View Single Post
Old 12-17-2008, 03:27 AM   #13
True_Avery
Banned
 
Status: Banned
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 2,002
Quote:
Originally Posted by Achilles
Congratulations on your promotion to moderator.
Ah, that answers a few questions. Well, sorry if my posts aren't worth your time then.

Quality problem, or do I just fit into the stupid and useless category?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Achilles
Shooting to kill is precisely well-trained. If you have to shoot, shoot to kill.
On after thought, that makes a bit of sense. Again, I'm just curious for more details regarding why it went that far.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Achilles
Better question: Where were the parents that should've taught their kid never to threaten to kill police officers?
Well, that seems to go without saying. But while the government cannot fully control parents, I'd think more effort would be placed into less than lethal methods of taking down a threat.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Achilles
In the movies where that kinda stuff takes place.
Upon reflection, shoot to kill makes sense, especially if the attacker is drugged out. Again back to my less than lethal quandary.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Achilles
IIRC from the article, the incident took place in a stairwell. Anything less than 7 yards is considered an eminent threat. The police had no way of knowing if the kid was on drugs, etc. Yes, it's a shame that a young man died, but he seemed to go into this knowing that would be the outcome. Let's not absolve him of his role in this incident.
I am in no way absolving him of his role. He was certainly asking to be put down in some way, and it isn't all too surprising that he was shot for doing so.

And you're right, hadn't thought of drugs at the time of writing. Sorry about that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Achilles
Like when they threaten to kill you?
Like I said, when necessary. I'm sure criminals say dumb crap like that all the time, but it doesn't always give a green light to put them down. But I'm sure I'm just preaching to the choir here.

Considering the situation, proximity, and possibility of drugs, it seems like a reasonable thing to do with the limited resources available to them.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Achilles
I retract my statement against them and instead aim it at the Australian government for not properly arming them for less than lethal situations.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Achilles
"Shoot to kill first" as in shoot to kill before doing anything else? No. "Shoot to kill first" as in when you shoot, shoot to kill? Yes. Well, technically it says something to the effect of "aim for center of mass" (i.e. the center of the torso).
Makes sense I suppose.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Achilles
That only happens in the movies and television shows.
Kind of a shame, in some ways.

Last edited by jonathan7; 12-18-2008 at 08:54 AM. Reason: Quotes
True_Avery is offline   you may: quote & reply,