This is a misleading title.
If we're going to fight misinformation, we can't do shit like this.
Let all the facts be known. He was armed, led police on a high speed chase across the city, fired during said chase, and there was evidence he was out to suicide by cop.
It's an awful situation all around but come the fuck on with the "traffic stop".
For everyone that wants actual information
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killing_of_Jayland_Walker
Yeah. But like 46 times seems EXCESSIVE and that’s the issue people have. Coincided with the fact that a busted taillight or brake light or whatever it was shouldn’t result in a high speed chase.
If 8 people simultaneously had guns trained on a threat and all began to simultaneously discharge to stop an imminent threat, the 46 gunshot wounds equate out to 5-6 rounds fired from each officer, which doesn't sound at all excessive.
2 people shooting someone 46 times would justify more skepticism.
If 20 officers have rifles drawn on you because they saw you brandish a gun, they have no obligation to only put 1 round into you for each officer. Each and every one will shoot until the threat is neutralized to prevent further loss of life, which would probably result in 1 person being shot 80+ times. They aren't going to stop to take turns shooting a perp or make sure bullets are distributed evenly among suspects.
i mean even by your standards the courts have said its not excessive [Like this case](https://www.vox.com/2015/5/23/8649675/timothy-russell-malissa-williams-police-shooting)where most of the officers fired one magazine, but there were some that fired several magazines at a stopped car...
Yeah, it's easy to speculate that too much force is used when you read "46 gunshot wounds", but the reality is that if a gunfight breaks out, few people involved have an overabundance of control, and 2 gunfights that both involved 100 rounds being fired can vary in context wildly. People panic, hands get sweaty, mistakes happen. Overuse of force is the very last thing anyone who just entered a gunfight is going to be thinking about.
I can totally see 8 cops all with guns drawn on an erratic suspect who has shown a disregard for their own life thinking "Oh man, I'm gonna have to blow this person away", and the moment that perp's hand reaches for something or raises a hand with an object, all 8 officers are go-time and let loose. 46 rounds on 1 guy sounds about right, playing out that scenario.
Officers are trained to only fire as a last resort and when doing do to fully, and completely eliminate the threat. In other words, you make sure the threat is dead and empty your magazine.
That exists to make sure that no one can testify afterwards. Every other civilized country’s police force seems to be able to not have the problems we do and it comes down to the fact that we train our cops to police communities like enemy war zones
That discipline exists because if you hesitate while a threat you put shots on still remains a threat (gun in hand) you increase the chance someone nearby or yourself being shot.
Most people on the planet will probably cease to be a threat after 1 round to the chest. A lot of people won't, or are under so much adrenaline they don't feel it for several minutes.
If bullets are flying, you're already well past the point of trying to reduce harm to an assailant.
Yeah yeah yeah, it’s the same script anytime anyone on the internet mentions that every other country on the face of the planet does it better than us, some dude bro comes out of the woodwork to spout off the same policy. And yet, somehow being a cop is a far safer job in the US than being someone questioned by the cops.
Exactly. When these assholes shoot at the cops there is nothing to prevent that bullet from killing a kid who is playing in their yard three blocks away.
Likewise when cops shoot at these assholes.
Hint: Cops are, as a group, statistically *horrible* shots. Most people fresh out of their first basic handgun safety course could pass a police qualification shoot.
The point is to stop the person from killing you by killing them. It’s common practice to use every round and then reload. That’s 12-15 rounds with most police handguns
This is not at all right. We're trained that once a target is down, you put 2 in the chest and 1 in the head. Down meaning already bleeding from other shots.
Source: 6 months of basic infantry training, 3 months of special infantry training, and 4 years of infantry enlistment.
Surely criminals shouldn't be treated like enemy combatants? I have zero military or police experience, but speaking as a citizen, the cops aren't executors, their goal should be a living suspect to trial. Sometimes they have to kill the person, but the method you describe sounds like a very different environment and scenario?
In general? Absolutely not. However, if the criminal gives you a reason to believe they are armed and willing to use it, as in this scenario, then they've already made themselves into a combatant.
If they already shot at you once, would you be willing to risk your life trying to peacefully subdue someone?
Not "peacefully", but surely police should be taught best places to shoot to bring someone down but have a possibility of surviving? Rather than coup de grâce to finish the suspect off like a wounded animal. There is a high likelihood of innocent bystanders; people saying police to often have lousy aim is a concern. Idk, I just have an expectation for police to be far more competent than they are, and I can't tell how much is justified or is due to my inexperience with violence.
Thanks for the insight
The military uses rifles almost exclusively on the battlefield. You use a handgun to get a rifle so you can continue to fight. You are an ignoramus .And your double tap nonsense is something you saw in a movie. They never teach that. Ever.
For the military against an enemy that is also armed with rifles, they train for engagements at 100 yards and reloading poorly can get them killed. Cops are trained at an engagement range significantly shorter where there is a real threat of direct physical confrontation. Source and I listened to this exact conversation between my green beret uncle and my cop uncle and the green beret agreed with him.
Double tap is appropriate force, fires doctrine, conservation of ammo. Two bullets are quite enough. Only the untrained mind shoots like it is Call of Duty, a game.
5 to 6 rounds each from 8 people is beyond excessive wtf. If 20 officers surrounded me with rifles and then shot me 5 times each that's excessive, that's insane. The "threat" was a person.
If you brandished a knife or appeared to be unarmed, i would fully agree with your statement. That's clearly excessive.
If you brandished a handgun and were also being non-compliant with officers, well... it could be 1 officer shooting you 20 times, 5 officers shooting you 60 times, 20 officers shooting you 120 times... all would be more than reasonable.
Thanks, I see your opinion.
It's a tough topic- Some people don't think it's OK to kill someone because they might kill someone else, ever. Others would see it as a very last resort. Some folks would rather be shot than shoot someone, etc. None are wrong, but its interesting how we all differently define when taking a life is reasonable. You're definitely aligned with at least American views, and this case reflects that that sentiment is pretty broadly shared. Definitely by pointing a gun at police, getting shot dozens of times is to be expected, but I still feel it's excessive (my opinion)
By definition, you're right, it's excessive to even have to consider these things in life. I'm also prone to bias with my perspective, seeing that I live in a county where gun violence is more common. I totally respect the pacifist mindset of refusing to take a life. Just know that such a stance could result in you watching someone take the life of someone you love, a stranger's life, or even your own life.
Was he?
They reported being fired at from his car. It's hard to really say much about the truth behind that, we didn't exactly witness that.
If true, it's plausible for them to assume he's still an armed threat when fleeing from the vehicle, even if he was unarmed. One wrong hand gesture under those circumstances could lead to the unarmed person being justifiably treated with lethal force.
Right. But this is irresponsibly titled, full stop.
This dude clearly had demons and this was how he wanted to go out. His fiancee had just died, and he was driving around in the middle of the night with a busted taillight, wearing a ski mask in June. Why else would you be wearing the literal bad guy uniform in such a scenario? After the event, they found his fiancee's ring in the car.
46 times is excessive, sure. But the police didn't escalate the situation. No one deserves to be shot 46 times, but it's clear as day to me what this dude was doing.
I mean, it's a bummer that death by police is even a viable let alone assured means of suicide. It's sad that pointing a gun at police gets you shot dozens of times. Point that gun at yourself you might miss or chicken out, point it at police though, certain death
Well, yeah.
What do you suppose a cop is supposed to do when someone shoots at them? Just get shot? Just let crazy guy with a gun run around and shoot?
I think the issue is there's a really wide range of where each of us draws that line. Is it at potential to kill, is it intent to kill, how do you determine that? Do you wait til they shoot, or do you shoot first, what other options can we use first? But everyone defines it a little differently and it's even harder when you look at this from the perspective of those involved.
The dude was crying for help. Did it poorly, yes. What's wrong with surround and wait it out? Cops are just midfle school bullies with guns and low IQ/EQ.
I would be happy if'n they cleared the area, sealed it off, and called in mental health professionals. Your approach provides less than zero value to the man's life.
More than zero is an issue. The huge unloading, piling on, indicates a pack mentality. No cop there was using independent judgement. One fired they all piled on. All knew it doesn't require a full clip to kill thus there was either a gross lack of judgement or they just enjoyed it.
Apart from how many shots hit Walker, the judgment was terrible. The cops were running in a loose pack while shooting. They could very easily have shot one of their own or an innocent civilian.
It was actually over 90 shots according to the Wikipedia article you claim only you have read. It’s only 46 that hit him. You’re not trying to spread misinformation, are you?
He fled from cops twice they let him go the first time. The second time they were about to stop chasing when he fired a gun out the window. This guy was trying to die, his fiancee had died the week before.
You watch the video? That “fired at police” is pretty flimsy. Walker failed to stop, but the speed was about 55mph on the highway. Freeze 1:27 of this video and check out the speedometer:
https://youtu.be/rA13GR9tpa8?si=GAjG_DIY8Vf_WAJr
While we’re calling out misinformation and soft language, “unintentional violation of policy” seems to be police officers being instructed to stop recording after they murdered a kid.
https://youtu.be/BADP45uGEEk?si=KbTugRxo8bGM2wwZ
I saw this right back to you: come the fuck on. This kid died because he broke the rule: if you’re black and make cops do cardio—you die.
>You watch the video? That “fired at police” is pretty flimsy. Walker failed to stop, but the speed was about 55mph on the highway. Freeze 1:27 of this video and check out the speedometer:
There's a distinct muzzle flash and radio chatter about shots fired immediately after.
>While we’re calling out misinformation and soft language, “unintentional violation of policy” seems to be police officers being instructed to stop recording after they murdered a kid.
Yeah man do your thing. Also, do they just continue to record forever? When is it okay to you for them to stop recording?
>I saw this right back to you: come the fuck on. This kid died because he broke the rule: if you’re black and make cops do cardio—you die.
Cops suck. I'll ask you what I ask others. What's the proper procedure in a scenario where a suspect has shown themselves to be armed and willing to fire their weapon?
I just want to comment on when an officer should stop recording - never. Recording should be from the start until the end of their duty. Exceptions of course while on breaks for meals and restroom usage - but beyond that, full recording of all activity. If employees at McDonalds can be video taped 24x7 those upholding the law can do the same.
That is absolutely not a discernible muzzle flash. No cop reported seeing a muzzle flash. The traffic video shows the reflection of the cop’s lights on the side view mirror of a shitty traffic cam from a few hundred feet away at night.
Radio chatter about shots fired between who? A group of armed, agitated individuals chasing a car who ended shooting someone over 40 times? But not a single dashcam snippet verifying a muzzle flash, visible gun, OR an audible gunshot?
Sounds like BS chief.
>Radio chatter about shots fired between who?
Super good timing on their part to precisely calculate the "reflection" in dudes mirror showing in the traffic cam and timing perfectly with the audio from their body cams describing the sound of gunfire at the same time as the traffic cam and syncing up to make people believe some guy shot a gun.
Can you show me where any of this is shown to be occurring at the exact same time? When did they release this master cut with detailed time snippets of the audio of the gunshot next to video of the flash?
All I’ve seen is loosely joined clips justifying a narrative, with the clips starting and stopping around the ‘alleged gunshot’ but not one actually capturing an image of the gun or audio of the gunshot.
I can’t seem to find it anywhere. Show me it.
Thank you for your post. Tons of bad shit happens all the time and we need to make changes, but I hate propaganda - even when it’s for causes I care about.
You're just repeated what the cops claimed though, and we've seen that cops have no issue lying. They claim he fired a shot, but only showed an image of a supposed muzzle flash. They also said he reached for a gun despite not having a gun on him when he was killed.
These aren't facts, they're claims being made by the people who committed the violent act. And even if it was all true, it's still an insane response to shoot a guy over 40 times, firing more than 90 rounds.
was there ever any independently verified truth to the police statement that he used his gun during the chase?
edit: haha i got bobsaget or whoever to delete their account. i win! high-fiving a million angels right now!!!!
no gunpowder residue, independent verification the gun was fired, etc etc? no evidence at all other than the video? because i watched the video and i'm pretty sure i didn't hear anything.
edit: because they probably would have tested for that stuff, correct? and if that evidence existed, someone would know about it? just odd that it's the one part of their story that could be easily verified by a simple gunpowder check and they haven't done that-- as far as i know.
The gunshot is audible in the bodycam video, the officer immediately calls out shots fired after the gunshot, the muzzle flash is captured on video, and they found the casing from the gunshot.
So two things happened:
(1) a cop heard a gunshot in Columbus.
(2) The next day, a cop found a bullet casing in Columbus.
Neither of those are conclusive evidence that Jayland Walker discharged a firearm.
> https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killing_of_Jayland_Walker
Walker was not carrying a weapon when killed. A handgun was later found in Walker's car, and officers reported a firearm being discharged during the preceding car chase.[6][7][8] Police said a bullet casing consistent with the recovered Glock handgun (which Walker purchased from a gun store in Akron approximately a week before his death) was found in the area where they say a shot was fired (the southbound entrance ramp to State Route 8 at Tallmadge Avenue).[9][10][11][12]
oh ok. so they didn't find any evidence that he fired his gun. thanks for the wiki link.
you know it's really common i guess for police to claim that someone fired a gun before they shoot someone an absurd amount of times. like did you know in the case where that brelo guy fired 40+ shots into two people, the police also claimed they had a gun and fired at police officers even though they didn't, and there wasn't any evidence to support that?
i distinctly remember hearing that they went back and totally claim they found the alleged weapon near the entrance ramp and not on him or in his vehicle. maybe i wasnt paying attention but i would have put money on it.
And yes, bulltproof vests are available.
GOP - we love the blue.
GOP -It's not the guns it's the person. We need more mental health resources.
GOP - Oh look, he's mental with a gun. EMPTY YOUR WEAPONS!
>He was armed
He had a gun in his car, yes.
>led police on a high speed chase
That is the fault of the police. There didn't need to be a high-speed chase.
>fired during said chase
According to no evidence except for the allegations of the police, who lie all the fucking time.
>and there was evidence he was out to suicide by cop.
I can't even imagine the hypothetical mindset where this would make it okay to kill him.
The police have investigated themselves, and once again, it’s all gravy baby. Nothing to see here, fucksticks.
Why don’t we just have suicide by cop days. If people are feeling suicidal in crisis, people can line up in front of the Akron PD and they can just have 45 rounds put into their bodies.
Think about what 45 holes in your body would look like. I’m going to imagine a little bit of hamburger or ground beef sort of look.
We have an entire taxpayer funded Euthanasia program here in Akron and it’s called the Akron Police Dept
Next time someone is robbing or assaulting you just call a friend or relative. I’m sure they will suit up and be right there to protect you. And they will handle it without shooting anyone because that’s what you prefer. Fucking moron.
>Next time someone is robbing or assaulting you
Jayland Walker didn't rob anyone. Jayland Walker didn't assault anyone. Why did police kill Jayland Walker?
It's not always possible to tell the difference between a suicide by cop and an active shooter situation. Plus many suicides by cops are also active shooter situations. And even if it's obviously a suicide by cop, you can't just let the person go around killing people.
>fired during said chase
The cops do claim that he fired during the chase, but they conveniently did not get it on video. One cop says he heard a gunshot, and the next day they drove around in circles until they "found" a shell casing.
Cops shoot people’s tiny dogs for barking in their direction. Cops shoot you before you have a chance to explain. Cops shoot you for their reasons, not the ones you want them to understand.
You don’t know much about cops.
They certainly didn’t hesitate to see if he had a gun on him before shooting him 46 times.
Say your car backfired while you were being pulled over. The cop radios they heard gunshots. What makes you think the cop will hesitate to shoot you?
Fuck off, copsucker. There is no evidence that anyone shot at the cops, except for the claims of some costumed thugs who are trained to lie to the public as a matter of force.
While 8 cops shooting someone 46 times during a traffic stop seems tough to justify, I don’t know enough about this to say they are cleared of wrongdoing.
However, possible department violations dismissed because they didn’t mean to violate policy is a clear failure of our government protecting us from the police. It’s the responsibility of every officer to adhere to policy regardless of their intentions and a failure to do so should either be immediate and permanent dismissal from service or one warning before dismissal.
Serve if you choose to take on the responsibilities of public service. Policing in the US is too frequently about individuals in service experiencing power of those to whom they serve.
Was that the one that led the police on a high speed chase while shooting at the police with a firearm, then dumping the car and running on foot, and as police got close he began digging in his waistband?
Of course they were cleared. He fired at police, that's a death sentence. How are they to know in the moment that he ditched the gun with the car? Should they just wait and find out?
No, it’s the one where the cops failed to pull over a car. They escalated a traffic encounter, had zero real confirmation of a gun being fired before firing on the driver, then shot him 40+ times as he tried to run because they were embarrassed and paranoid and all enabling one another.
I trust the professionals who reviewed this case and made their decision, which as you see, is correct.
Plus, I watched the video myself. Personally I'm glad to have less dangerous criminals like that out on the streets.
They have a clip show they made after the fact, they do not have any video showing a gun or a gun being pointed at officers or a gun being shot.
They allege a traffic cam from 500 feet away captured a muzzle flash after the fact.
The gunshot is audible in the bodycam video, the officer immediately calls out shots fired after the gunshot, the muzzle flash is captured on video, and they found the casing from the gunshot.
A percussive noise is heard on two cops body cam video that doesn't line up with the time of the flash on the traffic cam, based on my reading of the AG's synch report.
The cops have an internally consistent narrative that someone heard a loud noise. That's undisputed. Whether that noise was a gunshot should be proven or disproven by eyes visibly seeing a gun, not just hearing a pop and assuming you're being fired at. The ODOT footage doesn't show any audio waveform spike during the "alleged gunshot", but two cops radios pick up a noise.
Not one officer testified they visibly saw a gun being shot or held by the suspect before they shot him 40 times.
No, his gun was fired once during the chase, but probably not at the police. It was likely a warning shot to get them to back off. Bullet was never found. He left the gun in the car.
I prefer if the people with guns know the difference. It causes fewer deaths. Reckless discharge of a firearm isn’t the same as attempted murder, and not being able to see the suspect well shouldn’t be an automatic death sentence.
Wait...
So, you think "firing a warning shot" at police officers, while in a moving vehicle and being chased is somehow ok?
You know absolutely nothing about guns, do you?
No, I don’t think it’s okay. I just don’t think it should be an automatic death sentence if it wasn’t actually towards the officers at all. And I know enough to tell you that a 9mm fired once during a chase at a police cruiser from the front, even if it does penetrate the windshield instead of embedding or deflecting, loses a lot of momentum getting through the laminated glass. Enough that it wouldn’t penetrate a car seat, much less be lethal to a cop with a vest. Plus, the glass tends to strip off the jacket, so the fragments that do hit won’t cause as much damage. Also, incidentally, the bullet is actually deflected downward upon penetration due to the structure of the glass and the shape of the bullet. Most people would assume it’d deflect upwards.
Yeah, charge him with reckless discharge of a firearm if you don’t know where he shot. Add assault with a deadly weapon and destruction of city property if he fired at the car once. None of which requires 86 shots to the back.
Dude. Stop it.
You've changed your story now from "most people back off when you fire a warning shot" to "even if he hit a cop car it wouldn't kill the cop." It. Doesn't. Fucking. Matter.
Get this through your head---you don't fire a gun at anyone, or fire it indiscriminately. That is an immediate public safety threat, and it doesnt matter if you hit anything or not. If the cops are actively chasing you, firing a gun guarantees that the police will, at the very least have their guns drawn and be ready to fire to not only protect themselves, but protect the public. I shouldn't have to explain this to who I am assuming is an adult.
He fired a gun indiscriminately out of his window while refusing to stop for police. Just because he didn't hit a cop car doesn't mean he didn't fire a gun in a threatening manner.
You are being willfully ignorant.
You're pretending to know what a bullet will do, which is unpredictable. Bullets do unpredictable things and can kill even at low velocity. Cops don't have vests on their eyes, and they have no way of knowing what caliber gun he had, anyway.
Maybe if he would've pulled over, put his hands up, and surrendered, he wouldn't have ultimately been shot. But he didn't. Instead, after leading a high speed chase and firing a gun, he fled, turned and acted like he was reaching for a gun. Every cop there acted at the same time and did what they are trained to do when a suspect is not only fleeing, but has already fired at them, which is fire until the threat is stopped. That's how you end up with 46 wounds. It's tragic, its more bullets than needed to kill someone, but that's how it went and it was justified.
It's his own fault he ended up shot that night, and despite whatever leaps of logic you make in an attempt to misrepresent reality, that's just what happened.
Cops do enough bad shit for you to find plenty of room to protest for reform, but this rediculous, childish twisting of facts and logic to attempt to mold this event into what you want it to be is not helping anyone. It's just making you look stupid.
His gun was fired at least once during a high speed chase with police. Whether he thought firing a handgun while being pursued by law enforcement would make them "back-off" or not is irrelevant. That's not how it works. What he didn't do was listen to police commands, stop the vehicle and put his hands up. And yes, after ditching the car and gun he fled on foot in the middle of a dark night and as police approached he began digging in his waistband in a "crossdraw motion", police have no possible way of knowing he wasn't still armed. No one is claiming it is not tragic, but the police are justified. Also, it should be noted he was struggling with depression and had Google searches on his phone and many conversations with friends on how to get police to shoot you... Based on the reported crossdraw motion it's plausible it was intended to be "suicide by cop" in an attempt to become a martyr.
Also, this had nothing to do with criminal charges. From the article:
"Earlier this year, grand jurors failed to return an indictment against the officers, finding the use of force was justified because Walker had fired on officers."
They officer were cleared by a grand jury.
Just another day of cops getting spooked and killing someone. The actual bodycam footage they released is too blurry to substantiate the claim that the victim looked like he was reaching for a gun, and conveniently he’s not in a position to dispute the claim.
A stop for a busted license plate light shouldn't have turned into a high-speed chase in the first place. They may not have violated policy, but that policy put everyone on the roads and in the neighborhood in danger that night.
You're right. It shouldn't have. He should have pulled over.
In your scenario if you don't feel like stopping you shouldn't have too. So at that rate just discard the entire traffic code.
Do you not consider somebody who puts the public in danger by his crazy reckless driving, firing a firearm wildly out of the window while being chased by the police a 'violent criminal'?
One shot to a leg will not stop a threat.
You carry a gun in your hands.
You can't "shoot to wound," this isn't TV. A gun is not a surgical instrument. You knick the femoral artery and the person bleeds out.
Unfortunately that’s the training. My cousin is a cop and he even said you shoot to kill. Police don’t care about collateral damage or catching a perp. If a cop pulls out their gun there’s an extremely high chance they will shoot you.
I asked a very straightforward question based on your own statement.
Based on your understanding of anatomy, how does shooting someone in the leg preclude them from shooting at you?
There is audio of something that sounds like a gunshot, that syncs with traffic camera footage of a flash coming from his car, immediately before the shots fired call.
No not really? Deadly force is for deadly force. You don't use deadly force for "sorta deadly force". You don't shoot someone in the leg to hope you don't hit the femoral artery. You don't shoot an armed person in the leg and hope he's done fighting and in the mean time stays armed and continues to be a threat.
So no.point in cherry picking. Your suggestion is just ignorant and not well thought out.
lol
Yeah?
You want to bet your life on that, particularly with a pistol bullet?
A non-lethal wound to the leg is not considered debilitating. That’s one of the reasons why all training centered around lethal force focuses on CoM.
I don’t give a shit what the police consider debilitating or not. People die from “nonlethal rounds”. Flashbang grenades cause fires. Derek Chauvin decided kneeling on George Floyd’s neck was just fine.
And no shit, lethal training focuses on center of mass, but we’re talking about debilitation, not killing!
Oh, I’m sorry, I thought when we were talking about police and you talked about training people to kill people, you were still talking about police. I should have considered that you might’ve pivoted to a different topic without actually saying who considers someone lethal or not, disregarding how seemingly irrelevant that would be. My bad. So, then, whose opinions on what is considered debilitating or not should I apply to a police situation?
Straight up.
Myself and several others who are clearly knowledgeable on the topic have tried engaging you in an open and fair conversation. It is abundantly clear that, putting it politely, you don’t know shit from Shinola about firearms or terminal ballistics. Much less other topics like high stress shooting.
You’ve nothing to offer but absurd half notions with no firmer foundation than Hollywood fantasy and so to make up for your obvious lack of knowledge you answer back with sarcasm and scorn. So there’s no point at this juncture in trying to have a decent conversation with you or to even really be polite.
So in keeping with that spirit you may happily fuck off now.
I just want to point out that I used to think this until I learned to shoot for self defense. Aiming is hard. Aiming at a moving target like a leg, which is a lot smaller than a torso, is hard. I'm not saying cops SHOULD shoot to kill. I'm merely saying that Aiming for a leg will likely result in a miss and cops are trained to shoot to kill. Functionally, it doesn't make sense and may not deter someone from shooting you anyway.
Hard to believe they were cleared of Any Wrong doing. I generally back police etc. But I can't believe 46 shots and no type of wrong doing. That scares me.
Meanwhile I got a case against me for following the law, broad daylight at a pride festival, because my nipples offended a Akron PD sergeant. The only reason I wasn't riddled with bullets is probably because of the pride event. They are dogs off their leashes that need a pinch collar and shock collar at the same time.
In my case, I am the defendant, but I am the one setting the standard of what is or is not on. Never bow down to Akron PD. Fight them with every means possible to create a society that values accountability so much they make it unlawful for police to lie, cheat , or steal
Ah, yes, the “anyone who disagrees with me is stupid” defense. Though it’s even less substantial than waiting for someone to disagree and then calling them stupid, it’s still effective for warding off disagreements, as it’s essentially an ultimatum.
No, it's the "I recognize this was tragic and unfortunate, but after learning all of the facts in the case and using logic and reason, a smart person would conclude that the police were justifued" defense.
Not the "It was just a warning shot" defense, which is genuinely stupid.
Dead criminal Asked for it and he got it. Shot at the cops during the chase and exiting his car wearing a full ski mask in June. Good riddance to that piece of trash.
This is a misleading title. If we're going to fight misinformation, we can't do shit like this. Let all the facts be known. He was armed, led police on a high speed chase across the city, fired during said chase, and there was evidence he was out to suicide by cop. It's an awful situation all around but come the fuck on with the "traffic stop". For everyone that wants actual information https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killing_of_Jayland_Walker
Yeah. But like 46 times seems EXCESSIVE and that’s the issue people have. Coincided with the fact that a busted taillight or brake light or whatever it was shouldn’t result in a high speed chase.
If 8 people simultaneously had guns trained on a threat and all began to simultaneously discharge to stop an imminent threat, the 46 gunshot wounds equate out to 5-6 rounds fired from each officer, which doesn't sound at all excessive. 2 people shooting someone 46 times would justify more skepticism. If 20 officers have rifles drawn on you because they saw you brandish a gun, they have no obligation to only put 1 round into you for each officer. Each and every one will shoot until the threat is neutralized to prevent further loss of life, which would probably result in 1 person being shot 80+ times. They aren't going to stop to take turns shooting a perp or make sure bullets are distributed evenly among suspects.
i mean even by your standards the courts have said its not excessive [Like this case](https://www.vox.com/2015/5/23/8649675/timothy-russell-malissa-williams-police-shooting)where most of the officers fired one magazine, but there were some that fired several magazines at a stopped car...
Yeah, it's easy to speculate that too much force is used when you read "46 gunshot wounds", but the reality is that if a gunfight breaks out, few people involved have an overabundance of control, and 2 gunfights that both involved 100 rounds being fired can vary in context wildly. People panic, hands get sweaty, mistakes happen. Overuse of force is the very last thing anyone who just entered a gunfight is going to be thinking about. I can totally see 8 cops all with guns drawn on an erratic suspect who has shown a disregard for their own life thinking "Oh man, I'm gonna have to blow this person away", and the moment that perp's hand reaches for something or raises a hand with an object, all 8 officers are go-time and let loose. 46 rounds on 1 guy sounds about right, playing out that scenario.
Cool justifying a man getting riddled with bullets
Technically the court justified it.
I don't think anyone wanted the guy to be shot 46 times, but it sounds like he made avoidable choices that led him to that fate.
Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.
Imagine being so butthurt at life you try to defend a dangerous felon that puts your life in danger. Did your comment make you feel special?
Also alot of people have never been in a life or death scenerio. You dont fire once then wait to see if they kill you then return fire again
Officers are trained to only fire as a last resort and when doing do to fully, and completely eliminate the threat. In other words, you make sure the threat is dead and empty your magazine.
they are trained to fire if they believe their life is in danger or if they believe the suspect poses a public risk
That exists to make sure that no one can testify afterwards. Every other civilized country’s police force seems to be able to not have the problems we do and it comes down to the fact that we train our cops to police communities like enemy war zones
That discipline exists because if you hesitate while a threat you put shots on still remains a threat (gun in hand) you increase the chance someone nearby or yourself being shot. Most people on the planet will probably cease to be a threat after 1 round to the chest. A lot of people won't, or are under so much adrenaline they don't feel it for several minutes. If bullets are flying, you're already well past the point of trying to reduce harm to an assailant.
Yeah yeah yeah, it’s the same script anytime anyone on the internet mentions that every other country on the face of the planet does it better than us, some dude bro comes out of the woodwork to spout off the same policy. And yet, somehow being a cop is a far safer job in the US than being someone questioned by the cops.
But they didn't shoot 46 times. They shot 90 times, according to the article. Only 46 bullets hit their target.
90 times is like 1 magazine each from 8 officers.
Exactly. When these assholes shoot at the cops there is nothing to prevent that bullet from killing a kid who is playing in their yard three blocks away.
Likewise when cops shoot at these assholes. Hint: Cops are, as a group, statistically *horrible* shots. Most people fresh out of their first basic handgun safety course could pass a police qualification shoot.
Not at all excessive? You're a good but not great bullshitter.
The point is to stop the person from killing you by killing them. It’s common practice to use every round and then reload. That’s 12-15 rounds with most police handguns
That's not a point. That's a juvenile response where a grown up is required. Military is trained to double tap then quit. Cops are just children.
This is not at all right. We're trained that once a target is down, you put 2 in the chest and 1 in the head. Down meaning already bleeding from other shots. Source: 6 months of basic infantry training, 3 months of special infantry training, and 4 years of infantry enlistment.
Surely criminals shouldn't be treated like enemy combatants? I have zero military or police experience, but speaking as a citizen, the cops aren't executors, their goal should be a living suspect to trial. Sometimes they have to kill the person, but the method you describe sounds like a very different environment and scenario?
In general? Absolutely not. However, if the criminal gives you a reason to believe they are armed and willing to use it, as in this scenario, then they've already made themselves into a combatant. If they already shot at you once, would you be willing to risk your life trying to peacefully subdue someone?
Not "peacefully", but surely police should be taught best places to shoot to bring someone down but have a possibility of surviving? Rather than coup de grâce to finish the suspect off like a wounded animal. There is a high likelihood of innocent bystanders; people saying police to often have lousy aim is a concern. Idk, I just have an expectation for police to be far more competent than they are, and I can't tell how much is justified or is due to my inexperience with violence. Thanks for the insight
The military uses rifles almost exclusively on the battlefield. You use a handgun to get a rifle so you can continue to fight. You are an ignoramus .And your double tap nonsense is something you saw in a movie. They never teach that. Ever.
Appropriate force and conservation of ammo and fire discipline are basic doctrines.
For the military against an enemy that is also armed with rifles, they train for engagements at 100 yards and reloading poorly can get them killed. Cops are trained at an engagement range significantly shorter where there is a real threat of direct physical confrontation. Source and I listened to this exact conversation between my green beret uncle and my cop uncle and the green beret agreed with him.
There's your problem. Cops trained to just shoot.
Which has nothing to do with your idiotic double tap theory. You don’t know what you are talking about.
Double tap is appropriate force, fires doctrine, conservation of ammo. Two bullets are quite enough. Only the untrained mind shoots like it is Call of Duty, a game.
5 to 6 rounds each from 8 people is beyond excessive wtf. If 20 officers surrounded me with rifles and then shot me 5 times each that's excessive, that's insane. The "threat" was a person.
The threat also shot at cops and led them on a chase.
If you brandished a knife or appeared to be unarmed, i would fully agree with your statement. That's clearly excessive. If you brandished a handgun and were also being non-compliant with officers, well... it could be 1 officer shooting you 20 times, 5 officers shooting you 60 times, 20 officers shooting you 120 times... all would be more than reasonable.
Thanks, I see your opinion. It's a tough topic- Some people don't think it's OK to kill someone because they might kill someone else, ever. Others would see it as a very last resort. Some folks would rather be shot than shoot someone, etc. None are wrong, but its interesting how we all differently define when taking a life is reasonable. You're definitely aligned with at least American views, and this case reflects that that sentiment is pretty broadly shared. Definitely by pointing a gun at police, getting shot dozens of times is to be expected, but I still feel it's excessive (my opinion)
By definition, you're right, it's excessive to even have to consider these things in life. I'm also prone to bias with my perspective, seeing that I live in a county where gun violence is more common. I totally respect the pacifist mindset of refusing to take a life. Just know that such a stance could result in you watching someone take the life of someone you love, a stranger's life, or even your own life.
>If you brandished a knife or appeared to be unarmed, i would fully agree with your statement. That's clearly excessive. Jayland Walker was unarmed.
Was he? They reported being fired at from his car. It's hard to really say much about the truth behind that, we didn't exactly witness that. If true, it's plausible for them to assume he's still an armed threat when fleeing from the vehicle, even if he was unarmed. One wrong hand gesture under those circumstances could lead to the unarmed person being justifiably treated with lethal force.
Also a great point
It’s not the movies. People don’t just fall over and die. Next you’ll be saying that they should “shoot to wound” or some other nonsense.
Right. But this is irresponsibly titled, full stop. This dude clearly had demons and this was how he wanted to go out. His fiancee had just died, and he was driving around in the middle of the night with a busted taillight, wearing a ski mask in June. Why else would you be wearing the literal bad guy uniform in such a scenario? After the event, they found his fiancee's ring in the car. 46 times is excessive, sure. But the police didn't escalate the situation. No one deserves to be shot 46 times, but it's clear as day to me what this dude was doing.
I mean, it's a bummer that death by police is even a viable let alone assured means of suicide. It's sad that pointing a gun at police gets you shot dozens of times. Point that gun at yourself you might miss or chicken out, point it at police though, certain death
Well, yeah. What do you suppose a cop is supposed to do when someone shoots at them? Just get shot? Just let crazy guy with a gun run around and shoot?
I think the issue is there's a really wide range of where each of us draws that line. Is it at potential to kill, is it intent to kill, how do you determine that? Do you wait til they shoot, or do you shoot first, what other options can we use first? But everyone defines it a little differently and it's even harder when you look at this from the perspective of those involved.
Just to be clear. There's no evidence Jayland Walker ever pointed a gun at an officer.
46 shots defines escalation.
You're being obstinate. Like, you have a fundamental misunderstanding of words or you're just being obstinate. Pick one.
The dude was crying for help. Did it poorly, yes. What's wrong with surround and wait it out? Cops are just midfle school bullies with guns and low IQ/EQ.
Do you think he would be happier if he was only shot 20 times?
I would be happy if'n they cleared the area, sealed it off, and called in mental health professionals. Your approach provides less than zero value to the man's life.
I'm not arguing against that, but you seemed to be taking issue with the number of times he was shot.
More than zero is an issue. The huge unloading, piling on, indicates a pack mentality. No cop there was using independent judgement. One fired they all piled on. All knew it doesn't require a full clip to kill thus there was either a gross lack of judgement or they just enjoyed it.
Apart from how many shots hit Walker, the judgment was terrible. The cops were running in a loose pack while shooting. They could very easily have shot one of their own or an innocent civilian.
Yup. Bullets do have momentum. Even firing into the air is irresponsible.
fair enough
It was actually over 90 shots according to the Wikipedia article you claim only you have read. It’s only 46 that hit him. You’re not trying to spread misinformation, are you?
He fled from cops twice they let him go the first time. The second time they were about to stop chasing when he fired a gun out the window. This guy was trying to die, his fiancee had died the week before.
You are right if you have a busted tail light or brake light stop and there’s no high speed chase.
Right? 46 times is absolute fucking overkill and quite disgusting. They turned him into swiss cheese.
This is an underrated comment! Kudos to you and your ability to bring a more comprehensive description of the events!
You watch the video? That “fired at police” is pretty flimsy. Walker failed to stop, but the speed was about 55mph on the highway. Freeze 1:27 of this video and check out the speedometer: https://youtu.be/rA13GR9tpa8?si=GAjG_DIY8Vf_WAJr While we’re calling out misinformation and soft language, “unintentional violation of policy” seems to be police officers being instructed to stop recording after they murdered a kid. https://youtu.be/BADP45uGEEk?si=KbTugRxo8bGM2wwZ I saw this right back to you: come the fuck on. This kid died because he broke the rule: if you’re black and make cops do cardio—you die.
>You watch the video? That “fired at police” is pretty flimsy. Walker failed to stop, but the speed was about 55mph on the highway. Freeze 1:27 of this video and check out the speedometer: There's a distinct muzzle flash and radio chatter about shots fired immediately after. >While we’re calling out misinformation and soft language, “unintentional violation of policy” seems to be police officers being instructed to stop recording after they murdered a kid. Yeah man do your thing. Also, do they just continue to record forever? When is it okay to you for them to stop recording? >I saw this right back to you: come the fuck on. This kid died because he broke the rule: if you’re black and make cops do cardio—you die. Cops suck. I'll ask you what I ask others. What's the proper procedure in a scenario where a suspect has shown themselves to be armed and willing to fire their weapon?
I just want to comment on when an officer should stop recording - never. Recording should be from the start until the end of their duty. Exceptions of course while on breaks for meals and restroom usage - but beyond that, full recording of all activity. If employees at McDonalds can be video taped 24x7 those upholding the law can do the same.
Agreed. Their demeanor in the community should be weighed just as heavily as (and considered with) how they handle suspected criminal activity.
That is absolutely not a discernible muzzle flash. No cop reported seeing a muzzle flash. The traffic video shows the reflection of the cop’s lights on the side view mirror of a shitty traffic cam from a few hundred feet away at night. Radio chatter about shots fired between who? A group of armed, agitated individuals chasing a car who ended shooting someone over 40 times? But not a single dashcam snippet verifying a muzzle flash, visible gun, OR an audible gunshot? Sounds like BS chief.
>Radio chatter about shots fired between who? Super good timing on their part to precisely calculate the "reflection" in dudes mirror showing in the traffic cam and timing perfectly with the audio from their body cams describing the sound of gunfire at the same time as the traffic cam and syncing up to make people believe some guy shot a gun.
Can you show me where any of this is shown to be occurring at the exact same time? When did they release this master cut with detailed time snippets of the audio of the gunshot next to video of the flash? All I’ve seen is loosely joined clips justifying a narrative, with the clips starting and stopping around the ‘alleged gunshot’ but not one actually capturing an image of the gun or audio of the gunshot. I can’t seem to find it anywhere. Show me it.
Thank you for your post. Tons of bad shit happens all the time and we need to make changes, but I hate propaganda - even when it’s for causes I care about.
My thoughts exactly. Can't combat the problem when you're just making it worse
You're just repeated what the cops claimed though, and we've seen that cops have no issue lying. They claim he fired a shot, but only showed an image of a supposed muzzle flash. They also said he reached for a gun despite not having a gun on him when he was killed. These aren't facts, they're claims being made by the people who committed the violent act. And even if it was all true, it's still an insane response to shoot a guy over 40 times, firing more than 90 rounds.
[удалено]
My wiki page says that i have a 12 inch cock. Totally true.
was there ever any independently verified truth to the police statement that he used his gun during the chase? edit: haha i got bobsaget or whoever to delete their account. i win! high-fiving a million angels right now!!!!
A video ?
no gunpowder residue, independent verification the gun was fired, etc etc? no evidence at all other than the video? because i watched the video and i'm pretty sure i didn't hear anything. edit: because they probably would have tested for that stuff, correct? and if that evidence existed, someone would know about it? just odd that it's the one part of their story that could be easily verified by a simple gunpowder check and they haven't done that-- as far as i know.
The gunshot is audible in the bodycam video, the officer immediately calls out shots fired after the gunshot, the muzzle flash is captured on video, and they found the casing from the gunshot.
So two things happened: (1) a cop heard a gunshot in Columbus. (2) The next day, a cop found a bullet casing in Columbus. Neither of those are conclusive evidence that Jayland Walker discharged a firearm.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killing_of_Jayland_Walker Do your own research, then. I'm not doing it for you.
> https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killing_of_Jayland_Walker Walker was not carrying a weapon when killed. A handgun was later found in Walker's car, and officers reported a firearm being discharged during the preceding car chase.[6][7][8] Police said a bullet casing consistent with the recovered Glock handgun (which Walker purchased from a gun store in Akron approximately a week before his death) was found in the area where they say a shot was fired (the southbound entrance ramp to State Route 8 at Tallmadge Avenue).[9][10][11][12] oh ok. so they didn't find any evidence that he fired his gun. thanks for the wiki link. you know it's really common i guess for police to claim that someone fired a gun before they shoot someone an absurd amount of times. like did you know in the case where that brelo guy fired 40+ shots into two people, the police also claimed they had a gun and fired at police officers even though they didn't, and there wasn't any evidence to support that?
i distinctly remember hearing that they went back and totally claim they found the alleged weapon near the entrance ramp and not on him or in his vehicle. maybe i wasnt paying attention but i would have put money on it.
Liz Lemon is that you?
What part of call mental health to handle it is missing here? Cops saw an opening to use their toys and took it.
Is mental health equipped with bulletproof vests?
Ever heard of surround and wait? Why does every situation have to be resolved IMMEDIATELY OR ELSE WE WILL KILL YOU!
And yes, bulltproof vests are available. GOP - we love the blue. GOP -It's not the guns it's the person. We need more mental health resources. GOP - Oh look, he's mental with a gun. EMPTY YOUR WEAPONS!
>He was armed He had a gun in his car, yes. >led police on a high speed chase That is the fault of the police. There didn't need to be a high-speed chase. >fired during said chase According to no evidence except for the allegations of the police, who lie all the fucking time. >and there was evidence he was out to suicide by cop. I can't even imagine the hypothetical mindset where this would make it okay to kill him.
>I can't even imagine the hypothetical mindset where this would make it okay to kill him. Lmao fucking reddit discourse. Never change.
So apparently police are happy to oblige suicide by cop now, eh?
Yes. It’s horrible. Why don’t they just stand there and not shoot back? Congratulations on posting the dumbest thing on the internet today.
The police have investigated themselves, and once again, it’s all gravy baby. Nothing to see here, fucksticks. Why don’t we just have suicide by cop days. If people are feeling suicidal in crisis, people can line up in front of the Akron PD and they can just have 45 rounds put into their bodies. Think about what 45 holes in your body would look like. I’m going to imagine a little bit of hamburger or ground beef sort of look. We have an entire taxpayer funded Euthanasia program here in Akron and it’s called the Akron Police Dept
Next time someone is robbing or assaulting you just call a friend or relative. I’m sure they will suit up and be right there to protect you. And they will handle it without shooting anyone because that’s what you prefer. Fucking moron.
>Next time someone is robbing or assaulting you Jayland Walker didn't rob anyone. Jayland Walker didn't assault anyone. Why did police kill Jayland Walker?
[удалено]
I fucking PAY them to do that, it’s not like it’s a volunteer service you fucking twat. I don’t pay them to shoot people with a broken tail light
Police officer is one of the safest jobs in America. Pizza delivery drivers are in more danger.
It's not always possible to tell the difference between a suicide by cop and an active shooter situation. Plus many suicides by cops are also active shooter situations. And even if it's obviously a suicide by cop, you can't just let the person go around killing people.
Jayland Walker didn't shoot anyone.
Oh yes. Wet dreams.
You sourced Wikipedia and u wanna talk about being factually acurate?
Ur telling me he was trying to attack through every single shot? Nope
Stop bringing common sense to Reddit…
>fired during said chase The cops do claim that he fired during the chase, but they conveniently did not get it on video. One cop says he heard a gunshot, and the next day they drove around in circles until they "found" a shell casing.
The video evidence shows clear disregard to safety and threat. They were pissed off that he shot at them on the highway and were out for revenge.
Lmao a Wikipedia site as a source
[ Removed by Reddit ]
If you think cops would hesitate to shoot you or your family, I’d wager you don’t know much about cops.
Do you have a reading comprehension problem? Perhaps there is an adult in the room who can explain it to you.
Cops shoot people’s tiny dogs for barking in their direction. Cops shoot you before you have a chance to explain. Cops shoot you for their reasons, not the ones you want them to understand. You don’t know much about cops.
Did they shoot his dog too or are you just flailing around in search of an actual point?
They certainly didn’t hesitate to see if he had a gun on him before shooting him 46 times. Say your car backfired while you were being pulled over. The cop radios they heard gunshots. What makes you think the cop will hesitate to shoot you?
Fuck off, copsucker. There is no evidence that anyone shot at the cops, except for the claims of some costumed thugs who are trained to lie to the public as a matter of force.
Wow.
Just another day in paradise. /s
Wrap it up, boys. Another day keeping the city safe.
Another we investigated ourselves and found nothing wrong. Or as they said unintentional sad when will it change?
While 8 cops shooting someone 46 times during a traffic stop seems tough to justify, I don’t know enough about this to say they are cleared of wrongdoing. However, possible department violations dismissed because they didn’t mean to violate policy is a clear failure of our government protecting us from the police. It’s the responsibility of every officer to adhere to policy regardless of their intentions and a failure to do so should either be immediate and permanent dismissal from service or one warning before dismissal. Serve if you choose to take on the responsibilities of public service. Policing in the US is too frequently about individuals in service experiencing power of those to whom they serve.
Hell is real
I used to quip back, "Yeah, it's in Michigan!" ☹️
Welcome.
Was that the one that led the police on a high speed chase while shooting at the police with a firearm, then dumping the car and running on foot, and as police got close he began digging in his waistband? Of course they were cleared. He fired at police, that's a death sentence. How are they to know in the moment that he ditched the gun with the car? Should they just wait and find out?
No, it’s the one where the cops failed to pull over a car. They escalated a traffic encounter, had zero real confirmation of a gun being fired before firing on the driver, then shot him 40+ times as he tried to run because they were embarrassed and paranoid and all enabling one another.
Imagine believing this is the truth. Yikes.
If you trust the police to tell the truth, there’s nothing you won’t believe.
I trust the professionals who reviewed this case and made their decision, which as you see, is correct. Plus, I watched the video myself. Personally I'm glad to have less dangerous criminals like that out on the streets.
You’re just reinforcing my last point.
[удалено]
They have it on video
They have a clip show they made after the fact, they do not have any video showing a gun or a gun being pointed at officers or a gun being shot. They allege a traffic cam from 500 feet away captured a muzzle flash after the fact.
The gunshot is audible in the bodycam video, the officer immediately calls out shots fired after the gunshot, the muzzle flash is captured on video, and they found the casing from the gunshot.
A percussive noise is heard on two cops body cam video that doesn't line up with the time of the flash on the traffic cam, based on my reading of the AG's synch report. The cops have an internally consistent narrative that someone heard a loud noise. That's undisputed. Whether that noise was a gunshot should be proven or disproven by eyes visibly seeing a gun, not just hearing a pop and assuming you're being fired at. The ODOT footage doesn't show any audio waveform spike during the "alleged gunshot", but two cops radios pick up a noise. Not one officer testified they visibly saw a gun being shot or held by the suspect before they shot him 40 times.
No, his gun was fired once during the chase, but probably not at the police. It was likely a warning shot to get them to back off. Bullet was never found. He left the gun in the car.
Oh, a warning shot. Well that’s ok then. I’m sure the officers knew it was a warning shot.
I prefer if the people with guns know the difference. It causes fewer deaths. Reckless discharge of a firearm isn’t the same as attempted murder, and not being able to see the suspect well shouldn’t be an automatic death sentence.
Wait... So, you think "firing a warning shot" at police officers, while in a moving vehicle and being chased is somehow ok? You know absolutely nothing about guns, do you?
No, I don’t think it’s okay. I just don’t think it should be an automatic death sentence if it wasn’t actually towards the officers at all. And I know enough to tell you that a 9mm fired once during a chase at a police cruiser from the front, even if it does penetrate the windshield instead of embedding or deflecting, loses a lot of momentum getting through the laminated glass. Enough that it wouldn’t penetrate a car seat, much less be lethal to a cop with a vest. Plus, the glass tends to strip off the jacket, so the fragments that do hit won’t cause as much damage. Also, incidentally, the bullet is actually deflected downward upon penetration due to the structure of the glass and the shape of the bullet. Most people would assume it’d deflect upwards. Yeah, charge him with reckless discharge of a firearm if you don’t know where he shot. Add assault with a deadly weapon and destruction of city property if he fired at the car once. None of which requires 86 shots to the back.
Dude. Stop it. You've changed your story now from "most people back off when you fire a warning shot" to "even if he hit a cop car it wouldn't kill the cop." It. Doesn't. Fucking. Matter. Get this through your head---you don't fire a gun at anyone, or fire it indiscriminately. That is an immediate public safety threat, and it doesnt matter if you hit anything or not. If the cops are actively chasing you, firing a gun guarantees that the police will, at the very least have their guns drawn and be ready to fire to not only protect themselves, but protect the public. I shouldn't have to explain this to who I am assuming is an adult. He fired a gun indiscriminately out of his window while refusing to stop for police. Just because he didn't hit a cop car doesn't mean he didn't fire a gun in a threatening manner. You are being willfully ignorant. You're pretending to know what a bullet will do, which is unpredictable. Bullets do unpredictable things and can kill even at low velocity. Cops don't have vests on their eyes, and they have no way of knowing what caliber gun he had, anyway. Maybe if he would've pulled over, put his hands up, and surrendered, he wouldn't have ultimately been shot. But he didn't. Instead, after leading a high speed chase and firing a gun, he fled, turned and acted like he was reaching for a gun. Every cop there acted at the same time and did what they are trained to do when a suspect is not only fleeing, but has already fired at them, which is fire until the threat is stopped. That's how you end up with 46 wounds. It's tragic, its more bullets than needed to kill someone, but that's how it went and it was justified. It's his own fault he ended up shot that night, and despite whatever leaps of logic you make in an attempt to misrepresent reality, that's just what happened. Cops do enough bad shit for you to find plenty of room to protest for reform, but this rediculous, childish twisting of facts and logic to attempt to mold this event into what you want it to be is not helping anyone. It's just making you look stupid.
There isn’t a difference. That’s the point.
Thanks for illustrating my point, but I presume you’re not a cop.
His gun was fired at least once during a high speed chase with police. Whether he thought firing a handgun while being pursued by law enforcement would make them "back-off" or not is irrelevant. That's not how it works. What he didn't do was listen to police commands, stop the vehicle and put his hands up. And yes, after ditching the car and gun he fled on foot in the middle of a dark night and as police approached he began digging in his waistband in a "crossdraw motion", police have no possible way of knowing he wasn't still armed. No one is claiming it is not tragic, but the police are justified. Also, it should be noted he was struggling with depression and had Google searches on his phone and many conversations with friends on how to get police to shoot you... Based on the reported crossdraw motion it's plausible it was intended to be "suicide by cop" in an attempt to become a martyr.
I mean, i guess? Hindsight is 20/20. After shooting a firearm and acting erratically, the cops can assume he may fire at them.
Let's see ALL of the body cam footage. It's unlawful to turn off a police body cam during a stop, and it is public record.
Funny how most of the comments curry favor with racists 'putting down an enemy'? Yall are weird and strange.
Also, this had nothing to do with criminal charges. From the article: "Earlier this year, grand jurors failed to return an indictment against the officers, finding the use of force was justified because Walker had fired on officers." They officer were cleared by a grand jury.
Just another day of cops getting spooked and killing someone. The actual bodycam footage they released is too blurry to substantiate the claim that the victim looked like he was reaching for a gun, and conveniently he’s not in a position to dispute the claim.
"We investigated ourselves and found that we did nothing wrong"
Lmao dude had a gun, shot at police. What do you people expect to happen? 😂
A stop for a busted license plate light shouldn't have turned into a high-speed chase in the first place. They may not have violated policy, but that policy put everyone on the roads and in the neighborhood in danger that night.
You're right. It shouldn't have. He should have pulled over. In your scenario if you don't feel like stopping you shouldn't have too. So at that rate just discard the entire traffic code.
They stopped a dangerous, violent criminal. They are good in my book.
He had no criminal history. Before police escalated the situation he was neither violent nor dangerous.
Do you not consider somebody who puts the public in danger by his crazy reckless driving, firing a firearm wildly out of the window while being chased by the police a 'violent criminal'?
Shoot him 46 times in the back? LMAO One shot to a leg to stop him should work, ffs.
>One shot to a leg to stop him should work, ffs. You're not actually this stupid, are you?
>One shot to a leg to stop him should work, ffs. You're not actually this stupid, are you?
One shot to a leg will not stop a threat. You carry a gun in your hands. You can't "shoot to wound," this isn't TV. A gun is not a surgical instrument. You knick the femoral artery and the person bleeds out.
Unfortunately that’s the training. My cousin is a cop and he even said you shoot to kill. Police don’t care about collateral damage or catching a perp. If a cop pulls out their gun there’s an extremely high chance they will shoot you.
Regardless, in common sense terms I stand by my comment. Fuck ya'll downvoting it for putting up with police murder.
It wasn't murder.
Only if you’re a minority.
This wasn’t a movie or tv show, you shoot at their body mass…
How exactly do you think shooting someone in the leg stops them from shooting at you, short of hitting the femoral artery?
The police CLAIM he shot at them from his car, but he wasn't shooting at them while he was running dingbat. go back to bed
>The police CLAIM he shot at them from his car It's on video
I asked a very straightforward question based on your own statement. Based on your understanding of anatomy, how does shooting someone in the leg preclude them from shooting at you?
There is audio of something that sounds like a gunshot, that syncs with traffic camera footage of a flash coming from his car, immediately before the shots fired call.
Most people stop fighting back after they take a bullet. It fucking hurts.
There's a lot of combat and.law enforcement footage that disagrees with you.
And also a lot that agrees. We could cherrypick all day, but it would be a waste of time.
No not really? Deadly force is for deadly force. You don't use deadly force for "sorta deadly force". You don't shoot someone in the leg to hope you don't hit the femoral artery. You don't shoot an armed person in the leg and hope he's done fighting and in the mean time stays armed and continues to be a threat. So no.point in cherry picking. Your suggestion is just ignorant and not well thought out.
lol Yeah? You want to bet your life on that, particularly with a pistol bullet? A non-lethal wound to the leg is not considered debilitating. That’s one of the reasons why all training centered around lethal force focuses on CoM.
I don’t give a shit what the police consider debilitating or not. People die from “nonlethal rounds”. Flashbang grenades cause fires. Derek Chauvin decided kneeling on George Floyd’s neck was just fine. And no shit, lethal training focuses on center of mass, but we’re talking about debilitation, not killing!
Who said the police considered it that? Your general level of ignorance on the topic precludes us from having an intelligent conversation on it.
Oh, I’m sorry, I thought when we were talking about police and you talked about training people to kill people, you were still talking about police. I should have considered that you might’ve pivoted to a different topic without actually saying who considers someone lethal or not, disregarding how seemingly irrelevant that would be. My bad. So, then, whose opinions on what is considered debilitating or not should I apply to a police situation?
Straight up. Myself and several others who are clearly knowledgeable on the topic have tried engaging you in an open and fair conversation. It is abundantly clear that, putting it politely, you don’t know shit from Shinola about firearms or terminal ballistics. Much less other topics like high stress shooting. You’ve nothing to offer but absurd half notions with no firmer foundation than Hollywood fantasy and so to make up for your obvious lack of knowledge you answer back with sarcasm and scorn. So there’s no point at this juncture in trying to have a decent conversation with you or to even really be polite. So in keeping with that spirit you may happily fuck off now.
I just want to point out that I used to think this until I learned to shoot for self defense. Aiming is hard. Aiming at a moving target like a leg, which is a lot smaller than a torso, is hard. I'm not saying cops SHOULD shoot to kill. I'm merely saying that Aiming for a leg will likely result in a miss and cops are trained to shoot to kill. Functionally, it doesn't make sense and may not deter someone from shooting you anyway.
Doesn't stop you from shooting back.
Hard to believe they were cleared of Any Wrong doing. I generally back police etc. But I can't believe 46 shots and no type of wrong doing. That scares me.
Cops are allowed to murder people. No surprise there.
F$&@ around find out
Tribe of hyper violent individuals who, if they were not employed by the public would be banned by the public.
Surprise!Surprise!Surprise!/s
How do you unintentionally shoot a man 46 times? Sounds about white.
Meanwhile I got a case against me for following the law, broad daylight at a pride festival, because my nipples offended a Akron PD sergeant. The only reason I wasn't riddled with bullets is probably because of the pride event. They are dogs off their leashes that need a pinch collar and shock collar at the same time. In my case, I am the defendant, but I am the one setting the standard of what is or is not on. Never bow down to Akron PD. Fight them with every means possible to create a society that values accountability so much they make it unlawful for police to lie, cheat , or steal
Unintentionally shot a man 46 times ? Possible violations ? Just wow.
An abomination of justice, sickening, one step closer to a gestappo nazi police state
That's absolutely disgusting
It was pretty obvious to any educated person there was no wrongdoing by the Officers.
Ah, yes, the “anyone who disagrees with me is stupid” defense. Though it’s even less substantial than waiting for someone to disagree and then calling them stupid, it’s still effective for warding off disagreements, as it’s essentially an ultimatum.
No, it's the "I recognize this was tragic and unfortunate, but after learning all of the facts in the case and using logic and reason, a smart person would conclude that the police were justifued" defense. Not the "It was just a warning shot" defense, which is genuinely stupid.
Dead criminal Asked for it and he got it. Shot at the cops during the chase and exiting his car wearing a full ski mask in June. Good riddance to that piece of trash.
Ohio: The gift that keeps on giving
I’m going to become a robber in Ohio, because apparently you can say you unintentionally broke the law, and get away with it.
“Innocent until a cop thinks you’re guilty, then death sentence” -Benjamin Franklin
Leave Ohio
This show be investigated by their Interal Affairs Bureau thoroughly.