59 shots to kill one man?

[slammed4thgen]

stray bulletins flyingeverywhere that could have killed someone else

bulletins? what for!!!

lol only joking.

the bullets werent flying everywhere like you say, they were within a small area of the backdrop of the target...which is understandable.

it all boils down to if the suspects in these cases would of done what they should have, none of this would happen.. everyone seems to forget that these suspects have refused to listen repeatedly.

the police dont hop out of their car and say drop the gun, suspect refuses and they fire 59 shots into them...its after hours of trying to get the suspect to listen after repeated refusal.

[d112crzy]

He threatens them, they fire.

But something no one knows(except those who were there) is, was the guy REALLY threatening them or did the cops misinterpret some of his actions as "threats"?

See the guy who was pulling out his wallet and got shot to death.

Also..shooting until the threat is no longer? I'm sure that he was no longer any sort of threat after the 10th round. Serious, he may still be alive, but WHO the fuck on earth can still move and support a rifle after being hit with 10, let alone 15, 20, 25, 30...etc, rounds to the chest and arms?

I understand they're human and humans get tunnel vision and whatnot, but they need to learn how to control themselves. When a person blacks out like that, with a gun, they could be more dangerous than the threat themselves.

[Shadow1]

But something no one knows(except those who were there) is, was the guy REALLY threatening them or did the cops misinterpret some of his actions as "threats"?

See the guy who was pulling out his wallet and got shot to death.

Also..shooting until the threat is no longer? I'm sure that he was no longer any sort of threat after the 10th round. Serious, he may still be alive, but WHO the fuck on earth can still move and support a rifle after being hit with 10, let alone 15, 20, 25, 30...etc, rounds to the chest and arms?

I understand they're human and humans get tunnel vision and whatnot, but they need to learn how to control themselves. When a person blacks out like that, with a gun, they could be more dangerous than the threat themselves.

and cops are supposed to be trained to think and act properly in situations like this also. and there have been PLENTY of times where a cop misinterprets an action as something threatening and the suspect ends up getting killed.

[d112crzy]

and cops are supposed to be trained to think and act properly in situations like this also. and there have been PLENTY of times where a cop misinterprets an action as something threatening and the suspect ends up getting killed.

It's impossible to train someone without real life situations. They do "simulations" and what not, but it's no where near the same because they KNOW their lifes are not at danger.

Learning control over their feelings is something they need to learn on their own times. It's more of a mental thing.

[doughboy415]

the bottom line is HE WAS NOT SHOOTING AT THEM,if they are being constantly fired at I understand shooting back 59 times.All one of them had to do was fire a warning shot,if he fired back then they shoot back.but if he was lying down,why was there a need to fire that many times.All this tunnel vision is true if fired on,they would all be locked in on the shooter.Also what happened to calling in a police negotiator to talk him down.the whole situation was handled wrong in my opinion.Cops shoot to kill when they are threatened,the only person who was being threatened was the victim,I STILL SAY THEY COULD HAVE JUST SHOT HIM TO WOUND HIM AND DISABLE HIM,if he fired back then shoot to kill.

[JoshM]

the bottom line is HE WAS NOT SHOOTING AT THEM

If I were in the cops position, I'd have fired too. If the rifle is pointed at me, I'm going to fire. I'm sure as hell not going to wait to see if the suspect decides to shoot.

[doughboy415]

If I were in the cops position, I'd have fired too. If the rifle is pointed at me, I'm going to fire. I'm sure as hell not going to wait to see if the suspect decides to shoot.

thats just it,nowhere did it say he even pointed it at them or threatened them,So why shoot that many times,okay if he threatened them yes shoot,the point here is WHY SHOOT 59 TIMES

[Leung]

dang.. someone of them according to that link reloaded their weapon and started firing again.

On average, how many bullets does a clip hold?

[Shadow1]

dang.. someone of them according to that link reloaded their weapon and started firing again.

On average, how many bullets does a clip hold?

for law enforcement, its 13 rounds....standard issue

[Leung]

for law enforcement, its 13 rounds....standard issue

but don't some guys use non-issued guns also?

[Shadow1]

but don't some guys use non-issued guns also?

i know of a few cops in my city that do. not sure if they're allowed to or not. but they do.

[doughboy415]

something else that hasnt been brought up, police are trained to stay behind their cars for cover/protection,it wasnt like they were out in the open with no cover,so saying they were in danger doesnt cut it in my opinion,

[CB7_213]

wtf??? what happened to the 2 in the chest and 1 in the head??
damn 59 shots is too much! for 1 man!

[Brandoncb7]

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? .

I was just getting at what a 45 will do at close range. There's a steel barrel out in my back yard that I shot with a Glock 45 somewhere around 20-30 feet from it and I can almost fit my thumb through some of the holes. If they were close enough to use the stun gun and opened fire on him I can't see it taking more than a couple of shots. Granted once one officer opens fire the rest would more than likely follow suit but none of them should have HAD to fire more than a couple of times to drop him at close range with the caliber handgun they were all using. This isn't the first time it has happend and you can probably guarantee it won't be the last. I don't have their job and I wasn't there so I don't really have too strong of feelings on the matter but it would seem like it wouldn't take that much force.

[IAmTheNight]

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.

You're still avoiding facts. Chattanooga Times Free Press says that the officers' magazines can hold 9-16 rounds per clip. Like I said before, we DO NOT KNOW how many bullets each officer fired OR how many bullets were in each clip. You assume that they were fully loaded and that most of the officers had to reload when there is simply no evidence of that. The cops that did reload did so because they were out of bullets.

I am doubtful of the accuracy of the witnesses' descriptions, at least those reported by that MSNBC article. The quote made from the suspect's girlfriend says that he was down before the first shot? So what? He can't fire from the ground? As a matter of fact, according to the New Pittsburgh Courier (second link), the officers felt threatened by the way he moved the gun. Apparently, he was able to move the gun while lying on the ground. Go figure. Plus, autopsy reports say that it is possible that he turned around at some point when he was being shot. She also said "not one time did he threaten anyone," although he threatened to kill himself, as noted in the Free Press article, so that is another omission of facts. A person that is willing to harm himself or herself can easily be a threat to others. The police don't read minds.

Here's a quote from that Free Press article (linked at the bottom of the post):


This newspaper's Jacqueline Koch questioned Emmanuel Kapelsohn, vice president and director of the International Association of Law Enforcement Firearms Instructors, on the number shots fired by multiple police officers. Mr. Kapelsohn said a person can be shot 20 or 30 times and may still retain the ability to point and fire a gun. He also said a trained officer can fire six or more shots in one-and-a-half seconds, and that someone struck by those rounds may not fall in that time. He further said that the physical response of ceasing fire in that span of time, from shooting to sensing the cessation of a threat, may not be instantaneous.

An audio tape made by an officer at the scene, however, suggests that the shots were fired in three distinct volleys. "You hear a five-second delay," Lt. Kim Noorbergen said, "and then more gunfire." She said those separate bursts indicate officers didn't think the threat presented by Mr. Heyward was finished.


Three distinct volleys, meaning that the officers assessed the danger of the situation three times and fired their rounds three times. You don't have enough information to say whether or not the suspect was moving in a threatening manner. Apparently the police thought he was. The TBI will find out the truth.

How was the spokesperson lying? She said the officers responded to a REPORT of two men wrestling with a gun. The reality may have been different, but that is what the report said. She told the truth.

http://www.timesfreepress.com/news/2...-wounds-1-man/
http://newpittsburghcourieronline.co...ee-/Page1.html

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.

As you said, they were not crack shots. If they were, that is to say if they had that advanced training, they would not have needed to fire so many shots. A couple in the head from each officer would have done the trick. However, in this situation, I agree with you, as long as they truly believed he was a threat. Like I said, the TBI will find the truth.