From Somalia With Love

[Econoline]

Of course not. But that's not something I've been trained to do, and that's not part of my job. I also have no training with handguns, so I probably wouldn't do a competent job with that tool either.

But snailgate's point was that with training and competency something like a Monadnock PR-24 Control Baton *COULD* be--is designed to be--an effective, non-lethal tool to use in this sort of situation.

[BoSoxGal]

They shot him TWENTY-SEVEN times!

He wasn't wielding a firearm, just a knife. He could have been disarmed without use of a firearm, but certainly with a non-lethal shot to the legs/arms. There was no reason to shoot him TWENTY-SEVEN times!!

Our police are out of control!

I watched a video in which two of my cops held loaded guns essentially to the head of a motorist who took a little while to stop for them (less than a mile) while driving 35mph. She was 98 lbs soaking wet. They held their guns on her and screamed at her for approximately 15 minutes, after clearly recognizing that she was unarmed and incapable of harming them. They were PISSED that she didn't stop right away - she had mental health issues. I dismissed most of the charges they'd drawn up against her and did a deferred on the primary one because of the totally unnecessary show of force. It was obvious in the booking video that during the episode of being drawn down on, she had been so terrified that she emptied her bladder.

Protect and serve my ass; and yes, these same cops are 'great guys' who help little old ladies with flat tires and hand out candies at the fair, etc. Sorry but I'm at the point now where I just assume that behind every nice cop's smile lies a potentially corrupt, bullying, murderous monster.

[Big RR]

I agree BSG, and if police policy is always shoot to kill when a weapon is drawn, maybe it's time to reexamine that policy. If you're shooting to kill, 27 shots are not excessive (hell, 97 shots are not excessive), but we have to examine when it's proper to use lethal force and when it is not. Othersi4e, we will just have the same thing, again and again.

As for your example, I've seen things like it as well--testosterone fueled cops acting out after a chase or being called a name by a suspect. The solution is to get rid of these guys 9whatever their proportion of the force is), but it's pretty apparent we cannot rely on the police force to police themselves.

[Gob]

You should do away with your police force, its obviously broken. Things would all work out fine then.

[oldr_n_wsr]

He could have been disarmed without use of a firearm, but certainly with a non-lethal shot to the legs/arms.

Only in hte movies does that work. I agree being shot 27 times is excessive to say the least, but non-lethal shots to the legs/arms are not easily completed. Heck, a lot of time you hear about bunches of shots taken with maybe two hits.
When a gun is pulled, one aims for body mass, not arms and legs.
The question is not "where" to shoot, but "when" to shoot.