http://ps2.ign.com/articles/748/748950p1.html

EDIT: It looks like the article is a little shoddy, but I'd like to know if the kid only stole two PS3's, why the police would open fire on him when he was unarmed and apparently didn't threaten then.

Haha @ the dumbass.


he was unarmed but holding a PlayStation 3 controller at the time.
Its stupid, the officers thought maybe he was holding a gun instead of a controller when they saw him.


Strickland's dog, a German shepherd, was also shot and killed.
And they shot his dog aswell, what the fuck is wrong with them?

Its stupid, the officers thought maybe he was holding a gun instead of a controller when they saw him.

It isn't really that stupid. If the fucktard wouldn't open the door for the police, then they had to be prepared to encounter resistance, and that means neutralizing any potential threat they see when they break down the door is a necessity.


And they shot his dog aswell, what the fuck is wrong with them?

The article says nothing about why that was done. It's possible that the dog was aggressive or simply went nuts trying to protect its master. That would, of course, make it necessary to shoot it.

Honestly sad, ather killed for a PS3. Plus since when is petty theft terms for pulling out your gun? The suspect posed no threat, unless he broke the door with his gun, he already had a clutch on it.

Plus since when is petty theft terms for pulling out your gun?

It isn't necessarily. The fact that the suspect wouldn't open the door, however, is grounds for extreme caution, including having weapons ready.


The suspect posed no threat, unless he broke the door with his gun, he already had a clutch on it.

It's a matter of perception. The article says that the guy was holding a PS3 controller. If he made a rapid movement and waved that in the general direction of the officers, there's very little chance that they'd tell what it is immediately. The sensible assumption is that it's a weapon and the sensible answer is to disable the suspect as quickly as possible. That means shooting him.

1) That's a lot of stuff dumped on perception, granted yes when you don't comply you elevate the situation,
2) That not a good enough answer If he wanted to disarm the suspect, all police have standard issued tasers I believe, which would have been much better, you save a life and protect yours.

yea but wouldnt they try do shoot him non-leathally first?
like in the foot or leg?

Precision aiming isn't as enforced as you would think, as it is fairly hard, he probably aimed for the shoulder half-assedly and shot him in the chest. Or he saw the controller and just shot him in a panicked frenzy.

And a panicked frenzy is about all there would have been time for if I understand the situation correctly. If the door was broken down and they saw a guy with a black object in hand moving it rapidly in their direction, there would have been no time to assess the situation. There is only time to react because if that had been a gun, one of the cops would have died if they hadn't used their guns.

(no officer anywhere is trained to shoot in a "panicked frenzy" jftr)

It's kind of hard to disarm your reflexes.

It's kind of hard to disarm your reflexes.

the majority of police firearm education is about getting them to do just that.

Either way.
The article didn't state how they believed this kid stole the PS3's. Either that, or I wasn't looking hard enough. So I'm wondering how the feds showed up there in the first place.

Not to mention it's not necessarily true that one of the officers would have died if it had been a gun since they wear bullet-proof vests.

You can't really excuse it based on OMG IT COULD HAVE BEEN A GUN

a ps3 is worse than a gun imo

Once again, Garamond comes through with the most salient point in the thread.

haha

but seriously, given the situation, heat of the moment, a black object is quickly moved in your direction from someone who refused to open the door. its unfortunate and sad, but i think the officers were justified in shooting the guy.

just so u guys know i am a sony fanboy

the majority of police firearm education is about getting them to do just that.

Not so, actually. Take, for example, the training they receive in dealing with people with knives. They're trained to shoot to kill if someone ever rushes them with a knife. They're specifically taught to not even try. Mind you, this comes directly from a cop I know, so there is a possibility that it is not the same in all places, but it does demonstrate that there is a high priority placed on self-preservation in police training.


Not to mention it's not necessarily true that one of the officers would have died if it had been a gun since they wear bullet-proof vests.

You can't really excuse it based on OMG IT COULD HAVE BEEN A GUN

Not all cops wear those. Maybe they're standard issue for S.W.A.T. personnel, but odds are that the guys serving that warrant didn't have anything of the sort.

Not all cops wear those. Maybe they're standard issue for S.W.A.T. personnel, but odds are that the guys serving that warrant didn't have anything of the sort.

most cops in my area (hull, england) wear bullet proof vests but they are literally vests. (even when there visiting primary schools)

http://ps3.ign.com/articles/750/750719p1.html

BUMP

he refused to open the door to armed police? maybe those ps3's are pretty good afterall.

Oh man... this is hardly the kind of material that should have any kind of bias in it, but they still managed to slip it in there anyway. Notice how the article makes a point of saying the guy was about to open the door? It's like they're saying "He really wasn't that bad after all" even though it made no difference at that point. All it is is a blatant attempt to pander to the gamers reading the article since the editors probably figured they'd prefer that one of their own was a victim instead of a criminal (not saying the cop was right either, of course). Also notice that there is no mention of whether a stolen PS3 was recovered or not from the scene.

The whole article reeks of bullshit.

This is why games sites need to hire reputable journalists; for starters, the title 'finds officer at fault' is incredibly misleading. He's been charged with second-degree murder, but that just could be the kids' lawyers causing trouble. It should state that this is an alleged charge; given that bail is set at a reasonably low $50 000, the judge obviously thinks that the police officer was just doing his duty.

I really hope the cop gets off. Usually i'm against police brutality, but he was being fired upon; how did he know the kid wouldn't come out guns blazing?

Also, the obligatory: only in America =/

Sounds to me like a case of bad and stupid behavior all around.

My thoughts? Seven words --- PS3's don't kill people --- people kill people.

Agreed.

Charges dropped on a technicality (http://www.cnn.com/2006/LAW/12/12/playstation.theft.ap/index.html).

Sucks the cop got fired, though.

Also: Fuck that kid and anyone that cries over his death. Thieves deserve zero pity, whether they steal a car or someone's purse.

yea but wouldnt they try do shoot him non-leathally first?
like in the foot or leg?

youre not supposed to shoot unless it is to kill.

Wow, what a mishap. As Prak implied, there could indeed be traces of Yellow Journalism afoot within the article. Nonetheless, sad.

This is why law enforcement ought to have rubber bullets or whatnot to utilize more, if a such a misconception does in fact occur. At least a suspect will be injured and possibly incapacitated for an arrest to ensue, and less likely, killed.

I have read that they are using things like tasers and rubber bullets and other non-lethal forms of suspect immobilization more often these days. But it seems to be slow in catching on in the U.S. I do see them using tasers quite a bit though these days on shows like COPS (which I used to watch regularly, but lately have been eschewing in favor of America's Most Wanted.)

I see this as a positive thing. One guy was killed for committing one incredibly lame robbery, and this might be a crime deterrent. It could be even result in a new slogan for Sony.

"Steal our silver box, end up in one of your own."

This is what it is. Cops are so jumpy in situations that their sense becomes clouded. They react to quick, and with to much force, way beyond what is really neccesary. Heres s story, My friends dad knew this guy who had a warrent or somethin, The copd knock on the door, hes inside cleanin up his kids toys, it just so happened that in the handfull of toys he had, there was a Plastic toy knife. When he opened the door the cops shot him to death.

You especially gotta worry about cops in small towns like this one. They just ramdonly fuck with people just to make their quota. I got a damn ticket for "improper use of a seatbelt" I had the strap behind me, cuzz when I drive I like some room to move around freely, seriously. But the cops are just waitin for the action. And when it happens they get so nervous and jumpy that they overreact. Think Of Adam Sandler in the Movie angre management, On the plane. Thats the experience with alot of cops. Most are on power trips. They get the fuckin job so they can have power, and they abuse it. FUCK THE COPS!!

Although that kid who stole the PS3's was an idiot. They cops were out of control. Later

Oh --- I agree --- I've seen a lot in the news and stuff recently that funding for proper training isn't anywhere near what it should be.