284 replies to this topic

[old soldier]

Exactly. If I were an LEO, my goal everyday would be to live another day to see my family; and if that means I have to shoot somebody who is coming at me with a knife, then so be it. Police are paid to enforce the law, not die to prevent injury to a suspect.



I really don't think it is fair for anyone to be "armchair quarterbacking" the officers or the family. None of us were there so we don't know exactly what happened. The scene could have played out in many ways, but police officers don't always have the luxury of taking longer than a few seconds to make a decision. The family may or may not have feared for their lives. Nobody knows the events that led up to the incident so we can not judge the family for nat taking a different course of action either...

Maybe the man could have been subdued without the use of lethal force, but is it really a police officer's job to fight an armed man while being unarmed?

What if the police left the man in his home and he killed himself and/or a family member(s)? You better beleive that the police would be under fire for that.

if the police had cleared the house of parents and maybe got a preacher or hostage negotiator, and even those bean bag guns I saw cops on that tv show using they might not have had to shoot the guy. if he committed suicide while they were gearing up it would have caused a lot less commotion than when they have to shoot someone

I would guess they would be getting fewer calls now from families that have someone acting wierd in their house.

[momdadnteen]

FOLSOM, Calif. -- A witness reports that a man was fatally shot by Folsom police during an altercation Sunday morning.

The shooting happened in the 100 block of Elkin Circle in Folsom.

Police said they responded to a call from the family at the residence at about 10:30 a.m.

Officials said scene was very volatile. Details surrounding the shooting were not immediately available.

No other injuries were reported.

Stay with KCRA.com and KCRA 3 Reports at 5 p.m. for the latest on this developing story.

[momdadnteen]

Obviously a very touchy subject, as it always is. I'd like to add my Two Cents: I admire and support any police officer for always putting their lives on the line. HOWEVER, simply put, we must always QUESTION AUTHORITY. This situation does not have to be an "either or" choosing. Now a young 23 yro man is dead; I can't understand why the officers could not have shot him in the leg or even both legs to disable him. He needed help; not death.

We need the facts; and we should have the facts as citizens of thsi community; yet, the FPD is still not releasing any information. We should not put blind trust into authority as some have done on this thread. We should always respect those that fight for our safety. But, when unfortunate situations like this happen, and a young man is dead, we should question the facts and the authority.

Have a nice day!

[mylo]

I can't understand why the officers could not have shot him in the leg or even both legs to disable him. He needed help; not death.

Because the best way of taking down an assailant is 3 shots to the chest. They train for that, and practice all the time. It's why those little dummy targets at the firing range don't usually have legs.

Miss the legs, they reach you, you die. 3 to the chest, dropped, you live to do your job another day.

The police did exactly what they are trained to do.

[momdadnteen]

Because the best way of taking down an assailant is 3 shots to the chest. They train for that, and practice all the time. It's why those little dummy targets at the firing range don't usually have legs.

Miss the legs, they reach you, you die. 3 to the chest, dropped, you live to do your job another day.

The police did exactly what they are trained to do.

Thank you; that really helped me understand the situation.

[Sue]

Thank you; that really helped me understand the situation.

I agree with momdadnteen, and the thought that the police are trained to "shoot and kill", no matter what, is ridiculous, because they are not animals, they are human beings and they should be able to reason whether something is appropriate or inappropriate. If they are trained to only shoot and kill, why didn't they do that yesterday, in ARC? Because, they handled the situation appropriately, that's why, they used reasoning.

The FPD should release some kind of statement about the situation so that the citizens of Folsom can understand why/how this happened.

I appreciate the work they do, however, I also feel they need to have some accountability to the citizens of this community, we are paying their salary. Most of us rarely or never have interaction with them, but if/when we do, I would hope they would respond appropriately and at this point it appears, in this situation, their actions were not appropriate.

[ducky]

Has the investigation been concluded?

[jafount]

I agree with momdadnteen, and the thought that the police are trained to "shoot and kill", no matter what, is ridiculous, because they are not animals, they are human beings and they should be able to reason whether something is appropriate or inappropriate. If they are trained to only shoot and kill, why didn't they do that yesterday, in ARC? Because, they handled the situation appropriately, that's why, they used reasoning.

The FPD should release some kind of statement about the situation so that the citizens of Folsom can understand why/how this happened.

I appreciate the work they do, however, I also feel they need to have some accountability to the citizens of this community, we are paying their salary. Most of us rarely or never have interaction with them, but if/when we do, I would hope they would respond appropriately and at this point it appears, in this situation, their actions were not appropriate.

Wrong. You aren't trained to shoot and kill. You are trained to shoot to end the threat. A mentally deranged subject with a knife is a threat.

I will never cease to be amazed by the "shoot them in the leg" contingent that exists in society. Let me give you a couple of reasons as to why this doesn't work:

1. Legs are smaller targets than center mass of a torso, thus they are harder to hit
2. If you are shooting someone, you are doing so because there is an imminent and deadly threat. Shooting someone in the leg would imply there was no imminent threat, therefore deadly force was not justified
3. shooting peopel in the leg does NOT make them stop. Most people get their information from the TV and movies. Why doesn't anyone ever question why the goodguy always survives a hail of gun fire and wounding shots, but the bad guys always go down easily?
4. clip the femoral artery of a person and see how long they writhe in pain while their heart pumps their blood out through the hole.

Granted, there are less lethal options, i.e., bean bag gun, but it is not always practical to deploy these options. This could be due to a variety of reasons.

The level of stress an officer experiences in a shooting scenario is unlike anything most people are able to comprehend. By instinct, officers fall back to training, which does NOT include pointing and carefully taking aim in a shooting scenario. Please, for the love of Pete quit assuming a "shot in the leg" is a viable option in such a scenario.

[eVader]

I suppose jafount's well stated explanation applies to why police dont shoot out the tires of a dangerous criminal but will focus (at least on TV\movies) on the back window.

[Bill Z]

Wrong. You aren't trained to shoot and kill. You are trained to shoot to end the threat. A mentally deranged subject with a knife is a threat.

I will never cease to be amazed by the "shoot them in the leg" contingent that exists in society. Let me give you a couple of reasons as to why this doesn't work:

1. Legs are smaller targets than center mass of a torso, thus they are harder to hit
2. If you are shooting someone, you are doing so because there is an imminent and deadly threat. Shooting someone in the leg would imply there was no imminent threat, therefore deadly force was not justified
3. shooting peopel in the leg does NOT make them stop. Most people get their information from the TV and movies. Why doesn't anyone ever question why the goodguy always survives a hail of gun fire and wounding shots, but the bad guys always go down easily?
4. clip the femoral artery of a person and see how long they writhe in pain while their heart pumps their blood out through the hole.

Granted, there are less lethal options, i.e., bean bag gun, but it is not always practical to deploy these options. This could be due to a variety of reasons.

The level of stress an officer experiences in a shooting scenario is unlike anything most people are able to comprehend. By instinct, officers fall back to training, which does NOT include pointing and carefully taking aim in a shooting scenario. Please, for the love of Pete quit assuming a "shot in the leg" is a viable option in such a scenario.

I agree, TV doesn't care about reality, they only care about entertainment.

[Steve Heard]

We need the facts; and we should have the facts as citizens of thsi community; yet, the FPD is still not releasing any information. We should not put blind trust into authority as some have done on this thread. We should always respect those that fight for our safety. But, when unfortunate situations like this happen, and a young man is dead, we should question the facts and the authority.

The police did release information immediately after the incident, which is how we know that the young man came at them with a knife, and had been tasered twice.

Now, they are conducting an investigation, and I can't think of a case where the police come out and give a blow by blow of an incident before a thorough investigation is done.

[mylo]

The police did release information immediately after the incident, which is how we know that the young man came at them with a knife, and had been tasered twice.

I read a clarification where they stated that "both" needles of the taser had stuck. Not sure if that's being misinterpreted as "tasered twice"

[irish1]

I read a clarification where they stated that "both" needles of the taser had stuck. Not sure if that's being misinterpreted as "tasered twice"

When fired the tazer projects 2 prongs, each having its own charge wire attached. Both prongs have to hit target and 'stick' (skin, clothing etc.) which makes, or completes the circuit. This happens on one trigger pull. Once stuck a 5 second cycle of 'shock' happens and then stops. When the trigger is pulled again, another 5 seconds of 'shock'... etc...

I'm certain that the clarification of "both needles... stuck" was meant to establish that the tazer functioned as designed, and yet, did not eliminate the deadly threat.... unfortunately.

[03Evan]

The police did try non-lethal means; they used a taser. A shot to the leg is just impractical.

You have an artery in your leg called the femroal artery. If that artery is hit, you will be dead in 5-10 minutes. Not only in a leg harder to hit, but it is just as lethal as a shot to center mass. So there really isnt a point in attempting to shoot somebody in the leg because not only can it be lethal, but you can also miss and end up with injured/dead officers or bystanders.

The police shoot to subdue a threat, not to kill. If they wanted to kill, they would just shoot people in the head...

[Bill Z]

Swat isnt used in situations like these??? Wanna rethink that? This here was actually in folsom.. and this guy was actually a criminal..

http://edhtelegraph....l...n_id=&page=

So Jafout is all your insightful commentary about the rigors of policework complete fantasy and fabrication or just this particular one?? get your facts right before you leve another ridiculously long, innaccurate, and irrational post.. You sure talk like youre the definitive word on police work.. Unfortunately playing world of warcraft and shooting guns on xbox isnt real life, youre not a real cop, and therefore your "facts" are way off.. Thanks for the insight though!

Be careful, your naivety is showing.

I'm pretty sure Jafount is either a retired police officer or retired sheriff deputy.
If not "retired", then maybe he left the force for other reasons.

either way, I find your above comments insulting and out of line,
Jafount is a very respectable ex-officer and a respected member of this forum.