[disko]

This is an actual incident that happened in my city a few years back. The officer involved shot the offender twice, killing him. This was deemed manifestly excessive force and resulted in a coronial inquiry that received national attention.

----------

You are a LEO, doing a routine shift the night before Xmas eve.

You are armed with a 6 shot S&W revolver and expandable baton.

You receive a report of suspicious male near a train station in a bad area, so you attend with your partner. You see a male fitting the description. You pull your vehicle up, and as you do, the male begins to walk away. He is approximately 25 feet away from you. Your partner walks in the opposite direction to challenge another person. You challenge the male. From a distance of 25 feet, on a side walk with chainlink fence on one side and a solid row of cars on the other, the male turns around, quickly produces a hammer, raises it above his head and runs at you screaming like a mad man.

What would YOU do?

 

[P95Carry]

disko - here that behavior would almost certainly be regarded as a major threat. That distance is close to what we use here as a sorta baseline, the ''Tueller drill'' - and that distance can be covered in about 1 1/2 seconds!!

I hammer is maybe not quite as potentially lethal as say, a knife, but one blow received to the head could well prove fatal. Any one of us would very likely if armed draw and shoot - and even then time would be against this from the leather.

Chances are an LEO here would challenge and - have hand on gun as the threat or lack of it is unknown and already suspicious circumstances have been reported. We civilians maybe would act similarly tho of course would not be the LE in that scenario.

If however charged by someone wielding any substantial weapon and no place to retreat then lethal force would I think be justified. It would be after all an attack - attack = threat. The perception of threat level would be up to the courts but time for decision-making is short - very short.

Your case - and the excessive force decision sounds totally out of order. What was the guy supposed to do - sidestep and hope not to get a fractured skull? Had the cop had a hammer then maybe he could have fought at equal odds but - his gun was all he had I am sure.

 

[Bud White]

Think though chris if its a claw hammer and he reverses it to the claw side thats even worse than the hammer head .. Some one charges me like that as described above its a shoot

 

[rocky]

a hammer is a lethal weapon.

 

[Wyoming]

The only time I have come close to using deadly force was when I was threatened by a guy with a claw hammer. He saw that I was not backing down and decided bringing a claw hammer to a gun fight was not exactly smart.

 

[Rob72]

A 20 oz rip-hammer would fold the expandable baton up nicely, to fit in your rear....:duh: "Excessive force" means the BG is 1) unarmed, or 2) you shot him with an RPG. Anything else means you're spending cops, not money, on society's safety.

 

[Scott]

I would shoot the main wielding the claw hammer.

I know what I could do to someone with a claw hammer and I would not let anyone intent on using one get close to me.

-Scott-

 

[Team American]

This is an actual incident that happened in my city a few years back. The officer involved shot the offender twice, killing him. This was deemed manifestly excessive force and resulted in a coronial inquiry that received national attention.

Pollyanna Politicians think that a perfect world can be achieved just by wishing for it...reality be damned :rant:

"You can defend your life...just don't play too rough":twak:

 

[KC135]

Not enough information.

Diagram the situation, showing the vehicle/s, distances, positions, etc.

Why? I am not going to shoot someone running at me with a hammer IF I can move to get a Crown Vic between me and him.

Yes, I may make the decision to shoot, but I would rather take a defensive position first.

 

[P95Carry]

KC - the approx 1.5 seconds you may have before he is on you might be enough to get the other side of a parked vehicle but if the only lead advantage you have is at max, just that 1.5 seconds - what is to stop him continuing to pursue you, at every twist and turn.

At some point I venture to suggest you are likely to have to do 'something' to slow or stop him - unless you find open space and outrun him. If as described he is pretty crazy - maybe he is doped on PCP, and unlikely to slow down his pursuit.

 

[Rock and Glock]

Shoot until the threat stops.

 

[HotGuns]

Highlighting the differences between countries

In your country, wherever it may be, it would seem that a man attacking an armed officer could expect to not get shot...
thus the "exessive force" charge.

In my country, a man that charges an armed officer carrying ANYTHING that could be used to inflict bodilly harm could expect to get shot.

As a result, it happens very rarely here, and those that are stupid enough to do it are usually extremely drunk or drugged.

From the scenario that you described,more than likely it would be ruled a good shoot.


Would a cop in your country be expected to get shot at before shooting back ?

Where I am at, we dont wait for people to shoot first,thust a knife at us or whack us with a hammer. There just isnt any future in it.

 

[disko]

Well I'm in Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. In Australia, you need considerable justification to so much as put a hand on your firearm, much less draw or fire it or risk bad press, which in turn would cost you your job.

The reason resorting to lethal force is a big issue in my state is a bad one. In the 1980s, Victoria, which is the second biggest state, had a rate of lethal police shootings of offenders which out did all the other states combined. So we brought in new guidelines, gave our LEOs pepper spray, expandable batons, a whole new style of training and now we're trialling tasers... however, the issue remains the same.

Don't pose a deadly threat, and you won't get shot.

 

[P95Carry]

So we brought in new guidelines, gave our LEOs pepper spray, expandable batons, a whole new style of training and now we're trialling tasers...

I feel sorry then disko for the cops there when faced with a BG carrying a gun!!!!

Why is it that the bias there and UK in particular - pretty much seems to ever more embrace the well being of bad guys - and ignore the safety and well being of law abiding folk. I really don't get it, other than seeing the whole deal as a subjugation - control of the populace deal.

Even when I was shackled in UK I thought then just as I do now - that every person has an innate right to defense of self - in other words, why should a good guy aquiesce to the demands, threats or murderous intention of a slimeball! Does not make sense to me, never has!

Get your butt over here soonest - and join the ranks of the relatively sane :wink:

 

[HotGuns]

Don't pose a deadly threat, and you won't get shot.

Works for me.

I can use pepper spray,baton and gun.
We can legaly use one force higher than the perp.

If you use bodily force on me, I will pepper spray you first.
If that dont work, then its on to the baton.
If you use a weapon on me, I can use whatever suits the situation...if I have time to do so.

Sometimes things happen so quickly, that you must make a snap decision and sometimes live or die by it. Whatever the case may be, the decision that took you or me a millisecond to make, will be studied and anylayzed for months to come by people that have never had to use force on someone else for any reason.

 

[Bumper]

I am with the majority who have replied, I would not hesitate to draw and fire on a man charging me with a claw hammer, or I would die trying. Someone needs to start a reform movement in Australia. It ridiculous that an honest person is unable to adequately defend against an attacker, much less a law enforcement officer whos job it is to protect the public.

 

[disko]

This country has been leftie since the 70s. Right wing groups are reviled by the government and demonised by the media. The Sporting Shooters Association of Australia (SSAA, not dissimilar to the NRA) is viewed with utter disdain, so much so that when the Federal Gov. outlawed semi automatic rifles, pump and semi auto shotguns following a massacre, the Prime Minister fronted an SSAA rally in a bullet proof vest. Enough said.

 

[madmike]

disko,

Sounds to me like you've got a hard row to hoe, ahead of you. I hope you've got an organization in place that will eventually win your country back for you.

Get involved, get it going!

Get 'er DONE. :yup:

Failing that, well. . . Come on dow, er, uh, I mean, UP! :biggrin2:

I'd be very glad to see you come here. :hand10:

mm

 

[Colin]

Here in Canada we our police also carry Tasers in additions to batons, spray and for the RCMP S&W 5926’s in 9mm (Some forces use Glocks and a few are going to Sigs)

The tasers have resulted in a few deaths and the weanies are demanding they be withdrawn as they consider them “inhumane”. It’s lost on them that the Taser gives the cop a chance to down a BG from a distance without shooting him. Normally the cop carrying the taser is backed by another officer with their gun ready and if possible another taser equipped officer.

RCMP normally work alone and often with no backup for at least 30 minutes in rural areas, they carry a .308 bolt action rifle in those cases and a shotgun. However I know a couple that carry their own Norinco 305 (M14 copy) in their patrol cars.