Georgia Firearm Forums - Georgia Packing banner
1 - 10 of 10 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
461 Posts
Perfect example of shooting to stop the threat. The officer had every right to end the assailants life, but he kept a cool head and stopped shooting after the threat was gone.
 

·
Lawyer and Gun Activist
Joined
·
28,312 Posts
Neither the news article or the video linked above indicates that the officer could have kept shooting, but stopped to spare the suspect's life.
If the suspect flopped over and hit the ground when shot the first time, the cop can't keep pumping bullets into the man's body to finish him off.
I didn't hear anything that indicated that upon being shot, the bad guy remained upright and continued facing the officer while still having possession of the gun. THAT would be a situation where the cop could shoot again, but might not, if he thought the first hit and taken the fight out of his opponent.

P.S. Reminds of that Hank Willimas Jr. song, "Attitude Adjustment." Some people have a real bad attitude until you shoot them, and then they quickly learn to play nice.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
461 Posts
gunsmoker said:
Neither the news article or the video linked above indicates that the officer could have kept shooting, but stopped to spare the suspect's life.
If the suspect flopped over and hit the ground when shot the first time, the cop can't keep pumping bullets into the man's body to finish him off.
I didn't hear anything that indicated that upon being shot, the bad guy remained upright and continued facing the officer while still having possession of the gun. THAT would be a situation where the cop could shoot again, but might not, if he thought the first hit and taken the fight out of his opponent.

P.S. Reminds of that Hank Willimas Jr. song, "Attitude Adjustment." Some people have a real bad attitude until you shoot them, and then they quickly learn to play nice.
My point was that obviously the officer's objective was to only use enough force to stop the threat, not to kill the subject. Otherwise the subject would be dead. Some people confuse the two. I've seen in numerous news articles where the officers unload their weapons into the subject in a matter of seconds. justified overkill? maybe. But from what I gathered from the article this officer did not do that. Although he did have every right to keep shooting until the subject was down and disarmed. All I'm saying is that thankfully no one lost their life in that situation.
 

·
Lawyer and Gun Activist
Joined
·
28,312 Posts
Well there always was an "attempt" version of any crime (including murder), but the law used to say that except for drug crimes, an "attempt" would carry half the penalty of the completed crime. Murder = life, so half of a life sentence was viewed as being half of 20 years, or ten years. That's why no prosecutors charged attempted murder.
Aggravated Assault carries a 20 year penalty.

Now the law was recently changed, so attempted murder (and attempts to commmit some other life-sentence crimes) carries a 30-year sentence. Maybe more prosecutors will charge it now.
But "attempt" is a specific intent crime. It sets the burden higher for the State to show what motivated the defendant to do what he did. Aggravated Assault is easier to prove. The jury instructions on it are more favorable to the prosecution.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
238 Posts
COMMANDER1911 said:
My point was that obviously the officer's objective was to only use enough force to stop the threat, not to kill the subject.
Correct, the officer probably was only trying to stop the threat; however when you shoot someone you don't necessarily have control over whether they live or die that's between them and their maker. People have been shot 4 times center mass with a 45 and survived and some folk shot 1 time center mass with a 380acp and died. You just never can tell, but its best to just set out to stop the threat and leave it up to their maker to decide their fate thereafter. :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,946 Posts
JMJ2 said:
COMMANDER1911 said:
My point was that obviously the officer's objective was to only use enough force to stop the threat, not to kill the subject.
Correct, the officer probably was only trying to stop the threat; however when you shoot someone you don't necessarily have control over whether they live or die that's between them and their maker. People have been shot 4 times center mass with a 45 and survived and some folk shot 1 time center mass with a 380acp and died. You just never can tell, but its best to just set out to stop the threat and leave it up to their maker to decide their fate thereafter. :)
:exactly:
 

·
Atlanta Overwatch
Joined
·
13,888 Posts
triggerman357 said:
JMJ2 said:
COMMANDER1911 said:
My point was that obviously the officer's objective was to only use enough force to stop the threat, not to kill the subject.
Correct, the officer probably was only trying to stop the threat; however when you shoot someone you don't necessarily have control over whether they live or die that's between them and their maker. People have been shot 4 times center mass with a 45 and survived and some folk shot 1 time center mass with a 380acp and died. You just never can tell, but its best to just set out to stop the threat and leave it up to their maker to decide their fate thereafter. :)
:exactly:
:exactly: X 2
 
1 - 10 of 10 Posts
Top