The man still had access to deadly weapons he previously threatened to use. Level ground not only makes it easier to handcuff someone, it also makes it easier to fight.This is where I do not understand the argument of needing to flashbang him as he is walking down. In the video he is clearly giving up and coming down. Regardless of what was said in the 3+hrs prior, the situation appeared to be coming to an end. He is on rocky terrain and the officers didn't appear to be in a position to immediately grab him and put the cuffs on...so why throw the flashbang?
If they got him down to where the land was flat it would seem to me that would be the easier place to make the arrest...no?
Obviously we are all monday morning QBing this thing but it still doesn't make any sense to me the escalate a (seemingly) de-escalating situation.
I'll take the video of the event over an article written about it any day. Maybe you should try that.I've read multiple articles. You should try it.
public servant said:The flash bang is designed to disorientate. It momentarily scrambles you mental and physical ability to focus. If you cannot focus, you cannot fight.
The flashbang was attempt to distract him so they could arrest him, it was not self-defense.
Speaking of a shallow sea of obvious intellectuals...Yes. Disorient and scare him so that he instinctively grabs for a weapon. Then you get to shoot him. Win win amirite
public servant said:Speaking of a shallow sea of obvious intellectuals...
are flash bangs really that effective when used outside in the daytime in a completely open environment? I've never been around one going off, but I've stood too close to plenty of bright things that go boom and have never felt disorientated...might have been different if I was in an enclosed space however.The man still had access to deadly weapons he previously threatened to use. Level ground not only makes it easier to handcuff someone, it also makes it easier to fight.
The flash bang is designed to disorientate. It momentarily scrambles you mental and physical ability to focus. If you cannot focus, you cannot fight.
If I thought the flash bang would work outside I'd have flash banged him, waited for him to display effects that the flash bang worked then rushed him, put him on the ground if he wasn't already and handcuffed him. Knowing that deadly force still is an option if necessary.Did it make sense to you? Toss a grenade to disorient him then stand there and...what? What was the plan? He was walking, hands full of his stuff. What was the plan here?
Is that what you would have done?
See my reply above. I've never seen one used outdoors. They work damn well indoors.are flash bangs really that effective when used outside in the daytime in a completely open environment? I've never been around one going off, but I've stood too close to plenty of bright things that go boom and have never felt disorientated...might have been different if I was in an enclosed space however.
public servant said:I'm also not going to walk up to a man that had previously threatened to kill me (knowing he's armed) as if all is over and we're now best buddies.
I wasn't there. So you're asking me to speculate.So when it became clear that your flash bang didn't stun him as intended, only frightened him and caused him to reflexively reach for his knife and then clearly surrender and head towards the ground, would you have shot him in the back?
has he clearly surrendered?
So Kirk, which one of those killer cowboys are you friends with? Technically a good shoot or not, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that this is fxxked up like Uncle Sam ' s checkbook.
Was he reaching for more weapons in his packs?That would be no.
They had to pry the knives out of his hands when they arrested him.
There was no surrender.
They had to pry the knives out of his hands when they arrested him.
There was no surrender.
It was a good shoot.
That's because he was dead by then.
That would be no.
They had to pry the knives out of his hands when they arrested him.
There was no surrender.