59 shots to kill one man?

[fatboy1185]

Regardless of which officer shot X amount of times, 59 bullets is a freaking execution in my eyes. Especially since there were only 6 policemen. If you are unable to kill someone(which is what they were trying to do, shoot to kill is what they are trained for) with one clip, then you don't deserve to put in another clip. The guy was in plain sight, on his porch, laying on the ground.

Have you ever watched a high school fight? It starts out being 2 people, but before you know it, everyone is fired up and wants to fight. These officers got fired up. Plain and simple.

[kantkillkeenan]

cops kill

[JoshM]

cops kill

You don't have to worry. Because they "kant kill keenan".

[93sleeper]

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.

The only question that I ask you is: If situation was switched and that was either your son or brother would you feel that the police shooting 59 shots was a correct approach. Just really think about it. If you agree then fine in your eyes it was the 100% right situation. But honestly, if you were put in the situation and you lost a family member in that manner even if he was crazy. I don't think you would agree with the approach that these police officers took. Just a thought that you should consider and maybe you already have but no matter how you look at 6 armed guys verses one armed man shouldn't have end in a situation like that. The man is not Rambo or a trainer killer. He is just an average guy. I am sorry maybe I may not be knowledgeable of every fact because I have never been a police officer but it still sounds quiet crazy.

[d112crzy]

The man is not Rambo or a trainer killer. He is just an average guy.

The cops didn't know that, although it would have been a pretty accurate assumption I'm sure.

[Pandemic]

Here we go:

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.

A disarmed guy who is running away is no longer a threat.

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.

He was laying on his rifle. Chances are he was in front of the only access point to the deck - the stairs. You want them to run into the barrel of a gun to try to take it from him?

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.

20 ft max, true enough. But that's for a guy who is standing up. This guy was laying down. Very different story. Plus, they TRIED to use a taser. Tried usually means it didn't work - why? Maybe they were more than 20 feet away?

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.

Where are you getting your stats from. 16 rounds? I'd say the majority of cops who use a .45 use a 1911 type firearm. Traditional 1911's have a 7+1 to 8+1 round mag. +1 means 1 in the chamber.

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

Put at more risk, you say? Maybe the community would have been at less risk if they had allow the drunk suicidal guy to wonder the city with his illegally owned rifle?

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.

Yeah, because wallets and rifles look the same. The shooting of the wallet guy was pretty bad, no denying that. Fact is, this guy was armed with a high caliber rifle.

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?

People under the influence of drugs and/or alcohol can walk through more rounds than that. Someone on PCP can easily take a full mag and keep coming at you.

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.

They blacked out?

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.

Wow, that's all I can say. 1). Cops shouldn't have to take fire in order to protect their lives. They had legitimate reasons to fear for their lives and they fired. It's completely fine. You keep firing until there is no longer a threat. One round, 20 rounds, 1000 rounds, it does not matter.

2). YOU DO NOT SHOOT TO DISABLE. You fire kill shots to center mass. In a stressful situation like that center mass is the biggest target. Shooting to disable also means that you, in fact, did NOT fear for your life. If that's the case, you shouldn't have fired. Trust me, I'm right on this one.

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

On average, how many bullets does a clip hold?

Depends on the caliber (.45), pistol, and magazine size.

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

Why shoot 59 times? Because the officers still felt threatened. What is confusing about that?

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

Where are your sources? That's complete BS. It depends on state and even counties. Some still carry revolvers. You're telling me that there's a cop who has to carry a 13 round revolver?

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

i know of a few cops in my city that do. not sure if they're allowed to or not. but they do.
If they weren't allowed... would they? Seriously. They're cops who may need to use that firearm to defend their life. Think about this now.

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,

Well you're just a wealth of misinformation aren't you? Rifle rounds can easily pass through a car. Plus, if they were trying to tase the guy to get the gun... well... does that mean they drove up onto the deck? Cops also have bullet proof vests. Does that mean we should take their guns now because they're protected? Nope. Why? Because rifle rounds can easily pass through a vest too.

Regardless of which officer shot X amount of times, 59 bullets is a freaking execution in my eyes. Especially since there were only 6 policemen. If you are unable to kill someone(which is what they were trying to do, shoot to kill is what they are trained for) with one clip, then you don't deserve to put in another clip. The guy was in plain sight, on his porch, laying on the ground.

Yeah, let's take all police officer's spare mags. They don't need them! They're not trained to kill. They're trained to eliminate the threat which usually means death. Sometimes they survive after being shot.

Have you ever watched a high school fight? It starts out being 2 people, but before you know it, everyone is fired up and wants to fight. These officers got fired up. Plain and simple.

Yeah, everyone knows a high school fight is a lot like a gun fight!

The only question that I ask you is: If situation was switched and that was either your son or brother would you feel that the police shooting 59 shots was a correct approach. Just really think about it. If you agree then fine in your eyes it was the 100% right situation. But honestly, if you were put in the situation and you lost a family member in that manner even if he was crazy. I don't think you would agree with the approach that these police officers took. Just a thought that you should consider and maybe you already have but no matter how you look at 6 armed guys verses one armed man shouldn't have end in a situation like that. The man is not Rambo or a trainer killer. He is just an average guy. I am sorry maybe I may not be knowledgeable of every fact because I have never been a police officer but it still sounds quiet crazy.

If a family member of mine was drunk outside with a rifle threatening suicide and they threatened police, I'd be sad but I'd understand. Everyone is saying that the police had the right to fire but not 59 rounds. Why? If they fired it's because they felt threatened. Legally, you can fire if you fear for your own life or the life of another. That being the case, 6 officers fired roughly 10 rounds each. Some may fire faster than others, whatever. If they felt threatened and fired their weapons then that's all of the information that we need. 59 rounds is the number of rounds needed to eliminate the threat.

[According2Aaron]

You're wasting your time, mchaley. No matter how logical your arguments may be, some people will still see a law enforcement situation and automatically blame the officers for the events that occured. These kinds of people cannot be reasoned with.

[d112crzy]

They blacked out?

Basically. You ever been in a life threatening situation where you just used your instincts to react and couldn't really control what you were doing until you came back from the "black out"?

That sort of reaction is something that takes years of mind exercise to control and lot let it happen.

I'm sure one or a few of those cops got a little trigger happy because his blood was pumping so hard he couldn't think.

You'd HONESTLY have to be retarded to think that even 20 shots wouldn't immobilize a human being.

Please post links with TESTED facts about the supposed human that can take multiple bullets to the chest and arms and still be mobile enough that they could still pose a possible threat. None of this "theory" mumbo jumbo.

The logical thing isn't always the "right" thing. It definitely wasn't in this case.

[Pandemic]

You're wasting your time, mchaley. No matter how logical your arguments may be, some people will still see a law enforcement situation and automatically blame the officers for the events that occured. These kinds of people cannot be reasoned with.

Thanks.

Basically. You ever been in a life threatening situation where you just used your instincts to react and couldn't really control what you were doing until you came back from the "black out"?

That sort of reaction is something that takes years of mind exercise to control and lot let it happen.

I'm sure one or a few of those cops got a little trigger happy because his blood was pumping so hard he couldn't think.

You'd HONESTLY have to be retarded to think that even 20 shots wouldn't immobilize a human being.

Please post links with TESTED facts about the supposed human that can take multiple bullets to the chest and arms and still be mobile enough that they could still pose a possible threat. None of this "theory" mumbo jumbo.

The logical thing isn't always the "right" thing. It definitely wasn't in this case.

What you're talking about is a trauma spike. Yes I've been in a life threatening situation. No I didn't 'black out.' I'll look for your TESTED facts... assuming people have tested firing on people on PCP...

For the hell of it, here's the medical examiners report: http://media.timesfreepress.com/docs...lletwounds.pdf


Here's another related article:

Six Chattanooga police officers fired 59 bullets to subdue a suicidal armed man last month, a police spokeswoman said today.

A preliminary autopsy report shows the victim, Alonzo A. Heyward, 32, had 43 bullet holes in his body. Without question, those wounds led to his death, the medical examiner's report indicates. But police said the use of force wasn't excessive.

"When we are trained to shoot, we are trained to shoot until we subdue the threat," said Lt. Kim Noorbergen, police spokeswoman. "We are not trained to shoot to kill, as many people think."

Mr. Heyward was pointing a shotgun at his face outside the McDonald's restaurant on Rossville Boulevard in the early morning hours of July 18 when approached by police, according to previous police statements. Officers followed Mr. Heyward to his home on Seventh Avenue, continually asking him to disarm, but Mr. Heyward didn't comply, police have said.

On Monday, Chattanooga police released an audio recording of the encounter. The recording comes from the microphone of Officer Lauren Bacha, who apparently arrived at the scene after Mr. Heyward already was on the porch of his home.

One neighbor is heard telling officers that Mr. Heyward had been threatening to kill himself all day and had been drinking. Police say that once on the porch at his house, Mr. Heyward pointed his weapon at them, and that's when they used a stun gun. When that didn't work, the officers resorted to deadly force.

The audio plays out as a heated exchange between Mr. Heyward and police, followed by the sound of Mr. Heyward being hit with an electric stun gun and then three volleys of gunshots.

Lt. Noorbergen said those three gunfire bursts indicate officers didn't think the threat posed by Mr. Heyward and his gun was quashed.

"You hear a five-second delay and then more gunfire," Lt. Noorbergen said. "In these situations we do what it takes to stop the threat."

The autopsy report, which is not yet final, details gunshot wounds on nearly every part of Mr. Heyward's 5-foot-9-inch, 180-pound body. Bullet holes were present from his chin to his ankle, but Lt. Noorbergen said it's not clear which of those were entry or exit wounds.

"In one case we know there were three wounds for one gunshot," Lt. Noorbergen said, explaining a bullet entered one part of the body, exited and then entered another part.

But the officers did fire a total of 59 rounds at Mr. Heyward, the lieutenant said. A standard .45-caliber pistol holds nine bullets, but not all officers carry the same weapon, she said.

From the start, Mr. Heyward's family has questioned the use of force. No one was at the Seventh Avenue residence on Monday.

"It was like they had machine guns, all shooting," said James Heyward, shortly after the shooting. "All the officers fired a round. (Alonzo) said he didn't want to hurt anybody, he just wanted to hurt himself."

Also:

OFFICERS BACK AT WORK

The six officers involved in the July 18 shooting of Alonzo Heyward were placed on seven days administrative leave with pay after the investigation. Officers Lauren Bacha, Deborah Dennison, Zachery Moody, George Romero, William Salyers and Bryan Wood were placed on paid leave, according to Chattanooga Police Department policy. All were believed to be back at work this week, Lt. Kim Noorbergen said. (aug 4th 2009)

[d112crzy]

Damn, they shot his penis! Actually..it says beneath the scrotum..so that would be his gooch? Ouch. lol

[Pandemic]

Large doses may produce paranoia, auditory hallucinations, psychosis similar to schizophrenia. Massive doses, more commonly associated with ingesting the drug, may cause cardiac arrhythmias, seizures, muscle rigidity, acute kidney failure, and death. Because of the analgesic (pain-killing) properties of PCP, users who incur significant injuries may not feel any pain.

http://www.realmentalhealth.com/addi...g_names_02.asp


=================================================

It's well known that enemy combatants in Iraq and Afghanistan have taken various drugs to increase pain tolerance. Soldiers have reported shooting an enemy combatant only watching them run away.

Larry Phillips and Emil Matasareanu were on drugs when they kicked off the Hollywood shootout in 1997.

[19dabeast85]

I think the cops were way too trigger happy and at the very least need some time off duty and be sent back to weapons training.

I've shot 1000's of rounds out of various guns, hunted deer, birds, squirrels, wild dogs, etc. and I know that it takes only one carefully placed bullet to disable most creatures including humans (well the wild dog took three because it was running and it took 3 to hit the heart). Anyway, cops are trained to ALWAYS shoot the minimum required to subdue a person, and to never shoot if it could endanger the general public. I'd question where those 19 shots that missed actually went and why the cops responsible even fired them if they didn't hit the subject.

Granted adrenaline could have taken over, but it's not like the guy was even so much as threatening the cops, he just wanted to shoot himself and nobody else. Also, sticky situation or not, law enforcement is trained to always make careful, calculated decisions in any situation so the excuse of adrenaline taking over is just that, an excuse. A cops is supposed to be a professional at his job, not itchy on the trigger.

So, in short, I've lived my life around guns, used them all the time, always careful and respect them though, I think every person should know how to safely use one and own one, BUT I also believe these cops acting with very excessive force. One carefully placed bullet, either heart or head, is all that was needed. Nothing else is logical. Nothing else is proper protocol for any American law enforcement division.

[quakerjoe]

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

On average, how many bullets does a clip hold?

So are we sure that the 16 shots that didn't hit the subject were fired last? Or maybe they were fired first., requiring the officers to fire more shots. Either way a clip can go fast.

Here's a scenario that no one has mentioned yet. Perhaps the subject's gun was pointed towards the officers. With the subject laying prone it could be difficult to tell whether they are aiming it at you or not. It's like holding a coin 20ft away from someone and turning it so its edge is facing the person and then asking them to tell you what denomination the coin is. It's difficult. So as the officers are standing there with their guns drawn on the subject, unsure whether he is aiming at them to kill, he makes a sudden and unauthorized move that only one of the officers catches and preceives as a hostile move. He takes a shot without warning. If the other officers are unaware that this officer took the shot, then they may assume the shot has come from the subject, so they begin unloading in self defense thinking that they were fired upon.

Sometimes it just goes bad. And you guys are talking about excessive force. Excessive force or not, I bet those officers arrived there with no intention of killing someone. And worse than that someone lost their life, someone lost their boyfriend, somone lost their friend, and several lost their father. I think sometimes we get to caught up in the details and miss the big picture. Both sides ultimately could have done things differently, but they didnt.

And to the guy that said one of them should have taken a warning shot and then waited for a return fire. That's ridiculous. That's like pooping on some Chuck Liddell’s car and then waiting around to tell him it was you. Besides they gave him many verbal warnings, I'm sure. He was a not cooperating subject.

[Pandemic]

I think the cops were way too trigger happy and at the very least need some time off duty and be sent back to weapons training.

I've shot 1000's of rounds out of various guns, hunted deer, birds, squirrels, wild dogs, etc. and I know that it takes only one carefully placed bullet to disable most creatures including humans (well the wild dog took three because it was running and it took 3 to hit the heart). Anyway, cops are trained to ALWAYS shoot the minimum required to subdue a person, and to never shoot if it could endanger the general public. I'd question where those 19 shots that missed actually went and why the cops responsible even fired them if they didn't hit the subject.

Cops are trained to ALWAYS eliminate the threat.

Granted adrenaline could have taken over, but it's not like the guy was even so much as threatening the cops, he just wanted to shoot himself and nobody else. Also, sticky situation or not, law enforcement is trained to always make careful, calculated decisions in any situation so the excuse of adrenaline taking over is just that, an excuse. A cops is supposed to be a professional at his job, not itchy on the trigger.

They tried to talk him down. Tried to tase him. Didn't work. Doesn't sound like an itchy trigger finger at all. They were threatened and they fired.

So, in short, I've lived my life around guns, used them all the time, always careful and respect them though, I think every person should know how to safely use one and own one, BUT I also believe these cops acting with very excessive force. One carefully placed bullet, either heart or head, is all that was needed. Nothing else is logical. Nothing else is proper protocol for any American law enforcement division.

Shooting animals isn't quite the same as shooting a human who is threatening you with a rifle. One shot to the head or heart, eh? Yeah, you're right. If the threat is eliminated after one shot, job well done. If not, continue firing.

Is anyone tired of asking the same questions and making the same statements yet? I sure am.

[wed3k]

worse case of suicide ever.