H10 Posted November 7, 2015 Report Share Posted November 7, 2015 The cop had a bus driver he could have asked. He must have stated this or something like it early in the official investigation, where is that statement? Except the bus driver said he ran away and never looked back, when he was on the stand. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H10 Posted November 7, 2015 Report Share Posted November 7, 2015 The cop had a bus driver he could have asked. He must have stated this or something like it early in the official investigation, where is that statement? on the second point, I don't think he said anything nor gave any statements to the official investigator siu, and this is the norm when an officer commits murder. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H10 Posted November 7, 2015 Report Share Posted November 7, 2015 You still haven't provided citation that this was part of the cop's defence. Or citation that the prospect of accidentally shooting a hostage you have no confirmation exists is preferable to deescalation. Why not just shoot every violent offender site on scene? You cited instances where police shot at a suspect who had a hostage. In those instances though, you could actually see the hostage and the suspect. In this instance Forcillo was shooting at where he "thought" Yatim was. If he did, in fact, think there was a hostage, this is very dangerous behaviour. The transcript is available online for a fee, go pay it and read it, it was also in news reports. Any time you fire a gun there is a chance you shoot the wrong person by accident. I don't even need a source, its common sense. I already explained, in some cases violent individuals shield themselves with hostages, so they aren't shot because it is bad pr and looks bad if cops are shooting hostages. Anytime you pull out a knife if it dangerous, and when a cop pulls a gun it is even more dangerous. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H10 Posted November 8, 2015 Report Share Posted November 8, 2015 Cite required. Put another way: I don't believe you. The entire time elapsed between Forcillo arriving on the scene and him shooting Yatim was less than one minute. That's not enough time to adequately assess a situation like that. Had Forcillo taken another minute, he could have asked the streetcar driver if there was anyone else on the vehicle. Yes and imagine if Yatim had stashed a tactical nuke on the seat beside him. Get the transcript from the transcript office, then go and read it, where forcillo lawyer says it. How much time does it take for a man with a knife 16 feet away to stab you in the neck and kill you? I'd imagine in 1 minute a syrian would be eating your bones after he beheaded you. The driver ran away and never looked back according to his own testimony. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rue Posted November 8, 2015 Report Share Posted November 8, 2015 I defer to Army and Ghost on this. I also appreciate Hern's comments. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GostHacked Posted November 8, 2015 Report Share Posted November 8, 2015 Get the transcript from the transcript office, then go and read it, where forcillo lawyer says it. How much time does it take for a man with a knife 16 feet away to stab you in the neck and kill you? I'd imagine in 1 minute a syrian would be eating your bones after he beheaded you. The driver ran away and never looked back according to his own testimony. There did not seem to be any attempt to increase the distance between the cops and Yatim. Even if he was as fast as you can claim, a cop should stay out of the danger zone. I am not sure if I trust the police transcripts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smoke Posted November 9, 2015 Report Share Posted November 9, 2015 Hi everyone, this a tough one. On one hand, I think we have to consider how many times police officers encounter wackos in the line of duty. For example, if you have ever had a gun pointed at you by some nutcase, you would be prone to think that nutcases you encounter in the future would be packin' some heat as well. It must be unsettling for them, they are in a tough spot. However, After watching the videos it does seem the police officer in question acted prematurely, even recklessly. It would not always be practical, but in this case could they have not kept the perp on the bus and called in a police pyschologist to defuse the situation rather than blasting away. It's easy for us armchair commentators to form opinions, especially in light of the many videos on the internet showing questionable police behaviour. For example, does someone really need to be killed for refusing to get out of a car, or for walking down the street, or for reaching for the drivers licence that the officer just asked for? Surely there are ways to accomplish things without the shooting. IMHO opinion it's a matter of better, more comprehensive police training. Police are supposed to be "professionals". Lot's of times it seems emotions get in the way and they react accordingly. That is NOT professional. In fact, when dealing with the wackos out there, I think the police should expect things like verbal abuse and rise above that to administer their job. I may be wandering here a bit...sorry don't have time to organize all my thoughts on this. Smoke Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted November 9, 2015 Report Share Posted November 9, 2015 I still figure the cops who were standing around while their buddy went berserk should be fired for not doing anything to stop him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Army Guy Posted November 10, 2015 Report Share Posted November 10, 2015 De-escalation is certainly A option. But it is not the guideline. You have negotiators typically in a situation where shooting the suspect is not typically practical because he might be hiding behind a hostage for instance. Also SWAT teams are far more highly trained than regular street cops. For one they have near full body armour, and a huge swat shield made of metal or bulletproof glass where they can literally just knock a suspect over. They have way more training, way more experience, way more protection and are experts in this type of confrontation. Usually those situations are not on a bus, and the suspect is 16 feet away charging towards an officer who has his gun drawn who warns him he will shoot. In most SWAT scenarios, if the suspect charged with a weapon, he'd likely end up just as dead. Cops are paid well, just not well enough to go home with a knife in their neck. Our guy is a Toronto cop, not RCMP, different guide line. Our guys in Toronto are high on multiple drugs, they will kill you before you get off 5 single shots. He had the legal right to kill Yatim, it is withing the use of force guideline. And how can you see where your shot goes in the middle of the night on a dark streetcar? Nope, police have loser ROE, I remember after 2008 we couldn't shoot on until we were basically fired on or had a gun pointed at us. I couldn't shoot a guy with a knife unless he was an inch from killing me. I didn't get to shoot anyone unarmed in the back like Canadian cops can, and you know it. http://news.nationalpost.com/news/canada/canadian-politics/inquest-hears-rcmp-shot-former-canadian-soldier-twice-in-the-back De-escalation should be the first option always...it is the common sense approach....how many times did we take this type of training before going overseas, every time we went to Yugo it was the same thing over and over, shoot or don't shoot, most of the videos we watched were police training videos....Never did we walk on to a situation wpns drawn , start shooting and we were in a combat zone.....Access the situation, find out what happened, talk to those involved, De escalate if possible....Use common sense.......then follow your ROE's..... No common sense used here, this cop goes from zero to killing in record time, and yet there are are lot of officers on the scene just walking around like everything is fine, under control, like they were in the park walking a dog..........which i find odd, shit even after the first three shoots most are not even armed or have pulled their wpns.....it's like they are shocked that shots were fired...This has got to tell you something about the mood.... Where is the Chain of Command.....all these cops and nobody is in charge....that has to be strange even a private knows that, it is trained into us in the very beginning of training "SOMEONE NEEDS TO TAKE CHARGE" ....instead they let rambo continue on his power trip, or how was it put "compile or die" speech .....note that none of the other officers are checking out the car when the suspect is fully engaged up front....it was like i said everything was normal they were waiting for the tazer.....then Rambo starts to flex his shit..... No one is checking, is they're any else in there? is there another access piont , The reason i ask is this it would have been one more piece of the puzzle, to confirm they is no hostage would mean they could have locked this down wait for ERT to arrive, along with the negotiator ....a group that is trained in this type of situation.....Just a point of note Toronto ERT are proud of their resolution ratings, 97 % are done without shoots being fired.....or so says their web site...meaning Rambo missed another option he could have used..... My biggest issue here is 9 shots......OK it's night i get that, but this is a police officer which is familiar with his own side arm, atleast... i hope, might be 20 25 feet away, he has a clear line of sight, the car is light inside, So he can clearly see his target.....so why , why so many bullets.....Shit a monkey can throw a ball of shit 25 feet and hit moving targets, seen it at the zoo......but this cop can not put down one teenager with 9 rounds and a tazer.....You said how would you know if you hit the target.....trust me when i say you hit someone with a bullet they are going to show it some how....i mean the shooter is looking down the sights of his wpn, he sees the target, he will also see the splash, or bullet strike.....if not they will atleast see the target react to being shot.....Even the cooks could hit a target from 25 feet.... SO why 9 shots, well they say he was still armed.....still had the knife in his hands.....while in Afghanistan, i took a piece of grenade fragment to the ass, while clearing a trench line, "my fault" i jumped into the trench to early.....anyways this inch long of white hot piece of metal in my ass, is frying the meat around it.....the last thing in my mind was to drop my wpn, in fact my first worry was to pull this thing out of my ass cheek....My section mates tried to wrestle me to the ground to no avail, because i was jumping up and down, screaming get it out , get it out.....Why because it was burning my flesh and hurt like nothing i felt before....i could not imagine doing that 9 times.....My point is , the think is he is still armed, way of thinking is flawed.....he may of been armed but he was no doubt down and out of the game after three shots..... 9 shots shows alot of things , Rambo is not sure about the effects of his wpns, he lost control of his situational awareness meaning he was consumed with one thing engagement of his target nothing else nor was he aware of the condition of his target even after the pause. Then to fire 6 more rounds is hard to imagine.........and then to top it all off lets put a tazer into him.....shows me no one had the balls to go inside to disarm the suspect....they had to taze him just to make sure.....after nine rounds this guy is bleeding out fast.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rue Posted November 10, 2015 Report Share Posted November 10, 2015 Ghost I would trust the transcripts. Impossible to change them. Evidence can get lost, transcripts don't change. That said I agree with your comments defer to Army again, defer to Stone's comments. Stone well said. Stone I al like you very reluctant to criticize but I have the same concerns as you. I tend to defer to Army on this. I have a very good friend who was a police training officer who pretty much is saying what Army is saying. Look its easy to hang a guy from a distance. I hate this. I hate a mentally ill person was killed who might be still alive and living a meaningful life and I hate to see a cop throw away his life on a mistake. Its a lose lose. The only good that comes out of this is learning what went wrong and making sure it doesn't happen again. I would just remind people less than 5% of mentally ill people actually get violent and lose it When they do it is of course horrendous, but luckily in the majority of cases its not violent although the press makes it seem that way. The media mixes so called "normal" violent people with the mentally ill. Its hard to distinguish the two if not damn impossible. Violent people ho are bi-polar or schizophrenic or have schizo like symptoms in other diseases for the emost part are not violent. Unfortunately we can have people who are just outright violent-they know what they are doing-hey have not lost touch with reality-they know what they are doing so are they mentally ill-depends on what classification you want to give them and therein is the problem. In law our definition of mental illness is cloudy. If it prevents you from forming criminal intent, you are not guilty. If it does not, you are guilty. That is how it works in theory. The problem is in law, you can be what you and I consider a wack job but not be legally insane, i.e., you are capable of being found guilty for committing crimes. Judges are supposed to take in mind on an offence if its the first time, second time, whether your actions were deliberate, clouded by illness. In Yatim's case it sounds very much from his behaviour leading up to the incident and the incident that he was smoking dope which would have exasperated bi-polar or schizophrenic illness. Given his age, either disease only really shows up then and it makes young people moody, unstable, erratic and we just dismiss it as being in your late teens early twenties. We first start diagnosing bi-polar and schizophrenia and schizo affective disorders in the late teens and early 20's because by then pretty much the full frontal lobe is developed and so the symptoms are easier to detect or less likely to b written off as moody teenage years as the frontal lobe explodes in size. The description and film shows Yatim making incoherent statements and holding his genitals. The words indicate someone who if he had schizophrenia or bi-polar disorder, take your pic, would have triggered confusion by ingesting the the active ingredient of marijhuana. The grabbing of his genitals is an infantile regressive behaviour representing a feeling of insecurity. Young boys, will grab their genitals when they need to pee or feel anxious. A person Yatim's age experiencing regression from anxiety might do that. He did appear aggressive at one point with his knife but the totality of behaviour suggests he was passive aggressive not active aggressive but that is easy to say, there is such a fine line between the two. Yes a person like that can turn in a second from infantile to lethal. I myself hate tasers. I don't like electricity. It can induce heart attacks, seizures, kill people and in fact incite people in rage states. I prefer devices such as quick forming foam that stays safe inside near the skin but forms a quick drying block on the outside like a caccon that can only be broken from the outside. I like that better than tasers. Tranquilizer darts, canine intervention, gas, I prefer it all to tasers, myself. In an ideal world if people had no weapons then things would be a hell of a lot different. One someone has a knife in their hand the whole dynamic changes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H10 Posted November 11, 2015 Report Share Posted November 11, 2015 There did not seem to be any attempt to increase the distance between the cops and Yatim. Even if he was as fast as you can claim, a cop should stay out of the danger zone. I am not sure if I trust the police transcripts. Its not up to the cops to do that. Increasing the distance would be a danger to themselves and the public. They are never require to retreat, EVER. Although they may choose to do it. None of the officers retreated, because as I said, they believed it could be a situation with people on the floor hiding or dying. Also this is downtown toronto, there wasn't the space to stay out the danger zone. I am talking about court transcripts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H10 Posted November 11, 2015 Report Share Posted November 11, 2015 I still figure the cops who were standing around while their buddy went berserk should be fired for not doing anything to stop him. Stop him from shooting a knife wielding criminal who moved towards them in an aggressive manner? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H10 Posted November 11, 2015 Report Share Posted November 11, 2015 (edited) De-escalation should be the first option always...it is the common sense approach....how many times did we take this type of training before going overseas, every time we went to Yugo it was the same thing over and over, shoot or don't shoot, most of the videos we watched were police training videos....Never did we walk on to a situation wpns drawn , start shooting and we were in a combat zone.....Access the situation, find out what happened, talk to those involved, De escalate if possible....Use common sense.......then follow your ROE's..... ---SNIP--- De-escalation was the first option, Forcillo is heard on the tape saying to get the tazer to another officer. The problem was the suspect attacked the cops before the cops had a chance to de-escalate. Cops have more lateral to kill civilians than we do and you know it. You are wrong, every of the 3 cop pulled their guns, and the 4th pulled his gun but put it away because he didn't want to shoot his colleague in the back. You are misrepresenting the video, in fact the other officers pulled their guns a second time and all stepped back when they move in. The suspect charged them before they had the chance. After he is shot a cop runs through the back door, and the tazer comes, if Yatim didn;t charge the cops, then likely those things would occur. 16 feet away, about 2-3 big steps. The car has light but he is in the dark, so its hard for him to see if Yatim is even being hit or if he is faking it. Cops have low accuracy, 18% hit rate according to the fbi. 9 shots would typically yield just 2 hits. You aren't seeing the hit with those little cop guns. Well that is the difference between military and police. Cops shoot to kill. Military, we usually shoot to disable, because the top brass found that if you shoot a guy and kill him dead, well the 11 other guys he's with just leave him behind and keep coming. But if you shoot a guy and disable him so he can't walk or move, then 3 or 4 guys at least have to stay with him sometimes the whole group. The very last thing a cop wants to do, is shoot someone, injury them, and have them sue the cop after. Cops aren't like us. Its not the same, they are going to kill, they aren't going to stop, they aren't going to slow down, disarm, they aren't usually held accountable. Avillage of people aren't going to go burn down toronto because Sammy Yatim was shot, well actually they protested and that was the ONLY reason the cop was charged. There was unarmed men shot by cops in peel this year, multiple, cops have far more lateral to kill. Edited November 12, 2015 by H10 [---SNIP---] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Army Guy Posted November 12, 2015 Report Share Posted November 12, 2015 (edited) If any de escalation was being done it is not made apparent in the videos, with the exception of someone going to get the tazer....as you say.... from what I saw, I see dozens of cops not doing anything, it is complete caus....it looks like no one is in charge, it looks like they the rest of the cops are more than happy to take rambos lead....Am I an expert on cops tactics.....no....What I do know is military tactics, and seen more than my share of situations such as this.....I can tell you not many of those cops know what's going on, nor what they are suppose to do....they are not working as a team....but one big cluster fuck.... and when confusion rains, shit like this happens..... You say the suspect attacked.....not true.....he moved forward, and not in a fast deliberate move, because the way the doorway is made, the suspect was still behind the driver seat at the time of the shooting....he still had about 6 ft to negotiate then make a turn down a small set of steep stairs....the suspect distance from the officer did not warrant a shot fired....He panicked and you know it.....listen to the audio file 3 quick shots, and he had a clear view of the suspect, the inside of the car was lite.....at a distance of less than 25 feet at the max.....HOW could he miss....these are aimed shoots.....even air force cooks could hit a target with a 9 mm pistol at 25 feet...."To put some perspective into this my pickup is 20 ft long" and it only has a 6 ft box.... Trust me when I say if you can not fake being hit by a 9mm, id you do you deserve an acting award....I was in the the same tent, Big ass tents (BAT) as they called them in KAF, when someone cleaning his pistol "so he says", in a few tents over shot one of my comrads in the lower back.....no faking there.....we all knew he had been hit with a round, we heard the round strike skin and bone, we saw him fly off his bed, we saw the pain he was in.....we knew he had been shot right away..... You say it would have been hard to see the suspect, your wrong....try it look out one of your windows at night with the lights on.....can you see clearly outside, no you can't........ but go outside and look into the light window from 25 feet and you can see clearly who or what is inside....the suspect would not know where the police officer was.....but the officer knew exactly where the suspect was...... Cop's must pass a yearly firearms qual.....and 18 % is NOT the Passing mark.....I get it the stress level is not there, it's a day on the range....which is why we train, and why the pass mark is well above 18 %.... so even a basic cop can hit a target at 25 feet....and if they can't one should be taking some more time on the ranges.... At 25 feet you see everything, the entrance hole, the splash of the round into the sand, the flex of the target....if you want me to believe he did not see the rounds hit the suspect then his eyes were closed....which might explain why he had to fire 9 times.....he had to have seen the target go down, slump onto to floor.....he had to have seen the reaction to being struck by bullets in some form..... No cops are trained to shoot for the center of mass just like we are, because it is the much larger target, easier to hit.... And if cops are worrying about getting sued for shooting someone then we have a much bigger problem don't we.....And while there are bad cops, like there is bad soldiers, I am not trying to paint them all with the same brush , just Rambo here in this video. He was not acting professionally, tell me do you think the Toronto PD is using this as what to do for future trainees, or are they looking at this as an embarrassing mishap.....well he has been charged with murder has he not.....do you think the Toronto PD shooting investigators cleared him, how did the prosecutors office press charges without evidence . They should be very upset, this could have been in any part of Toronto, to any one of our kids.....for several reasons, restore trust in the PD, get cops like this off the streets, and send a message the police dept does not have the license to kill , it has the responsibility to serve and protect.....no where does it say, piss me off and i'll kill your ass.... which is my point, SERVE and PROTECT..... Edited November 12, 2015 by Army Guy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black Dog Posted November 12, 2015 Report Share Posted November 12, 2015 The transcript is available online for a fee, go pay it and read it, it was also in news reports. Any time you fire a gun there is a chance you shoot the wrong person by accident. I don't even need a source, its common sense. Cite required. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boges Posted November 12, 2015 Author Report Share Posted November 12, 2015 Cite required. He wants you to go pay for the cite yourself, I think. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted November 13, 2015 Report Share Posted November 13, 2015 Stop him from shooting a knife wielding criminal who moved towards them in an aggressive manner?Stop him from pumping bullet after bullet after bullet after bullet after bullet after bullet in an aggressive manner into another human being. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H10 Posted November 14, 2015 Report Share Posted November 14, 2015 If any de escalation was being done it is not made apparent in the videos, with the exception of someone going to get the tazer....as you say.... from what I saw, I see dozens of cops not doing anything, it is complete caus....it looks like no one is in charge, it looks like they the rest of the cops are more than happy to take rambos lead....Am I an expert on cops tactics.....no....What I do know is military tactics, and seen more than my share of situations such as this.....I can tell you not many of those cops know what's going on, nor what they are suppose to do....they are not working as a team....but one big cluster fuck.... and when confusion rains, shit like this happens..... You say the suspect attacked.....not true.....he moved forward, and not in a fast deliberate move, because the way the doorway is made, the suspect was still behind the driver seat at the time of the shooting....he still had about 6 ft to negotiate then make a turn down a small set of steep stairs....the suspect distance from the officer did not warrant a shot fired....He panicked and you know it.....listen to the audio file 3 quick shots, and he had a clear view of the suspect, the inside of the car was lite.....at a distance of less than 25 feet at the max.....HOW could he miss....these are aimed shoots.....even air force cooks could hit a target with a 9 mm pistol at 25 feet...."To put some perspective into this my pickup is 20 ft long" and it only has a 6 ft box.... Trust me when I say if you can not fake being hit by a 9mm, id you do you deserve an acting award....I was in the the same tent, Big ass tents (BAT) as they called them in KAF, when someone cleaning his pistol "so he says", in a few tents over shot one of my comrads in the lower back.....no faking there.....we all knew he had been hit with a round, we heard the round strike skin and bone, we saw him fly off his bed, we saw the pain he was in.....we knew he had been shot right away..... You say it would have been hard to see the suspect, your wrong....try it look out one of your windows at night with the lights on.....can you see clearly outside, no you can't........ but go outside and look into the light window from 25 feet and you can see clearly who or what is inside....the suspect would not know where the police officer was.....but the officer knew exactly where the suspect was...... Cop's must pass a yearly firearms qual.....and 18 % is NOT the Passing mark.....I get it the stress level is not there, it's a day on the range....which is why we train, and why the pass mark is well above 18 %.... so even a basic cop can hit a target at 25 feet....and if they can't one should be taking some more time on the ranges.... At 25 feet you see everything, the entrance hole, the splash of the round into the sand, the flex of the target....if you want me to believe he did not see the rounds hit the suspect then his eyes were closed....which might explain why he had to fire 9 times.....he had to have seen the target go down, slump onto to floor.....he had to have seen the reaction to being struck by bullets in some form..... No cops are trained to shoot for the center of mass just like we are, because it is the much larger target, easier to hit.... And if cops are worrying about getting sued for shooting someone then we have a much bigger problem don't we.....And while there are bad cops, like there is bad soldiers, I am not trying to paint them all with the same brush , just Rambo here in this video. He was not acting professionally, tell me do you think the Toronto PD is using this as what to do for future trainees, or are they looking at this as an embarrassing mishap.....well he has been charged with murder has he not.....do you think the Toronto PD shooting investigators cleared him, how did the prosecutors office press charges without evidence . They should be very upset, this could have been in any part of Toronto, to any one of our kids.....for several reasons, restore trust in the PD, get cops like this off the streets, and send a message the police dept does not have the license to kill , it has the responsibility to serve and protect.....no where does it say, piss me off and i'll kill your ass.... which is my point, SERVE and PROTECT..... He was 16 feet away. Its about 2-3 steps. 1 shot doesn't always stop a guy high on drugs with psychiatric issues. cops are paid well, not well enough to get stabbed. I wouldn't have shot him. But I am not a cop, they are trained from a position to shoot butterflies. Cops are bad shots. 18% average hit rate according to the fbi. 9 rounds usually means 2 hits. And it was 16 feet up an elevated area in low light, with loud sirens. The error you make is forgetting there were lights flashing around the officer. So it wasn't like being in the dark looking in. It was being in the dark with a light flashing in your eye and looking into a dimly lit area. They are trained to shoot centre mass but to kill their suspect once they shoot. I think he did what he was trained to do. Cops are trained to shoot to kill. You keep shooting until the person is dead. Its not politicall correct, I don't agree with it, but this is what they are told. Its why they shoot like Rambo. Forcillo was charged for political reasons, it was bad optics for the department to have 500 people protesting in the street on every news channel and having that footage played over and over. It has nothing to do with the facts. If Forcillo is found guilty, there are about another 100 cases the prosecutor is going to need to go back to and try. I agree we have a much bigger problem. The cops supported forcillo, don't forget that. It wasn't like they arrested him after he did it. It was only after the sister got togather hundreds of protestors and got in on media 24/7 did they go back and bring charges. The cat is out the bag, prosecutors have already told cops they have a license to beat and kill and the judges have supported this. Look at the cop in the adam nobody case. Judges need police protection. Prosecutors need police protection. So the end result is police are giving a carte blanch to kill anyone when in uniform who posses any perceived threat. Should it be like this, no, but this is the law, change the laws. Otherwise we are getting selective prosecutions which are arbitrary and unfair. if your son was killed in the exact same manner, there would be no charges, we know this, we have about a dozen examples in peel where cops did the same thing. Killing unarmed guys they claimed had knives. You never read the sign properly army guy. Notice it says to serve and protect, but it doesn't say WHO! They serve the state (taxman, judges, prosecutors, other cops) and protect themselves. Theyd on't care abouts us peons. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H10 Posted November 14, 2015 Report Share Posted November 14, 2015 Cite required.yOU SAID OYU DON'T TRUST ME, SO GO FIND IT YOURSELF. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
On Guard for Thee Posted November 14, 2015 Report Share Posted November 14, 2015 Stop him from shooting a knife wielding criminal who moved towards them in an aggressive manner?Yeah that 3 inch blade from a kid essentially locked inside a streetcar is really scary. And I guess some cops will use any excuse to fire that pistol they have been have been just itchin' to use for so long. To hell with that de escalation crap they tried to teach us. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hardner Posted November 14, 2015 Report Share Posted November 14, 2015 yOU SAID OYU DON'T TRUST ME, SO GO FIND IT YOURSELF. It's actually expected that you would be able to produce evidence of stated facts when it's requested. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GostHacked Posted November 14, 2015 Report Share Posted November 14, 2015 Its not up to the cops to do that. Increasing the distance would be a danger to themselves and the public. They are never require to retreat, EVER. Although they may choose to do it. None of the officers retreated, because as I said, they believed it could be a situation with people on the floor hiding or dying. Also this is downtown toronto, there wasn't the space to stay out the danger zone. I am talking about court transcripts. The cops actions instantly posed a danger to themselves and the public. The cop got into a danger zone and killed Yatim. The cops actions posed a threat to any hostage that might be in the street car. Your turn to be smart. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jacee Posted November 14, 2015 Report Share Posted November 14, 2015 (edited) I agree. Cops should have been standing back a safe distance to evaluate the situation ... instead of rushing in and pumping a distressed person full of bullets. Most of them knew that. One was stupid. . Edited November 14, 2015 by jacee Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted November 14, 2015 Report Share Posted November 14, 2015 Stop him from pumping bullet after bullet after bullet after bullet after bullet after bullet in an aggressive manner into another human being. Why ? Police officers are trained to stop the threat once the decision to use deadly force has been made. It is shoot to kill....aggressively. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jacee Posted November 14, 2015 Report Share Posted November 14, 2015 (edited) Why ? Police officers are trained to stop the threat once the decision to use deadly force has been made. It is shoot to kill....aggressively.Don't confuse our cops with yours, BC.We'll tell ours what to do, thanks. Pumping a young man in distress full of bullets isn't it. Edited November 14, 2015 by jacee Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.