"Cannibal" victim was shot by cop !!

[mistermack]

There's no good answer as to what an unarmed British cop should do in identical circumstances, if he's the first and only officer on scene. I think it's foolish to send an unarmed officer to such a call in the first place, why should I be the one to dictate the actions an officer should take in such a foolhardy endeavor?

Well, you wouldn't hack it as a cop over here then. Why does that not surprise me?

You wouldn't have done anything, so don't criticize someone who did and saved a victim's life.

I would have done something. Especially if I was getting paid to do something.
Saved the victim's life?
HE SHOT THE FUCKING VICTIM !!!!!

Did you miss that bit?

[Wumbologist]

Well, you wouldn't hack it as a cop over here then. Why does that not surprise me?

I bet you think you would.

I would have done something. Especially if I was getting paid to do something.

I doubt it.

Saved the victim's life?
HE SHOT THE FUCKING VICTIM !!!!!

He quickly stopped the attack, which surely would have led to the victim's death if the attacker had continued.

Did you miss that bit?

Did you miss the bit where the gunshot was the least of the victim's problems?

The officer arriving on scene would have had no way to know the mental status of the attacker or what drugs he was on. It's doubtful he would have been easily able to ascertain the presence of a weapon, even with a naked attacker. For all he knew the attacker could have been slicing off the victim's face with a kitchen knife, which would be used to slash the officer's throat if he came within hand-to-hand distance. It's unfortunate that the victim was shot in the course of the incident but ultimately that officer made the right call, and the victim is alive today as a result.

[mistermack]

So that's your logic? Someone MIGHT have a knife, so shoot them in case?

You realise that that applies to EVERY single incident that cops are called to?

You would be shooting a hell of a lot of people, if you were a cop. You are making this guy out to be some kind of superman.
He attacked an old frail homeless person. Not a big fit cop.

Have you ever tried fighting, with no clothes or shoes on? Fighting a fit man with a baton and mace and protective clothing?
Who had a gun if all else fails? I think I'll pass on that thanks.

Personally, I would have whacked his hands, shins and bollocks with my stick, as hard as I possibly could. I'd like to see a naked man take that and keep fighting.

[Wumbologist]

So that's your logic? Someone MIGHT have a knife, so shoot them in case?

You realise that that applies to EVERY single incident that cops are called to?

Very few of those incidents involve eating the face off a live victim like it's just another Tuesday afternoon. That sort of thing simply does NOT happen without some cause for altered mental status. If the altered mental status is caused by drugs, there's a good chance it's one of the many that can significantly increase pain tolerance, such as PCP, "Bath salts" and most opiates. Lack of pain tolerance means two things. It means that most non-lethal attacks won't faze the target, and it means that, since there is no pain response telling the body to stop when it's reached a dangerous level of exertion, that person may continue to exert themselves beyond typical levels, making them much more dangerous for anyone around them. So yes, in a case like this, that person is a potentially lethal danger even with his bare hands, and the possibility of his having a weapon only makes things more dangerous. The ONLY way such a suspect should be taken down non-lethally is by overwhelmingly outnumbering and quickly restraining him. If a half dozen cops showed up on the scene it would be reasonable to try to subdue such a suspect. If you're the first on scene and you need to react quickly to save the life of a victim, fucking shoot the attacker.

You would be shooting a hell of a lot of people, if you were a cop. You are making this guy out to be some kind of superman.
He attacked an old frail homeless person. Not a big fit cop.

You're right. A man eating the face off another person, even a "frail homeless person", is probably not at all dangerous.

Have you ever tried fighting, with no clothes or shoes on? Fighting a fit man with a baton and mace and protective clothing?
Who had a gun if all else fails? I think I'll pass on that thanks.

Ever tried to take down someone on PCP, who had lost all concept of pain? I think I'll pass on that, even with the baton and mace and protective clothing.

Personally, I would have whacked his hands, shins and bollocks with my stick, as hard as I possibly could. I'd like to see a naked man take that.

This was clearly a man who was in his right mind who would have responded to pain. Fucking seriously? I wish you would go toe to toe with such a suspect, least we probably wouldn't have to sift through your drivel on here anymore if you gave it a whirl.

[Seth]

You're right mistermack. British police wouldn't have taken a shot unless it was an unarmed man sitting in his car.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/apr/0 ... ng-partner

Now please, spare me the heaping load of horse shit about how your beautiful island nation is some fucking utopia where the police are absolute paragons of virtue, and over here in gritty 'Murrika they make sure to shoot all the victims just as much as the criminals. It's fucking stupid and you should be ashamed of yourself.

It's a bit desperate to mine the internet for British shootings. And in your desperation, you actually defeat your own argument.
My point isn't that British cops are clever, and american ones are stupid. The point is that they are all dumb, and when you give them guns, they do dumb things.

My point about the cannibal is that the cop shot first and thought later, because thats what idiots do, when they have a gun.
The British example just proves more of the same.

And I reiterate that a British cop COULDN'T have shot the victim, in the cannibal incident, because he wouldn't have HAD a gun in the first place.

Of course, if he had a gun, he would probably do the same. They are all pretty dumb.
The POINT is about guns, not British/USA cops.

They are getting far too quick with guns over here too. Nothing like the US, but far worse than it used to be.

Yeah, the Brits (police and fire) are the dumb motherfuckers who stood there and watched a man drown in knee-deep water because it was "against policy" for them to wade in and rescue him.

Twats.

[Seth]

There's no good answer as to what an unarmed British cop should do in identical circumstances, if he's the first and only officer on scene. I think it's foolish to send an unarmed officer to such a call in the first place, why should I be the one to dictate the actions an officer should take in such a foolhardy endeavor?

Well, you wouldn't hack it as a cop over here then. Why does that not surprise me?

You wouldn't have done anything, so don't criticize someone who did and saved a victim's life.

I would have done something. Especially if I was getting paid to do something.
Saved the victim's life?
HE SHOT THE FUCKING VICTIM !!!!!

Did you miss that bit?

Actually, you're making up that "bit" because the story specifically says "an object" and not "a round fired from the police officer's gun."

Could be that the face-eater himself stabbed the victim with something before dining.

If it was a bullet, the doctors would have said it was a bullet wound.

Oh, and in general, police carry hollow-point to prevent overpenetration for precisely this reason, so the officer may have expected his round to stop in the face-eater's body. As for your apocrophal British Bobby, speculating what he would have done is just that, speculation.

[mistermack]

Wumbologist, you've got a great imagination.

Shoot them in case they have an invisible knife.

Shoot them because they might not feel pain. ( he actually had NO drugs except trace cannabis in his system ).

Shoot them because they might be on PCP. ( imaginary PCP )

Shoot them because they might be lethal with their bare hands. They're not just mad, they are supreme martial artists.

Basically, just shoot first, and engage the brain later.
And don't even take the trouble to shoot from the side. Hell, he could even have SHOT HIM UP THE ASS, even that would have made more sense than what he did.

I'm sure that lots of US cops would have done a proper job. This one didn't. He took the cowardly and stupid route.

[Seth]

So that's your logic? Someone MIGHT have a knife, so shoot them in case?

You realise that that applies to EVERY single incident that cops are called to?

Well, except for that whole "eating the face off the victim" stuff. You see, the totality of the circumstances, which means EVERY relevant detail the officers saw, is what determines if the shooting was justified, not the ignorant opinion of someone who has no police training and has never faced someone high on PCP.

You would be shooting a hell of a lot of people, if you were a cop. You are making this guy out to be some kind of superman.
He attacked an old frail homeless person. Not a big fit cop.

There's a photo in one of the texts used in the police academy called "Street Survival - Tactics for Armed Encounters" that shows the body of a perp who was shot TWENTY NINE TIMES by police before he was "disabled" (not dead, he died a few minutes later). The perp absorbed many lethal hits without apparent effect because he was hopped-up on PCP. To a responding officer, someone deranged enough to eat the face of a victim is extremely likely to be on PCP or some other drug that can give him seemingly super-human strength, and given the immediate jeopardy to the victim, there was plenty of justification to shoot immediately.

Have you ever tried fighting, with no clothes or shoes on? Fighting a fit man with a baton and mace and protective clothing?
Who had a gun if all else fails? I think I'll pass on that thanks.

Personally, I would have whacked his hands, shins and bollocks with my stick, as hard as I possibly could. I'd like to see a naked man take that and keep fighting.

You ever fought with someone on PCP? I have. I damned near had my thumb bitten off in the process. You can whack them as much as you like with your "stick" (I used a PR-24 side-handle baton) or hose them in the face with OC spray and they don't even feel it.

Don't bother trying to opine on something that you haven't the slightest clue about. After you've had a little scuffle with a raging PCP addict, THEN you can open your pie hole on the subject and not be dismissed as a complete loon.

[Wumbologist]

Wumbologist, you've got a great imagination.

Shoot them in case they have an invisible knife.

Make sure you take the time to do a thorough 360 degree inspection of the scene to ensure there are no weapons before engaging the assailant. While a victim's face is being eaten off.

Shoot them because they might not feel pain. ( he actually had NO drugs except trace cannabis in his system ).

Shoot them because they might be on PCP. ( imaginary PCP )

Every single news report on this incident when it happened focused on the idea that he was probably on drugs. When someone is EATING THE FACE OFF A MAN on the side of the road in broad daylight, it's not exactly a wild assumption to make. If there's good reason to make that assumption, an officer should treat the assailant accordingly.

Shoot them because they might be lethal with their bare hands. They're not just mad, they are supreme martial artists.

If there's reason to assume that the assailant is on drugs, it reasonably follows that they're going to be harder to take down and potentially more dangerous as well. And in this case, as evidenced by every single news report that came out about it, there was pretty good reason to assume the assailant was on drugs. If it happens that he wasn't, it's an extraordinary case, but the officer on scene did not have an portable, ranged instant drug-test scanner and had to work on what evidence he had, under which most people are going to conclude that the dude is probably fucking on something.

Basically, just shoot first, and engage the brain later.
And don't even take the trouble to shoot from the side. Hell, he could even have SHOT HIM UP THE ASS, even that would have made more sense than what he did.

I'm sure that lots of US cops would have done a proper job. This one didn't. He took the cowardly and stupid route.

It doesn't matter what angle he shoots from, and the fact that you think it does further proves your ignorance on the topic. If it was a through-and through, a bullet can deflect off bone and leave the body on a different trajectory from the one at which it entered. At any rate, when you've got a victim having his face literally eaten off, you don't take the time to analyze the most optimal angle from which to shoot the assailant, run it through the supercomputer at HQ, and then precisely target according to the results on the printout. You fucking shoot the assailant as quickly as possible so that he stops eating the face off the victim. All you are doing here is Monday morning quarterbacking about how it could have been done this way or that way instead.

[mistermack]

Well, if that was you having your face chewed on, I'm sure that you'd want the cop to just shoot. Yeh, right, sure you would.

It's dead easy, when it's someone else who is taking the bullet.

You know what I would like the officer to do in that situation? If it was me getting chewed?
I would like him to whack him on the head with all his strength, with his baton.

Is that REALLY asking too much? I certainly wouldn't be thanking the twat for nearly killing me.

If the loony wasn't knocked out, the cop could have shot him, if he got up to attack him.
It's the loony who was defenceless. The cop was armed to the teeth.
You're living in fantasy land.

[Twoflower]

If someone was chewing my face off, I would defiantly want the cop to shoot.

[Wumbologist]

Well, if that was you having your face chewed on, I'm sure that you'd want the cop to just shoot. Yeh, right, sure you would.

It's dead easy, when it's someone else who is taking the bullet.

You know what I would like the officer to do in that situation? If it was me getting chewed?
I would like him to whack him on the head with all his strength, with his baton.

Is that REALLY asking too much? I certainly wouldn't be thanking the twat for nearly killing me.

If the loony wasn't knocked out, the cop could have shot him, if he got up to attack him.
It's the loony who was defenceless. The cop was armed to the teeth.
You're living in fantasy land.

I'd want the officer to make the attacker stop eating my face as quickly as possible, and the fastest means to that end is shooting him. Sure, I'd rather not take a bullet in the process, but in the real world shit happens and not every variable can be precisely measured and accounted for.

Actually, having seen the pictures of the victim even this far into recovery, I personally would rather the officer aimed higher with that one bullet, to be perfectly honest.

[mistermack]

If someone was chewing my face off, I would defiantly want the cop to shoot.

So you like being shot then?
The cop shot four times. It's lucky he only shot the victim once.

[tattuchu]

I'm with mistermack.


No I mean we're dating

[Twoflower]

If someone was chewing my face off, I would defiantly want the cop to shoot.

So you like being shot then?
The cop shot four times. It's lucky he only shot the victim once.

Rather be shot and most likely not die, than not be shot and most likely die.