Justified shoot ?

[Jdp751]

Just on the news earlier today a police officer shoots a man who does not have a weapon. and it was declared justified. because he was ((approaching)) the officer in a ((threatening manner)) with his hand in his pocket. I wonder if there is double standards or if that would be justified for us as well. So now I guess we have to think about what is exactly a threatening manner. How would you interpret a threatening manner to you or your loved one. Would it be somebody who is approaching you and they are (focused) on you saying things to you. Or you have decided to move as far away as possible from this person and he keeps following you and approaching you. And remember this police officer and all are trained in self defense where most of us are not. and he still presented his weapon and fired with no visible signs of another weapon. And yet it was declared justified. So I guess we need to research what is a threatening matter against you. what standard does the police department use defining a threatening manner against you

[DefensiveCarry.com]

[JerryMac]

Not sure there, was not there, and did not see what all was entailed, up to that point. Myself, deadly force will be the last resort, but if someone is focused on me, approaching, and I hold my hand uup, adk them to stop, and they keep coming, and I cannot evade them, they are intent on me for some reason, maybe they just wanna give me a kiss....maybe they want to cut my throat..... I think my first option, would be evade, and speak in a loud voice while holding my hand up in the stop position, note it would be left hand, while draw hand is still free, next, if it came to it, would be possible pepper spray or knucklesammich.....weapon would be last option, but an option just the same.

[Okemo]

Do you have a link to the story?

[VanguardMP]

I think you would have to look at the situation holistically. We can all sit back and criticize the situation, but if we don't know the entire story we could miss a key fact in why it was considered justified. For instance, if the officer was called to the scene for a person with a gun and this guy is approaching him aggressively, ignoring the officer's orders, then the officer probably does have the right to shoot him. There have been civilian cases, based on what I've read from Mas Ayoob and in the news, where civilians have been aquitted for almost the same type of situation. After working in law enforcement for 15 years there are always two sides to every story and somewhere in the middle is the truth. Just my opinion.

VMP

[Chad Rogers]

After working in law enforcement for 15 years there are always two sides to every story and somewhere in the middle is the truth. Just my opinion.

VMP

My life's experience is the truth usually lies somewhere in between, but not necessarily in the middle.

[tacman605]

There is not a double standard at all. Note this is based on the info you presented nothing else.

Using the reasonable man criteria a person coming toward you implying they have a weapon, who refuses commands, saying whatever would be a legitimate target.

Again very few details. There could have been a disparity of force issue the suspect was two times the size of the officer. He could have been saying I am going to pull this gun from my pocket and shoot you! Would like to see the link to the shooting.

[archer51]

Without being there and knowing all the facts, it is hard to say.

That being said, you will have to be able to convince the police/DA and possibly a jury that you feared for your life and deadly force was the only option available to you.

[apvbguy]

an adversary doesn't have to be armed to be a threat, think disparity in force

[dukalmighty]

Suspect with hand in pocket ignoring orders to stop and show his hands or he will shoot,could be a gun or knife,whatever the case most sane people would stop and slowly raise their hands,In my CHL class the Instructor was trying to raise awareness about using loud voice commands,to not only draw attention,but to let the perp and bystanders know that their actions were scaring you and telling them to back off,any reasonable person would get away from the crazy guy/gal,if the perp continues closing after warning them and you feel justified to use deadly force there will be witnesses that heard you verbally warning the perp

[Speculator]

LEOs have a difficult job and have to make split second decisions. They have to go into dangerous situations. I think it's not unreasonable to support their actions. No LEO wants to shoot anyone, normally - it's very traumatic.

[OldVet]

In all cases such as this, I feel the investigation leans toward the LEO. Right or wrong, that's the way it is. Anyone with 2 cents worth of brains would know not to threaten any LEO in any manner. The consequences can be less than satisfactory.

[barstoolguru]

LEO or not if you feel like your life is in danger at least get ready or even brandish you firearm but remember a lot of things hinge on what is said, his demeanor, where you are because he did not infract pull a weapon BUT did insinuate he had one it is going to get picked apart and you will have to defend it. It best to back off and seek cover if possible and if not then using lethal force is more justified

[Speculator]

LEO or not if you feel like your life is in danger at least get ready or even brandish you firearm but remember a lot of things hinge on what is said, his demeanor, where you are because he did not infract pull a weapon BUT did insinuate he had one it is going to get picked apart and you will have to defend it. It best to back off and seek cover if possible and if not then using lethal force is more justified

More brandishing. Not good. Say you do this and a LEO sees you (and you don't see him). He's justified in shooting you. The best thing is to create distance and time and impose an obstacle or seek cover. If you are NOT a LEO you have no duty to stand and confront. Since a LEO does have this duty, he's justified shooting sooner, or possibly less visible cause (using instinct and experience). We don't have much choice but to trust them and to lean towards approving those actions.

[HotGuns]

Justified shoot ?

it was declared justified.

So what is the question? It was declared a justified shoot.

There is always more to the story than the published article tells us. Are you questioning the actions of an officer as the news media reported it?

The ones that investigate the shooting, the Attorneys, the Police Chief, his investigators, and anyone else that investigated the situation and the facts, declared it a good shoot.

Thats good enough for me.

I wonder if there is double standards or if that would be justified for us as well

Police Officers are held to a different standard. Not your standard or what you think is a standard. You are not a police officer, therefore the standards that they use do not apply to you, so there is no "double standard".

So I guess we need to research what is a threatening matter against you. what standard does the police department use defining a threatening manner against you

I guess you need to understand that failing to heed the warnings of a police officer and refusing to do what he tells you can get you shot. I though most of us here understood that, but perhaps not.

[kathie63]

I pray I NEVER get in a situation where I have to decide whether or not to use deadly force! I could back away but with a knee replacement I could not run away, so if I was threatened with great bodily harm or death I don't know if I would shoot to kill but they would definitely be on the ground in pain.