28 votes

Graphic Police Shooting in Riverview, MO yesterday Aug. 19 - anyone see this?

Found this while looking for *live* feeds from tonight:

"KWMU has published a video of what appears to be one of the shootings that happened yesterday. This happened in Riverview, about 15 minutes outside of the center of the protests. We believe that it is important to be transparent in what information we gather and allow for you to make the decision yourself on what you want to see or not see.

The video is graphic, and contains images of someone being shot and killed. Viewer discretion advised, you have been warned."


http://youtu.be/j-P54MZVxMU

...



Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

I always look at both sides

I always look at both sides before I respond to things like this, there are many cases where police were wrong, there are also many cases where they were justified, you need to approach these types of issues with an open mind and not bias.

Some of the comments here show true bias against police rather then facts of what actually happened. It is easy to be an internet tough guy that would have disabled him with judo or they should have shot him in the leg or fired a warning shot, REALLY? The warning was drop the damn weapon, end of story. The problem I have is the story they told, the report has many things wrong with it and they should have to answer for that without exception.

Personally, I would have shot him without exception and I would not have fired a warning shot, my warning would have been drop the knife, nothing more, once he kept approaching I would have dropped him; however, I would have stopped firing once he hit the ground but he most likely would have been dead before he hit the ground. Everyone has a right to defend themselves, including police.

When a person threatens your life, I don't want to hear this bullshit of hey lets sit down and have a discussion and talk them down, screw that, the discussion was over once you pulled a weapon on me and continued to approach me in an aggressive manner with said weapon.

Dead for being a dumbfk

seemed like a reasonable shooting. crazy guy comes a me with a knife would get the same thing. Justified shooting, end of story.

It was murder

Unless the first shot that put him down was lethal, it was murder.

If the first shot that put him down was lethal, they wouldn't have kept shooting. They kept shooting to kill him. Medical liability is expensive. There's not likely to be compensation for a dead idiot.

Plus he was approaching slowly, a warning shot most likely would have called his bluff.

Yes the guy was stupid, but people saying if it was me I'd have done the same thing, I really hope you just haven't thought it through.

You'd have really shot someone to death who was already down?

You'd really not have fired a warning shot?

You're really so bad a shot that you couldn't shoot up a leg on a slow moving man?

And is the point of tasers now just to torture people? Why do they have them if they don't use them in the cases they were intended?

Fully agree.

They kept shooting as he was hitting the ground. I counted 9 rounds total, though there were two shooters, so it might've been more, but not less.

Also, I don't think that he had yet become an imminent threat when he was first shot. They shot to kill, not to defend. If you shoot for the purpose of kill, rather than to stop a threat, that's murder.

"Tu ne cede malis, sed contra audentior ito."

The fastest way to get killed

The fastest way to get killed in a lethal confrontation while you have a fire arm drawn is to take one shot then stop to assess the situation.

I promise you, and this applies to police officers and military combat veterans, once you pull that trigger once you've determined a lethal threat, you will not just pull the trigger once then stop to analyze if he's still a threat. You will continue to pull that trigger until you KNOW there is no threat.

He was an imminent threat the second he was within 21 feet. Weapons drawn, had he stayed at 21+ feet, there's no reason to fire. But even with verbal warnings and weapons drawn, the man continued to close that gap. By the time he was shot the first time, he was well within 10 feet of the officers.

The time for an average person to cover 10 feet from a dead stop is easily within a second. Nearly a blink of an eye.

I believe the officers were justified in their shooting.

---------------------------------
Finally HOME! For Good!
---------------------------------
I am an Oath Keeper
I am an Agnostic
I am a father and I want my children to know true freedom in their lifetime.

You make good points

Though, no shots needed to be fired in the first place. The knife weilder never made an aggressive motion. Though he was approaching, a reasonable person would not have feared for his life because they knew the had the means to end the threat as soon as an aggressive motion was made. They had two officers there. The man was asking to be shot, literally, out loud. That should change the dynamic completely for the cops. They're trained in dealing with a suicide by cop situation. Though, I will concede that of I was a juror, I don't know if I could convict the officers based on this video.

However, if indeed they lied about the circumstances then they should be charged with obstruction of justice.

"Tu ne cede malis, sed contra audentior ito."

What do you call approaching

What do you call approaching someone with a knife in your hand?

Not only that, but approaching someone who has a gun drawn on you?

Not only that, you are telling them to shoot you, which indicates to me that you are suicidal, a man with nothing to lose, a loose cannon and capable of killing me even if it means getting killed himself.

Not only that, but he was well within 20 feet.

Posted below but well worth posting again:


http://youtu.be/QbnSTW7Ar44

The man was at 10 feet when the officer fired. Watch the video above to see how a 10 foot gap can be closed quickly. Then you expect the second officer to be able to shoot the suspect without further hurting his partner?

---------------------------------
Finally HOME! For Good!
---------------------------------
I am an Oath Keeper
I am an Agnostic
I am a father and I want my children to know true freedom in their lifetime.

You're right

I was wrong.

I watched it a few more times after I made these comments. You're totally right. That was a justified shooting. The fact that they lied in the police report clouded my judgement on the video. I should've been more attuned to the video at first.

I agree, this was a justified shooting. I don't know what I was thinking. Even I had to downvote my comments.

"Tu ne cede malis, sed contra audentior ito."

So...

I guess PO's/LEO's no longer carry mace or tasers...

Dude had a knife, which isn't smart to begin with.

I dunno, though. This shit is happening too much.

If you don't know your rights, you don't have any.

Nature says,

If your too stupid to live you will most likely not.

Examples: breathing under water
playing chicken wit a train
jumping off a tall structure
darting across a busy highway
the list goes on and on.

The cops had no right to shoot when they have other forms of defense in that situation. (non lethal)

NOSHEEPLE

Suicide by Cop

This video is really kinda strange.

So the dude steals two cans of soda, puts them on the sidewalk and then waits for the police to show up?

When the cops show up, the thief initially walks backwards and then approaches the cops stating shoot me, shoot me. Did you notice how as the bad guy gets closer to the police, he then moves 10 feet to his left so the several onlookers directly behind him are longer in the police line of sight? How nice of the bad guy to take others out of harms way.

After the shooting, the white dude just strolls on up to the scene?

Why is the videographer even filming this to begin with? A guy steals two cans on soda and that is worthy of his homeboy coming to get him so he can film it? He was more excited in the beginning of the video then he was after the shooting, never missed a beat.

It seems this is a case of suicide by cop and I'm not trying to make a conspiracy out of it, but the video just seems odd to me.

I am not ready to buy that is

I am not ready to buy that is was a staged event, but it was weird, I think the guy was on a suicide mission I believe.

Good point,

It is a strange video. Though I believe it does capture a murder.

"Tu ne cede malis, sed contra audentior ito."

It's possible they set the whole thing up thinking the cops

would not actually commit murder on the spot and on camera.

I'm not sure what they intended to capture on film, perhaps just police brutality, but it wasn't a wise move regardless. (why would I ask for a beating when I could just go about my normal day?)

This was not murder. If

This was not murder. If someone is within 10 feet from me with a knife threatening me and is moving towards me, I would be justified shooting him. The officers are no exceptions, even if they do carry non-lethal options.

Not everyone goes down from being tazed, especially if they are enraged and aggravated. Are you willing to bet your life that, at 10 feet, the man with a knife will go down to your tazer and you have no secondary to the tazer shot before the aggressor can reach you and sink his knife into your delicate throat?

I wouldn't take that risk and I wouldn't expect these officers to either.

If I were in the officers shoes, I would have pulled that trigger.

---------------------------------
Finally HOME! For Good!
---------------------------------
I am an Oath Keeper
I am an Agnostic
I am a father and I want my children to know true freedom in their lifetime.

If two officers with guns...

..against a guy with a knife, can't knee cap him (while he is moving slow as a sloth) then
YES THAT IS MURDER!

My dad (rip) was a big city cop. He's probably rolling over in his grave.

"Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos!"- Homer Simpson

The victim was asking for it (literally)

but did anyone notice that the last two (at least) shots were fired when the victim was already on the ground? The cops are trigger happy.

Leges sine moribus vanae

People on this forum watch to many damn movies

I carry a gun every day, if you approach me with yelling with a knife, expect to die. Knifes can kill you very quickly and people that have one can get to you faster than you think.


http://youtu.be/QbnSTW7Ar44

"Timid men prefer the calm of despotism to the tempestuous sea of liberty."

Click Here To See The Candidates On The Record

Not sure if I missed

Not sure if I missed something or if there is more information available about this... but I don't see a knife anywhere.

turn up your volume/s to full

turn up your volume/s to full blast and listen to what the cops are yelling several times "drop the knife"...also watch the guys right hand throughout the video....

The video is shitty but if you look close there is a knife

All of the witnesses at the scene saw the knife and the local news is reporting it as well.

You need only google search "Knife man st.louis robbery" or something similar.

"Timid men prefer the calm of despotism to the tempestuous sea of liberty."

Click Here To See The Candidates On The Record

Thanks for sharing the video...

The officers in the OP video certainly were within their rights of self-defense. I think anyone would shoot in a similar situation.

Unlike the scenario in the video you shared, the police already had their weapons drawn (justifiably). That should make the "comfort bubble" a little smaller, but the fellow in the video was closing ground and made it to ~10ft (an estimation) - well inside the bubble. It was also clear that he had no intention to stop or retreat.

What I have a problem with

And what I think everybody else has a problem with is not that the cops shot the guy with the knife who approching them and telling them to shoot him. Were I in their shoes I'd have shot him the moment I saw the knife and he approached me.

No, the problem is two fold. First, they LIED about the guy and how he approached. They make it out to be this psycho shower scene bum rush. DON'T FREAKING LIE; the cops were in the right here ... at first. And that brings me to point number two. When you shoot a person and he falls face first onto the ground DON'T KEEP SHOOTING HIM IN THE BACK!

Yes, I know you may have to shoot a person more than once to stop them; I am trained with a fire arm and get this. But once the guy/gal is face first on the ground with several rounds in him/her stop shooting and back the fork up.

I agree... I think they fired too many times...

It was something like 10 shots in 3 seconds. He began to fall around the 2nd shot. They could have stopped then. I completely agree.

I'm not sure if the police are trained to empty their clips or not, but it can potentially be a dangerous policy in situations where multiple threats are present. One doesn't want to be left standing with an empty firearm in a, still, hostile situation. In addition, there's a higher chance of stray bullets when firing so quickly (and in this case there was a house behind the fellow).

I haven't heard everything the police have said, but I did see the post on the front page where they said he was within 3 or 4 feet when the first shot was fired. I disagree with that. It was closer to 10 feet when the first shot was fired, and the man's momentum carried him forward (a little further forward than would have been the case if he wasn't standing in a elevated position). The body ended up close to 3 or 4 feet, but he wasn't alive by that time.

Police are trained to unload

Police are trained to unload their clips. Dead people can't sue.

I know this is false

at least where I'm at. The problem is they aren't taught control. You could look at it the same way, I suppose, but there is a slight difference. Sadly, most people become cops to do good. The sad bit is they are too blinded by their shiny badge to realize when they step over the line from good guy to bad guy. I really do pitty them.

Is this an excuse for their behavior? Absolutely not. It is just a more realistic way of looking at the world. The conversation about the failure of their training and the pathetic way their training teaches them to deal with a situtation could go on indefinitely; I don't have that much time. :)

I would like to throw this

I would like to throw this out here, I do not hate cops. I happen to know quite a few in my area. Most are really good people that are genuinely trying to do the right thing. Some, on the other hand on are on a major power trip. As with anything, it is best to look at cops on an individual basis.

When I purchased my first handgun, I asked one of my cop buddies about our state laws regarding open carry, concealed carry etc. He was very informative. I then told him how I felt uncomfortable with the idea of taking a life, and if I were ever forced to draw my weapon I would try to shoot to wound and immobilize, not shoot to kill. I was told that was wrong, wrong, wrong. Unload your clip, he said. Dead men will not sue. It is your word against a ghost.

So police may not be trained to kill, but it seems there is a general consensus within the ranks of the department to do just that.

If you only seek to wound someone by shooting, you do not have justification to shoot at all. An attempt to shoot to wound all too often can end up in death. It does no good if a police officer says, 'I was just trying to wound and ended up killing somebody,' because that officer now faces criminal prosecution, not to mention a civil lawsuit. And the law will say the officer better be justified in using deadly force.

Dead people can't sue, but

Dead people can't sue, but their estate can. Of course it is less likely that the family of a person with little or no estate would hire a lawyer to open an estate and have a probate court appoint an administrator, who would then hire that or some other lawyer to sue the police. If it could be proved that any police department actually advised its officers to make sure that the people they shoot are dead so as to avoid or reduce law suits, and not just to insure officer and public safety, that despicable policy would be actionable.

PEOPLE OPPOSING TYRANNY - Real Grass Roots!
Are you a POT or a PET - Person Embracing Tyranny?

I really need to be a bit

I really need to be a bit more careful about my wording. Please see above reply.

You're welcome

I agree with your assessment entirely. I personally despise the police, because I've known quite a few of them. For every 1 good one, there are 2 bad ones. That's personal experience. But people need to step outside their personal bias when looking at events like this and think objectively. If you are armed and threateningly advance on a person, regardless of who they are, they have a right to defend themselves.

"Timid men prefer the calm of despotism to the tempestuous sea of liberty."

Click Here To See The Candidates On The Record