<iframe width="560" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/Nt6kKhlX8vU" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

No doubt. This guy was clearly more skilled in knife throwing than the cops would have been with a non-lethal shot.

So who shoulda been the first one stabbed? Lowest rank? The dog?

Man, what if aliens landed and intervened. Or what if there was an earthquake! Shit, better shoot him in the back.

The answer is everyone would say, "that is a tragedy, but understandable and a freak occurrence, is there some way we can do better in the future."

Tazers are not a perfect solution, but given the options of shooting a man full of holes in the back or tazering him, it seems like a pretty easy choice. Realistically, tazers should only be used when lethal force would be justified. But the point is that there is an entire continuum of force. They didn't try OC spray. They didn't try the bean bags, they didn't try the tazers. They got impatient and trigger happy and murdered a man out of some combination of convenience and cold-blood. **** them for that.

ROFL You're joking right? Everyone would be screaming that they didn't take him down another way. There is no winning scenario. And you're delusional if you think that people would be ok with him being tazed, falling and hitting his head.

This was exactly what I thought about when they all started screaming about the knife.

Yes. I'm sure this homeless man living out of a plastic bag was proficient at hitting the carotid artery from 15 feet out.. With his back turned.

No, I'm not joking. They murdered a man with automatic weapons and 20% of the people in this thread think its great.

People have been killed by tazers before. Where there is uproar is when they are used on elderly people with heart conditions and mentally ill children who are unarmed.

This would not be a national news story. And regardless, you have picked a stupid hypothetical scenario that is extremely low probability. Juxtapose that probability with the odds that shooting a man in the back 10 times is almost guaranteed to kill him, and maybe you will have a better decision making calculus.

You know this use to America and we use to have a right to question authority.

Apparently we just need to sit down shut-up and do what ever we are told.

Or get shot to death, sure seems what freedom is all about.

Your argument really is one of the dumber I've ever heard.

It boils down to "police should do whatever they want, because they will be criticized no matter what. This makes all criticism invalid and all police behavior valid." That is pre-school reasoning.

The ****er who shot the stun grenade after the guy agreed to peacefully come along with them should have been stabbed first.

No shit. And we have people lining up to defend the cops here. It's no wonder cops think they are above the law.

ROFL My argument? It was a question about a hypothetical situation that could have happened if you consider their surroundings and environment.

And show me the post that I made where I applauded the cops for shooting a man who had his back turned. I'll wait...

I have to agree. It's pretty bad.

I never even applauded him for the shots, I was trying to explain reasoning, training, possible line of thinking. If the cop is found to be in error, that's the duty of the lawyers and judges to decide. You know, when ALL the facts are able to be considered.

I have kept up with this thread and didn't know what to post because I think the police handled it wrong..I know it's a bad situation because I have been in situations they were similar while on my deployments

With that being said I don't care if they talked for 3 hours..If they needed to talk to him for 6 hours to get him down then they needed to..it's there job..Serve and Protect

He was mentally ill and had a violent history..ok so now you know don't walk up to him and grab him like he is your buddy..talk to the man..have an officer in normal clothes talk to him so it's not as threatening to him..having 5 tactical dressed officers pointing rifles at you is going to get anybody nervous and or agitated

Ok he had a knife..If you can't talk him down have the 5 officers in tactical gear move to all sides of him and start closing the gap..have a couple stand below the steep hill in case he bails but use that terrain feature as something to push him towards..then as you close the gap have the dog ready the shotgun with bags ready and a teaser ready..As you close the gap and he decides he wants to charge hit him with the teaser and bags and if needed turn the dog on him

The situation was handled wrong..there was a threat because of his mental health issues his violent history and the knife but the the numbers the gear and the availability of non lethal means to subdue the man highly outweighed the threat..The situation should of and most certainly could of been handled better..The man should be alive