Graphic Video Released in “Firing Squad” Style Police Killing of Milton Hall

a reply to: BASSPLYR

Your head has to hurt from pounding this wall with logic and being met with the same non sense over and over again.
All great post from you

a reply to: Sremmos80

Well thank you. It's nice to talk to another rational adult. Bet you don't immediately shoot people 10 times as a flinch response while they are standing 40 feet away from you stammering around terrified of 8 guys with guns and a crazy attack dog. But hey that's us normal people thinking here.

a reply to: BASSPLYR

Oh man if you call what he did a fighting stance then you should just admit now that you know very little about what a fighting stance is and have just shown your hand that you really don't know f all about this whole dealing with aggressive people thing. Cop or not.

The guy was in an aggressive fighting stance. Just because it does not match, in your "expert opinion," a specific fighting stance does not matter. The stance he took was menacing and showed he was preparing for action against the police officers.

His whole body language tells me that this is a scared, confused person, who can be dealt with in a more mature less short sighted reactionary response. Could he have charged like you're ENTIRE HYPOTHESIS for explaining their poorly thought out response to this situation resides on. Sure. but HE DIDN'T. That's evident in the video. He clearly didn't. SO EVERYTHING you keep bringing up is IRRELEVANT. That wasn't what was going on there. Rational people see this. Bet talking to the guy and trying to use well thought out dialogue with him could have lessened the tension. A professional would have tried to disarm the tension first. Hard to believe but Calm EXPERIENCED dialogue works even on crazy people too. You just have to think for a millisecond. You know like a normal socially developed adult would think to do.

If he was scared and confused, he would not be making aggressive threats towards the officers. He knew exactly what he was doing and the appearance he was giving off.

There is no way you can argue the guy did not start approaching the officers to the left just before he was shot.

Talking only goes so far. They told him to drop the knife many, many times. Maybe if he would have taken a less aggressive stance, making the officers think he could attack at any moment, they could have tried to start a dialog by asking him what his favorite color is. Like I said, both parties have to be willing to deescalate. If he showed he was willing to deescalate, by doing something like sitting down or dropping the knife the police could have responded in kind.

Plus, like I said, he was not completely surrounded. He could have started to flee or retreated if he did not want to take an aggressive stance.

I, yes I, and plenty of other people could have taken any one of the cops "nightsticks" and calmly walked up to the guy and simply whacked the stick on his hand. The tip of the stick is somewhere 5 feet in front of me. I think I'll make it. Hey you, YES YOU! do this experiment at home. Take a solid 2 foot long hardened stick and tap the back of your hand with it. Hurts like hell. Damn thats S#*$@ is delicate!!! Trust me it takes a long time of exposure to getting sticks whacked on your hands to resist not immediately dropping ANYTHING that is in your hand, cracked out, pcp'd out or not. . You'll be lucky if your hand isn't shattered. Again I would say "it's simple Physics" but what are the odds. Either way I would have a reasonable degree of safety and comfort. Especially since another guy is standing 18 inches away from with me with a what?... a taser gun. You telling me 99% of the time a taser doesn't Completely F up a old 145 lb mans day. combined with a dude whacking his hand with a stick, combined with a dog and a bunch of other dudes with tasers. I'm sure I'd be OK. And don't bring up that "21 foot rule thing again" Remember I know a hell of a lot more about how blades work then you. Remember the whole half a lifetime practicing blade work thing. I know it's convenient to forget. But it really does mean that in this situation when I say there are better ways to deal with a scared confused guy with a knife. there actually is and what they did wasn't it.

It is extremely hard to hit something with a baton, such as a hand or a knife, with reliable accuracy especially if it is moving. Or trying to stab you. Plus, you have now moved yourself closer to someone armed with a knife. And you are only armed with a baton. Please, fiction vs. non-fiction. This is real life, not some movie or tv show.

You keep taking this situation out of context. If every day people can Immediately think up of more adult and reasonable way to deal with the exact same situation, then that shows that there is a PROBLEM with the way these cops dealt with this situation.

Every day people who are suddenly thrust into the situation with mere moments to make decisions and take actions that could result in the death of yourself or someone else? No.

You are making these criticisms from the comfort of your home, in front of your computer, with the luxury of seeing the entire incident numerous times, with an unlimited amount of time to pick apart their approach, think about your own approach and then rethink the approach and then back it all up with the assumption that such a brazen approach is sure to succeed.

The police officers did not have that luxury in this situation and do not have that luxury in future situations.

a reply to: areyouserious2010

Time and time again I see posters defend police actions,the stories get more and more ridiculous soon they'll be mobilising swat teams to shut down lemonade stands,of course they'll shoot the dog whilst there,taser granny for complaining,burn the house down with flash bangs as officer tackleberry types drag out little Johnny to be held indefinately under the patriot act for his latest facebook posts and people like you will be there to explain away how their actions are measured and logical.

a reply to: areyouserious2010

I must say that the absolute bravery the 6 officers exhibited was exemplary. I was impressed, "NOT"!

a reply to: Sremmos80

So lets just assume everyone is going to bull rush as soon as they take 2 steps.

You do realize you are citing South Park as evidence of some argument you are trying to make right?

Let me go over it again. The man was not completely surrounded. The man had a clear path to retreat from the officers or attempt to flee.

The man was presented with three choices.
1. Don't move at all. Stand your ground, don't approach the police, but don't flee. The standoff would have continued and could have resulted differently. The police did not shoot the man when he did this.

2. Take the clear avenue of retreat, which is away from the camera and towards the right of the screen. The police will assuredly follow you or give chase if you flee. The man started to take this avenue and the police did not automatically shoot him.

3. Move in the direction of the police. You are holding a knife, acting aggressively, making threats and are now closing the distance between yourself and the police.

For some reason, the man chose the option to move towards the police.

Why?

Was it to give the nearest police officer a handshake? Probably not.

Was it to go pet the nice doggy? Probably not.

Was it to close the distance with the nearest police officer or police dog and follow through with the threats you have been making for the last minute? Who knows?

It is not unreasonable for the police to perceive this as his intention. It was clearly demonstrated he was not going to be shot if he stood there or retreated because the police did not shoot him when he chose these options.

a reply to: khnum

Time and time again I see posters defend police actions,the stories get more and more ridiculous soon they'll be mobilising swat teams to shut down lemonade stands,of course they'll shoot the dog whilst there,taser granny for complaining,burn the house down with flash bangs as officer tackleberry types drag out little Johnny to be held indefinately under the patriot act for his latest facebook posts and people like you will be there to explain away how their actions are measured and logical.

What you describe has no comparison to the events we are discussing.

I understand this is a conspiracy website. Try to keep it in perspective.

Why are people arguing? A mentally ill person with a knife just got shot by multiple cops as if their life was actually threatened by this man.

We don't even do this to animals, we tranq them.

You guys are pathetic.

originally posted by: areyouserious2010
a reply to: Sremmos80

So lets just assume everyone is going to bull rush as soon as they take 2 steps.

You do realize you are citing South Park as evidence of some argument you are trying to make right?

Let me go over it again. The man was not completely surrounded. The man had a clear path to retreat from the officers or attempt to flee.

The man was presented with three choices.
1. Don't move at all. Stand your ground, don't approach the police, but don't flee. The standoff would have continued and could have resulted differently. The police did not shoot the man when he did this.

2. Take the clear avenue of retreat, which is away from the camera and towards the right of the screen. The police will assuredly follow you or give chase if you flee. The man started to take this avenue and the police did not automatically shoot him.

3. Move in the direction of the police. You are holding a knife, acting aggressively, making threats and are now closing the distance between yourself and the police.

For some reason, the man chose the option to move towards the police.

Why?

Was it to give the nearest police officer a handshake? Probably not.

Was it to go pet the nice doggy? Probably not.

Was it to close the distance with the nearest police officer or police dog and follow through with the threats you have been making for the last minute? Who knows?

It is not unreasonable for the police to perceive this as his intention. It was clearly demonstrated he was not going to be shot if he stood there or retreated because the police did not shoot him when he chose these options.

So your answer is shoot at him over 30 times?
Go move to a different country please.

originally posted by: areyouserious2010
a reply to: khnum

No apologies your country cant liberate a can of beans without blowing the living crap out of it first,this guy would of probably survived with Canadian or Australian police.

Ok? There are millions upon millions of people who aren't speaking German right now because the US decided to blow the living crap out of stuff and liberate a few people.

Let's try to stay on topic.

I missed your argument.

Did you have one?

so now you are saying that the police are at war...they are defending their country ?

i was depressed watching those cops murder that guy and now even more depressed reading your posts through this thread.....you may consider yourself a reasonable person but i can assure you that you are not...reading your posts remind of the crazy guy screaming "i am not crazy"

that was a firing squad and those police are murderers

a reply to: mindseye1609

Basically at bare minimum the 21 foot rule establishes that it takes 1.5 seconds on average to cover 21 feet when attacking... 1.5 seconds is an instant when its life and death.

Yes.
But when did the victim ever approach the speed where he could cover 21 feet in 1.5 seconds?
The man shuffled sideways... Quick, shoot him guys!
You cops just hate that your brethren look like a bunch of scared little girls in this case

a reply to: jidnum

So your answer is shoot at him over 30 times?

No, my answer is to shoot him. He was only struck 11 times. If there are six out of eight officers that fired that is an average of between 7-8 shots per officer.

I'll even show my math. 47 / 6 = 7.833333333333....

If it were one on one, 7-8 shots from the officer does not seem so unreasonable.

It was only multiplied by 6 because there were six officers who perceived the same threat and opened fire at the same time. If there was a threat, which clearly there was, what would it matter if one cop or 1000 cops opened fire?

Go move to a different country please.

Umm, no.

a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

so now you are saying that the police are at war...they are defending their country ?

That's not what I said at all. I totally disagree with the very premise of your statement. You are taking this part of the conversation completely out of context. Go back and read the proper context to put my comments into perspective.

i was depressed watching those cops murder that guy and now even more depressed reading your posts through this thread.....you may consider yourself a reasonable person but i can assure you that you are not...reading your posts remind of the crazy guy screaming "i am not crazy"

I missed your argument. I caught that you are calling me crazy, but I missed where you add something constructive to the conversation.

I understand you may disagree with me. And that's ok. And I understand I might not persuade you with my argument. That's ok because some people here are so entrenched in the "hate cops no matter what they do" type mentality. I make my argument not to necessarily persuade you but other, more reasonable, people who are reading this. They are there and if it were not for me and a few others, they would only get one side of an argument and the lynch mob would continue to spin itself into a fervor.

that was a firing squad and those police are murderers

The officers were cleared of wrongdoing and the prosecutor,as well as the US Department of Justice, declined to charge them based on the very argument I am making.

The fact that you do not like that does not change that fact.

I understand you would claim to know better than the State's Attorney and the entire Civil Rights Division of the DOJ. Like I said before, the Civil Rights Division of the DOJ is more than willing to go after cops, under this administration, than ever before. And they declined to charge the officers because it was clear they committed no crime.

a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

Can we stop with the firing squad nonsense.

I haven't drawn a conclusion yet because a short video of the end of an incident is not enough to pass judgment in my book. We don't know the history of the suspect they might have had with him, or his actions prior to the video starting. The Ferguson fiasco should have taught us all that lesson.

But calling it a firing squad is just silly.

Should they have all formed a line and pointed their guns at each others backs?

The jury is yet to be seated, let alone come in with a verdict.

Armchair lynch mobs are rarely helpful.

I just wish he would stop pretending he knows more about sticks and blades then I do. Remember the whole kali thing. Look it up. I know what I'm talking about and yes it's easy to whack a guys hand with a stick when they are holding an object like the man in the video was doing. Not fiction - REAL LIFE. You know like how people who are trained know all about.

You just don't want to admit the police in the that video over reacted.

a reply to: BASSPLYR

I just wish he would stop pretending he knows more about sticks and blades then I do. Remember the whole kali thing. Look it up. I know what I'm talking about and yes it's easy to whack a guys hand with a stick when they are holding an object like the man in the video was doing. Not fiction - REAL LIFE. You know like how people who are trained know all about.

I don't pretend to know more about sticks and blades then you do. You can claim to be a professional in knife fighting or underwater basket weaving. It does not matter.

It doesn't take a professional to know that blades kill people.

It doesn't take a professional to know that it is easier to stab a large target, like a person's torso, then it is to strike a small moving target, like a hand holding a knife.

With this in mind, a person would be putting his or her self in a position where they are at an unreasonable disadvantage. I am not going to ask someone, like a police officer, to put his or her self in a position of disadvantage when dealing with a life threatening situation such as this. Period.

You just don't want to admit the police in the that video over reacted.

You are correct, I will not concede that the police overreacted.

I see that the police reacted. It is my opinion, based on the video, that the police were not unreasonable in their reaction. There is a clear chain of events as to why the police reacted in the manner they did.

a reply to: Another_Nut

Dirty Harry's response to cops like these

a reply to: areyouserious2010

SO you think I make these judgments from the comfort of my home and that I've never been out in the real world and dealt with a guy with a knife before when a few posts back I told you I have. I have even been cut by a knife before that someone else was using against me. Your argument is that the police are the only ones who know how the world works. When the citizens say ....ehhh we could have handled that better so there is no excuse for a trained professional to have done such a crummy job.

You're completely paranoid and off base if you see that guy as charging the police. Like I said the police really did have all the time in the world. They had the advantage. They chose the easy path. One would even say the lustful path. It sure seemed like they had itchy trigger fingers there. They wanted a reason to shoot. When the mature response is to look for reasons not to shoot. Christ nurses in mental homes deal with more dangerous knife wielding people and come up with better solutions.

We get it. The cops did nothing wrong. Their training tells them to just over react. Take no reasonable risks. Just hose em at the slightest excuse. Sadly their training does teach them this. So everything in this video is OK. Besides the DA couldn't prosecute them. There's a loophole where cops don't have to be reasonable and do indeed get to just shoot people nearly on a whim. SO yeah. let em loose bruce they did nothing wrong. This whole video shows that the training, although efficient is lacking. That's the general message the public are trying to tell you. DO a better job. The cops rushed that one. They could have done many different things. Like maintain their line and keep the safe distance. if he charges then. the n ok shoot. But not advance slowly towards him. And when he goes back to his same position at the same range. Don't shoot. Keep your cool. Hold your safe position. Like I said this is 101 regardless of the weapon. Know your range. The cops didn't adhere to that at all. You know set up a loose cordon. Those work too. Pressuring a scared person is not just unproductive it's literally stupid. Especially when time is on your side, which it was there.

But keep going on with the guy bum rushed them in a full out sprint or was even preparing to. Doesn't matter if the police cronies let them off. They sorta do that all the time. It's called corruption. It's rampant in case you didn't know. For a long time now too. Besides if they didn't find no fault the polices reckless actions would have bankrupted the city when the lawsuit settled.

a reply to: Another_Nut

That's what tazers are really made for. You use non-lethal force. These so called police officers are blood thirsty bastards.

a reply to: LOSTinAMERICA

Hehe for sure. People still keep defending them though no matter how many of these stories there are. It's rather amazing.