I would have shot the crazy, naked, homicidal, homeless, aggressive attacker.Pinkamena said:Why did the police have to shoot the crazy guy? Sure, he tried to attack the police, but surely there are other ways to stop him than to kill him...
I would have shot the crazy, naked, homicidal, homeless, aggressive attacker.Pinkamena said:Why did the police have to shoot the crazy guy? Sure, he tried to attack the police, but surely there are other ways to stop him than to kill him...
Do not spoil everyone's fun, he was a zombie, end of story!rolfwesselius said:It was probably cocaine psychosis.
No its probably cocaine psychosis it raises body temperature which would explain the no clothes part.lRookiel said:Do not spoil everyone's fun, he was a zombie, end of story!rolfwesselius said:It was probably cocaine psychosis.
xD
OT:
ZOMBIES, AAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!
I agree, they should have tazed the guy instead. The dude was clearly mentally unsound, that is not a reason to execute someone.Pinkamena said:Who are you to decide whether he should die or not?Mysterious Druid said:...You're joking right? If a naked man was chewing on someone's face and didn't seem the least bit fazed by the first shot, I'd put him down too.
So the stereotypical European do not want policemen shooting crazy people? Well I'm ok with that. And I must say, I am not against policemen wearing and using their guns, I'm just saying that he could have stopped him in a different way, like shooting him in the legs. But given the circumstance, I guess he freaked out. I would've.FelixG said:Bahaha I could tell it was someone from Europe before I even looked at the profile.
How stereotypical.
God I hope if someone is chewing another persons face off you never are the one to come across it.
He got bit in the shower ofcourserolfwesselius said:No its probably cocaine psychosis it raises body temperature which would explain the no clothes part.lRookiel said:Do not spoil everyone's fun, he was a zombie, end of story!rolfwesselius said:It was probably cocaine psychosis.
xD
OT:
ZOMBIES, AAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!
Because Why would a zombie take of his clothes?
Knew someone would bring this up, its extremely dangerous to shoot someone in the leg, not to mention somewhat more difficult. Sounds like he did the right thing.Pinkamena said:Who are you to decide whether he should die or not?Mysterious Druid said:...You're joking right? If a naked man was chewing on someone's face and didn't seem the least bit fazed by the first shot, I'd put him down too.
So the stereotypical European do not want policemen shooting crazy people? Well I'm ok with that. And I must say, I am not against policemen wearing and using their guns, I'm just saying that he could have stopped him in a different way, like shooting him in the legs. But given the circumstance, I guess he freaked out. I would've.FelixG said:Bahaha I could tell it was someone from Europe before I even looked at the profile.
How stereotypical.
God I hope if someone is chewing another persons face off you never are the one to come across it.
Pinkamena said:Why did the police have to shoot the crazy guy? Sure, he tried to attack the police, but surely there are other ways to stop him than to kill him...
We didn't listen!GethBall said:![]()
It was only a matter of time until the apocalypse. We.....we didn't listen
McLean, a 22-year-old Canadian man, was stabbed, beheaded and cannibalized while riding a Greyhound Canada
[...]
"I got sick after I saw the head thing. Some people were puking, some people were crying, some people were shocked. [The attacker] just looked at us and dropped the head on the ground, totally calm." A police officer who was at the scene said the attacker also cut off parts of the victim's body and ate them
No. Just no. My pop is a police officer and they are trained to discharge their weapon in order to "stop the threat." Police never shoot to kill. They are told to aim for center mass, as that is the largest portion of the body and the area least likely to result in a miss or in the bullet traveling through the target and passing out the other side. They may only fire their weapon if their life of the life of a member of the public is in "grave and immediate danger," where there is no possible alternative--that means if the officer can flee and no one will be harmed, they must; if they can safely talk the aggressor down, they must.Lord Mountbatten Reborn said:The human body is not Hollywood-resilient. Getting shot in the leg is still likely to kill you, for instance of an artery is hit. You shoot to kill or you don't shoot at all. That's how it works.Pinkamena said:Uh, no. I'm pretty sure bullets in your legs will persuade you to stop running/moving.
It may not be the goal but it is certainly a likely end, especially if aiming for centre mass. Obviously you know more so I won't argue that, but it's evident that if it's not "shoot to kill" then it's certainly not "shoot to wound" either.Grey Day for Elcia said:I'm not talking about this case or suggesting they shouldn't ave fired on the suspect, but your comment that "shoot to kill or don't shoot at all" is incorrect. You only ever fire your weapon to stop the threat. The suspect dying is never, ever the goal.
That's... Appetising.Grey Day for Elcia said:OT: Pfft. All he did was bite and chew his face?
McLean, a 22-year-old Canadian man, was stabbed, beheaded and cannibalized while riding a Greyhound Canada
[...]
"I got sick after I saw the head thing. Some people were puking, some people were crying, some people were shocked. [The attacker] just looked at us and dropped the head on the ground, totally calm." A police officer who was at the scene said the attacker also cut off parts of the victim's body and ate them