Tuesday, February 15, 2011

Another Execution for Disobedience

This time the dead guy didn't even "lunge," he just "moved towards the officer."  I guess he forgot that disobedience is punishable by summary execution.

Here's the story in the Houston Chronicle.


  1. Yeah. You just left out that whole part about the guy having a knife.

    He was shot because he had a knife, refused to drop the knife, and moved towards the officers with the knife.

  2. I guess "knives are bad news for scumbags," eh?

  3. Should the officer wait until the person has actually attacked someone with the knife first? Does he just have to let the guy swing the knife or does someone have to be cut or stabbed before the officer is allowed to use violence to subdue the attacker?

    Should the officer have put away his gun and attempted to disarm the man with his bare hands instead?

  4. The cop could have turned and run away. Isn't that what some law enforcement "professionals" suggest WE do if confronted by an attacker?


  5. "The cop could have turned and run away."

    If this happened in New Orleans right after a major disaster, that's probably what would have happened.

  6. What often happens, the part you guys want to pretend doesn't exist, is that cops demand obedience. It's often more about their egos than their safety. It's the power thing.

  7. I agree, they demand obedience, which creates a double standard when THEY are allowed to threaten and use deadly force when regular citizens would get in trouble.

    Take this instance for example:

    There was no imminent threat of violence of physical harm against the officer, yet he pulled his gun, seemingly to force obedience and nothing more.

    Here's another plainclothes detective pissed because his poor Hummer got pelted with snowballs.

    Here's an example where it went terribly wrong:

    A police officer can put HIS hand on HIS firearm whenever he feels even remotely threatened, yet citizens that open carry don't dare rest their hands on their holstered firearm or it's an act of aggression.


  8. Mike - you are not answering the question. How much violence does the cop need to let the potential attacker perform before it is ok to use deadly force to stop him?

    In this case, the potential attacker had a knife. Is the cop to wait until someone is cut by the knife?

    When the potential attacker has a gun, does he get to shoot it first before the cops respond? How many shots? Does he have to hit someone with his shots?

    You have stated before that "it depends" - what does it depend on?

    Come on and enlighten us on how these police officers should act in the face of potentially deadly violence being directed at them. Don't waste your time with "they need more training." What specifically should the do?

  9. Jim, They should stop shooting people who are POTENTIAL threats. They should make damn sure there is LETHAL THREAT before discharging their guns.

    And above all they should stop shooting people for disobedience.