RAW VIDEO: Swat team doesn't mess around

[Ares]

That's why they stalk you. They know.

 

[bearmick]

Well I disagree with you here. I'm not talking knee-jerk crap like you listed. "Oh that guy's a dick for not loving his kids he should be shot." That's Sensationalist nonsense. We're talking about a person who took innocent bystanders against their will and was holding them hostage. At that point the police did make an effort to talk to the guy yet he still hadn't released his hostages. I think the police were totally in the right to shoot the guy if they had a clear shot, which they did. You can't play the what if, woulda coulda bullshit when innocent lives are in the balance and you have a chance to end it.

Usually I'm pretty critical of police and support those who video them to make sure they're not abusng the law like so many do. But if that's my wife, mother or child I want the police to do what they have to do to protect the innocent. If the the perp happens to live through it, that's fine but is secondary to the lives of the victims.

Sent from my Galaxy Note 8 using Tapatalk

You accuse me of being sensationalist, then completely personalilze the issue by discussing how you would feel if it was a family member of yours.

We'll have to agree to disagree. I don't think unarmed people should be shot in that situation.

 

[R_Mac_1]

You accuse me of being sensationalist, then completely personalilze the issue by discussing how you would feel if it was a family member of yours.

We'll have to agree to disagree. I don't think unarmed people should be shot in that situation.

I dont think personalizing the situation is even remotely similar to making sensationalist analogies. If you empathize with those involved, including the police there, one may think about the situation differently. They may have no way of knowing whether or not the guy has a "deadly weapon" but they sure as hell know he's capable of doing harm to this innocent woman and if they have the oppurtunity to end the situation, I say do it.

You kind of give up your right to be given the benefit of the doubt when holding a hostage, IMO. But that's just me.

Sent from my Galaxy Note 8 using Tapatalk

 

[Shawon0Meter]

A couple quotes here tell us either he had a gun or he was trying to make it seem like he had a gun.


"Police say the suspect indicated he had a gun."


" The hostage caught between the gunman and police later spoke about her ordeal, though she didn't want her name to be released.

"It was terrifying. It was stressful and I don't wish it on my enemy," she said. "
http://www.myfoxphilly.com/story/24445755/hostage-situation-caught-on-camera-in-denver

 

[HeHateMe]

People should prolly pump the breaks here. While there are a fair share of dumb cops out there, the guys at the scene risk their lives every day, swat guys are usually extensively trained, and they deserve more benefit of the doubt in this situation than a criminal. Every use of deadly force is something these guys are held accountable for. I don't want people hating for me making this personal, but my uncle was swat in flint mi, and a very humble man, but he would have done the same thing because of his training. It is what they are supposed to do and even that gets scrutinized when they do it.

 

[Les Grossman]

Idk, I feel we shouldnt tolerate anything like hostages. Even if he didn't brandish a weapon, you never know what the hell he had in his jacket. 9/10 times, if you take someone hostage you have some sort of weapon.

Yup.

But dudes that leave their family don't, LOL at bearmick.