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

What's the opinion of the posters regarding the UK cops that taser the guy wielding two machetes. They seemed to have found a solution to the problem at hand with out resulting in unnecessary force.

Were they competent? Were they incredibly stupid, undertrained and uneducated or at least in comparison to the US police forces? Oblivious to the obvious danger? Reckless?

originally posted by: roadgravel
a reply to: areyouserious2010

What a joke. The cops had plenty of time to talk and make a plan. One or maybe two take the roll of shooting if necessary.

Since they love the military aspect of it all...

Flank his ass. Right?

I can be dramatic like a snickers commercial too. But give me a huge stick and see how worried I am about your little ole blade. I'll tear that head up. But you'll live.

Police should not be the judge, jury and executioners.

Due process yall...hence the word due.

a reply to: BASSPLYR

you guys gotta stop using the 21 foot rule as an excuse. It doesn't apply to this situation. They already had their guns out and a bead on the guy.

You have to stop discounting it without proper evidence that it does not apply or is inaccurate.

The fact that they had their guns drawn has very little bearing on the scenario.

In order to save time, please go back and read the previous post between myself and another on why it has no bearing.

Taser would have worked just fine.

Really? What makes you so sure? Are you willing to bet your life on it? Of course not and any reasonable person would not expect you to.

So you have to walk up to 15 feet of the guy.

Really? That is a very bold statement coming from someone who wouldn't actually have to walk up to within 15 feet of a guy wielding a knife.

So you have to walk up to 15 feet of the guy. Seems to work for actual professional cops around the world in much more dangerous situations.

If you are referring to the video that is linked in the original article, there are differences that the author failed to mention.

The main difference? The knife wielding man in the video from England is threatening himself by holding the knife up to his own throat. The knife wielding man in the video from Michigan is holding the knife in a threatening manner towards the officers.

The two scenarios can be confronted completely differently.

originally posted by: BASSPLYR
What's the opinion of the posters regarding the UK cops that taser the guy wielding two machetes. They seemed to have found a solution to the problem at hand with out resulting in unnecessary force.

Were they competent? Were they incredibly stupid, undertrained and uneducated or at least in comparison to the US police forces? Oblivious to the obvious danger? Reckless?

Absolutely.... any trained, competent police officer can deal with an armed suspect.
Especially one with a knife, and without killing them or shooting them, 46 times.

These officers wilfully murdered this man.

They are pure scum.

a reply to: drneville

Execution, pure and simple... bunch of idiots with a badge.

No, it wasn't....

If you are only going to respond to me with a statement, then I am only going to respond to you with a statement.

I suppose they did come up with a plan.

"When we get tired of standing here, we all shoot him"

a reply to: TiedDestructor

There is no excuses for what he did.

However only one of the parties involved had a mental disability.

And I'm not referring to Milton...

Again, how are the actions of the man armed with a knife completely disregarded?

And it was clearly stated that Milton suffered from a mental disorder.

EDIT: Where in the hell are all of the net launching guns? Only in movies???

Sounds like a million dollar idea.

Invent it and demonstrate that it works. Then market it to Law Enforcement and Military.

a reply to: ScientiaFortisDefendit

Listen, your argument might hold water if it was one or two cops. All of those idiots are standing there with guns drawn itching to shoot this guy.

How does the number of police present change the circumstances of why they shot the man?

The reason they shot the man is the real issue at hand. It sounds like you are saying if there was only one or two cops, they would have been justified in shooting him but any more than that, they are not justified. That makes no sense. If they were justified to shoot when only two cops were present, they would have been justified if 1000 cops were present.

They even held the dog back.

We already went over why they didn't release the dog. They release the dog, the guy stabs the dog, they shoot the guy.

Same result, only now we have a needlessly dead dog.

They all knew what was coming next and they did NOTHING to defuse the situation.

They held their fire and ordered the guy to drop the knife.

The only person that could have made the decision to drop the knife, at that point, is the man holding it. And he chose not to.

Instead he decided to walk towards the police officers, with their guns pointed at him, and was shot.

I am tired of all the cop apologists.

I am tired of the lynch mob spinning itself up into a frenzy.

There are actual incidents of police impropriety. Drawing attention to incidents like this, and labeling it as police impropriety, only distracts from the actual thing. By doing this, you take weight from the accusation even when it is leveled against actual police misconduct.

a reply to: butcherguy

There you go folks.

Cops are absolved of all responsibility.

Every time.

That's not what I said.

Obviously the police were responsible, they shot him.

What they are absolved of is complete fault. There are several contributing factors that lead to this incident. One being the failure to address a family member's mental illness appropriately before it leads to something like this.

There are millions of people who suffer from mental disorders across the US. Only a small percentage have something like this happen to them.

Why? Because either they realize they need help and successfully seek out and receive treatment. Or, concerned family realize their family member has a mental disorder and is not seeking or receiving appropriate treatment. The family then takes the step to get their family member help.

Again you spout nonsense

the twenty one foot rule applies if you have to unholster abd cock yiur gun

watch the entire episode

if you have your wepon drawn and ready to fire the person dies if your a good shot

When me, tadaman and a " cop" agree on something like this

we are right

and you Are an apologist

reply to: areyouserious2010

a reply to: blupblup

If you're actually defending or justifying the actions of these scum...pure murdering scum, then you have mental issues.

You have yet to make a convincing argument and are now resorting to name calling.

Reasonable people see this for what it is. Try getting away from ATS and your close friends or family. Go talk to people and see what their opinion is.

I understand, the majority of ATS has a certain view on police no matter what they do. And some come here to be immersed in positions that fit their own.

Its like conservatives going to Fox News and liberals going to MSNBC.

Like minds think alike.

a reply to: areyouserious2010

I am tired of the lynch mob spinning itself up into a frenzy.

Should we get some ballistic protection on hand?

Only a small percentage have something like this happen to them.

11/47 = 23
23 percent.

a reply to: areyouserious2010

Dude the 21 foot rule applies to a holstered firearm. Not one drawn on a suspect 40 feet away with a good bead on the guy for several seconds or minutes.

I'm a firearm owner and user too. I know how guns work. I have studied Silat and Kali. Knife based arts for a long time, with knife experts. I know more about how a knife works and what it can and can't do than an LEO who gets minimal training in how they work and what they can and can't do. I also probably spend more time at the range then most LEOs.

I've successfully shot a 250 lb razorback that was charging me at full sprint zig zagging this way an that to cross the terrain faster so that it could gore me. He started at 80 feet and I got him at 60 feet. Hogs that stand 3 feet high zig zagging and moving the same speed as a sprinting dog with 4" tusks are a legitimate threat. That's a good time to pull the trigger. A guy who can barely stand, stammering around at 40 feet even if he is holding a knife is not a shoot to kill on sight scenario. I can say that they weren't in immediate danger. They still had plenty of options. Taking two half steps sorta in your direction isn't a "OMG!!!! He's coming right at us!!!!!! SHOOT TO KILL!!!!!" situation.


Oh yeah and to add. I have walked up to a guy holding a knife. Even had to parry away him jabbing at me with it. He got me 3 times in the upper right forearm before I even realized he was armed. I still empty handedly subdued the guy. Oh yeah and he WAS on drugs and selling them too at the place I was moonlighting at. He didn't want to go to jail after the 3rd time we had caught him there doing that. It was my job to keep him in a corner. the second he head the cops were coming he started punching at me (I thought) turned out the guy was trying to cut me so that he could make a run for it. He failed. But I sure as hell didn't resort to lethal force, and I could have. These cops were just reckless and stupid in this situation in my opinion.

But your right. I have no idea what I'm talking about. OK.

a reply to: butcherguy

I have watched the video repeatedly.

There were many shots fired after he was down.

The shots continued for longer than a fraction of a second after he was immobile.

How can you accurately make that determination?

First, you cannot establish criminal intent from the amount of time it took the police to stop shooting. You act as if he fell to the ground and an officer intentionally took a shot to his head after he fell to the ground.

Second, look at this link. The same video is shown if you scroll down a little ways.

It says the audio is taken from bystander footage before you play the video.

When you are second guessing the shooting, and apparently to you one millisecond means it's justified and the next millisecond is murder, how can you be sure the video and sound are synchronized to accuracy?

a reply to: butcherguy

What if?
Seems like he probably would miss.... with the shooting that we have seen in the video.

Look if you are trying to insult the officers, it doesn't really matter to me.

But what you just said lends credibility to my argument. And a miss, in the situation described, could mean serious injury or death.

If you are arguing for better police training then great. But try not to blur real life from fiction when it comes to the abilities of human beings.

What I disagree with is the argument being made that the officers were wrong to shoot the man or should be charged with a crime.

The fear this poor guy was feeling, 6 armed men pointing there guns at him a dog trying to get at him. The cops never tried to deescalate the situation, never tried to arrest him. Six verses one, and not one thought "hey if we put our guns down he might surrender"! In a country that has epidemic problems with mental health, I guess this tactic is the cure?

Its unbelievable that no charges for these police officers. They murdered this poor man in a parking lot they never intended to arrest him.

a reply to: Dolby_X

im sorry but if 4+ cops and a dog cant restraint one man with a knife they need to find another kind of work...

And how exactly should then have "restrained" him.

No hypothetically, no fictional tactics. Knowing what we know about the incident, knowing the police are human beings, how exactly do you propose they "restrain" him without exposing themselves to unreasonable risk of serious injury or death?

a reply to: roadgravel

Willing and doing are different things. Lip service to appease those who believe in words alone.

Unfortunately for the current administration and you, we have things like codified laws. These laws spell out the elements of a civil rights violation. If the elements are not met, no charges can be made.

a reply to: areyouserious2010

Simple two guys walk up to him each with a taser. One is going to be the guy who zaps him. The second guy his back up incase the guy charges them. Simply shoot him at 15 feet. Telling me two tasers at once aren't going to drop some 145lb old man. He won't at the least let go of the knife?

Wait a few minutes and have the fire department blast him with a hose to drop the knife, bum rush him after wards and handcuff him.

Simply walk up to said knife wielder with stick and smack his hand with it. That's really effective too. Just ask an escrimador. No wait don't do that. That would mean you are actually consulting an expert in how to disarm knife wielding maniacs.

originally posted by: areyouserious2010
You have yet to make a convincing argument and are now resorting to name calling.

Reasonable people see this for what it is. Try getting away from ATS and your close friends or family. Go talk to people and see what their opinion is.

I understand, the majority of ATS has a certain view on police no matter what they do. And some come here to be immersed in positions that fit their own.

Its like conservatives going to Fox News and liberals going to MSNBC.

Like minds think alike.

Actually this was my argument

originally posted by: blupblup
Only in America....

Why did they all have to shoot him at all?

Get a riot shield and rush him
Tranq the guy
Fire rubber bullets
Water Canon
Go at him with batons while dressed in riot gear...

Even if they had a hard-on for shooting, here's a ****ing idea.... SHOOT TO MAIM!!!! You know, the legs, arms.... not 46 frickin' times and even when he's dead on the floor.

FFS


There are so many ways to have dealt with this and the absolutely ONLY one that should NEVER have happened, is the one that actually did happen.

Just pathetic

Any compassionate, reasonable, sane and decent human being watches that video and is shocked and disgusted at what they see.

You can dress it up however you like and cite whatever you like it terms of defending these officers but as I also said

originally posted by: blupblup


Absolutely.... any trained, competent police officer can deal with an armed suspect.
Especially one with a knife, and without killing them or shooting them, 46 times.

These officers wilfully murdered this man.

They are pure scum.

What these officers did and how they acted is completely indefensible and utterly reprehensible.

I hope they lose their jobs... I'm sure they'll get medals though.