Crazy naked dude chews a man's face off

[Raven's Nest]

If someone is in the process of murdering me I just want him stopped the fastest way possible. Safety for him is not my concern. I don't think the police officer should be trying anything that might not work when someone is in the process of being killed.

Perhaps... But it shouldn't be for me or you or some police officer to decide who lives and who dies.

I'd have preferred a non-lethal takedown if possible, but I wasn't there and I wasn't having my face bitten off. All I can do is question how quickly the police are to use lethal force against an unarmed man.

 

[Raven's Nest]

While I didn't really care to listen to the news video(watched it to see if actual footage came up and it didn't) the article I read mentioned that he told the guy to back away from the other guy and when he didn't stop eating him he shot him. Considering he's biting off the other guy's face I think shooting him at that point is justified, the other guy's life is in danger. Though not sure which would be more accurate the article or the video.

My problem is that the police shot an unarmed man. If this were to happen in a place where regular police officers don't carry guns, the police officer would have found another method of taking him down without killing him. But as far as I know this police officer didn't even try.

There is potential for crazy zombie style attacks anywhere. American police are far too trigger happy for my liking. As I said, I'm glad I don't live there.

"I realize that having your face eaten is painful, but do you mind hanging out for a sec while I think of a way to capture the drugged up psycho eating your face? Thanks."

We're glad you don't live here, too.

The use of a taser or baton doesn't require any more thinking than pulling out your firearm and using it, any trained police officer can tell you that.

 

[Fiz_The_Toaster]

And I just had leftover spaghetti for lunch, gross.

I knew I shouldn't have clicked the thread, but the title was so.... provocative.

Remember kids, don't do drugs, or you will be eating someone's face off!

 

[Yopaz]

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...

While I would normally agree with you that they shouldn't have shot him in this case I think it was for the best. The man is assumed to be homeless and he was clearly mentally unstable. He would most likely have tried to bite if they got close and who knows what kind of diseases that could cause. I'm thinking along the lines of hepatitis not the T-virus.

 

[-Samurai-]

While I didn't really care to listen to the news video(watched it to see if actual footage came up and it didn't) the article I read mentioned that he told the guy to back away from the other guy and when he didn't stop eating him he shot him. Considering he's biting off the other guy's face I think shooting him at that point is justified, the other guy's life is in danger. Though not sure which would be more accurate the article or the video.

My problem is that the police shot an unarmed man. If this were to happen in a place where regular police officers don't carry guns, the police officer would have found another method of taking him down without killing him. But as far as I know this police officer didn't even try.

There is potential for crazy zombie style attacks anywhere. American police are far too trigger happy for my liking. As I said, I'm glad I don't live there.

"I realize that having your face eaten is painful, but do you mind hanging out for a sec while I think of a way to capture the drugged up psycho eating your face? Thanks."

We're glad you don't live here, too.

The use of a taser or baton doesn't require any more thinking than pulling out your firearm and using it, any trained police officer can tell you that.

Then you shouldn't have a problem remembering it when you become the world finest police officer, and you happen across a psycho eating another persons face.

There isn't always time to consider an alternative. We don't live in a perfect world.

 

[Dectomax]

All I can do is question how quickly the police are to use lethal force against an unarmed man.

Lethal force against the Unarmed-crazed-man who is currently eating someones face, ignored the officers first warning ( All the while continuing to help himself to some Nose-pie ), who completely shrugged off the first shot like the Black Knight from Monty Python? I think in that situation, any sane human being would shoot because: A. The man has just killed and EATEN someone, thus being an IMMEDIATE danger to EVERYONE and B. He's EATING a HUMAN FACE.

 

[Raven's Nest]

Then you shouldn't have a problem remembering it when you become the world finest police officer, and you happen across a psycho eating another persons face.

There isn't always time to consider an alternative. We don't live in a perfect world.

No we don't, but we try to live in a just one. I apologise If my notion that shooting dead an unarmed man doesn't agree with your definition of it.

Lethal force against the Unarmed-crazed-man who is currently eating someones face, ignored the officers first warning ( All the while continuing to help himself to some Nose-pie ), who completely shrugged off the first shot like the Black Knight from Monty Python? I think in that situation, any sane human being would shoot because: A. The man has just killed and EATEN someone, thus being an IMMEDIATE danger to EVERYONE and B. He's EATING a HUMAN FACE.

Easy caps, I can read.

And the man didn't kill anybody. It was a horrific attack sure, but not something somebody would be given the death penalty for. I'm not excusing the crime but the guy didn't deserve death. Why is that such an impossible idea for some people?

 

[Dectomax]

Then you shouldn't have a problem remembering it when you become the world finest police officer, and you happen across a psycho eating another persons face.

There isn't always time to consider an alternative. We don't live in a perfect world.

No we don't, but we try to live in a just one. I apologise If my notion that shooting dead an unarmed man doesn't agree with your definition of it.

Lethal force against the Unarmed-crazed-man who is currently eating someones face, ignored the officers first warning ( All the while continuing to help himself to some Nose-pie ), who completely shrugged off the first shot like the Black Knight from Monty Python? I think in that situation, any sane human being would shoot because: A. The man has just killed and EATEN someone, thus being an IMMEDIATE danger to EVERYONE and B. He's EATING a HUMAN FACE.

Easy caps, I can read.

And the man didn't kill anybody. It was a horrific attack sure, but not something somebody would be given the death penalty for. I'm not excusing the crime but the guy didn't deserve death. Why is that such an impossible idea for some people?

Oh, he didn't kill anyone? Well, that's ok then! Dear god, what's all this moaning about?! The man didn't kill anyone...just a little nibble on someones face, no harm done! Y'know, it's only a potentially life changing action...but hey, he didn't kill anyone! Don't worry people it's all fine!

On a less sarcastic note - The man was naked, eating someone, ignored warnings and shrugged off a bullet. The Police officer was obviously slightly panicked and worried. He shot and put the man down. Potentially saving a life and stopping anyone else, let alone himself, from being injured. Yes, the crazed-cannibalistic man was shot and killed, but hey - attacking and eating someones face in public has some pretty damn serious side effects. Like death via hail of bullets from sane police officer.

 

[viranimus]

Hrm, better sure up the stockpiles now while theres still stock on shelves. Im mostly prepared, but you can never hoard enough

 

[Chrono212]

No way, dude. No way!

I thought it was all silly Internet hysteria, but I read about stuff like this happening in a book, man!
A book! They don't put just anything' in a book!

I ain't saying' nothin', but those baked beans are mine! Mine, gosh darn it!

Head to the East Coast as fast as you can! Get yo bike! Got yo machete! Ain't nobody safe, bro! Nobody!

/parody

 

[Dectomax]

the man who was getting his face even

I'm sorry, but that typo made me laugh. I'm a terrible person.

"<Nom, nom, nom> Dat sides lookin' pretty even now, gimme a sec while I munch on the other side...<Nom, nom, nom>"

 

[kickyourass]

My money's on meth, that shit is scary as hell.

I really feel bad for Florida, I know there are crazy people everywhere but Florida seems to have an unnaturally high concentration of the bastards. Is it the heat or something?

 

[Raven's Nest]

No, the man didn't kill anybody, because, thankfully, an officer of the law killed him before he could. The officer used the correct amount of force to stop the crime in progress. I don't know why you value the life of the man eating someone's face over the life of the man who was getting his face even, but I think you need to re-evaluate your priorities. Maybe lose your 'fuck da police' attitude in favor of reason.

Officers of the law in my country clearly don't need to kill people to stop crimes or they would carry guns. I like it that way. Get over it.

 

[elvor0]

Uh, no. I'm pretty sure bullets in your legs will persuade you to stop running/moving.

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.

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.

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.

Hang a bout, I assume you're right that unless they're being shot at they are trained not shoot to kill, but surely aiming centre mass is more likely to kill you? That's where the heart and lungs are, take a bullet there and you're defently dead, I know there's arteries and stuff else where, but a shot somewhere than head or chest is less likely to kill you, no?

Then you shouldn't have a problem remembering it when you become the world finest police officer, and you happen across a psycho eating another persons face.

There isn't always time to consider an alternative. We don't live in a perfect world.

No we don't, but we try to live in a just one. I apologise If my notion that shooting dead an unarmed man doesn't agree with your definition of it.

Lethal force against the Unarmed-crazed-man who is currently eating someones face, ignored the officers first warning ( All the while continuing to help himself to some Nose-pie ), who completely shrugged off the first shot like the Black Knight from Monty Python? I think in that situation, any sane human being would shoot because: A. The man has just killed and EATEN someone, thus being an IMMEDIATE danger to EVERYONE and B. He's EATING a HUMAN FACE.

Easy caps, I can read.

And the man didn't kill anybody. It was a horrific attack sure, but not something somebody would be given the death penalty for. I'm not excusing the crime but the guy didn't deserve death. Why is that such an impossible idea for some people?

Well no, he didn't kill anyone, mainly because he was killed himself before he managed to do so, what if he had killed the man before he had been shot? The crazy, bullet shrugging naked man was eating someones face, I'm pretty sure that's intent to kill right there. Granted the copper may have been able to pistol whip him into submission, but in that scenario I would imagine he panicked, having just seen what he did, shot the crazy man coming at him, who then proceded to keep coming, leading him to panic further and unload four more bullets. I don't necessarily condone his actions, there were other possible outcomes, but I'm not going to berate him for it either; he saved a life and he has to live with what happened.

 

[Starik20X6]

PREVIOUSLY ON AMC'S 'THE WALKING DEAD'... Oh wait it's real life and happening right now and someone better keep an eye on the bitten guy.

I FUCKING LOVE YOU. NUT UP BUDDY, I'M COMING OVER TO AMERICA AND YOUR THE NEWEST EDITION THE SEAGOON AND ASSOC. ZOMBIE SLAYERS!

Awww yeah! Thing is though, I'm Australian, so I guess I'll meet you over there!

 

[Raven's Nest]

Well no, he didn't kill anyone, mainly because he was killed himself before he managed to do so, what if he had killed the man before he had been shot? The crazy, bullet shrugging naked man was eating someones face, I'm pretty sure that's intent to kill right there. Granted the copper may have been able to pistol whip him into submission, but in that scenario I would imagine he panicked, having just seen what he did, shot the crazy man coming at him, who then proceded to keep coming, leading him to panic further and unload four more bullets. I don't necessarily condone his actions, there were other possible outcomes, but I'm not going to berate him for it either; he saved a life and he has to live with what happened.

No doubt the naked zombie man would have gone on to kill but consider something...

A police officer arrives at the scene, broad daylight, people screaming, a naked man is eating another man's face. The two are obviously in close proximity.

The police officer is shocked and draws his weapon and commands the guy to back away. The command is ignored so the officer shoots.

He shoots at the attacker who is inches from the victim. The zombie man shrugs off the wound, the police officer fires again, a further 3 times in quick succession at a target which is a mere foot away from the victim.

Do you really think that opening fire in a panic when the chances of hitting an innocent are sky high was a good tactical decision?

I don't, I call that a bad decision. A desperate decision that was extremely lucky not to have ended with the victim also being shot and killed. Any police officer worth his salt knows that when he draws his weapon he should be prepared to shoot to kill. At the forefront of his mind should be the safety of the public. I just don't find it a reasonable risk when non-lethal methods were available to him.

I've got nothing against the police, they do fine work. But If I were to accept armed police officers patrolling my streets, I'd like to know damned well they won't fire their weapons when I am standing one foot away from the target, how about you?

 

[tendaji]

Wouldn't using a taser cause the guy to bite down even harder? We have no idea how they were positioned or where he was eating the guy's face from, but sending electricity through his body, causing his jaws to clamp down even tighter probably would have killed the victim, depending on where the guy was eating on him, and could have had the chance to fire the aggressor's body, seeing how he was probably overstimulated and overprocessing everything from the drugs he was most likely taking.