• 2ugly2live@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    23
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 months ago

    I don’t care if this woman pulled a Eustace and went “Ooga Booga Booga,” mask and all. A officer’s default reaction should not be “shoot in the head.” And they’re not releasing the footage, which they would happily do of they believed it was in their favor.

    Even if she came out with a bat/knife, they didn’t try to hit anything else? Leg, arm, shoulder, nothing? Neither officer had injuries, so who was shooting at them? Clearly it wasn’t this woman, but the article says they reported shots fired. Did they even get the intruder? I’m not going to say that every case is the same, but I’ve seen plenty of standoff videos where cops plead with people to drop the weapon, give multiple warnings, etc., and STILL don’t shoot to kill.

    There have been many, many cases of officers shooting first and asking questions later. And they usually just get a paid vacation. We will continue to rage until they understand that this is not okay, and that being an officer doesn’t give you carte blanche to shoot people when you get startled. If you can’t handle that, you shouldn’t be a officer

    Signed, Someone who shouldn’t be an officer because I also startle easy

    • Semi-Hemi-Lemmygod@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      4 months ago

      Even if she came out with a bat/knife, they didn’t try to hit anything else? Leg, arm, shoulder, nothing?

      Aiming for center of mass is a pretty universal bit of firearm training. Doesn’t excuse their reaction, but it is what you should be doing if you’re gonna fire on someone. Going for legs or arms or a headshot means you’re more likely to miss.

      • skuzz@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        4 months ago

        Even civilian concealed carry training has some hands-on courses to teach why it is trained this way. You’re also taught, “only draw your weapon if you have intent to kill,” which is sobering in and of itself.

        This leads to the bigger question: why does US cop training paint every scenario as “time to pull out the hammer, I see a nail!”? That’s fundamentally wrong at its very core. “Oh, shit, an acorn! blam! blam! blam!

        It seems the very antithesis of the US legal tenet “innocent until proven guilty” as one can’t be innocent nor proven guilty if they’re already dead.

        • Semi-Hemi-Lemmygod@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          4 months ago

          Yeah, the issue isn’t that the cops didn’t shoot an arm or a leg, but that they shot at all. There’s the whole “Be sure of your target and what’s behind it” that they didn’t seem to learn.

      • 2ugly2live@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        4 months ago

        another reason I shouldn’t be a cop

        Thank you for the info. I didn’t realize about the center mass part. Always good to get new info 👍🏾

      • ShaggySnacks@lemmy.myserv.one
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        4 months ago

        Aiming for center of mass is a pretty universal bit of firearm training. Doesn’t excuse their reaction, but it is what you should be doing if you’re gonna fire on someone. Going for legs or arms or a headshot means you’re more likely to miss.

        Since Sonya Massey was shot in the head, that implies three things:

        1. There was an exchange of gun fire and Sonya was caught in the crossfire.
        2. The police showed up and started shooting randomly, killing Sonya.
        3. Sonya was executed.

        None of these outcomes look good on the Police.