[MrMcCrackin]

I was watching this and they were talking about deploying no-leathal force with good results when they transitioned to the snipers


LV SWAT sniper had to take out a man with a shotgun - once the person aimed the 12g at fellow officers the sniper took his shot

the shotgun guy died

the entire swat team had to prove in criminal court to a jury of 7 that they were justified in using leathal force





now is this standard practice for any and every LEO involved shooting around the country?


i know that in AZ the LEO are placed on admin leave until an investigation is completed - but i never understood that to mean they were going to have their day in court to prove it was a justified use of leathal force

 

[techwrtr2]

Wouldn't surprise me, it's just another way to force pussification of thecountry.

 

[Nose Nuggets]

in almost every case of an LEO using deadly force, i have heard of a follow up trial to prove if deadly force was necessary.

from what i have heard, MOST of the time these cases are cut and dry and simply a formality due to the family/friends of the BG "wanting justice". The scenario you drew out, of a BG pointing a shotty at an LEO should be AS cut and dry as it sounds. however, read on.

techwrtr2: care to expand on that relatively short sighted comment? i have seen video of a man inside his house. he was armed with a shotgun. outside his house, along the left side was 4 man SWAT entry team standing by for their call. the armed guy came outside his house and started wondering around the porch. mind you, no hostages, no violent crime as of yet, its just a guy getting a tad crazy making threats and walking around his house with a shotgun. dude-head walks down the steps of his porch, rounds the corner where the entry team is waiting, and startled as could be makes a reactionary move and readies his shotty (moving from a cross the chest carry to a ready-to-fire at the shoulder stance). for god sakes the man is now face to face with 4 men holding MP5's. what would YOU do? well ill tell you what the lead on the entry team did, click it into burst and laid down 3 rounds center mass without much hesitation. is that instantly justified? does that not deserve a few days of a courts time?

to instantly conclude that any LEO is legally able and justified in the killing of another human is simply retarded. Having these hearings, or knowing of the possibility of a hearing is what keeps the system balanced.

ill be perfectly honest. reading "it's just another way to force pussification of thecountry." upsets me. i dont think any coherent thought process was traveled while trying to conjure this insightful response. it leads me to believe that instead of actually thinking the entire scenario out in your head, and how it could possibly effect you, you instead saw gun+leo+leo's in court=bad and thus we are left with your mind numbing perspective.

but it is just that, your perspective. and just like any other member of this forum you are entitled to it. so, i hope i have not upset you too much. but that kinda shit is less then worthless, it actually reduces the overall intelligence level of this community by actually becoming a possible, acceptable response to the OP's question;

do leos who kill in the line of duty go to court to prove their use of deadly force is justified?

 

[MrMcCrackin]

so basically any person will have to prove that the use of deadly force was justified regardless of profession.

 

[Nose Nuggets]

i duno about all that. im sure someone here has freaky tale of men in black suits.