Al Z. Heimer Posted December 5, 2012 Report Share Posted December 5, 2012 http://www.google.com/m/search?q=cleveland+police+shooting&hl=en&tbo=u&source=univ&tbm=nws&sa=X&ei=pGa_UPnLGY-u0AGI-YH4BQ&ved=0CCsQqAI. Cleveland police bustin caps. Wow!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madcat6183 Posted December 5, 2012 Report Share Posted December 5, 2012 Dont be runnin from the popo 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bad324 Posted December 5, 2012 Report Share Posted December 5, 2012 Dont be runnin from the popoBingo!Everyone is all up in arms about this and I think it boils down to one thing in my mind: Don't want to get shot at by the police? Don't run! Make their job harder than it needs to be and you get what is coming.*disclaimer: I'm insensitive and approve of "excessive force" in 95% of cases Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bad324 Posted December 5, 2012 Report Share Posted December 5, 2012 (edited) lol posted in wrong thread....whoops Edited December 5, 2012 by Bad324 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magley64 Posted December 5, 2012 Report Share Posted December 5, 2012 Toy Hauler for sure! I tried relentlessly to convince my Dad to get a toy hauler instead of his RV but the major downfall was he really wanted to be able to pull the car trailer with the GTO in it more than he wanted to haul the bikes around? i'm sure this is a reply to another thread... just curious how it ended up here.edit: yep.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bad324 Posted December 5, 2012 Report Share Posted December 5, 2012 ? i'm sure this is a reply to another thread... just curious how it ended up here.multiple tabs open Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tpoppa Posted December 5, 2012 Report Share Posted December 5, 2012 (edited) Dont be runnin from the popoSure. But if you are stupid and run, the Police don't have the right to kill you.13 officers fired 137 rounds into a car killing the 2 occupants, who were unarmed. Police claimed they were being fired at, but no weapons were found. Family of the deceased said the car made backfiring sounds. How about something like "Cleveland Police...Get Out of the Car" before unloading into the vehicle?Now police are searching the chase route to look for a gun. If a gun is found, they may be able to justify some of their actions. Hmmm...I bet they find a gun or 2: http://www.ohioriders.net/showthread.php?t=99963 Edited December 5, 2012 by Tpoppa Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C-bus Posted December 5, 2012 Report Share Posted December 5, 2012 Did they not ram the police car as covered by Cleveland radio? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magley64 Posted December 5, 2012 Report Share Posted December 5, 2012 I'm not sure that fleeing justifies shooting...Let's see what turns up Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScubaCinci Posted December 5, 2012 Report Share Posted December 5, 2012 Bingo!Everyone is all up in arms about this and I think it boils down to one thing in my mind: Don't want to get shot at by the police? Don't run! Make their job harder than it needs to be and you get what is coming.*disclaimer: I'm insensitive and approve of "excessive force" in 95% of casesI'm a taxpayer and I approve of this message. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bad324 Posted December 5, 2012 Report Share Posted December 5, 2012 I'm not sure that fleeing justifies shooting...Let's see what turns upLegally, it more than likely doesn't. A couple shots to shoot out the tires I don't even think would technically legal but I have no idea Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CBBaron Posted December 5, 2012 Report Share Posted December 5, 2012 Based on current information the force used seems excessive but we dont know much about what happened yet.Though I'm sure the cops involved were on edge after being lead on a wild case involving at least a couple collisions. Very interesting that this started in front of the Justice Center downtown. Craig 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tpoppa Posted December 5, 2012 Report Share Posted December 5, 2012 Some crimes justify the death penelty...running form police is not one of them.I don't have an issue with officers returning fire if they were actually fired on. However, no weapons or shell casings were found in the car. I'm sure more information will become available. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cOoTeR Posted December 5, 2012 Report Share Posted December 5, 2012 (edited) The case that this will look towards as far as a fleeing subject is Tennessee vs. Garner most likely. This case sets the guidelines for using deadly force on a fleeing subject. What it boils down to is the subject would need to present an immediate threat of death or serious bodily harm towards another person. If they've shot a gun or the officers have reason to believe had shot at officers then that would pose an immediate threat. It was mentioned that an officer put it on the radio that they had fired a gun. It was also hinted at on the article that they used the car to ram other cars. Also an immediate threat to others. Also if they hadn't done anything wrong why would they run? The case of Graham vs. Commerce will also be used. It comes down to the decision of justifying a use of force situation must be based on the totality of the circumstances of what the officer perceived at that exact moment in time. It must be looked at from the officers point of view and everything that he used to make the decision to use the level of force he used. It can't be broken down to there turned out not to be a gun in the car when it was done. The gun could have been thrown from the vehicle. Even if there wasn't a gun every other person listening to the radio heard the officer say there was a gun and shots were being fired. All the officers present believed there was a gun so their actions were based on that. The only one who should be held liable if there was no gun is the officer who reported the gun over the radio. Hopefully he can articulate why he thought he saw a gun if there wasn't one.Now I'm not a lawyer (disclaimer) and I may be a little biased by not being a criminal but I think that they will be cleared. It's already clear that this is going to get a racial spin on it. As if the 13 officers involved got together and said let's shoot some people based on their race tonight. Race had nothing to do with it. It doesn't matter what race you are if you fire a gun in the presence of police they will shoot back. The problem for these officers is how strict policies are on shootings. Basically they've got to be 120% sure that there is zero possibility that their round will hit anything other than the intended target and there is nothing inline of the shot in the fore or background of the target that would be at risk. 100+ rounds that's going to be hard to account for all that they shot. Edited December 5, 2012 by cOoTeR Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cOoTeR Posted December 5, 2012 Report Share Posted December 5, 2012 Some crimes justify the death penelty...running form police is not one of them.I don't have an issue with officers returning fire if they were actually fired on. However, no weapons or shell casings were found in the car. I'm sure more information will become available.If you hold a gun outside of the car window while driving and shoot it it would be difficult to get the casings back inside the car. It's not hard to throw a gun out the window and it not be noticed. You can also use your vehicle as a deadly weapon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tpoppa Posted December 5, 2012 Report Share Posted December 5, 2012 If you hold a gun outside of the car window while driving and shoot it it would be difficult to get the casings back inside the car. It's not hard to throw a gun out the window and it not be noticed. You can also use your vehicle as a deadly weapon.The entire reason that the chase began was because police said they were being fired at. No gun or shell casing were found in the car. They are running forensic tests to see if either of the 2 in the car had recently fired a gun. We'll see what they find. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TSB67 Posted December 5, 2012 Report Share Posted December 5, 2012 I may be a little biased by not being a criminalI like that, I'm gonna use it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scruit Posted December 5, 2012 Report Share Posted December 5, 2012 I don't have an issue with officers returning fire if they were actually fired on. What if the police believe, in good faith, that they were fired upon? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scruit Posted December 5, 2012 Report Share Posted December 5, 2012 The entire reason that the chase began was because police said they were being fired at. No gun or shell casing were found in the car. They are running forensic tests to see if either of the 2 in the car had recently fired a gun. We'll see what they find.Not finding a gun is not unusual - the gun can be easily ditched and it may have been a revolver or a semi-auto held out of the window.The GSR tests will be VERY interesting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redkow97 Posted December 5, 2012 Report Share Posted December 5, 2012 Gun or not, if the driver was attempting to run over officers as has been reported, deadly force to prevent that/those officers from being run down is more easily justified. If no gun is recovered, the police are in hot water, but as noted, it's not unreasonable to believe that they could have fired a revolver (no casing ejected) and ditched it some time during the 20 minute pursuit.Assuming there was no shot fired and no gun, why flee? I am betting both occupants were high. Both have criminal records, including 7 felony convictions for the male, and he has fled before. But back to the assumption that there was no shot fired, and it was a car backfiring - I don't think the police acted unreasonably by attempting to stop a car that they believed had just shot at them. Once the car was finally cornered, the occupants used the car itself as a deadly weapon, and deadly force in response was appropriate. The fact that 12 officers all thought so and fired at the same time is helpful or harmful depending on how you view things. If I'm putting myself in the cops' shoes, I am under the belief that the suspects have at least 1 firearm in the vehicle, have already fired at officers, and are now using the car as a weapon. Shooting until the suspect stops moving is a lot more reasonable when you're acting on that premise. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redkow97 Posted December 5, 2012 Report Share Posted December 5, 2012 Both victims will have hands checked to see if there is evidence either fired a gun. If not, things will get bad quickly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tpoppa Posted December 5, 2012 Report Share Posted December 5, 2012 What if the police believe, in good faith, that they were fired upon?Trained police officers should be able to tell a gunshot from a car backfiring (which is what the family of the driver is suggesting). If you are shooting to kill, you better be f*&king positive.Let's assume they had a gun and ditched it somewhere in the chase... That means when the police fired 137 shots, the 2 people in the car were unarmed.Do Cleveland Police have dashcams? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C-bus Posted December 5, 2012 Report Share Posted December 5, 2012 Both victims will have hands checked to see if there is evidence either fired a gun. If not, things will get bad quickly.Agreeing 100% with your previous post, the choice to use the word "victims" is premature. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magley64 Posted December 5, 2012 Report Share Posted December 5, 2012 Trained police officers should be able to tell a gunshot from a car backfiring (which is what the family of the driver is suggesting). If you are shooting to kill, you better be f*&king positive.Let's assume they had a gun and ditched it somewhere in the chase... That means when the police fired 137 shots, the 2 people in the car were unarmed.Do Cleveland Police have dashcams?wow 137 shots, that's between 11 and 12 per officer...I thought police were supposed to be good shots... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tpoppa Posted December 5, 2012 Report Share Posted December 5, 2012 Both victims will have hands checked to see if there is evidence either fired a gun. If not, things will get bad quickly.I foresee a large civil case against Cleveland Police if no GSR evidence is found. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.