed to see the threat. I am getting old thought, perhaps I don't understand anymore.
I know hundreds of retired cops in their 60’s and 70’s and almost every one of them says the same thing, and NONE of them will have anything to do with today’s “law enforcement officers”, because they were all “Peace Officers”
I guess Lowering Standards nationwide 40 years ago worked out like most of us said it would.
Footage showed him reaching into the car. I've no knowledge of police procedure. If a suspect makes a sudden movement to retrieve some unknown item in a hidden area, does a weapon have to be visible before a responding officer opens fire? My guess is that these officers would have had a split second to respond, if he pulled out a gun.
I think the most rational thing to think under those circumstances was that he was reaching for a weapon. And if that was what he was reaching for, he’d obviously have the intent to shoot and be one step ahead of you if you waited to see the weapon. So your decision would’ve been dead wrong.
No question the officers had the drop on him. But still, unless they dropped him immediately once they saw a gun, he could have gotten a few shots off at them.
He “reached for something”. I’m not sure how long ago you were on the force, but I’ve heard cops using that excuse for shootings for at least 20 years now. It’s so common that, as a citizen, most of us who don’t want to get shot know that you had better keep your hands on the wheel during a traffic stop, and even if the officer asks for your ID and registration, you had better ask them for permission before you try to get it out of the glove compartment.
Did you look at the video? It seems pretty clear why the police felt compelled to shoot him. After a 20 minute high speed chase culminating with him hitting three other cars and injuring two people, inexplicably, he jumps out of the car and immediately starts reaching frantically in the backseat of the car for something. If I were a cop, I would have concluded that he was reaching for a weapon. The shooting appears fully justified based on the video.
I agree with all that you said, but you worked in LE when society was a bit saner perhaps?
These days evil reigns and I’m not making excuses for bad cops but it’s getting harder and harder to stay one step ahead of the bad guys.
20 years ago a Darren Wilson would never have even been questioned. Now everybody is underneath the microscope.
“Good question, but a better question was why was he shot if the police did not actually see a weapon”
My guess is that he wasn’t following directions. Do you think the Cops asked him to grab the umbrella out of the back seat after a high speed chase? Of course not, they told him to hit the ground / hand on the top of the car. He didn’t do it, reaching back into the car against directions is a death wish. He got his wish, end of story. Wise up.
You mean no weapon apart from the car?
You don’t understand because the standards have changed. They used to be experiencing an actual threat. Now they are simply if an officer is afraid something dangerous might happen. Period. 007, license to kill. Those are the current police shoot to kill rules of engagement. And they are ten times looser than our combat troops have to obey. These are just facts.