US Cops Shoot Dead Immobilized Double Amputee

cant say I agree with your risk management, the secret it to absolutely comply with the police while knowing your rights, if the police overstep the mark sue em later and get a payout

'Oh my sweet summer child'

(Breonna Taylor was sleeping, js)

firstly the salient point was to get away alive , There is no generalised law you cant sue the police, for example there is a youtube channel called Audit the Audit and there are plenty of examples where the individual treated badly by the police sue and get payouts.

The only issue I see here is the amount of times they shot him. Overkill as usual, but it's basically standard at this rate from what I can tell. Shoot to incapacitate. If they die, that's just the outcome. The intent is to make sure they can't do further harm. These lads went overboard with that, but that's what American cops do.

Re: different cops doing different things in different situations, all I can say to that is people react differently.

Re: why handcuff a shot person? Procedure. They're handcuffed in case they can do further harm. Not everyone who gets shot dies instantly. Some can still move and potentially do further harm. Not when handcuffed. It's like asking why do they handcuff anyone. Procedure.

Now, I'm not defending it. Them lads are probably in bother. But the victim sounded like a right upstanding (pun intended) citizen. No loss really.

Arms were all they left him with, so they took those as well. 2 police murders via 'non-lethal' Tasers in a month, incredible place.

The years Taser product placement took over north american policing were **** brutal.

There was another recent tasing killing and it was clear they had learned none of the takeways, just kept tazing this person again and again and again and again. That's like, oh I didn't subdue him with 1 tranq dart, let me try 12. The body can only take so much electrocution before cardiac arrest. They do not taze themselves this much in training.

The units since those years where deaths were prevalent have afaik had their voltages lowered and police (through billions of dollars in additional political funding mind you) were to have already been trained on the actual lethal potential of them.

If he was charging at them, I might see that point of view.

The cops risked their lives for the attacker of Paul Pelosi.

huh?

Shur isn't that the whole theme of these threads? American cops are crazy, all gun toting murdering baxtards. Except the ones who dealt with Pelosi. Or the ones who don't shoot people unncessarily. The vast majority I'd imagine, but no, ACAB means they're all baxtards. And a lot of posters on here seem to fit that ACAB flag.

I've no idea why they dealt with Pelosi and Lowe different. I'd imagine one had a stabby instrument so was a tad more dangerous. Maybe the cops didn't like Mr. Pelosi so waited. Maybe the ones attending the Pelosi call were better trained. Who knows. This is why I like to wait until all the information is out. But it's also 'Merica, whole country is crazy so it's mad to lose it at yet another story from that messed up country.

There's no doubt 'Merican cops need better training, but not all of them. Just so happens to be such a big country that there's more than enough of these stories to hide all the non-negative interactions. 'Merica has a problem with guns, which is why I'm never surprised to hear these things. I honestly believe cases like Tyre are few and far between in the grand scheme of things. Lowe probably shouldn't have been shot as many times, but he definitely deserved to be shot imo. Ever had to take on anyone with a knife?

Boy did you grab the wrong end of that stick.

The idea that those are the only options speaks to your mindset.

When it works, it works! But like was mentioned above, unless both barbs or contacts hit the skin, they can be ineffective. Doesn't excuse those who keep tazing, the whole idea is to incapacitate in order to arrest.