Police Shoot and Kill Man

[Bigum1969]

Check out the following link to a story about a shooting early this morning here in SW Indiana. Take a look at the comments the story is generating.

Police fatally shoot Washington, Ind., man who fired rifle : Local News : Evansville Courier Press

 

[NateIU10]

Hmmmm, Did he fire at the police ? Or did he have his back turned and fire at the ground ? The reason I ask these questions is because they wasnt. Why did the police feel they had to KILL this man ( who was obviously having some problems ), why didnt they shoot him in the leg or arm. I guess this cop missed the day they was teaching how to wound and disable a suspect, huh ? Now lets have the people chime in how wonderful the police are. If the police there are anything like here, I wouldnt be suprised if it turns out his shotgun that turned into a muzzle loader later turns into a broom handle ! Hence the new EPD moto "LIE, CHEAT & STEAL", do anything to keep the people from knowing the real deal. WAKE UP PEOPLE.

People's stupidity never ceases to amaze me

 

[JcJ]

itbjr2....wow


Nice work by the officers, glad they are all safe..

 

[Episcopus]

People's stupidity never ceases to amaze me

When it comes to intelligence, just remember that 50% of people are below the median.

I really wish the "shoot to wound/disable" misconception would go off and die somewhere. It isn't taught to anyone, anywhere.

 

[Crystalship1]

People's stupidity never ceases to amaze me

Yep!! Shoot to wound????..... Please!!!!

 

[BloodEclipse]

I really wish the "shoot to wound/disable" misconception would go off and die somewhere. It isn't taught to anyone, anywhere.

That may be true now, but it was taught to me when I was in the Navy.
When I first heard this, me being the smartass I can sometimes be, asked "Can I wound them in the head?"
As for the story I wonder if he was going to shoot himself and the cops just made it easier?

 

[Dogman]

I really wish the "shoot to wound/disable" misconception would go off and die somewhere. It isn't taught to anyone, anywhere.

 

[rkba_net]

That may be true now, but it was taught to me when I was in the Navy.

This may be true, but I bet you cannot find a reference to "shooting to wound" in any FM (Field Manual) in the entire US Military...

 

[slacker]

Shoot to wound is an awful idea. You will get sued by the person you "shot to wound," they could be concealing a secondary weapon that could be used once they go down, if they are methed out a single shot is not going to stop them from doing anything... and the list goes on and on.

Heck shooting to kill ends up saving us money by now giving the BG the privilege of living in our prisons for the next 50 years.

 

[Scutter01]

When I first heard this, me being the smartass I can sometimes be, asked "Can I wound them in the head?"

Are you sure you're not Skippy?

 

[indyjoe]

I always set my Glocks to stun. At least I think I do. Getting hit with a good .40 cal is probably stunning.

 

[GetA2J]

I always set my Glocks to stun. At least I think I do. Getting hit with a well placed .40 cal is probably stunning.

Fixed it.

 

[munky_3434]

oh yeah, shoot him in the leg or the arm......brilliant

much better than shoot to eliminate the threat.

 

[Episcopus]

Fixed it.

I think a poorly placed .40 would be more stunning. A well placed .40 would leave you dead before you had a chance to be stunned.

 

[cce1302]

Shoot to "Stop the threat."

Dead guys are no longer a threat.

 

[Episcopus]

Shoot to "Stop the threat."

Dead guys are no longer a threat.

Until they come back as zombies.