Just because a guy wants the police to shoot him doesn't mean that they should. Taser the guy, subdue him, and get him some ****ing help.

The lack of respect for human life in this world sickens me. We are so quick to judge and discard, but no one wants to help their fellow man.

The dude had a knife. So ****ing what? I've seen ONE OFFICER subdue a guy that had pulled a knife on him outside a bar while I was college. This was several armed men with assault rifles and body armor. If you mean to tell me that they couldn't have used non-lethal tactics then you're daft.

I agree with a lot of this, but it just doesn't seem right that deadly force is necessary when you outnumber a man 5 to 1 or whatever. Plus you have an attack dog. All he had was that little 2 inch blade?

The fact that he had a knife when he was gunned down is a null point. He only drew it after they set off the grenade despite him already agreeing to come down. Not to mention he's running in the other direction as they gun him down..

Don't forget they all bench 225 pounds 35 times, run a 4.4 40, and have 15" dicks. CP is an amazing place.

Go **** yourself, dipshit.

Funny....he wasn't running. He turned. Everyone who said he was running needs to get their eyes checked.

true. it only looks like he was running away, he was actually being propelled by bullets.

Yeah, he only slightly turned to conceal his true intentions.

HE WAS ABOUT TO THROW THE KNIVES.

WITH ASTOUNDING ACCURACY.

Reading some of the comments on this site generally makes me question humanity, but specifically in this thread it worries me that some of you may ever find your way onto a jury. It is no wonder that it is nearly impossible to hold police accountable in this country.

To the police defenders - What in your mind justifies the officers firing automatic weapons at this man, rather than using the force escalation continuum that their training calls for? There were obviously less-lethal options available...since you know, they used them on the guy after they killed him. Presumably there were tazers as well as the bean bag shotgun.

What justifies the officer shouting "Booyah!" after he unloads several rounds into this man's back? Is that not indicative of the officer's intent to do harm?

Why do you believe that the penalty for "having a knife in the desert and not immediately doing what the police tell you to" should be the death penalty, when if the man was arrested, he was likely to only be charged with a misdemeanor or a low-level felony?

When specifically should the officers have been in "reasonable fear of imminent bodily harm?"

Over the last ten years, more people have been killed by police officers in this country than all American soldiers who died in Iraq. We are militarizing our police at astounding rates. We send SWAT teams to solve every problem (and justify their existence and budget) and we get SWAT solutions. Every tool in the toolbox is a hammer now, and guess what cop defenders...you and everyone you love are the nails.

They feared for their lives. Obviously shooting the guy in the back was the only resort they had. The "Boo-yah" at the end is just short-speak for "I'm certainly glad I'm alive and no longer feel like I am in imminent danger".

No one answered my question from before...


Say the cops tazed him....he fell down to the ground...hit his head and died. Then what?

thrown knives aren't a joke. even if a knife is weighted awkwardly and is not a knife made for throwing, it can still be thrown effectively. I can throw a large bowie knife (obviously not made for throwing) and get it to stick in a tree 7/10 times. all you have to do is throw it with no spin. go to youtube and look up no spin knife throwing tutorial. you can watch people throw pocket knives, kitchen knives, hunting knives, tac knives, even swords.

And I'm not defending the cops either.