What caused the situation in the first place? What was the fight over? Boyfriend? Money? Something more serious?

Posted by DougOut on 4/24/2021 1:19:00 PM (view original):
What caused the situation in the first place? What was the fight over? Boyfriend? Money? Something more serious?

Something far LESS serious.

Sounds absurd, but initial reports seem to indicate that there was a b-day party planned and Ma'Khia was triggered because she was asked to clean up before the party started.

The scumbag who was kicking the woman on the ground is supposedly Ma'Khia's FATHER.

Posted by tangplay on 4/24/2021 1:13:00 PM (view original):
I really don't think that my position on this issue is unreasonable. I don't even think the officer violated protocol in any way or should be prosecuted. I just believe that there should be a better way to resolve these situations.

-1

cant always have a happy ending in life and death situations.
I believe in facts.
the facts dictate whether or not the cop did what was necessary and sometimes in the real world someone will get killed to protect an innocent because there is no choice.

the difference is that after the questions I recognize that.

Hey bruce, could you please explain why in your OPINION 4 shots were needed.

I do not know enough yet to form a definitive conclusion but based on what I know I have an initial opinion that the shooting was necessary.
I do question more the number of shots.
probably 2 were in rapid succession.
id like to know what happened after the first shot.
was she immediately down or not and what continued to happen.

Posted by all3 on 4/24/2021 1:32:00 PM (view original):
Hey bruce, could you please explain why in your OPINION 4 shots were needed.

When you draw your firearm you do so with intent to kill.
Were 4 shots necessary? I have no idea. Nor do I care.

You guys seem to have a Hollywood driven idea of how firearms work.

What if he only shot once and it didn't put her down, resulting in deadly injury to the girl in pink?

His intent at that split second was to put the assailant down. He did so and the girl in pink is alive today because he did.

Ooh Ooh me me mememememememe...PICK ME! PICK ME! I GOT ONE!

How many stab wounds does it take to kill someone? Is one enough?

Posted by bruceleefan on 4/24/2021 2:01:00 PM (view original):

Posted by all3 on 4/24/2021 1:32:00 PM (view original):
Hey bruce, could you please explain why in your OPINION 4 shots were needed.

When you draw your firearm you do so with intent to kill.
Were 4 shots necessary? I have no idea. Nor do I care.

You guys seem to have a Hollywood driven idea of how firearms work.

What if he only shot once and it didn't put her down, resulting in deadly injury to the girl in pink?

His intent at that split second was to put the assailant down. He did so and the girl in pink is alive today because he did.

What if he shot once and they both lived? Neither side can play the "what if" game here; what happened happened.
I KNOW how firearms work. They kill people. Often just as dead with one shot as with four.
You ever seen someone get shot IRL? If not, I hope you never do, but if so, do you really think they had enough left in them to kill someone with a knife after being shot?

I can't stress enough the absurdity of trying to argue that we need to enact a policy of "wound just enough to stop the threat".

Either some set of circumstances requires the use of deadly force or it doesn't. That's real life.

If an officer CHOOSES to attempt an ill advised "injure but not kill" maneuver great, but that can't be the standard nor the expectation.

Back to back they faced each other
they drew their swords and shot each other

one dark morning in the middle of the day.

Thanks for totally avoiding the question. I'll take that to mean you haven't seen a 1st-hand shooting. Yet, you want to try to come across as an expert on that very thing. Does that truly make sense to you? I've never once said the 4 shots weren't justified in this case, just that there need to be some answers to questions about them. You claiming to know they were necessary is no better or worse than someone claiming they know they weren't. Why is it so difficult for people to wait for all the facts/evidence?

Posted by all3 on 4/24/2021 5:58:00 PM (view original):
Thanks for totally avoiding the question. I'll take that to mean you haven't seen a 1st-hand shooting. Yet, you want to try to come across as an expert on that very thing. Does that truly make sense to you? I've never once said the 4 shots weren't justified in this case, just that there need to be some answers to questions about them. You claiming to know they were necessary is no better or worse than someone claiming they know they weren't. Why is it so difficult for people to wait for all the facts/evidence?

Yes, I've seen a person get shot, however I do not for a minute believe that makes me any expert. I never once "claimed to know" 4 shots were necessary.

What I said was "I have no idea. Nor do I care".
What i meant to convey is when a situation calls for the use of deadly force, it isn't a great idea to try and guess how many shots are necessary. Expecting an officer to do that in such a high level situation is just crazy imo.

That he saved a woman's life and y'all are like "yeah, but maybe he coulda saved her life a little nicer". "He didn't consider all of his options". WHAT??

That was one crazy ******* scene to roll up on. He gets out the car, asks what's going on, Bryant shoves one woman to the ground and while a man rushes to begin kicking HER, Bryant lunges at another woman and begins to thrust a large knife towards her. All in a matter of seconds. HOLY ****!

Sorry but you are not practicing what you preach.
let’s get the rest of the facts.
a cop shoots in a situation to save another and can and should shoot to kill if necessary.
they are not told to kill at all costs....make sure the perpetrator is dead even if down and incapacitated and can easily be subdued and arrested.....I’m not sure yet what did or did not happen in this case but I’m sure we will hear from many reputable trustworthy unbiased experts that will weigh in and explain after all the facts are out and I’m looking forward to that.

do you have to be a brain surgeon around here to be able to think clearly.

I feel like there is a disconnect here... all3 and I (feels weird to lump us together but ok) are questioning whether going forward, it would be possible to develop a different method besides shoot to kill, and I think bruceleefan interprets this as an attack on the police officer and his judgement in this case. I fully acknowledge that he did was he was trained to do.

bruce, nobody here has criticised the officer for his actions. I think we all agree being a "good" officer is truly a thankless job these days. Making blanket statements like "shoot to kill" is either ok or it isn't, just isn't realistic. Every policeman will tell you no 2 situations are alike and need treated as unique.