Looks like even in that ten second video he was looking for trouble and that's a decent-sized axe from the looks of it, but what causes a 21 year old kid to go nuts like this? Almost seemed like a "suicide by cop" scenario.
If you're 21 and your idea of fun is to vandalize other people's shit and then ignore a cop who tells you to put the axe down. and instead advance on the dude with a drawn gun, well...you get what you get.
Yeah, there's no doubt the cop was in the right. I can't imagine anybody would advance on a gun unless they actually wanted to die, there's no other explanation unless he's high off his ass.
Maybe I missed something, but the article and video don't actually show the guy advancing on anyone with an axe. Is there another story? I'm not sure why everyone's jumping to the conclusion - based only on this link - that the kid advanced on the cop with the axe. I'm not saying he didn't, but many of you seem to be privy to information not contained in the linked article. Unless you're not, in which case, you're jumping to conclusions based solely on the cop's version. If the past several years have taught you anything, we have significant issues with police violence in this country. I'm not saying the cop's version is definitely false. I am saying that I haven't seen anything to indicate that his version (and let's face it, he has plenty of reasons to shade the truth as there's a dead kid here) is the definitive one. I'd like to see more evidence, or non-interested eyewitness accounts as to what happened before I jump on the 'Cop absolutely did the right thing' bandwagon. Maybe he did, but that article doesn't have anything other than the cop's bare bones version. Once again, this goes to my continuing point about the media and being discerning regarding what is actually fact and what is supposition.
That was one reason why I poste the link. It seems this happened on Saturday? Based on the way this info is handled in the news for this sort of thing, within 24 hours, we usually get either a) media firestorm and public outcry about a wrongful shooting; b) evidence the person shot was a whack job or hopped up on drugs. The coverage for this seems over. There was a non-cop account of immediately prior to the shooting, that I saw reprinted in several places: I was hoping there was more info.
The dialogue continues: http://www.mediaite.com/tv/msnbcs-m...ck-guy/#ooid=FlNGxpeTq8wHkfOiRujWNKf87o6Vkyhx
N. M She is a monstrously retarded nutjob on a holiday from lithium. She doesn't belong on TV, she doesn't belong working in fast food. She needs professional help.
I did find this: Cops usually work with the "21 foot rule" (Meaning it only takes about a second for an armed person to attack from 21 feet away) so, if it was "Almost point blank range" the guy was most certainly advancing on the cop. I also love the "...the man likely could have been disarmed." line. Disarming someone with an ax is not easy, nor very prudent to do when you're holding a gun to keep yourself from being attacked.
An axe could be one of the worst blunt weapons to be attacked with. You might use that "X" move with your arms properly to soften a bat blow, or maybe wrap your coat around your arm to block a small blade, there's no stopping an axe. It can heavily damage something a car travelling at full speed can't put a dent in. Guys who are well-trained like cops should be handle their shit and use lethal force as a last resort. Watch this Russian cop define "badass motherfucker": ... Enjoy those broken ribs, dipshit. But that was a flat shovel, meant to hurt. An axe is meant to kill, we all know how dangerous they are. You get attacked with THAT, by all means kill the silly son of a bitch.
Why is it that the people who most vociferously argue for the government to have as little impact as possible over people's lives seem to be the least sceptical when a duly appointed agent of the government kills one of its citizens?
Are you saying in general, or in the instance of the guy with the axe charging the police officer? With the axe dude, I think it's a good example of people taking the side that most benefits them directly (I lost a good friend! He was a nice guy!) rather than what benefits society at large and/or is the legally and morally correct thing (my idiot friend charged an officer with a deadly weapon? Sucks he's dead, but what did he expect would happen?). In general... well, it's hard to give an answer about something so broad. If we had an answer, it wouldn't be a problem.
I do mean in general. The axe guy might be a good example of suicide by cop, or might be a good example of lethal force being necessary, or it might be an example of a situation where lethal force wasn't actually necessary. There is certainly a huge difference in numbers of people killed by police in America compared to the amount of people killed by other first world police forces. I hope I'm not being too dramatic in saying this, but the police killing someone is, I think, the ultimate expression of the state's power over its citizens. I'm not saying that the police should never need to use lethal force, but I would hope that any reasonable person would see every instance of it happening as something that require scrutiny and investigation and an understand of how it happened so as to prevent it happening again in the future. I would hope that anyone with a libertarian streak would believe that to a much stronger degree than the average person. But it seems people around this board have posted words to the effect - and not just in regards to this particular case - that summary execution is what you deserve for not behaving in the correct manner in the presence of a police officer.
Libertarian here. Or at least that's how I identify; easiest answer to questions on forms, views are obviously nuanced depending on the situation. I have my views about what the state and government should and shouldn't do. In fact my next tattoo, for reasons not limited to but including my political views, is going to be a version of the Gadsden Flag. However, my views, and my moral compass, include the caveat of "don't be a fucking idiot." If you do something criminal that is putting an innocent person's life in danger (yes, I'm including actors of the state as innocent people, because they still have families and loved ones to go home to as well), you should be prepared to face the consequences of your actions up to and including death.
'Credible terror threat' prompts closure of all LA public schools http://www.foxnews.com/us/2015/12/1...s-closure-all-la-public-schools/?intcmp=hpbt1
It's an interesting time to work in schools, I can tell you that. As an administrator based at one, I have had numerous questions from parents and teachers alike regarding our response. Fortunately, we are very well prepared. Unfortunately, I have also had to ask myself some very serious questions... I work in a "gun free zone," which means for me that even once I get my CHL I will not be allowed to defend myself or others by conventional means (I am legally allowed, at least here, to defend children under my care using up to and including deadly force). I have ultimately decided that my passion for this job, and my happiness in this profession, is worth losing my life. It's not something I hope occurs, but if it does, then I have already accepted it. The day to day joy I get, and the impact my profession has on others, is worth the potential costs. As far as mounting a defense, my office is hidden but has a great view of the front door and parking lot. I would be the person in the best position to react to a threat, which I am prepared to do as much as the law allows those in gun free zones to "prepare."... All around, it's a sad scenario. But you have to be prepared for if the worst happens (and it will never, ever happen like you anticipate). You should not be afraid, but you should be prepared to act in a fluid to any kind of situation.
I work in a completely different environment than where that threat took place, never mind a different state. I can't comment on that. But I figured it would be a good place to offer some commentary on the idea of guns in schools and the possibility of arming teachers/administrators. Anyone have any thoughts on this? I am still not sure where I stand, and regardless my opinion will always start with "it depends."