Police shooting in Wisconsin 4/22/2011 - Page 3

Adam21 · May 8, 2011, 04:55 PM

Glad to see the officers were alright. He must have thought "Okay, I get out, shoot a few times, scare them, jump back in my car, and get away." Should have kept him around to train the SEAL combat driving school.

chadstrickland · May 8, 2011, 09:09 PM

My eyes have opened just a little bit more...before now I havnt been able to fully comprehended the lessons I have been taught but now after going over this I think I will add some new material to my training...( which is self taught with the help of books and a few seal dvds )....when its all you got..its all you got

markj · May 9, 2011, 03:06 PM

Just make sure them engines are full of oil chad

former mechanic here. LOL

justjim75 · May 11, 2011, 12:15 AM

there's no way i would have shot that many rounds at someone running away with a house behind them. ricochets, misses, the legality of shooting a man in the back. i think with two cars and the man being stuck they might could've stopped him without risking that hypothetical 5 yr olds life. glad about the actual results but if a non LE civillian had done it they'd be in prison.

aryfrosty · May 11, 2011, 12:43 AM

But I'm not sure where you got the "hypothetical 5 year old" or the idea that it's illegal to shoot the criminal in "the back". Your hypothetical bystander is overruled by the factual suspect who is using deadly force against the Officers. If I am in a gunfight for my life I will/would shoot the bad guy in the toe...in the ear...in the back...in the front. Wherever it takes shooting him to stop the threat to the Officers and the public. This isn't the movies where all shooters stop while everyone reloads and then asks if it's OK with all parties if we resume fire. The bad guy suspended the "rules of fair play" when he opened fire on the Officers. I am not trying to offend you but I iterate my earlier statement that unqualified persons really should not criticize Officers who do the dirty work.

Double Naught Spy · May 11, 2011, 07:41 AM

Right, there are no laws in the US that stipulate where a person can or cannot be shot during the use of lethal force where lethal force is justified. You can shoot them in the back. You can shoot them while they run.

gearhounds · May 11, 2011, 08:19 AM

"Right, there are no laws in the US that stipulate where a person can or cannot be shot during the use of lethal force where lethal force is justified. You can shoot them in the back. You can shoot them while they run."

Exactly right; when deadly force is called for, you shoot for center of mass of whatever target you have available, be it a head, arm, leg, etc. This is not the same thing as the ridiculous notion made by the uninformed when they state something like "why didn't they just shoot them in the leg?".

justjim75 · May 11, 2011, 09:25 AM

none of you know who, if anybody was in the building behind the truck. the cops shot towards a possibly occupied building at a man that was NOT shooting at them anymore. i just dont see how you guys can think that its worth the risk of shooting innocent people. the fact is the cops shot all of their rounds after he stopped shooting and ran away. maybe he was reloading or getting another gun. maybe he had an RPG. he was still a threat i agree but your statement about "if i was in a fight for my life" doesn't apply to the portion of this incident when 4 cops are shooting a man who is running away and not shooting back. once again, if a civillian had done the same, that person would go to prison for a very long time.

output · May 11, 2011, 10:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by justjim75

none of you know who, if anybody was in the building behind the truck. the cops shot towards a possibly occupied building at a man that was NOT shooting at them anymore. i just dont see how you guys can think that its worth the risk of shooting innocent people. the fact is the cops shot all of their rounds after he stopped shooting and ran away.

I don’t think the police did anything wrong in this instance, especially after being fired on within spitting distances. This was a very dangerous criminal. This guy meant business, he was determined, and by the looks of the video was not afraid to die or confront the police (as shown in the shootout.)

What if the police didn’t fire back and he ended up driving over kids on a bus stop. Or they ended up in another shootout in a busy intersection where more people were? IMO this guy needed to be stopped ASAP. At some point(s) when lives are at risk we have to give our Men and Women in uniform a little leeway…they put it all on the line for us every day of the week.

aryfrosty · May 11, 2011, 12:03 PM

Back to the cops habving to make decisions in seconds that lawyers will have months, if not years, to decide if they were right or wrong. I suspect that if the likliehood of the suspect moving on to other victims didn't have to be factored in many Cops would try other ways to contain a suspect. Often their hesitation leads to their own death. I have been shot on the job. Waiting until the suspect had a chance to shoot me before my risk assessment keyed me to shoot cost me many painful months in rehab and lost time on the street while driving a desk. I was blessed by God. I helped bury two field training students and a high school classmate. All killed by violence of others on the job. I have attended far too many Cop's funerals to criticize them for taking action to protect their lives and the lives of others. Curious thing about Officers killed while on duty...None that I have known, even knowing that the chances were great that they could lose their lives and their family's futures, would take back their actions that lead to their deaths. That dedication to their fellow humans deserves more than micromanagement. Regards, Al

markj · May 11, 2011, 01:26 PM

Quote:

who, if anybody was in the building behind the truck. the cops shot towards a possibly occupied building at a man that was NOT shooting at them anymore.

Well just goes to show, best not to ever shoot at any police officer, they will shoot back till the threat is down and not moving. Would HPs travel thru the walls of them buildings? I dont know what caliber either.

Cops did you, me, and every American a favor by doing thier job there.

justjim75 · May 11, 2011, 01:32 PM

i think you got me all wrong from the beginning. i have alot of respect for LEO's and what they are faced with is terrible. i am both sorry for you and your collegues getting shot and/or killed, and thankful for your contributions to keeping us safe. i read on this site and others constantly about being very, very careful where your bullets go if and when you decide to shoot and in this particular case it seemed like there was a very high risk of "collateral damage" due to many rounds being fired after the threat level went down to a degree. once again, thank you and sorry if you misunderstood me (i certainly think that guy needed to be stopped ASAP)

chadstrickland · May 11, 2011, 07:13 PM

Mark j...I agree with the last part of your post...you hit the nail on the head...but..I have also made my comments earlier and I still stick with them...imho..each bullet that didn't stop in that truck or bad guy had a lawer attached to it...I would be willing to be that all those cops had locked slides when they stopped shooting....I don't think it takes 50 bullets to stop a truck and kill a guy....that's my main point...I thank the good lord for cops..they do a dangerous job and im thankful they are there...( I have also never got a ticket )..any of you guys that are cops..im not trash talkin you at all..and I thank you for your service

MLeake · May 11, 2011, 07:33 PM

Of the two issues put forward (collateral damage risk; shooting at the back of a felon who is no longer shooting) only one would apply in my neck of the woods, and that would be the collateral damage.

As far as shooting in the back, or shooting at a fleeing felon, or for that matter continuing pursuit of a fleeing felon:

The guy was wanted for drive-by shootings, and had just fired on police. By law and by local department policies, those factors made the felon a lawful target until he surrendered. He didn't have to approach, he didn't have to continue to fire, all he had to do was fail to comply, and shooting him was lawful and in accordance with the policies I've read posted in local media.

Collateral damage could have been a legitimate reason to consider ceasing fire. I'd have preferred to see fewer rounds fired in a residential neighborhood.

But that has nothing to do with whether the guy was no longer shooting at, nor facing, the officers.

He only sowed what he very actively had reaped.

Big Shrek · May 11, 2011, 08:59 PM

JustJim, let me give you some info that you are missing.

Quote:

Tennessee v. Garner, 471 U.S. 1 (1985). The justices held that deadly force "may not be used unless necessary to prevent the escape and the officer has probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a significant threat of death or serious physical injury to the officer or others."

Kinda sums it all up in a nutshell...if you are ONLY running away, that's not a shootable offense,
UNLESS, you have previously been violent...and especially if you had just been shooting at someone/cops.
So if you just beat your wife with a baseball bat, and are running from the cops with the bat in hand, they can blast you.
If you just pee'd on a cop car, and are running away, they can't shoot you (legally).

Violent Felony or multiple violent felonies = getting shot if you run.

Non-violent Felonies & misdemeanors = no bang-bang unless they spot a weapon on you.
(In which case they tend to run you over with a police car (see the Pensacola PD "Ard" case.)

It's that simple.

**JohnKSa** · May 11, 2011, 09:32 PM

Quote:

none of you know who, if anybody was in the building behind the truck.

We also don't know who was behind the cops when Mr. Nice Guy opened up on them without warning.

But we (and the cops) know what he would have done had he gotten away in his stolen truck. He would have continued doing driveby shootings--taking pot shots at people & buildings as he drove down the road.

It's too bad they didn't drop him with a single round, but it is (and was) painfully obvious that the cops were justified, in fact morally and legally obligated in doing whatever was necessary to stop him from leaving the scene.

TenRing · May 11, 2011, 10:47 PM

The perp in this case must have been deranged or insane. I don't know how he expected to get away after jumping out of the truck and firing rounds at the officers. It seemed like just another drive by shooting to him. Did he really think he would be allowed to just jump back into the truck and continue on his way? Maybe he thought he would race through residential streets and lose the officers. Seems like the perp was acting out scenes from a movie that he saw.

markj · May 12, 2011, 03:05 PM

Quote:

each bullet that didn't stop in that truck or bad guy had a lawer attached to it...

Cops get into shootouts all the time, how often do innocents get hurt? Hardly ever, but it does happen. Now do them cops think about this when under fire? Heck no they are concentrating on stopping a known bad guy was drive by shooting at folks and shot at 4 officers, no all they were thinking of was stopping that threat before he hurts others.

How many people could he potentially kill or injure if he was left to get away?

I got family in LEO and I feer for them daily. It isnt a good job IMHO. Gotta go babysit adults, arrest them or hand out a ticket with a fine to upset individuals may be have a gun on them, or a gang wannabe wants to make a name for himself.

Nope, shoot at a cop, you gonna get shot up. And rightly so.

Double Naught Spy · May 12, 2011, 06:00 PM

Quote:

I don't know how he expected to get away after jumping out of the truck and firing rounds at the officers.

Who said he did?

Quote:

Did he really think he would be allowed to just jump back into the truck and continue on his way?

Sadly, it happens more often than folks would like to believe. It isn't that the suspects are "allowed" to get back in their vehicles and leave, but that they manage to do so successfully for various reasons.

Quote:

Cops get into shootouts all the time, how often do innocents get hurt? Hardly ever, but it does happen. Now do them cops think about this when under fire? Heck no they are concentrating on stopping a known bad guy was drive by shooting at folks and shot at 4 officers, no all they were thinking of was stopping that threat before he hurts others.

Yep. We still want them to shoot better. Personally, I don't care how many times they fire so long as their shots go where they are supposed to go.

9mm · May 12, 2011, 06:06 PM

I have a question!

With all the shots fired while he was standing outside the car before he got back in. Why didn't he get hit?? or go down? The cops seamed to missed him before he got back into his car.

**JohnKSa** · May 12, 2011, 09:33 PM

Handgun bullets aren't lightning bolts. I suspect he was hit at least once and maybe multiple times before he got back into his truck. At one point he stumbles slightly while trying to get back to and into the truck which might be evidence that he sustained an injury about that point in time.

The average service pistol caliber bullet destroys approximately 0.1% of the average adult male's body. Or, looking at it from the other side, the impact of the average service pistol caliber bullet leaves the average adult male 99.9% intact.

If the 0.1% damaged isn't anything particularly important or significant it's not going to have a particularly significant effect.

9mm · May 13, 2011, 09:49 AM

I argee I think he was acting some role play crap out. Just look how he hopped outta the car then ran back (silly) like.

Double Naught Spy · May 13, 2011, 10:13 AM

Quote:

I argee I think he was acting some role play crap out. Just look how he hopped outta the car then ran back (silly) like.

Have you seen many of these sorts of events? Bad guys and good guys alike often look very silly under stress.

Of course he had to run back to his truck if he wanted to get back in it. He didn't get it into park and so it left him behind.

Tyrant · May 13, 2011, 12:33 PM

I do not think the police fired excessive rounds. The BG is pulled over and immediately discharges every round he has. The building behind the truck was most likely the same as what was behind the police.
Wait for back up - No longer an option. They had to remove the threat and end it before he could reload or utilize his other weapon (The vehicle).
There are so many things that can go wrong with the situation and few options.

May 8, 2011, 09:09 PM	#52
chadstrickland Senior Member Join Date: January 26, 2011 Location: alabama Posts: 537	My eyes have opened just a little bit more...before now I havnt been able to fully comprehended the lessons I have been taught but now after going over this I think I will add some new material to my training...( which is self taught with the help of books and a few seal dvds )....when its all you got..its all you got __________________ Two weapons that was designed by the same man still in use by the us military 100 years later...1911 and m2...is there anything that comes close.....lol annd maybe perhaps a sig sauer p226 tac ops edition..

May 11, 2011, 12:43 AM	#55
aryfrosty Senior Member Join Date: September 14, 2010 Location: Concord, NH Posts: 209	Still sure But I'm not sure where you got the "hypothetical 5 year old" or the idea that it's illegal to shoot the criminal in "the back". Your hypothetical bystander is overruled by the factual suspect who is using deadly force against the Officers. If I am in a gunfight for my life I will/would shoot the bad guy in the toe...in the ear...in the back...in the front. Wherever it takes shooting him to stop the threat to the Officers and the public. This isn't the movies where all shooters stop while everyone reloads and then asks if it's OK with all parties if we resume fire. The bad guy suspended the "rules of fair play" when he opened fire on the Officers. I am not trying to offend you but I iterate my earlier statement that unqualified persons really should not criticize Officers who do the dirty work. __________________ 'At the end of the fight is a tombstone white with the name of the late deceased...And the epitaph drear, "a fool lies here who tried to hustle the east."'

May 11, 2011, 07:41 AM	#56
Double Naught Spy Senior Member Join Date: January 8, 2001 Location: Forestburg, Montague Cnty, TX Posts: 12,717	Right, there are no laws in the US that stipulate where a person can or cannot be shot during the use of lethal force where lethal force is justified. You can shoot them in the back. You can shoot them while they run. __________________ "If you look through your scope and see your shoe, aim higher." -- said to me by my 11 year old daughter before going out for hogs 8/13/2011 My Hunting Videos https://www.youtube.com/user/HornHillRange

May 11, 2011, 08:19 AM	#57
gearhounds Senior Member Join Date: February 20, 2011 Location: M'burg WV Posts: 332	"Right, there are no laws in the US that stipulate where a person can or cannot be shot during the use of lethal force where lethal force is justified. You can shoot them in the back. You can shoot them while they run." Exactly right; when deadly force is called for, you shoot for center of mass of whatever target you have available, be it a head, arm, leg, etc. This is not the same thing as the ridiculous notion made by the uninformed when they state something like "why didn't they just shoot them in the leg?". __________________ Busting thugs since 1992

May 11, 2011, 12:03 PM	#60
aryfrosty Senior Member Join Date: September 14, 2010 Location: Concord, NH Posts: 209	That's it in a nutshell. Back to the cops habving to make decisions in seconds that lawyers will have months, if not years, to decide if they were right or wrong. I suspect that if the likliehood of the suspect moving on to other victims didn't have to be factored in many Cops would try other ways to contain a suspect. Often their hesitation leads to their own death. I have been shot on the job. Waiting until the suspect had a chance to shoot me before my risk assessment keyed me to shoot cost me many painful months in rehab and lost time on the street while driving a desk. I was blessed by God. I helped bury two field training students and a high school classmate. All killed by violence of others on the job. I have attended far too many Cop's funerals to criticize them for taking action to protect their lives and the lives of others. Curious thing about Officers killed while on duty...None that I have known, even knowing that the chances were great that they could lose their lives and their family's futures, would take back their actions that lead to their deaths. That dedication to their fellow humans deserves more than micromanagement. Regards, Al __________________ 'At the end of the fight is a tombstone white with the name of the late deceased...And the epitaph drear, "a fool lies here who tried to hustle the east."'

May 8, 2011, 04:55 PM	#51
Adam21 Junior Member Join Date: May 7, 2011 Posts: 3	Glad to see the officers were alright. He must have thought "Okay, I get out, shoot a few times, scare them, jump back in my car, and get away." Should have kept him around to train the SEAL combat driving school.

May 9, 2011, 03:06 PM	#53
markj Senior Member Join Date: October 27, 2005 Location: Crescent Iowa Posts: 2,971	Just make sure them engines are full of oil chad former mechanic here. LOL

May 11, 2011, 12:15 AM	#54
justjim75 Senior Member Join Date: April 9, 2011 Posts: 182	there's no way i would have shot that many rounds at someone running away with a house behind them. ricochets, misses, the legality of shooting a man in the back. i think with two cars and the man being stuck they might could've stopped him without risking that hypothetical 5 yr olds life. glad about the actual results but if a non LE civillian had done it they'd be in prison.

May 11, 2011, 09:25 AM	#58
justjim75 Senior Member Join Date: April 9, 2011 Posts: 182	none of you know who, if anybody was in the building behind the truck. the cops shot towards a possibly occupied building at a man that was NOT shooting at them anymore. i just dont see how you guys can think that its worth the risk of shooting innocent people. the fact is the cops shot all of their rounds after he stopped shooting and ran away. maybe he was reloading or getting another gun. maybe he had an RPG. he was still a threat i agree but your statement about "if i was in a fight for my life" doesn't apply to the portion of this incident when 4 cops are shooting a man who is running away and not shooting back. once again, if a civillian had done the same, that person would go to prison for a very long time.

May 11, 2011, 01:32 PM	#62
justjim75 Senior Member Join Date: April 9, 2011 Posts: 182	i think you got me all wrong from the beginning. i have alot of respect for LEO's and what they are faced with is terrible. i am both sorry for you and your collegues getting shot and/or killed, and thankful for your contributions to keeping us safe. i read on this site and others constantly about being very, very careful where your bullets go if and when you decide to shoot and in this particular case it seemed like there was a very high risk of "collateral damage" due to many rounds being fired after the threat level went down to a degree. once again, thank you and sorry if you misunderstood me (i certainly think that guy needed to be stopped ASAP)

May 11, 2011, 07:13 PM	#63
chadstrickland Senior Member Join Date: January 26, 2011 Location: alabama Posts: 537	Mark j...I agree with the last part of your post...you hit the nail on the head...but..I have also made my comments earlier and I still stick with them...imho..each bullet that didn't stop in that truck or bad guy had a lawer attached to it...I would be willing to be that all those cops had locked slides when they stopped shooting....I don't think it takes 50 bullets to stop a truck and kill a guy....that's my main point...I thank the good lord for cops..they do a dangerous job and im thankful they are there...( I have also never got a ticket )..any of you guys that are cops..im not trash talkin you at all..and I thank you for your service __________________ Two weapons that was designed by the same man still in use by the us military 100 years later...1911 and m2...is there anything that comes close.....lol annd maybe perhaps a sig sauer p226 tac ops edition..

May 11, 2011, 07:33 PM	#64
MLeake Senior Member Join Date: November 15, 2007 Location: Outside KC, MO Posts: 10,128	Of the two issues put forward (collateral damage risk; shooting at the back of a felon who is no longer shooting) only one would apply in my neck of the woods, and that would be the collateral damage. As far as shooting in the back, or shooting at a fleeing felon, or for that matter continuing pursuit of a fleeing felon: The guy was wanted for drive-by shootings, and had just fired on police. By law and by local department policies, those factors made the felon a lawful target until he surrendered. He didn't have to approach, he didn't have to continue to fire, all he had to do was fail to comply, and shooting him was lawful and in accordance with the policies I've read posted in local media. Collateral damage could have been a legitimate reason to consider ceasing fire. I'd have preferred to see fewer rounds fired in a residential neighborhood. But that has nothing to do with whether the guy was no longer shooting at, nor facing, the officers. He only sowed what he very actively had reaped.

May 11, 2011, 10:47 PM	#67
TenRing Senior Member Join Date: December 1, 2009 Posts: 427	The perp in this case must have been deranged or insane. I don't know how he expected to get away after jumping out of the truck and firing rounds at the officers. It seemed like just another drive by shooting to him. Did he really think he would be allowed to just jump back into the truck and continue on his way? Maybe he thought he would race through residential streets and lose the officers. Seems like the perp was acting out scenes from a movie that he saw.

May 12, 2011, 06:06 PM	#70
9mm Senior Member Join Date: January 9, 2011 Location: Land of the Free Posts: 2,834	Question I have a question! With all the shots fired while he was standing outside the car before he got back in. Why didn't he get hit?? or go down? The cops seamed to missed him before he got back into his car.

May 12, 2011, 09:33 PM	#71
JohnKSa Staff Join Date: February 12, 2001 Location: DFW Area Posts: 24,993	Handgun bullets aren't lightning bolts. I suspect he was hit at least once and maybe multiple times before he got back into his truck. At one point he stumbles slightly while trying to get back to and into the truck which might be evidence that he sustained an injury about that point in time. The average service pistol caliber bullet destroys approximately 0.1% of the average adult male's body. Or, looking at it from the other side, the impact of the average service pistol caliber bullet leaves the average adult male 99.9% intact. If the 0.1% damaged isn't anything particularly important or significant it's not going to have a particularly significant effect. __________________ Do you know about the TEXAS State Rifle Association?

May 13, 2011, 09:49 AM	#72
9mm Senior Member Join Date: January 9, 2011 Location: Land of the Free Posts: 2,834	I argee I think he was acting some role play crap out. Just look how he hopped outta the car then ran back (silly) like.

May 13, 2011, 12:33 PM	#74
Tyrant Member Join Date: December 26, 2010 Posts: 63	I do not think the police fired excessive rounds. The BG is pulled over and immediately discharges every round he has. The building behind the truck was most likely the same as what was behind the police. Wait for back up - No longer an option. They had to remove the threat and end it before he could reload or utilize his other weapon (The vehicle). There are so many things that can go wrong with the situation and few options.