United States News
See other United States News Articles
Title: St. Louis Police Just Shot Man Who Was Talking About ‘Revolution’
Source:
Counter Current News
URL Source: http://countercurrentnews.com/2015/ ... -was-talking-about-revolution/
Published: Apr 19, 2015
Author: Counter Current News
Post Date: 2015-04-19 17:55:20 by Deckard
Keywords: None
Views: 3936
Comments: 34
Another African American man has been shot and killed by Missouri police officers even though he was not attacking anyone, and had no firearm of any kind. This happened in the midst of ongoing protests all over the nation, and especially in Ferguson and St. Louis, regarding police shootings of African American men. This case has already been justified by the police who said that Thaddeus McCarroll, 23, “had a knife.” But McCarroll was locked in his mother’s house, and he was no threat to officers. Instead, his mother called the police when she said her son had been “talking about revolution” and locked himself in the house. Instead of showing up and getting him help, officers in the St. Louis suburb shot and killed him. McCarroll’s mother said she called the police to “help”. She was concerned about her son, but she never thought police would show up and kill him, reports from the scene stated. She added that she had explained the situation to the officers who arrived, but instead of bringing in specialists who could deal with potential issues that McCarroll might have been facing, within minutes they surrounded the house and escalated things. When McCarroll emerged from the house, he was seen with a Bible and a knife. Police wasted no time opening fire on him, even though he had not attacked anyone, nor issued any threats. It is quite possible that he was in a state of distress and was suicidal. The fact that he had not threatened anyone would seem to indicate that even further. The St. Louis County police department says that they have already placed the officers who opened fire on McCarroll on paid administrative leave. They tell us that they are “investigating the incident.” St. Louis County Police Chief Jon Belmar stated that, “This is another tragic situation where police officers had no other option but to use deadly force against an armed subject.” Meanwhile, the St. Louis police are leaning heavily on the statement from McCarroll’s mother that he had recently “spoken about revolution.” Can you see where they’re going with this yet?
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 31.
#1. To: Deckard (#0)
When are people going to learn that calling the cops often results in your loved ones getting killed?
This was no quick, undocumented incident. His mommy called the police, told them that he was acting strange, and was armed with several knives and a Samurai sword. She stated she wanted him out of her house... He refused to leave for responding units. They surrounded the house and he stayed in the house, being seen often with the sword in front of the windows. After quite some time, a negotiator arrived and after several hours of every Ferguson zoo animal recording the incident with their free O'bunghole phones, he finally exited the house armed with a knife. Repeated commends to drop the knife were ignored while the armed zoo animal walked closer to officers. He was shot with a non-lethal round (to get him to drop the knife)... and that had the opposite effect. The armed zoo animal then rushed towards the officer that shot him with the non lethal round, still holding the knife... and he was shot several times by two officers that he ran toward. All well documented. All the choices were the zoo animals.
Isn't this where officers are supposed to use the Taser? They should have made the attempt before firearms were used. Cops are too Taser-happy these days but I have no objections if they tase anyone holding a weapon. By the time they told him twice to drop the knife, they should have tased him. And he would be in custody now, not a casket.
Actually, the training block that I went through suggested that officers not tase knife holders... for fear they will fall on the weapon and the family will sue as the cause of death. I was trained in taser around 2011. My department was one of the last departments to buy them due to budget restrictions. Them suckers are 3 times the cost of a Glock. Page 5 of the taser PDF Manuel specially lists not taking people holding edged weapons.
You've gotta be kidding. How often does that happen in real life? OTOH, if you use that as an excuse not to tase, you're going to shoot and they'll end up dead or seriously wounded anyway and lawsuits will be pretty likely. That policy makes no sense to me from any angle.
Here's the problem. If I'm trained not to tase an edged weapon holder, and I do, and they fall to the ground on the knife and die, it's a slam dunk EASY lawsuit against me... and the department is gonna leave me swinging and say I was trained otherwise. If I just wait until the edge weapon holder gets close enough to be a threat and I ventilate his chest with my Glock... I'm relatively safe from lawsuit and my department will have to stand behind me because I followed the correct use of force continuum... by the book and per policy. I tried telling you all as far back as LP that all the things you dislike about what police have evolved to is based on LIABILTY LAWSUITS. Large settlements have caused a widespread change in our society today.
Most law enforcement officers, at some point or another, are named as a defendant in a lawsuit. As such, they need to be better equipped to handle it, limiting not only their liability, but the department’s liability. The Maryland Police and Correctional Training Commission (MPCTC) provides a two-week training course that is mandated by statute for all police officers who are newly promoted to either first-line supervisor (corporal and sergeants) or as an administrator (lieutenant and captains). As a former lieutenant with the Maryland State Police, I taught the module on risk management, which focused on how police officers can limit their exposure to lawsuits. Law enforcement is a tough career as an officer not only has to protect and serve, but must do so within the confines of the law. Often, an officer will need to make a split-second decision; if the decision does not stay within the parameters of statutes, case law, department rules and regulations, then the consequences for the officer can be dire. The result can be a civil lawsuit, criminal charges, and/or administrative charges against the officer. In addition, the officer’s department as well as the officer’s chain of command can face civil liability based on an officer’s action or inaction. Departments attempt to minimize their exposure to civil lawsuits as most plaintiffs seek monetary damages. Since police departments are governmental agencies, citizens view them as having deep pockets. One of the problems with civil lawsuits is the burden of proof. In civil cases, the burden of proof is the preponderance of evidence, not beyond a reasonable doubt. The preponderance of evidence standard can be viewed as a scale; if one side is tilted, however slightly, then the standard is met. Life, liberty, and property rights are the biggest risks facing officers when they are performing their job. Violating any of these constitutional rights can result in not only the officer and department potentially being sued civilly, but also in criminal and/or administrative charges against an officer. With this is mind, officers need to understand and be able to apply the law in high-risk situations, keeping themselves and the public safe while ensuring that they protect the constitutional rights of the individuals involved. An officer can be liable in two ways: An officer is not liable if he or she: Some examples include: Anyone can file a lawsuit and there is always the possibility that an officer will be sued. The best defense for an officer is to adhere to the law. “I didn’t know” is not a defense.
If you unload a 30-round magazine into anyone, that's pretty much an execution, not an arrest. He should have been arrested and read his rights, not machine-gunned. Look at that video, listen for the commands, the single shot, the machine gun. What, the cop was such a bad shot that he couldn't have squeezed off a few torso shots at 30' or less? He just had to flip on the full-auto and unload an entire magazine into a crazed/drugged civilian?
Officers are trained to shoot until the threat has ended. That's basic academy 101...if there are several officers aiming at him... he's gonna be shot A LOT.
It was one officer who used an assault rifle in full auto mode. He was machine-gunned, apparently by a single officer.
And a jury of his peers or that officer facing the threat should have the only say as to if his actions were proper. Like I said, this knife & bible carrying stellar human being held all the cards...
ALL the cards?? Chyeah. The guy was holding a pair of weak ducks. Lol. BLAM!! (x30)
#33. To: Liberator (#31)
Rule # 1.... don't ever bring a knife and bible to a gun fight. Play stupid games... win stupid prizes.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#2. To: TooConservative (#1)
(Edited)
When are people going to learn that calling the cops often results in your loved ones getting killed?
#3. To: GrandIsland (#2)
(Edited)
Repeated commends to drop the knife were ignored while the armed zoo animal walked closer to officers. He was shot with a non-lethal round (to get him to drop the knife)... and that had the opposite effect. The armed zoo animal then rushed towards the officer that shot him with the non lethal round, still holding the knife... and he was shot several times by two officers that he ran toward.
#9. To: TooConservative (#3)
(Edited)
#11. To: GrandIsland (#9)
Actually, the training block that I went through suggested that officers not tase knife holders... for fear they will fall on the weapon and the family will sue as the cause of death.
#12. To: TooConservative (#11)
(Edited)
OTOH, if you use that as an excuse not to tase, you're going to shoot and they'll end up dead or seriously wounded anyway and lawsuits will be pretty likely.
#13. To: GrandIsland, TooConservative (#12)
I tried telling you all as far back as LP that all the things you dislike about what police have evolved to is based on LIABILTY LAWSUITS. Large settlements have caused a widespread change in our society today.
What Legal Issues Should Law Enforcement Know About?
#15. To: Gatlin, Liberator (#13)
An officer can be liable in two ways:
#18. To: TooConservative (#15)
What, the cop was such a bad shot that he couldn't have squeezed off a few torso shots at 30' or less? He just had to flip on the full-auto and unload an entire magazine into a crazed/drugged civilian?
#26. To: GrandIsland (#18)
Officers are trained to shoot until the threat has ended. That's basic academy 101...if there are several officers aiming at him... he's gonna be shot A LOT.
#29. To: TooConservative (#26)
(Edited)
#31. To: GrandIsland (#29)
(Edited)
This knife & bible carrying stellar human being held all the cards...
Replies to Comment # 31. ALL the cards?? Chyeah. The guy was holding a pair of weak ducks. Lol. BLAM!! (x30)
End Trace Mode for Comment # 31.
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]