I could go along with that, but I don't think all 3 cops needed to empty their clips (or close to it) shooting to kill, especially when NO one saw a weapon, just arms flailing. That's text book definition of 'excessive use of force' in my eyes.

It's outrageous to me that not one of them had a taser, baton, or pepper spray out, and instead they all had their guns out ready to kill. It's inhuman to me that they always seem to think it's proper to kill rather than disable, and worse that they are supported in that contention by fellow officers AND the law (in many cases).

It's also outrageous and quite telling to me that they initially shoot at him 5 times as he's running/walking away with his hands completely visible. Apparently all those rounds missed the target and flew down the street where there were many bystanders. Absolutely no excuse for that part. That alone should get all 3 fired, or at least on desk duty until they all 3 pass a gun safety class.

All that said, I expect you are correct and this will be seen as 'justified' because...he had hands that might have had a gun in them? Sad but true.

I'm really starting to think we need to do what England did and stop allowing street beat cops to carry guns and only special weapon and tactics guys should have them, and they should be trained to not use them unless needed. These terrified bullies running around our country armed to the teeth with an immunity shield protecting them from consequence is not working.

>> ^Ryjkyj:

That's total bullshit. Cops are allowed to do things during the course of their job that the average citizen is not.
Try pulling someone over with your car today. Really yell at them and honk your horn like crazy and see if they pull over. Then, when they don't, perform a nice PIT maneuver with your car. After all, cops are allowed to do it right? So shouldn't you?
Or how about this: Try carrying around a loaded, fully-automatic assault rifle. If anyone screws with you, tell them that SWAT team members are allowed to carry them, so you should be allowed to as well. Sound like crazy talk? It is.
How is this for a double-standard: if a cop sees someone committing a crime, they are required by law to stop it. Whereas you, a normal citizen, is not required by law to do anything. Is that unfair? Or is that because stopping criminals is part of a cop's job description?
Cops are allowed to do things that normal citizens are not. They can put up barricades. They can direct traffic. They can use "police only" radio channels.
It seems to me like this is equivalent to walking into a hospital and saying, "I'd like to perform some brain surgery, and if you don't let me, you're holding me and the actual brain surgeon up to different standards!" But they're not holding you up to different standards at all. Almost anyone can go to school to become a brain surgeon. But the school part is a requirement to actually practicing the work.
In the same way, almost anyone can go to a police academy or other training school and become a cop. So it's not a double-standard, it's two separate roles that individuals play in a society. Roles that are established by that same society. It's not that complicated.
Again, if the cop was using an illegal space to park in while he went and got a tic-tac or something, I could see the argument. But this isn't even an argument. It's crazy talk.


Cops are allowed to do break the law only in the case of an emergency.

A citizen is not afforded the lawful power to stop someone from moving freely on the street, or in the commission of a misdemeanor, or felony.

When was the last time you saw Special Weapons and Tactics carrying around fully automatic weapons on a beat, or a QRT for that matter? No, they cannot just walk around with their fully automatic weapons while patrolling. That argument is bogus. Force proportion. A peace officer does not need an M-4 to perform a traffic stop.

Cops are allowed the erect barricades only in case of emergency. Traffic redirection is case of emergency or special occasion, funerals and the like. In some cases officers have the legal authority to setup checkpoints for license and registration checks. That's been argued that they cannot do that because it hinders freedom of movement, and the police didn't have a legal reason to stop. Other than to check if someone committed an offense.

You will find that police only radio channels are often encrypted, because the public can listen to them, and hijack them. Which is illegal and those laws are enforced by the FCC.

Your argument above has many sections I would say are crazy talk. The video producer's argument is simply stating if a officer who is at rest and is illegally parked he or she is violating the same law he or she is sworn to uphold. There is a reason that area is illegal to park in; fire hydrants, bus-stops, bicycle path, or whatever reason the municipality decided citizens can't park there. What is the officer doing? The exact same thing a citizen would be doing, except he has a different hat on.

This has been argued over and over. The only time an officer can lawfully break the law is in case of emergency. It's the same case when an officer is speeding without his or her lights and sirens active. The only time anything ever gets done to stop unlawful activity is when someone raises the red flags, otherwise it will continue.

Whether the producer's a douche or not is beside the base argument of this video.

A long while ago there was a man who was a criminal in Odessa.

He was barricaded in his house, and he had nothing to lose.

The cops decided that they would try to take him out with out negotiations or special weapons and tactics.

They were going around to the side of the house, and forgot about the windows on the side of the house. Do I need to say any more?

This is why there are rules that uniforms have to follow, warrants that you do not lie on. Etc Etc. These things are there to keep citizens safe, and moreover to keep the uniforms safe.

Playing the system that was meant to keep citizens and uniforms safe, only leads to people getting hurt or worse.