KZN rugby player shot dead by cops in Hawaii

[DA-LION-619]

"in an unknown situation". You said it. If a cop feels safe and sure during for instance a traffic stop, like when he asks a driver to put his hands out the window and the driver complies, he would probably not have to draw his gun. If the situation is unknown or may pose risk, the duty of the officer is to protect his own life and the lives of bystanders. Often drawing his gun necessitates this, especially in a country with 330m guns on the street.

Sure, but if you have backup there’s more logical ways to approach the situation so 3 officers don’t have to ‘fight for their lives’.

Which info?

The taking off his shoes aspect.

She didn't say that. I heard "he's in the car" or something

Yes but in the situation the cop could have heard anything but there is another person there which is being left out of the story.

Cops pointed gun at an intruder as they should. That's not trigger happy

As above I saw two people people, there has been no mention of the other witness.

 

[Kodi]

The cops reacted pretty poorly, but he must have known they were cops from when they pulled up. Running at them like a crazy person is on his own shoulders.

The moment the attack commenced, the cops were not acting in the enforcement capacity. Heck, they didn't have time to even know whether he was the person of interest yet.

They were acting in self defence. The very same force you and I are allowed to exert in proportional to a threat in order to protect oneself or someone else from harm.

The question therefore is, not whether they were good at being cops, but whether the force used to repel the attack in self defence was justifiable, and therefore lawful.

 

[Tokolotshe]

What do UK cops point at intruders ?

Tbh, not sure what that is. I haven't been keeping up with firearms.

 

[Milano]

The taking off his shoes aspect.

That had been widely reported and his wife tried to offer an explanation. So that info could only have come from the woman who he followed into the house. Should be interesting once her full detailed statement is made public as there are a few bizarre areas of the incident that need to be understood.

 

[bwana]

View attachment 1054301

Tbh, not sure what that is. I haven't been keeping up with firearms.

It's called a minority.

Less than 6% of the British police are firearm certified.

 

[Tokolotshe]

The moment the attack commenced, the cops were not acting in the enforcement capacity. Heck, they didn't have time to even know whether he was the person of interest yet.

They were acting in self defence. The very same force you and I are allowed to exert in proportional to a threat in order to protect oneself or someone else from harm.

The question therefore is, not whether they were good at being cops, but whether the force used to repel the attack in self defence was justifiable, and therefore lawful.

Very much this.

I think the part that causes confusion for some, is ideology. Are people accountable for their actions, are cops an evil and dispensable, ... ?

In my view, law enforcement is not a game where opponents should be equally matched, with the cops being the kleenex brigade. The clue is enforcement.

 

[animal531]

The moment the attack commenced, the cops were not acting in the enforcement capacity. Heck, they didn't have time to even know whether he was the person of interest yet.

They were acting in self defence. The very same force you and I are allowed to exert in proportional to a threat in order to protect oneself or someone else from harm.

The question therefore is, not whether they were good at being cops, but whether the force used to repel the attack in self defence was justifiable, and therefore lawful.

I don't agree. They arrived on the scene and the woman immediately yelled at them where he was. Legally speaking they have to identify themselves, then find out what's going on.

They didn't speak with him, they just immediately treated him as hostile, based on the woman's shaky yelling. Yes, he then ran at them which justified being tasered at the very least...but then there were 3+ of them. Had they been properly positioned and ready before moving in they would have been able to subdue him without anyone dying, which is what policing is all about.

As soon as they arrive on any scene they have protocol that needs to be followed, instead of going at it half-assed.

 

[Milano]

I'm curious to know why there were so many vehicles on the property.

Yes also curious. If I recall the story originally made reference to quite a few people in the house. Later it always referenced the woman. As if it was just her. The number of cars would indicate several people so not sure why that kept changing. May mean nothing and just choices on how different reporters choose to word it. We need this full statement from her and anyone else occupying the house.

 

[Tokolotshe]

It's called a minority.

Less than 6% of the British police are firearm certified.

The devil made me do it

There are actually some good articles how UK cops have shifted their views over the past years. Here is one

Firearms

www.polfed.org

Summary of results below:

• 84 per cent of respondents (for whom it is applicable to their role) want access to Taser at all times on duty;
• 53 per cent of respondents’ lives had been in serious danger at least once in the last two years;
• 69 per cent of respondents were not satisfied that armed support would be readily available should they require it; and
• 34 per cent of respondents personally supported the idea of routine arming.

 

[Dan C]

Oh dear... Here's their Zulu wedding ceremony

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1281892497342582784

Why is she trying to show her fanny to everyone ?

 

[bwana]

I don't agree. They arrived on the scene and the woman immediately yelled at them where he was. Legally speaking they have to identify themselves, then find out what's going on.

Legally speaking?

 

[Willie Trombone]

Not when he was shot.

That wasn't the point. They were chasing him and knew he had a gun. They shouted for him to drop it, he didn't comply. He dropped it less than a second before being shot. They didn't have the luxury of replays on bodycam footage to review from their couch.
Also, what the camera sees and what the cop sees are not the same, the lighting is significantly worse for the cop.

 

[wbot]

They didn't speak with him, they just immediately treated him as hostile

He treated them as hostiles. He approached cops which is a no no when cops don't know who he is, if he's armed or whatever. He pretty much attacked them when they arrived so clearly he wasn't in the mood to talk.

All that the cops knew was that he was an intruder on someone's property... Who then immediately attacks and refuses to get on the ground so that they can cuff him.

 

[Milano]

Tough though for a police officer to ever know who they are meeting during any incident:

 

[DA-LION-619]

That had been widely reported and his wife tried to offer an explanation. So that info could only have come from the woman who he followed into the house. Should be interesting once her full detailed statement is made public as there are a few bizarre areas of the incident that need to be understood.

I agree, the statement doesn’t match the actions by the police.
If it was justified it shouldn’t take this long to release all evidence for transparency.

Very much this.

I think the part that causes confusion for some, is ideology. Are people accountable for their actions, are cops an evil and dispensable, ... ?

In my view, law enforcement is not a game where opponents should be equally matched, with the cops being the kleenex brigade. The clue is enforcement.

I don’t think anyone is saying the he didn’t attack the cops or they shouldn’t have defended themselves but without the facts initially it’s was hard to understand 1 guy seriously injuring 3 cops.

But the idea they put their lives at risk is BS, if you’re afraid of the dark don’t be a cop. I don’t see fire fighters going on about how their life is at risk.

 

[Willie Trombone]

But the idea they put their lives at risk is BS, if you’re afraid of the dark don’t be a cop. I don’t see fire fighters going on about how their life is at risk.

You seem to be conflating fear with fact.

 

[TheMightyQuinn]

The guys from Hawaii 5-0 would have been able to handle this situation with no fatalities.

Nope:

 

[supersunbird]

I agree, the statement doesn’t match the actions by the police.
If it was justified it shouldn’t take this long to release all evidence for transparency.



I don’t think anyone is saying the he didn’t attack the cops or they shouldn’t have defended themselves but without the facts initially it’s was hard to understand 1 guy seriously injuring 3 cops.

But the idea they put their lives at risk is BS, if you’re afraid of the dark don’t be a cop. I don’t see fire fighters going on about how their life is at risk.

You put your live at risk but just responding to a crime report, or by pulling a vehicle over (for a traffic violation maybe?) as shown in post just before yours. You seem to conflate fear with being at risk. When last did you go post haste to a possible crime scene?

 

[supersunbird]

So when randoms approach you in the darkness of night and shout at you to get down you comply? Interesting
Police approached the house with no sirens or lights, and the officer who's body cam we see did not identify himself.

Criminals don't yell "get down on the ground"*, they yell "give us your wallet/phone/whatever"

*unless a bank robbery, according to the movies.

 

[TheMightyQuinn]

Oh dear... Here's their Zulu wedding ceremony

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1281892497342582784

Trap sy kakkerlakke dood...awkward to say the least.