Suicide by Cop on Film

[Cameramonkey]

How was she a "complete non-threat"?

Well, hindsight IS 20/20. Foresight? Not so much.

I think what Libertarian01 wants is for her to harm herself or someone else FIRST. THEN the officers would be justified. Personally, I'm not waiting for it to go "bang" to find out whether its real or not. I guess we are following the "wild west" white hat rule #1: the good guy never shoots first.

So, Libertarian01, you have a guy with a "gun" in his hand as he walks up to you in your back yard. You waiting for him to fire it before you feel justified in shooting?

 

[Libertarian01]

How was she a "complete non-threat"?

To Frank_N_Stein,

I mean with hindsight, knowing after the fact. The extremely common psychological effect of people second guessing themselves when a tragedy occurs and they were in a position to have reacted differently - whether or not it could have helped.

I am not speaking of her appearance. Obviously at the time and in the moment the LEO's acted appropriately to defend themselves. I speak of the post analysis where some may begin questioning themselves and how they might have "looked harder" at the apparent threat.

To my thinking this is something we all do to a greater or lessor degree and can rip someone apart for years to come.

Regards,

Doug

 

[Libertarian01]

Well, hindsight IS 20/20. Foresight? Not so much.

I think what Libertarian01 wants is for her to harm herself or someone else FIRST. THEN the officers would be justified. Personally, I'm not waiting for it to go "bang" to find out whether its real or not. I guess we are following the "wild west" white hat rule #1: the good guy never shoots first.

So, Libertarian01, you have a guy with a "gun" in his hand as he walks up to you in your back yard. You waiting for him to fire it before you feel justified in shooting?

To Cameramonkey (et alia),

Not at all. I am saying that with the clarity of hindsight it is naturally, regrettably, for decent people to second guess themselves. This can rip them apart.

If people are given information they act upon, in this case a woman with an apparent firearm, and respond reasonably to this apparent (but false) threat, only to learn after the fact that the appearence was deceiving, they can begin a process of self inflicted mental pain (not a shrink, don't know the medical terminology.)

This has happened to soldiers who feel guilty surviving a combat where their fellow soldiers died. They did nothing wrong, yet for some reason feel guilty. This also happens to people who act completely appropriately at the time given information that later is proven to be false, in this case a fake firearm.

To answer the first point more directly I do NOT want her to harm herself or someone else first.

To answer the second question directly I do not want to wait for him to fire. I would hopefully at least wait for more of a threat than simple possession of a firearm. What if he is a neighbor chasing a bad guy? The presence of a firearm does not equal a threat to me. MWAG is hopefully not the minimum standard of killing someone, and I do not think you are implying that.

For the record I believe from what I can see now that it appeared she was turning the firearm toward them and they acted appropriately in self defense. Barring further information I would not and do not find any fault with their actions.

I hope that clarifies.

Regards,

Doug