Australian Politics Forum

Sir Spot of Borg

Gold Member

Offline

WE ARE BORG

Posts: 26513
Australia

Re: Shoot to Kill
Reply #15 - May 11^th, 2012 at 9:36am

Johnsmith wrote on May 11^th, 2012 at 9:23am:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 11^th, 2012 at 9:20am:

freediver wrote on May 10^th, 2012 at 7:31pm:

Tasers are obviously a far better option - much lower risk of death, pretty much zero compared to a gun. Even pepper spray can kill occasionally, but to attempt to compare it to shooting someone is absurd.

If someone has a knife and is threatening people with it, I don't have a problem with killing them. Someone skilled with a knife can kill in under a second if they are close enough.

I UNDERSTAND YOUR POINT but i disagree. I dont think police are justified in killing someone with a gun if they only have a knife. I especially dont think private citizens are justified. My opinion. Every case is different of course and if they are close enough perhaps it may be needed but usually in the cases on the news they arent. A taser would do the same job.

SOB

SOB - your living in lala land if you see any difference between a knife and gun .. both kill just as easily, and someone juiced up on drugs just won't stop if you shoot them in the arm or legs .. how many people died from stabbings last year? how many were shot? If I was a cop and you ran at me with a knife, sorry but your an idiot and you deserve to die.. I'm aiming for the head

What did I just say? Obviously there are circumstances where they should be shot. I dont think it should be just routine though to shoot because someone might have a knife and they arent close to you or threatening you imminently.

The cases that get on the news are usually someone turning around or putting their hand in their pocket or something. WTF is wrong with a taser?

SOB

Back to top

Whaaaaaah!
I'm a
Moron!

- edited by some unethical admin - you think its funny? - its a slippery slope

IP Logged

Johnsmith

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 4716
Gender: male

Re: Shoot to Kill
Reply #16 - May 11^th, 2012 at 9:39am

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 11^th, 2012 at 9:36am:

Johnsmith wrote on May 11^th, 2012 at 9:23am:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 11^th, 2012 at 9:20am:

freediver wrote on May 10^th, 2012 at 7:31pm:

Tasers are obviously a far better option - much lower risk of death, pretty much zero compared to a gun. Even pepper spray can kill occasionally, but to attempt to compare it to shooting someone is absurd.

If someone has a knife and is threatening people with it, I don't have a problem with killing them. Someone skilled with a knife can kill in under a second if they are close enough.

I UNDERSTAND YOUR POINT but i disagree. I dont think police are justified in killing someone with a gun if they only have a knife. I especially dont think private citizens are justified. My opinion. Every case is different of course and if they are close enough perhaps it may be needed but usually in the cases on the news they arent. A taser would do the same job.

SOB

SOB - your living in lala land if you see any difference between a knife and gun .. both kill just as easily, and someone juiced up on drugs just won't stop if you shoot them in the arm or legs .. how many people died from stabbings last year? how many were shot? If I was a cop and you ran at me with a knife, sorry but your an idiot and you deserve to die.. I'm aiming for the head

What did I just say? Obviously there are circumstances where they should be shot. I dont think it should be just routine though to shoot because someone might have a knife and they arent close to you or threatening you imminently.

The cases that get on the news are usually someone turning around or putting their hand in their pocket or something. WTF is wrong with a taser?

SOB

Standard Operating Procedure, to my understanding (I am not nor ever have been a police officer), is to shoot only if they are threatened with a knife .. the person has to be approaching them or another innocent bystander with the weapon before the police shoot ... they do not just shoot everyone that holds a knife

Back to top

When politicians offer you something for nothing, or something that sounds too good to be true, it's always worth taking a careful second look.
(Malcolm Turncoat)

IP Logged

BigOl64

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 14438
Townsville QLD
Gender: male

Re: Shoot to Kill
Reply #17 - May 11^th, 2012 at 9:53am

They is only one purpose to shooting a human being, and that is to kill them, no-one gets taught to wound / miss on purposes, that is merely a by-product of poor aiming / adrenaline shakes / fear.

The standard is three rounds to the centre body mass, so the person pulling the trigger better be sure that is the outcome required and it can be justified.

Back to top

IP Logged

... Gold Member Offline Posts: 23673 WA Gender:	Re: Shoot to Kill Reply #18 - May 11^th, 2012 at 9:54am Tasers don't always stop people either. A quick brush- off of those electrodes and they're free. Also the range of tasers are severely limited, and there is no second shot.
Back to top	In the fullness of time... IP Logged

Sir Spot of Borg

Gold Member

Offline

WE ARE BORG

Posts: 26513
Australia

Re: Shoot to Kill
Reply #19 - May 11^th, 2012 at 9:55am

Johnsmith wrote on May 11^th, 2012 at 9:39am:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 11^th, 2012 at 9:36am:

Johnsmith wrote on May 11^th, 2012 at 9:23am:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 11^th, 2012 at 9:20am:

freediver wrote on May 10^th, 2012 at 7:31pm:

Tasers are obviously a far better option - much lower risk of death, pretty much zero compared to a gun. Even pepper spray can kill occasionally, but to attempt to compare it to shooting someone is absurd.

If someone has a knife and is threatening people with it, I don't have a problem with killing them. Someone skilled with a knife can kill in under a second if they are close enough.

I UNDERSTAND YOUR POINT but i disagree. I dont think police are justified in killing someone with a gun if they only have a knife. I especially dont think private citizens are justified. My opinion. Every case is different of course and if they are close enough perhaps it may be needed but usually in the cases on the news they arent. A taser would do the same job.

SOB

SOB - your living in lala land if you see any difference between a knife and gun .. both kill just as easily, and someone juiced up on drugs just won't stop if you shoot them in the arm or legs .. how many people died from stabbings last year? how many were shot? If I was a cop and you ran at me with a knife, sorry but your an idiot and you deserve to die.. I'm aiming for the head

What did I just say? Obviously there are circumstances where they should be shot. I dont think it should be just routine though to shoot because someone might have a knife and they arent close to you or threatening you imminently.

The cases that get on the news are usually someone turning around or putting their hand in their pocket or something. WTF is wrong with a taser?

SOB

Standard Operating Procedure, to my understanding (I am not nor ever have been a police officer), is to shoot only if they are threatened with a knife .. the person has to be approaching them or another innocent bystander with the weapon before the police shoot ... they do not just shoot everyone that holds a knife

Yeah I just keep thinking though about some case where some kid was shot while threatening HIMSELF with a knife. I will see if i can find it in google but not sure what to look for. Can you remember it?

SOB

Back to top

Whaaaaaah!
I'm a
Moron!

- edited by some unethical admin - you think its funny? - its a slippery slope

IP Logged

Sir Spot of Borg Gold Member Offline WE ARE BORG Posts: 26513 Australia	Re: Shoot to Kill Reply #20 - May 11^th, 2012 at 10:01am I cant find it because I dont know what to look for. It doesnt matter anyway. It was a one off and I think the policewomen who did the shooting is under review or something. SOB
Back to top	Whaaaaaah! I'm a Moron! - edited by some unethical admin - you think its funny? - its a slippery slope IP Logged

Bobby. Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 107265 Melbourne Gender:	Re: Shoot to Kill Reply #21 - May 11^th, 2012 at 11:45am The police should be like in New Zealand & the UK where they don't have guns.
Back to top	IP Logged

FriYAY

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 7395

Re: Shoot to Kill
Reply #22 - May 11^th, 2012 at 2:10pm

Shoot to kill.

I think one thing that happens is police spend so much time trying to talk the person into giving up, that when the criminal over steps the line, then shoot to kill is about the only option left.

I remember the young fella shot in Melbourne (I think that is the one SOB was referring to) and often think what would have happened if earlier on, before he became menacing, an officer had taken direct aim at a leg, to bring him down.

Another case was the bloke stomping around, waving a knife, in front of a burning house. When he eventually came at police the only option left was to shoot him dead. I recon I could have popped a .22 in his knee-cap from across the road with-out my scope. Might have given police more time and an easier target to subdue if they had tried to injure him earlier.

Who knows.

Back to top

IP Logged

Sir Spot of Borg

Gold Member

Offline

WE ARE BORG

Posts: 26513
Australia

Re: Shoot to Kill
Reply #23 - May 11^th, 2012 at 2:17pm

FriYAY wrote on May 11^th, 2012 at 2:10pm:

Shoot to kill.

I think one thing that happens is police spend so much time trying to talk the person into giving up, that when the criminal over steps the line, then shoot to kill is about the only option left.

I remember the young fella shot in Melbourne (I think that is the one SOB was referring to) and often think what would have happened if earlier on, before he became menacing, an officer had taken direct aim at a leg, to bring him down.

Another case was the bloke stomping around, waving a knife, in front of a burning house. When he eventually came at police the only option left was to shoot him dead. I recon I could have popped a .22 in his knee-cap from across the road with-out my scope. Might have given police more time and an easier target to subdue if they had tried to injure him earlier.

Who knows.

Huh. I think I agree with that. Whodda thunkit. Kinda.

I still dont see why we dont just use tasers though.

SOB

Back to top

Whaaaaaah!
I'm a
Moron!

- edited by some unethical admin - you think its funny? - its a slippery slope

IP Logged

FriYAY

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 7395

Re: Shoot to Kill
Reply #24 - May 11^th, 2012 at 2:22pm

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 11^th, 2012 at 2:17pm:

FriYAY wrote on May 11^th, 2012 at 2:10pm:

Shoot to kill.

I think one thing that happens is police spend so much time trying to talk the person into giving up, that when the criminal over steps the line, then shoot to kill is about the only option left.

I remember the young fella shot in Melbourne (I think that is the one SOB was referring to) and often think what would have happened if earlier on, before he became menacing, an officer had taken direct aim at a leg, to bring him down.

Another case was the bloke stomping around, waving a knife, in front of a burning house. When he eventually came at police the only option left was to shoot him dead. I recon I could have popped a .22 in his knee-cap from across the road with-out my scope. Might have given police more time and an easier target to subdue if they had tried to injure him earlier.

Who knows.

Huh. I think I agree with that. Whodda thunkit. Kinda.

I still dont see why we dont just use tasers though.

SOB

maybe it won't be the last time!!

I'd say guns should be the last line of defence, after sprays and tasers.

As long as the police officer makes it home safe, ahead of the criminal.

Back to top

IP Logged

Johnsmith

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 4716
Gender: male

Re: Shoot to Kill
Reply #25 - May 11^th, 2012 at 2:49pm

FriYAY wrote on May 11^th, 2012 at 2:22pm:

Sir Spot of Borg wrote on May 11^th, 2012 at 2:17pm:

FriYAY wrote on May 11^th, 2012 at 2:10pm:

Shoot to kill.

I think one thing that happens is police spend so much time trying to talk the person into giving up, that when the criminal over steps the line, then shoot to kill is about the only option left.

I remember the young fella shot in Melbourne (I think that is the one SOB was referring to) and often think what would have happened if earlier on, before he became menacing, an officer had taken direct aim at a leg, to bring him down.

Another case was the bloke stomping around, waving a knife, in front of a burning house. When he eventually came at police the only option left was to shoot him dead. I recon I could have popped a .22 in his knee-cap from across the road with-out my scope. Might have given police more time and an easier target to subdue if they had tried to injure him earlier.

Who knows.

Huh. I think I agree with that. Whodda thunkit. Kinda.

I still dont see why we dont just use tasers though.

SOB

maybe it won't be the last time!!

I'd say guns should be the last line of defence, after sprays and tasers.

As long as the police officer makes it home safe, ahead of the criminal.

they should use grenade launchers ... that'll stop em .

Back to top

When politicians offer you something for nothing, or something that sounds too good to be true, it's always worth taking a careful second look.
(Malcolm Turncoat)

IP Logged

angeleyes

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 615

Re: Shoot to Kill
Reply #26 - May 11^th, 2012 at 4:07pm

Another case was the bloke stomping around, waving a knife, in front of a burning house. When he eventually came at police the only option left was to shoot him dead. I recon I could have popped a .22 in his knee-cap from across the road with-out my scope. Might have given police more time and an easier target to subdue if they had tried to injure him earlier.

Stomping around with a knife and you could shoot him in the knee from across the road with a 22??

Move over Michael Diamond.

Back to top

IP Logged

FriYAY

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 7395

Re: Shoot to Kill
Reply #27 - May 11^th, 2012 at 4:52pm

angeleyes wrote on May 11^th, 2012 at 4:07pm:

Another case was the bloke stomping around, waving a knife, in front of a burning house. When he eventually came at police the only option left was to shoot him dead. I recon I could have popped a .22 in his knee-cap from across the road with-out my scope. Might have given police more time and an easier target to subdue if they had tried to injure him earlier.

Stomping around with a knife and you could shoot him in the knee from across the road with a 22??

Move over Michael Diamond.

Sorry, I thought people may have been familiar with the situation. Many times the man stood motionless with his arms over the front rail of the veranda, or in front of the house. Wouldn’t have been that hard.

I guess the issue then becomes “why did you shoot him, he wasn’t even threatening you”

But, hey, thanks for the input into the discussion.

Back to top

IP Logged

freediver

Gold Member

Offline

www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 49509
At my desk.

Re: Shoot to Kill
Reply #28 - May 11^th, 2012 at 6:49pm

Quote:

I dont think police are justified in killing someone with a gun if they only have a knife.

What if they attempt to stab the officer? I would be happy for a tasering policy in this situation, but only if the taser is turned up high enough to definitely stop the guy, not matter what drugs he is on. In fact a taser may even be better than a gun because it floors them pretty much straight away. You can put a hole in someone with a gun and they don't even notice it for a few seconds.

Quote:

but usually in the cases on the news they arent

I have never read a news report that contained enough of the right sort of detail to tell. A 'knife wielding man was shot' tells you nothing.

Back to top

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.

IP Logged

Sir Spot of Borg

Gold Member

Offline

WE ARE BORG

Posts: 26513
Australia

Re: Shoot to Kill
Reply #29 - May 12^th, 2012 at 6:10am

The reason I started this thread is not really because of our police and our culture seems to be okay on this issue really. I have been talking to a bunch of yanks lately though and their gun culture and the way they think seems to be completely different to us. the ones I have talked to seem to think that even from a distance you should always aim to kill. Aim for the head. Its self defense afterall. Since its mainly the police that have to make that decision here . . . . . I just wanted to guage the different opinions.

SOB

Back to top

Whaaaaaah!
I'm a
Moron!

- edited by some unethical admin - you think its funny? - its a slippery slope

IP Logged

Poll
Question: Shoot to Kill?
Yes kill em dead! No shoot to disable Use the Taser and no guns No dont shoot Maybe « Created by: Sir Spot of Borg on: May 10^th, 2012 at 5:17pm »