Quote:
Originally Posted by Bent Wookie
Sorry, but that wiki article isn't accurate.
Reread what I wrote.
An individual who used "deadly force" while committing a crime will, most assuredly see a much different response from police in terms of tactics. That fact, in it of itself does NOT mean lethal force can be used by police.
The part you should have highlighted was the "all circumstances at the time".
In your original video link, I don't think lethal force could have been justified at any point in that video.
|
You know, you are right about one thing. It is the internet and people are allowed their opinions no matter how uniformed they are. From the chief of police...
Quote:
|
"For him to make the judgment call that he did shows great restraint and maturity," New Richmond Police Chief Randy Harvey told WLWT about Kidder, who's been on the force for a year. "This video footage, it eliminated all doubt that this officer would have been justified if in fact it came to a shooting."
|
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/crime-co...y-sure-n344011
Pretty much any article you read on the matter says the same thing. From CNN...
Quote:
If there were a checklist for when it's OK to shoot a suspect, Kidder could have ticked most of the boxes.
Double homicide suspect, check. Possibly armed, check.
Verbally threatening police, check.
Refusing to remove hands from pockets, check.
Charging at an officer, check.
|
http://www.cnn.com/2015/04/19/us/ohi...shoot-suspect/
Anyone of those facts would have justified shooting the guy much less all of them. So considering
all circumstances at the time doesn't mean you can ignore any of them including what crime he is suspected of committing.