Ontopic Jacksonville police are all about the collateral damage.
- Thread starter Duke
- Start date
Except for the fact that you don't know if they knew there were children in the vehicle.
40 seconds.
If your firing at a vehicle for 40 fucking seconds, you better sure as fuck know whats inside of it before you start to pull the trigger.
They are lucky, fucking lucky, they didn't find 4 bodies in that car.
Seriously, they TRAIN for this shit. They train not to fire unless they are sure they have a clean shot. You don't 'shoot and hope', you make sure, then fire.
WTF is wrong with you? You are advocating 'it's okay to shoot first at a perp if you are kind of certain no one else will get shot?'
You're really missing a huge part of what could have sparked their decision making. Forget the guy had a gun and didn't use it. A CAR CAN FUCKING KILL YOU IF IT HITS YOU....IT IS CERTAINLY POSSIBLE THAT THE SUSPECT WAS USING THE CAR WITH THE INTENT OF HITTING ANOTHER PERSON WHICH DOES JUSTIFY THE USE OF A GUN!!! Now you're going to argue with the 40 seconds, but here's the other part......A WEAVING CAR CAN STILL TURN AROUND AND COME RIGHT BACK TO THE OFFICERS MEANING AN ENTIRE OPPORTUNITY AGAIN TO FIRE AT THE SUSPECT SINCE HE'S AGAIN ATTEMPTING TO USE A HEAVY OBJECT (THE VEHICLE) AS A WEAPON.
Shut the fuck up. Now you are jsut making up irrational shit to try and validate your bullshit stance. I guarantee you your opinion would be radically different if it was your wife and kid in the car.
So, lets look at some math.
Let's just say our get away driver isn't a very good get away driver, and assume he's only trying to get away from the cops at 30mph.
That works out to, in 40 seconds time, a distance traveled of almost 1800 feet. Roughly 1/3 of a mile. See where I'm going with this. The car had to be going slower than 30 mph. Or you are figuring 5 cops ran on foot after a car for 1/3 a mile, over 5 football fields in length, to unload 42 shots at a car, and never once noticed ANYONE in the car besides the perp.
When you tune back into reality, let us know.
Most of what you've weighed in on the matter has been entirely conjecture. Again, none of us were there. Obviously I would feel differently "if it were my kid" because I would be responding to the situation emotionally. The facts of what actually happened would be irrelevant in my mind because I would be so distraught with grief and anger that I could not properly process them. Since I have detachment, and you can't get much more detached than getting the story on the internet, I can try to look for the underlying facts and reasons of why they chose the course of action they did. Ya know, like how our court and justice system is supposed to work.
No, and no. Here is why.
You cannot 'wait for the courts' to validate a shooting like this? Why? Because, by then, it's too late. There is a reason police train for these scenarios, and the reason being so innocent people don't die in a hail of gunfire from overzealous cops (amadou diallo anyone?)
Second, this will only make the courts when (and you know she will) the woman sues. Since the kid didn't die, the cops most likely won't face assault with a deadly weapon charge, which they should.
Now, if I look at the underlying facts, I see a stolen car with people in it. I see cops shooting at the car as it passes by, and taking 40 seconds to fire all of their rounds into the vehicle. Without a single round fired back. I'd love to look at some of the impact angles in the car, and see how many were fired from which angles.
That being said, there is no underlying circumstances that allows for the shooting 42 holes in a car with 75% of the occupants being victims of an active crime.
Oh wait, never mind, the occupants were black, so they couldn't really be innocent victims. (/mindofacop)
You cannot 'wait for the courts' to validate a shooting like this? Why? Because, by then, it's too late. There is a reason police train for these scenarios, and the reason being so innocent people don't die in a hail of gunfire from overzealous cops (amadou diallo anyone?)
Second, this will only make the courts when (and you know she will) the woman sues. Since the kid didn't die, the cops most likely won't face assault with a deadly weapon charge, which they should.
Now, if I look at the underlying facts, I see a stolen car with people in it. I see cops shooting at the car as it passes by, and taking 40 seconds to fire all of their rounds into the vehicle. Without a single round fired back. I'd love to look at some of the impact angles in the car, and see how many were fired from which angles.
That being said, there is no underlying circumstances that allows for the shooting 42 holes in a car with 75% of the occupants being victims of an active crime.
Oh wait, never mind, the occupants were black, so they couldn't really be innocent victims. (/mindofacop)
those cops just retired that family. the county is going to have their asses handed to them in civil court
But you're making up sh*t to validate that the cops decided, hey let's shoot this car up for the hell of it. How is that any different?
I guarantee you your opinion would be radically different if it was your body that was in the way of the car.
Your situation assumes the driver was simply trying to get away.
Reality?
You're right, it never happens
http://www.policeone.com/suspect-pu...njured-when-suspect-uses-vehicle-as-a-weapon/
http://cbs13.com/local/ambulance.shooting.police.2.1595710.html
http://www.wfaa.com/news/crime/ffff-84867942.html
Duke, I appreciate your empassioned responses, but the reality is that 5 cops took 42 shots at a moving car.
That's an average of 8 shots per cop, which would probably take 2-3 seconds to fire. This isn't Rambo 3. There weren't machine guns or bombs involved. Cops all over America (and elsewhere) open fire on moving vehicles many times per day in order to take a dangerous suspect down as quickly as possible, before they have a chance to put additional people in danger. Since that's the case it could be argued that the reaction in this instance was completely normal. Justified, even, considering I've only seen a few bankrobbers or criminals calmly drive away following an incident. Most of them are erratic at best, and very anxious to get away. They don't care who they run over to do so. So perhaps that was what the cops were thinking. Perhaps they actually felt threatened by the man and the car, or a desire to preserve the general public.
It goes without saying that this case is a bit different since there happened to be children in the car. I can't say for sure, but I doubt the police knew that. Cops aren't trained to assume there are children in backseats and to never, ever open fire on a vehicle for fear of killing a baby. They are trained to use what they consider to be an appropriate level of response to a given situation.
This whole thing is unfortunate. It's also a journalist's wet dream. Drama! Intrigue! Don't get sucked into the gay media game. Sup Dave. I guarantee these cops are pretty torn up over this. They have a lot of time on the force. It's just one of those things where the good guys look like the bad guys in the eyes of the bored public even though this sort of tragedy hardly ever happens.
That's an average of 8 shots per cop, which would probably take 2-3 seconds to fire. This isn't Rambo 3. There weren't machine guns or bombs involved. Cops all over America (and elsewhere) open fire on moving vehicles many times per day in order to take a dangerous suspect down as quickly as possible, before they have a chance to put additional people in danger. Since that's the case it could be argued that the reaction in this instance was completely normal. Justified, even, considering I've only seen a few bankrobbers or criminals calmly drive away following an incident. Most of them are erratic at best, and very anxious to get away. They don't care who they run over to do so. So perhaps that was what the cops were thinking. Perhaps they actually felt threatened by the man and the car, or a desire to preserve the general public.
It goes without saying that this case is a bit different since there happened to be children in the car. I can't say for sure, but I doubt the police knew that. Cops aren't trained to assume there are children in backseats and to never, ever open fire on a vehicle for fear of killing a baby. They are trained to use what they consider to be an appropriate level of response to a given situation.
This whole thing is unfortunate. It's also a journalist's wet dream. Drama! Intrigue! Don't get sucked into the gay media game. Sup Dave. I guarantee these cops are pretty torn up over this. They have a lot of time on the force. It's just one of those things where the good guys look like the bad guys in the eyes of the bored public even though this sort of tragedy hardly ever happens.
Last edited:
wtf is this?I never said 'it never happens'.
Once again, math doesn't follow. 40 seconds @ 30 miles mph = 1/3 of a mile. No real person would really fire a handgun at a target that far away and expect to make hits. And thats 40 seconds of FIRING the guns. Also, 30mph = plenty of time to get out of the fuckin way if you are on foot. Do the math. Don't add up. He couldn't have been going so fast that a reasonable civilian would feel 'OMG I HAVE TO SHOOT RIGHT NOW OR IM DEAD'.
Much less 5 of them, emptying their guns full clip, slowly, I may add, at a car with 3 innocents inside.
The cops were not trained well. Period.
The cops were trigger happy.
Duke, can you show me the full scale layout you used to determine exactly what happened to know where things were and where the car was during these 40 seconds (that I still haven't found a news article that says that, only you saying, "reports say that it happened in 40 seconds"
Because I just looked at the layout, and I could easily see how 40 seconds translated into not much movement by the vehicle other than attempts to hit people and still find a way out.
Syrup Beaver
pants log
lol
Who needs a diorama when you have photos.
Explain this coqui.
Let's see, how fast could the car have been going to have at least 11 (count them) shots fired into it in a close pattern like that?
Oh, and I'm guessing you can tell those shots were fired from the side of the car, right? Either that, or the 2 officers (based on the amount of shots fired) suck so bad at marksmanship that trying to shoot the officer from the front wound up with them peppering the passenger side of the vehicle.
Use logic here, for once.
Who needs a diorama when you have photos.
Explain this coqui.
Let's see, how fast could the car have been going to have at least 11 (count them) shots fired into it in a close pattern like that?
Oh, and I'm guessing you can tell those shots were fired from the side of the car, right? Either that, or the 2 officers (based on the amount of shots fired) suck so bad at marksmanship that trying to shoot the officer from the front wound up with them peppering the passenger side of the vehicle.
Use logic here, for once.
Ask Duke. He's the one that knows exactly what happened. All I can do is speculate as to how there's enough traffic, etc. to cause enough looping around for him to have to get shot multiple times.