A question for liberals: How many times should the police have to say “Drop the gun!” before it’s OK for them to shoot an armed suspect?

[BertramN]

This video from Phoenix shows police shooting and killing an armed suspect named Ekom Udofia.

Prior to shooting him, the police repeatedly shout “Drop the gun” over and over and over and over and over.

The suspect refuses to drop the gun.

Then the police shoot and kill him.

So, this is my question for liberals: How many times should the police have to say “Drop the gun!” before it’s OK for them to shoot an armed suspect?

Here’s the video. Skip to 2:28

The number of times should depend on whether the suspect is holding a firearm or a Reuben.

Sandwiches are NOT deadly weapons, despite police and RWNJs' claims.


.

 

[Sunsettommy]

He POINTED the gun at the police several times, the video even highlighted one specifically.

When? Before he was shot?

You didn't watch the video well since they HIGHLIGHTED a specific scene showing him pointing the gun at a policeman.

It doesn't matter if it was before or after he was shot because he was repeatedly ordered to let go of the gun BEFORE he was shot (he was still alive after the first volley), it is a lawful order the dead fool ignored, when you have a lot of police around you, it makes sense to let go of the gun as repeatedly ordered.

Yes I read your post, it is clear you are trying to defend a stupid dead fool who refused to do what the police asked him to do repeatedly even when they warned him they will shoot him if he doesn't let go of the gun, you seem to ignore what he was reported doing BEFORE the police arrived at the science.

 

[jbrownson0831]

This video from Phoenix shows police shooting and killing an armed suspect named Ekom Udofia.

Prior to shooting him, the police repeatedly shout “Drop the gun” over and over and over and over and over.

The suspect refuses to drop the gun.

Then the police shoot and kill him.

So, this is my question for liberals: How many times should the police have to say “Drop the gun!” before it’s OK for them to shoot an armed suspect?

Here’s the video. Skip to 2:28

Poor mistreated illegal probably didn't understand English.

 

[Rigby5]

Clearly example why we need to get rid of or greatly change the police.
The police most certainly should not have killed him, and he was essentially no danger at all.
It clearly was a BB-gun, and was not threatening in any way.
Not did they have to aim at the chest.
They could have fired warning shots, aimed for a leg, or a variety of other less than lethal choices.
It is not like he was running at them.
They could even have retreated.
A normal average person would not have deliberately killed him.
And the multiple chest shots was deliberate murder.

 

[jbrownson0831]

Clearly example why we need to get rid of or greatly change the police.
The police most certainly should not have killed him, and he was essentially no danger at all.
It clearly was a BB-gun, and was not threatening in any way.
Not did they have to aim at the chest.
They could have fired warning shots, aimed for a leg, or a variety of other less than lethal choices.
It is not like he was running at them.
They could even have retreated.
A normal average person would not have deliberately killed him.
And the multiple chest shots was deliberate murder.

Right, just like on tv, shoot the BB gun out of his hand. More libber Monday morning quarterbacking about things which, as usual, you have no idea about.

 

[SC Patriot]

The more accurate question to ask right wing retards is, "How many unarmed black people do you want the police to kill?" Because people aren't always holding guns on police when police shoot people. But police will write that in their report or make that claim to cover themselves.

Here are 8 white people who pointed guns at police officers — and didn’t get killed – Raw Story
[/QUO

I didn't watch the video and I probably won't.

If the gun is pointed away from any officers there is no need to shoot. Just being BORED is not a reason to take a life.

You are aware, I am sure, that holding a gun is a threat to anyone regardless of where it is pointed at any given time. It takes less than a second to aim your gun in a different direction. Bottom line....if am officer of the law is pointing his/her gun at you and he/she demands you put your weapon down, you do it or risk losing your life.
What gives anyone the right to brandish a firearm in public without risk of losing your life?
Legal gun owners know better.
Enough said on the dumbass debate.

 

[pknopp]

Its an impossible question to answer. It entirely depends on the situation. Many times the person has some mental issues and wants to get shot. There is no reason to shoot that person.

Someone able to deal with situations like this can end it without anyone getting killed.

 

[jbrownson0831]

Clearly example why we need to get rid of or greatly change the police.
The police most certainly should not have killed him, and he was essentially no danger at all.
It clearly was a BB-gun, and was not threatening in any way.
Not did they have to aim at the chest.
They could have fired warning shots, aimed for a leg, or a variety of other less than lethal choices.
It is not like he was running at them.
They could even have retreated.
A normal average person would not have deliberately killed him.
And the multiple chest shots was deliberate murder.

1000 total deaths by police per year in 12 million arrests and 400 of them are black. That's .000083%.

 

[SC Patriot]

Clearly example why we need to get rid of or greatly change the police.
The police most certainly should not have killed him, and he was essentially no danger at all.
It clearly was a BB-gun, and was not threatening in any way.
Not did they have to aim at the chest.
They could have fired warning shots, aimed for a leg, or a variety of other less than lethal choices.
It is not like he was running at them.
They could even have retreated.
A normal average person would not have deliberately killed him.
And the multiple chest shots was deliberate murder.

Once you said "aim at a leg" you displayed your naivety to how a firearm works. You ain at a leg, you will likely miss and possibly harm or kill an innocent bystander.
Trust me......you aim at sticks it is likely you will miss. Then what?

 

[Sunsettommy]

Clearly example why we need to get rid of or greatly change the police.
The police most certainly should not have killed him, and he was essentially no danger at all.
It clearly was a BB-gun, and was not threatening in any way.
Not did they have to aim at the chest.
They could have fired warning shots, aimed for a leg, or a variety of other less than lethal choices.
It is not like he was running at them.
They could even have retreated.
A normal average person would not have deliberately killed him.
And the multiple chest shots was deliberate murder.

It appears to look like a gun and in a darkened situation, meanwhile I notice the part where you ignored the fool ignoring repeated lawful requests to drop the gun. You also ignored the reports about his BEHAVIOR before the police arrived.

You also ignored where they used pepper shots to get him to let go of the gun they keep asking him to let go, he fights ALL attempts to get him to comply.

BB guns can be powerful and dangerous, shoot out an eye is possible, don't try so hard to support this now dead (died on the way to the hospital) idiot!

 

[jbrownson0831]

Clearly example why we need to get rid of or greatly change the police.
The police most certainly should not have killed him, and he was essentially no danger at all.
It clearly was a BB-gun, and was not threatening in any way.
Not did they have to aim at the chest.
They could have fired warning shots, aimed for a leg, or a variety of other less than lethal choices.
It is not like he was running at them.
They could even have retreated.
A normal average person would not have deliberately killed him.
And the multiple chest shots was deliberate murder.

Once you said "aim at a leg" you displayed your naivety to how a firearm works. You ain at a leg, you will likely miss and possibly harm or kill an innocent bystander.
Trust me......you aim at sticks it is likely you will miss. Then what?

But, but, but....we are the uber intelligent liberals who tell you exacly how you should do things......

 

[SC Patriot]

Its an impossible question to answer. It entirely depends on the situation. Many times the person has some mental issues and wants to get shot. There is no reason to shoot that person.

Someone able to deal with situations like this can end it without anyone getting killed.

So what does an officer do? Ask the guy with a gun if he has mental issues? Who with mental issues holding a gun will say yes?

You make it sound so easy. Should I have asked that man who was carryinging an automatic firearm in the sand pit if he had mental issues?

If I did, my wife would be a widow.

You guys make it sound so easy....you try it one time. Go ahead. Grow some balls and risk your life as you help those who want to take your life. Go ahead. I dare you.

 

[pknopp]

Clearly example why we need to get rid of or greatly change the police.
The police most certainly should not have killed him, and he was essentially no danger at all.
It clearly was a BB-gun, and was not threatening in any way.
Not did they have to aim at the chest.
They could have fired warning shots, aimed for a leg, or a variety of other less than lethal choices.
It is not like he was running at them.
They could even have retreated.
A normal average person would not have deliberately killed him.
And the multiple chest shots was deliberate murder.

1000 total deaths by police per year in 12 million arrests and 400 of them are black. That's .000083%.

Very few banks are robbed each year especially compared to the number of instances they are used daily.

No one argues "oh well, things happen" when one is robbed.

Very few abortions were late term. We still addressed the issue.

 

[pknopp]

Its an impossible question to answer. It entirely depends on the situation. Many times the person has some mental issues and wants to get shot. There is no reason to shoot that person.

Someone able to deal with situations like this can end it without anyone getting killed.

So what does an officer do? Ask the guy with a gun if he has mental issues? Who with mental issues holding a gun will say yes?

You make it sound so easy. Should I have asked that man who was carryinging an automatic firearm in the sand pit if he had mental issues?

If I did, my wife would be a widow.

You guys make it sound so easy....you try it one time. Go ahead. Grow some balls and risk your life as you help those who want to take your life. Go ahead. I dare you.

An expert was called in and no one was killed.

UPDATE: Suspect who was at the center of a swat standoff in Vienna appears in court.

 

[Uncensored2008]

He POINTED the gun at the police several times, the video even highlighted one specifically.

When? Before he was shot?

 

[SC Patriot]

Its an impossible question to answer. It entirely depends on the situation. Many times the person has some mental issues and wants to get shot. There is no reason to shoot that person.

Someone able to deal with situations like this can end it without anyone getting killed.

So what does an officer do? Ask the guy with a gun if he has mental issues? Who with mental issues holding a gun will say yes?

You make it sound so easy. Should I have asked that man who was carryinging an automatic firearm in the sand pit if he had mental issues?

If I did, my wife would be a widow.

You guys make it sound so easy....you try it one time. Go ahead. Grow some balls and risk your life as you help those who want to take your life. Go ahead. I dare you.

An expert was called in and no one was killed.

UPDATE: Suspect who was at the center of a swat standoff in Vienna appears in court.

an expert called? Cool. Lets wait for the expert to come.
Are you aware of how many firearm standoffs results in shots fired within the first minute?
Should police simply say "let him brandish that firearm with people being held hostage...and let the shrink finish his dinner and get here before we do anything.
It is quite obvious you have never wondered whether or not you will survive a confrontation with someone with a firearm.
I get it.
I hope you never have to.
But just think about it. What would you do?

 

[Uncensored2008]

He POINTED the gun at the police several times, the video even highlighted one specifically.

When? Before he was shot?

Communists have this sick belief - the duty to die.

If a black man points a gun at a cop - or any victim for that matter - democrats demand that the cop has a duty to die. That defending their life is forbidden.

The Communists may or may not punish the black man for killing the cop or other victim, but under no circumstance may the police defend their life - they are required to die or they will be treated as criminals.

 

[SC Patriot]

He POINTED the gun at the police several times, the video even highlighted one specifically.

When? Before he was shot?

Communists have this sick belief - the duty to die.

If a black man points a gun at a cop - or any victim for that matter - democrats demand that the cop has a duty to die. That defending their life is forbidden.

The Communists may or may not punish the black man for killing the cop or other victim, but under no circumstance may the police defend their life - they are required to die or they will be treated as criminals.

it is quite simple...

holding a firearm in your hand, even with an open carry license, is illegal unless you are threatened. If an office tells you to drop the weapon, you must.
If you dont, you are subject to being shot....why? Because there is reason to believe you may shoot someone else.

What is so hard to understand?

 

[Uncensored2008]

it is quite simple...

holding a firearm in your hand, even with an open carry license, is illegal unless you are threatened. If an office tells you to drop the weapon, you must.
If you dont, you are subject to being shot....why? Because there is reason to believe you may shoot someone else.

What is so hard to understand?

democrats are those who Can't Understand Normal Thoughts.

 

[pknopp]

Its an impossible question to answer. It entirely depends on the situation. Many times the person has some mental issues and wants to get shot. There is no reason to shoot that person.

Someone able to deal with situations like this can end it without anyone getting killed.

So what does an officer do? Ask the guy with a gun if he has mental issues? Who with mental issues holding a gun will say yes?

You make it sound so easy. Should I have asked that man who was carryinging an automatic firearm in the sand pit if he had mental issues?

If I did, my wife would be a widow.

You guys make it sound so easy....you try it one time. Go ahead. Grow some balls and risk your life as you help those who want to take your life. Go ahead. I dare you.

An expert was called in and no one was killed.

UPDATE: Suspect who was at the center of a swat standoff in Vienna appears in court.

an expert called? Cool. Lets wait for the expert to come.
Are you aware of how many firearm standoffs results in shots fired within the first minute?
Should police simply say "let him brandish that firearm with people being held hostage...and let the shrink finish his dinner and get here before we do anything.
It is quite obvious you have never wondered whether or not you will survive a confrontation with someone with a firearm.
I get it.
I hope you never have to.
But just think about it. What would you do?

As I noted, it depends on the situation. Your argument is to fire away.

And I bet you consider yourself pro-life.