>> ^SeesThruYou:

Wait, wait... this guy was a drug addict or drug dealer? If he was a drug DEALER, then they didn't shoot him fast enough or use enough bullets. Drug dealers are not human beings and shouldn't have any fucking rights.

The police believed he was a meth dealer (hence the raid), but I'm not sure if that was confirmed. He was almost certainly a user and possibly an addict.

Of course, some people "deal" just enough to cover the cost of their use because of their addiction, so there isn't a clear distinction between addict/dealer in such cases. Supposedly he had very few items of discernible value, so if he was selling then he was probably more of a middle-man than a distributor.

Congratulations! Your comment has just received enough votes from the community to earn you 1 Power Point. Thank you for your quality contribution to VideoSift.

This achievement has earned you your "Silver Tongue" Level 1 Badge!

Congratulations! Your comment has just received enough votes from the community to earn you 1 Power Point. Thank you for your quality contribution to VideoSift.

This achievement has earned you your "Silver Tongue" Level 4 Badge!

>> ^MarineGunrock:

This is why all police should employ flash bangs.


Flash bangs can blind, deafen, or even kill. I'd be outraged if they threw those into the houses of suspects without confirming that they are armed.

But definitely they should have non-lethal weapons drawn on raids. This is a perfect example of why. I have a bit of sympathy for the officer's decision to shoot. It did sort of look like he came around the corner with a sword. If that was the case he could close that distance in a dark room very quickly. What turned this into a tragedy is that the officer was holding a gun in the first place.

Wait, wait... this guy was a drug addict or drug dealer? If he was a drug addict, they should have gotten him some help for his addiction. If he was a drug DEALER, then they didn't shoot him fast enough or use enough bullets. Drug dealers are not human beings and shouldn't have any fucking rights. I'm so sick of fucking pussy-ass liberal fags supporting criminal activity. "Waaahhhh! The big bad police are hurting all the drug dealers, rapists, and murderers!!! How dare they! Waaahhhhh!!! Where's my iPhone? I'm gunna call mommy Hillary!!!"

>> ^Lawdeedaw:

>> ^GeeSussFreeK:
>> ^Aniatario:
^ There was a sh tload of things they could've used. Tazers, pepperspray, rubber bullets, common fucking sense?

Ya, that or wait till he leaves the house in the morning and arrest him? I don't understand why forced entry is even necessary in most of these cases. I guess mostly because waiting around for someone to leave a house requires manpower/police work. It is easier to bust down the door, shoot the guy, then file a report.

I can agree to this waiting until the offender is out of the house first. However, since Law Enforcement would need to be around his house for when he did leave, that would be one hell of an overtime bill. Say it takes 12 hours, and each officer makes 40 bucks in overtime-age, that adds up to 4800 dollars... Assuming the offender even comes out within 12 hours... Let's multiply that by the number of raids around the state and...wow, what a tab... Are you willing to pay for/ and justify that expense in a down economy to your video sift neighbor? (And to argue that we would not neeed to pay the officers overtime is just foolish. They would not be able to just go home, after all.)
Oh, and with the hate I hear about tazers and rubber bullets, we eventually equate this (horror) with those circumstances anyways.... "How dare they use 20 rubber bullets" etc... Sad, we should embrace less-than lethal methods all the times, especially in cases of abuse where people would die, but all I hear about them is shit talk (Right until something like this happens, I mean.)
Onto the actual video. 21 feet is the lethal zone a knifeman needs to kill a gunman. That may sound off, but it is completely accurate. I get hit twice or so with fourty, and ofteb I would still be up (Which happens often since men don't die like they show in the movies.) I can and will stab whoever shot me.
That doesn't mean I agree with this video at all. The officers had little security for themselves, so they relied on their weapons. That is just plain dumb. These officers seemed intent on a showdown. Waiting till the suspect leaves does seem the best option. That at least allows space to find cover and surround a suspect.


This was interesting -> http://www.usadojo.com/articles/21-feet-valid.htm

Your video, 10 Fully Armored Police vs. 1 Burnt Out Drug Addict...GO, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

>> ^Smugglarn:

I normally do not bash police work, but this seems strange.
It's obvious that the suspect has a weapon in his hand, but it's also obvious that it is a melee weapon. The suspect pretty much goes down on the first shot. The rest are kill shots.
Now, if this was a military op I would understand, but this seems like strange procedure in police work - SWAT team or not.


I had a discussion about this kind of thing with a cop a while back. She basically said that you don't fire unless you fear for your life, and if that is the case then you don't fire just one bullet and wait to see if one was enough. Part of that is because with some drugs one bullet isn't going to neutralize the person immediately unless it's through the head or spine. Another part is that a judge/jury is less likely to believe the officer feared death if they only fired once.

In this case it's hard to tell because of the poor video quality. The first time I watched this video I thought the guy opened his front door and the police gunned him down immediately. Watching it again they were inside yelling "search warrant" and then there's suddenly a guy holding a golf club (?) in a stance like he's about to attack with it. I watched that part several times but couldn't tell if the guy was moving forward, backward, or standing still.

I prefer non-lethal means, but in this case I'm not sure what the cop should have done differently at that moment, nor can I say with any certainty what I would have done in his place (one reason why I'm not a cop). I've seen police video of a meth'd-up guy repeatedly punching someone with his severely broken arm, so I doubt a non-lethal bullet wound would stop someone in that state (all the more reason for preemptive flashbangs).

I feel that the first cop in perhaps should have had a tazer rather than a pistol, but then I'm not sure what he would do if the guy had turned the corner with a shotgun instead. That's a situation I don't care to be on either side of.

Quote-"And even the title now is numerically incorrect. It was one officer against one man--the others who came after never pulled their triggers. And though this seems nit picky, it is not. You could call it "One Premature Cop Unloads.""

What a stretch.

The title is not in-accurate. If the title read, "10 Fully Armed Police SHOOT Drug Addict" *THAT* would be in-accurate. I don't know if there's ten cops in the video (so there's that), but whatever the number is.. that's what the guy was up against.

The rest where trying to hand him a copy of the Watch Tower..??

..just sayin'

>> ^JiggaJonson:
@<A rel="nofollow" class=profilelink title="member since May 28th, 2007" href="http://shepppard.videosift.com"><STRONG style="COLOR: #0000cd">Shepppard Meh I had a shitty childhood so I wound up with a sadistic/dark/drydrydry sense of humor. Humor is one of my ways of dealing with things I find repulsive.
I'm still waiting for a more appropriate title suggestion b/c "Cops murder some poor schlep" doesn't sound appealing to me.
Also @<A rel="nofollow" class=profilelink title="member since February 16th, 2006" href="http://dag.videosift.com"><STRONG style="COLOR: #008800">dag quotefail 2 posts up


So it is a comedy to you Jigga? And the others have the right to be a bit upset because you labeled it humorous, when to everyone else it is not? Then why argue so vehemently with Sheppard and Yogi at the their comments? Why say you clearly labeled its intent, when its intent to you is comedy?

How about the label "Ten Glocks versus Drug Suspect" or "Ten Thugs versus Unarmed Man."

And even the title now is numerically incorrect. It was one officer against one man--the others who came after never pulled their triggers. And though this seems nit picky, it is not. You could call it "One Premature Cop Unloads."

Last point Jigga, you state that only 3-5 seconds after the man goes limp that police could clearly be heard saying "get on the ground?" Well, I wasn't there, and cameras suck at transplanting real life on screen. I heard it loud and clear before the guy got shot (But still too late to be considered an adequate warning) and you know what? With the walls, hallways, noise and such, the suspect still may not have heard it. Or he may have. You, me, no one can know.

>> ^GeeSussFreeK:
>> ^Aniatario:
^ There was a sh tload of things they could've used. Tazers, pepperspray, rubber bullets, common fucking sense?

Ya, that or wait till he leaves the house in the morning and arrest him? I don't understand why forced entry is even necessary in most of these cases. I guess mostly because waiting around for someone to leave a house requires manpower/police work. It is easier to bust down the door, shoot the guy, then file a report.


I can agree to this waiting until the offender is out of the house first. However, since Law Enforcement would need to be around his house for when he did leave, that would be one hell of an overtime bill. Say it takes 12 hours, and each officer makes 40 bucks in overtime-age, that adds up to 4800 dollars... Assuming the offender even comes out within 12 hours... Let's multiply that by the number of raids around the state and...wow, what a tab... Are you willing to pay for/ and justify that expense in a down economy to your video sift neighbor? (And to argue that we would not neeed to pay the officers overtime is just foolish. They would not be able to just go home, after all.)

Oh, and with the hate I hear about tazers and rubber bullets, we eventually equate this (horror) with those circumstances anyways.... "How dare they use 20 rubber bullets" etc... Sad, we should embrace less-than lethal methods all the times, especially in cases of abuse where people would die, but all I hear about them is shit talk (Right until something like this happens, I mean.)

Onto the actual video. 21 feet is the lethal zone a knifeman needs to kill a gunman. That may sound off, but it is completely accurate. I get hit twice or so with fourty, and ofteb I would still be up (Which happens often since men don't die like they show in the movies.) I can and will stab whoever shot me.

That doesn't mean I agree with this video at all. The officers had little security for themselves, so they relied on their weapons. That is just plain dumb. These officers seemed intent on a showdown. Waiting till the suspect leaves does seem the best option. That at least allows space to find cover and surround a suspect.

>> ^GeeSussFreeK:

Ya, that or wait till he leaves the house in the morning and arrest him? I don't understand why forced entry is even necessary in most of these cases. I guess mostly because waiting around for someone to leave a house requires manpower/police work. It is easier to bust down the door, shoot the guy, then file a report.


Completely ignoring the content of this video for a moment, the usual reason for forced entry is the possibility that if they wait, he (or an accomplice) would have a greater chance to destroy evidence or he might give them the slip while they were on a doughnut run.

>> ^JiggaJonson:

@<a rel="nofollow" href="http://videosift.com/member/Yogi" title="member since May 15th, 2009" class="profilelink">Yogi @Shepppard
Are you fucking kidding me? You mean the 16 seconds of warning messages at the beginning wasn't enough to tell you? I didn't trick you into watching anything unless a statement like
"Warning: the following video depicts a Weber County, Utah, police raid in which a man is shot to death,"
can be misinterpreted, I don't see how either of you have much to stand on. Ok I guess I didn't put "kill" in the tags but "murder" is in there (so give me a break eh?). That said I'd be willing to change it to something less pseudo-humorous out of respect for the victim.
Suggestions?


Video is good but change the title.
Based on your title I expected the same as Shepppard - comedy. I did see the warnings and changed my expectations, but still.

>> ^Shepppard:

Sorry Jig, awareness or not, I don't really feel this should be on the sift.
Post a news story about it, get the message out. Don't post the actual video.
Your title is misleading, I came in thinking this was going to be something funny (there's another video of a single druggie trying to fight a bunch of cops, but he's "girl" hitting them.) And because I didn't read the text first I saw something I never want to see again.
The message should get out, but videosift is not the medium for this.


Who died and made you the guy who makes decisions....YEAH!

Despite being a moron Shepppard is right about one thing the Title. It could've been much clearer and done in a way that could've shown more respect for this serious incident. I think we should have a "kill" tag or something like that. It's not something some of us want to have anything to do with when we check out our sift, I pass by a lot of videos because the descriptions are obviously something I don't want to see. However I believe having them available is a good idea...just like the Wikileaks collateral murder video which took me about a year to actually get up the guts to watch.

I just finished reading the whole newspaper article on the drug addict shot.... Now I'm not sure if there was someone else in the house or not. The article is silent. And they apparently cuffed the guy after they shot him.

So maybe he was alone, and they were talking to a dead guy.

Drugs. Man. Our society doesn't want people to kill themselves with drug use, but they end up dead because they are illegal.