59 shots to kill one man?

[JoshM]

I work in that area.
That's an area you don't want to go to after dark. 90% of crimes reported on the local news stations come from that area.

[Shadow1]

I'm shocked by the comment:

"Police accounts and a patrol car video indicate the shots were fired in three volleys, all within 30 seconds. Each officer used a .45-caliber pistol. Some officers emptied their magazines, reloaded and fired again..."

thats what makes it so wrong. why did you feel the need to empty your clip then start firing again? i seriously doubt that anyone would be alive after a WELL TRAINED officer empties a clip on you.


if not then all that tells me is that they werent firing to kill, they were firing because they enjoy it. think about it. a guy who has been trained for weeks how to use, clean, and aim a gun shoots at you, dont you think he's gonna fire shots to take you down, like taking aim, and not just shoot at you.

i remember seeing this clip of this state trooper who pulled over a guy. guy got out the car and everything was going normal. then the guy went for the cops gun. after dropping his and tried to shoot the cop. but when he couldnt get the gun, he ran across the highway(good thing this was at like 2am when no one was out there). the cop fired 7-9 shots at the guy. 4 of them hit him. but the guy was still running. in that case, i say empty the clip because the 1st thing that guy is going to do when he gets a chance is kill you.

this tho is not the case with this story tho. the guy was talking about committing suicide himself. the cops did try to take the guy out with tazers. i applaud them for that. id rather try to get him help instead of kill him. but like i said before. 59 shots is too many.

[IAmTheNight]

and no matter what math you do, the number 59 is too many bullets to be fired to bring down a suspect.

"Police accounts and a patrol car video indicate the shots were fired in three volleys, all within 30 seconds. Each officer used a .45-caliber pistol. Some officers emptied their magazines, reloaded and fired again, while others didn't fire all their bullets, Weary said."

the main thing is the cops RELOADED and then started firing again.

"Police said the officers tried but failed to disarm Heyward with a stun gun. Weary said Heyward ignored repeated commands to drop the rifle and officers fired when they felt threatened by the way he moved it."

now im all for them firing because he was moving the gun in a threatening way. take him down. make sure he doesnt harm anyone or himself. 20 shots ok. if their so called "training" was good then they should have been able to hit him and kill him. i know about aim. i know about accuracy. and with a gun and TRAINING you should be able to hit a prone target. but 59 is too many.

thats like me shooting a guy with a gun coming at me with a gun. then once he's on the ground shooting him 20 more times because i saw his body twitching so he's still a threat to me.

Yes, let's only talk about the facts that support your opinion. I'll go ahead and quote the same thing you quoted.



"Police accounts and a patrol car video indicate the shots were fired in three volleys, all within 30 seconds. Each officer used a .45-caliber pistol. Some officers emptied their magazines, reloaded and fired again, while others didn't fire all their bullets, Weary said."



So let's say hypothetically that three officers emptied their clips (around a 14-round capacity) and fired again. That's 42 of 59 bullets there, 17 remaining. Since some of the other officers didn't fire all their bullets (read above in case you missed it), and since the article does not state who fired how many bullets, it is perfectly logical that some officers had to reload and fire again while others did not. We don't know how many bullets were fired by each officer.

If the suspect is threatening six people that are armed with 14 bullets, don't you think that those people who feel threatened (the cops) are going to fire those bullets? If the "suicide by cop" accusation is true, then the suspect aimed at the cops with the intent of having them kill him. If he is aiming at all of them, why wouldn't they all fire? But perhaps with better training, they could have reduced the number of bullets fired.

[coletrain]

thats what makes it so wrong. why did you feel the need to empty your clip then start firing again? i seriously doubt that anyone would be alive after a WELL TRAINED officer empties a clip on you.


if not then all that tells me is that they werent firing to kill, they were firing because they enjoy it. think about it. a guy who has been trained for weeks how to use, clean, and aim a gun shoots at you, dont you think he's gonna fire shots to take you down, like taking aim, and not just shoot at you.

i remember seeing this clip of this state trooper who pulled over a guy. guy got out the car and everything was going normal. then the guy went for the cops gun. after dropping his and tried to shoot the cop. but when he couldnt get the gun, he ran across the highway(good thing this was at like 2am when no one was out there). the cop fired 7-9 shots at the guy. 4 of them hit him. but the guy was still running. in that case, i say empty the clip because the 1st thing that guy is going to do when he gets a chance is kill you.

this tho is not the case with this story tho. the guy was talking about committing suicide himself. the cops did try to take the guy out with tazers. i applaud them for that. id rather try to get him help instead of kill him. but like i said before. 59 shots is too many.

I wonder why, if they were dealing with a suicidal person they didn't use non lethal ways to bring him down. They tried using the tazer but who knows...

Well there aren't videos posted and non of us were there...so who knows what really happened

I just keep imagining a clip where: Cop approaches person with tazer warning him and just says "oh fuck this" and starts unloading on him.

[doughboy415]

59shots,that is clearly excessive force,race has no factor here.Cops are supposed to be trained marksmen,one of those cops could have shot him in the arm or hand to disarm him.He never fired a shot,itwasnt a shootout with a automatic weapon.That was clearly excessive force.thats like 20 cops pulling you over for speeding.What happened to the rubber bullets departments use.

[Shadow1]

Yes, let's only talk about the facts that support your opinion. I'll go ahead and quote the same thing you quoted.



"Police accounts and a patrol car video indicate the shots were fired in three volleys, all within 30 seconds. Each officer used a .45-caliber pistol. Some officers emptied their magazines, reloaded and fired again, while others didn't fire all their bullets, Weary said."



So let's say hypothetically that three officers emptied their clips (around a 14-round capacity) and fired again. That's 42 of 59 bullets there, 17 remaining. Since some of the other officers didn't fire all their bullets (read above in case you missed it), and since the article does not state who fired how many bullets, it is perfectly logical that some officers had to reload and fire again while others did not. We don't know how many bullets were fired by each officer.

If the suspect is threatening six people that are armed with 14 bullets, don't you think that those people who feel threatened (the cops) are going to fire those bullets? If the "suicide by cop" accusation is true, then the suspect aimed at the cops with the intent of having them kill him. If he is aiming at all of them, why wouldn't they all fire? But perhaps with better training, they could have reduced the number of bullets fired.

that still doesnt help the fact that they UNLOADED and started firing again. its understandable that they fired because he was a threat to them. and 14 bullets in a clip. yeah. i can see that. but would you need to unload ALL of the bullets, reload THEN fire again? no. but then i read this:

"Amanda Counts, Heyward's girlfriend, and neighbor Darrell Turner said they witnessed the shooting. They said Heyward was lying on the porch on top of the rifle when officers opened fire.

"Before the first shot was fired he was down," Counts said. "Not one time did he threaten anyone."'

the guy was laying down on his porch. the report also says that there was a struggle with the said rifle. the father said there was no stuggle at all.

"Police spokeswoman Weary said the officers confronted Heyward when they responded to a report of three men wrestling over a gun in the street just after 4 a.m.

Heyward's father said there was never any wrestling over the .44 Magnum rifle that his son was carrying and sometimes pointing at his chin."

mad the spokeswoman for the 5-0 would lie to the media. wow. says a lot dont it? what else has she lied about in this case?


being that he was laying down on the gun, he wasnt posing a threat to anyone. so he wasnt waving it around or using it in a threatening manner.

I wonder why, if they were dealing with a suicidal person they didn't use non lethal ways to bring him down. They tried using the tazer but who knows...

Well there aren't videos posted and non of us were there...so who knows what really happened

I just keep imagining a clip where: Cop approaches person with tazer warning him and just says "oh fuck this" and starts unloading on him.

tazer yeah. im surprise the autopsy said nothing about tazer wounds and if they really did taze the guy, even if he was drunk, he would have dropped to the ground or stop doing what ever he was doing. im sorry. 100k volts is enough to drop anyone.

what about tear gas? what about rubber bullets?

[Brandoncb7]

It said that they were wrestling with him and also using a stun gun to try and disarm him........they weren't that fucking far away when they opened fire. I mean I could be wrong, but if you're using a stun gun you've already gotten close to him. It doesn't sound like they were at the street or far away trying to talk him into dropping his weapon. So that many rounds out of a 45?!? A 45 up close or even at a short distance will drop your ass when used right. Nobody can change the outcome now but someone needs to look into it.

[Pandemic]

guns themselves cant kill a person. it takes a human to pull the trigger. and that human has to be either an evil person or doing it out of self defense. thats what i mean by "guns dont kill people. stupid mother******s with guns kill people." and i understand your point about him being disturbed enough to take someone with him. but that wasnt the case here. he HIMSELF was talking about committing suicide. not taking someone with him. if he had that intention in his head he wouldnt have been on the phone with someone, he'd be at their house.

I see. So everyone who fires in self defense is a stupid mofo. I like it... How do you know this wasn't the case and he didn't want to take a cop with him? The guy was a criminal. Let's not forget that it was most likely ILLEGAL for him to own that rifle. But yeah, maybe he's a cozy bear and the cops should have trusted him more. Nope, he's a threat, plain and simple.

feeling the need to reload your gun after a suspect is down to start firing again once you reloaded is wrong. im sure after about 20 bullets, the guy wasnt going to be moving. so yes. no matter how you put it, 59 shots for ONE person is still excessive force. if he was still moving, THREATENINGLY now, not just moving in pain but moving to be a threat like going after a gun, after the 1st 15 shots hit him, then yes. i say another few WELL PLACED shots are needed. 59 is not.

You should go show them how it's done.

just because it was 6 cops AVERAGING means nothing to me. that just says all the shots fired added up and divided by 6. it doesnt say how many shots were ACTUALLY fired by each officer. whos to say one cop didnt fire 40 and the others only fired 19? like the report says, some officers reloaded and continued to fire while others stopped. you saying "averaging 10 shots per cop" means nothing. that just divides the shots between all 6 cops.

That's correct, what's your point?

thats what makes it so wrong. why did you feel the need to empty your clip then start firing again? i seriously doubt that anyone would be alive after a WELL TRAINED officer empties a clip on you.

How many rounds did their pistols hold? 5? 8? 10? They felt the need to reload and continue fire because they felt their lives and the lives of their partners were in danger. Just because they're cops doesn't mean they fire hundreds of rounds per week. Believe it or not cops are not all crack shots as you assume they are. Most qualifications are only quarterly, which means once in three months.

if not then all that tells me is that they werent firing to kill, they were firing because they enjoy it. think about it. a guy who has been trained for weeks how to use, clean, and aim a gun shoots at you, dont you think he's gonna fire shots to take you down, like taking aim, and not just shoot at you.

Yeah, they were purposely shooting the guy in the ass! No, in fact training for weeks does not mean you're a sharp shooter. Once again, in a stressful situation like that you get tunnel vision and your fine motor skills are compromised. They weren't shooting the guy to disable him like you suggested before.

i remember seeing this clip of this state trooper who pulled over a guy. guy got out the car and everything was going normal. then the guy went for the cops gun. after dropping his and tried to shoot the cop. but when he couldnt get the gun, he ran across the highway(good thing this was at like 2am when no one was out there). the cop fired 7-9 shots at the guy. 4 of them hit him. but the guy was still running. in that case, i say empty the clip because the 1st thing that guy is going to do when he gets a chance is kill you.

So... let me get this straight. You'd rather you empty a full mag on a guy who DROPPED his gun and is running away than empty a full mag on a guy who is laying prone with a rifle... Yep, that's what you said.

this tho is not the case with this story tho. the guy was talking about committing suicide himself. the cops did try to take the guy out with tazers. i applaud them for that. id rather try to get him help instead of kill him. but like i said before. 59 shots is too many.
You're right, they should have thrown teddy bears at him! Big pink snuggly teddy bears!

Yes, let's only talk about the facts that support your opinion. I'll go ahead and quote the same thing you quoted.



"Police accounts and a patrol car video indicate the shots were fired in three volleys, all within 30 seconds. Each officer used a .45-caliber pistol. Some officers emptied their magazines, reloaded and fired again, while others didn't fire all their bullets, Weary said."



So let's say hypothetically that three officers emptied their clips (around a 14-round capacity) and fired again. That's 42 of 59 bullets there, 17 remaining. Since some of the other officers didn't fire all their bullets (read above in case you missed it), and since the article does not state who fired how many bullets, it is perfectly logical that some officers had to reload and fire again while others did not. We don't know how many bullets were fired by each officer.

If the suspect is threatening six people that are armed with 14 bullets, don't you think that those people who feel threatened (the cops) are going to fire those bullets? If the "suicide by cop" accusation is true, then the suspect aimed at the cops with the intent of having them kill him. If he is aiming at all of them, why wouldn't they all fire? But perhaps with better training, they could have reduced the number of bullets fired.

A drunk suicidal guy is on his deck with an illegally owned rifle. Cops try to disable him to save his life. He threatens them, they fire. He's still felt to be threatening so they reload and continue firing. They stop when they feel he is no longer a threat. Seems logical to me.

If I'm carrying and I'm in a situation where I have to fire, I'm not going to stop firing until the guy is down, not moving, and no longer a threat.

[Pandemic]

59shots,that is clearly excessive force,race has no factor here.Cops are supposed to be trained marksmen,one of those cops could have shot him in the arm or hand to disarm him.He never fired a shot,itwasnt a shootout with a automatic weapon.That was clearly excessive force.thats like 20 cops pulling you over for speeding.What happened to the rubber bullets departments use.

You'd think that they were trained marksmen but shooting is a perishable sport. If you don't practice regularly you get pretty bad. Once again, you cant shoot someone in the hand. If you fire it has to be to kill not to disable.

that still doesnt help the fact that they UNLOADED and started firing again. its understandable that they fired because he was a threat to them. and 14 bullets in a clip. yeah. i can see that. but would you need to unload ALL of the bullets, reload THEN fire again? no. but then i read this:

"Amanda Counts, Heyward's girlfriend, and neighbor Darrell Turner said they witnessed the shooting. They said Heyward was lying on the porch on top of the rifle when officers opened fire.

"Before the first shot was fired he was down," Counts said. "Not one time did he threaten anyone."'

the guy was laying down on his porch. the report also says that there was a struggle with the said rifle. the father said there was no stuggle at all.

"Police spokeswoman Weary said the officers confronted Heyward when they responded to a report of three men wrestling over a gun in the street just after 4 a.m.

Heyward's father said there was never any wrestling over the .44 Magnum rifle that his son was carrying and sometimes pointing at his chin."

mad the spokeswoman for the 5-0 would lie to the media. wow. says a lot dont it? what else has she lied about in this case?


being that he was laying down on the gun, he wasnt posing a threat to anyone. so he wasnt waving it around or using it in a threatening manner.



tazer yeah. im surprise the autopsy said nothing about tazer wounds and if they really did taze the guy, even if he was drunk, he would have dropped to the ground or stop doing what ever he was doing. im sorry. 100k volts is enough to drop anyone.

what about tear gas? what about rubber bullets?

yeah, it's a big conspiracy. The father and girlfriend could never lie!

[Shadow1]

A drunk suicidal guy is on his deck with an illegally owned rifle. Cops try to disable him to save his life. He threatens them, they fire. He's still felt to be threatening so they reload and continue firing. They stop when they feel he is no longer a threat. Seems logical to me.

If I'm carrying and I'm in a situation where I have to fire, I'm not going to stop firing until the guy is down, not moving, and no longer a threat.

yes. your right. i did say that cop was right for emptying his clip on the guy running away. why? because the guy had the intent to kill the officer. not give up. not say "sorry for trying to kill you" with his arms up, but he WANTED to kill the cop. the guy was laying on his rifle. maybe he did that so when the cops pulled up, they wouldnt start firing on him as soon as they got up there.

like Brandoncb7 said. if they were close enough to fire a stun gun at him, werent they close enough to get the gun away from him? ive seen 3 cops takle a guy with a AK before. 6 cops on a guy LAYING on his rifle. im sure they could have thought better.

and this tunnel vision thing. haha. thats funny. training for officers is supposed to be for them to think LOGICAL. not "this guy is laying on his gun so lets shoot him." i understand about adrenaline rushing and all. some might be able to think properly. but having 6 cops there is not just for back up. its also for someone there to be able to think thru a situation properly.

im not just looking at it from my POV. yeah. the guy had a rifle. he could have shot one of the cops. but he said he wasnt there to harm anyone. and no throwing teddy bears at him isnt going to work, silly. lol. they SAY they tazed him. but if they were close enough to taze the guy, why werent they close enough to takle him? i talk to cops every day at work and the tazers dont have that far of a distance they can reach. 20ft max.

my point about the averaging is that averaging doesnt tell anyone what cop fired more rounds. some reloaded. if they thought their life was still in danger after 14-16 rounds, they dont need to be cops. after 16 rounds and the suspect is still STANDING being a threat to you, thats when you need to look at running the guy over or running away. thats like me shooting at robocop. if i empty a clip of M16 rounds on him and he's still walking towards me, im giving up or trying to find a rocket launcher.

[slammed4thgen]

no one in this thread will agree with the other.

59 with .45's is quite a lot, but as mchaley said you shoot until the threat is no longer.

they are here to protect and serve, and that community was protected.

[Shadow1]

no one in this thread will agree with the other.

59 with .45's is quite a lot, but as mchaley said you shoot until the threat is no longer.

they are here to protect and serve, and that community was protected.

true. ill agree to disagree with him. we can go all day back and forth with this. but it'll never get solved between us. lol.

[JoshM]

but it'll never get solved between us. lol.

Ya'll need to solve this like men.




Russian roulette.

[doughboy415]

the community was put at more risk,the coroner only removed 43 bullets,they said the house's front room was riddled,okay 6 oficers x how rounds per clip,there were stray bulletins flyingeverywhere that could have killed someone else

[Shadow1]

Ya'll need to solve this like men.




Russian roulette.

oh hecks yeah.....but with a bb gun tho....no bullets for me.

the community was put at more risk,the coroner only removed 43 bullets,they said the house's front room was riddled,okay 6 oficers x how rounds per clip,there were stray bulletins flying everywhere that could have killed someone else

thats very true man. ive looked around and some of these guns have a bullet range of like a mile. even my .22 my brother had, had a 2 mile range on it. would it actually fly that far? maybe. but being in such a closed area, having that many shots fired could have thru the house and into someone else house on the other side and killed a sleeping child. and there have been reports all over of stray bullets killing kids in their bed.