Random shooting in Salt Lake City

[Vegeta]

For the people asking so many questions; watch the video provided.

This idiot... is a total psychopath. I'm glad police shot him, because he'd just be causing more people harm. I would assume he was inspired by some ****ty video game, or something else ridiculous. Tragic. My hats off to the police officer who risked his life.

but, why is it, that whether someone has shot anyone or not, when it comes to a shootout, the criminal is almost always fatally shot? haven't police in america been taught the numerous (and often obvious) places to shoot someone if they want to disarm/aprihend someone, while keeping them alive for questioning?

I can tell you right now, that if I were a police officer, and there to witness this I wouldn't hesitate to shoot him several times.

Take THAT Jack Thompson.

Who gives a flying **** what his motive was; their theories are strong--just because he didn't own a console doesn't mean he never played games. And you guys should loosen up on defending violent games so much, people are dead, and your impulses make you defend the **** out of this stuff, because you fear Jack Thompson may get away with banning some of them. There's been a history of random-acts-of-violence-inspired-by-games; and has been admitted by the culprits before. Anyway, Jack Thompson is a peaceful individual, who's against violence [no matter what form it's in]--but forget games for a minute and think about who died because of a psychopath, who was probably influenced by something...

 

[Optimus Prime]

I'm guessing very few read my post where in a police statement, it was said that the assailant did not own a computer or video game system.

 

[sub]

I love how everyone jumps to the "HE MUST HAVE WATCHED VIOLENT MEDIA / PLAYED VIDEO GAMES". That **** doesn't cause someone to go out and shoot people, you need to be seriously messed up.

His family fled to the U.S. from Bosnia after Serb forces were committing genocide against people like him. But no, it was the video games guys.

 

[Almighty_Gir]

This idiot... is a total psychopath. I'm glad police shot him, because he'd just be causing more people harm. I would assume he was inspired by some ****ty video game, or something else ridiculous. Tragic. My hats off to the police officer who risked his life.



I can tell you right now, that if I were a police officer, and there to witness this I wouldn't hesitate to shoot him several times.

then you are no better than he is.

as i said, i'm not trying to advocate violence at all. i am just trying to give a new perspective on the situation.

hitokiri, i agree in this situation, the quickest way to take someone down would be to shoot him. however, what you need to remember is that he is a psycho with a gun, and he is against a squad of well trained individuals, who know how to use both their weapons, and the area around them to their advantage. you wouldnt believe how likely it would be for the guy to have gone into shock for a couple of seconds if a bullet hit the wall next to him, which would give enough time for officers to aim at non vital targets. failing that, a shot to the leg would have dropped him. PERIOD.

everyone wants to talk about "zomg guns take him out NAO!!!", but what they forget, is that shooting someone ANYWHERE will make them drop 90% of the time. a shot to the leg would literally knock their foot out from under them, despite what is shown in movies. a shot to the arm would probably have made him drop his gun.

there are plenty of "non violent" endings to the scenario. but as always, it comes down to narrow minded views versus, guess what, narrow minded views. (psycho guy intent on killing versus people who think the only way to stop him is with another death).

 

[sub]

He is better than he is. He's not out shooting random individuals for no reason. He's shooting someone to prevent the further loss of life.

Until you're in a situation where someone is shooting at you and it's life or death, you can't really say the cops shouldn't have aimed to kill. I'm sure you'd want to do the same, to prevent more loss of life by any means possible.

 

[Zeonix]

It's easy to say, "Pfft, they could have just aimed at his legs!" when you're a thousand miles away, but when you're up close, and see a guy with a shotgun and a .38, you'd probably want to end the scenario as quickly as possible.

The goal is to a) Save civilians and b) Neutralize the threat. Even if I had a helmet and a vest on, I'd still be cautious because I don't want to get shot. I wouldn't stick my neck out, take aim, pray he doesn't see me staring at him, and hope I hit. It's easier to shoot him 10 times in the chest than it is to hit his arm or leg from a distance, especially when he's shooting back at you or at innocent bystanders.

 

[Almighty_Gir]

i was trained as a Royal Marine thanks, i've been in situations like that, except it was knives and bottles, not guns.

 

[Zeonix]

So you're telling me you're going to try to stab some guy's legs and arms when he intends to kill you and everyone around him?

 

[Almighty_Gir]

actually i broke her arm, and her boyfriends jaw.

but thank you for asking.

like i said, there are plenty of non-lethal remedies to any situation, ESPECIALLY when you have the advantage of:
Numbers
Training
Firepower
Tactical positioning

they said in the video, that the off duty officer had already managed to pin down the guy before backup arrived. by my reckoning, that leaves 3 minutes AFTER they have arrived, and before he dies, to find a way to have him surrender.

most cops in armour, could spring 50 meters in about 10 seconds, now, how much ground could they cover, in order to catch him in a cross fire situation, in those 3 minutes?

within that space of time, they could have easily gained control of the situation, but the fact he is dead tells me they had **** all control at all.

 

[Zeonix]

Was their intent to kill everyone around them? I'm going to say no, based on the fact that you got into a brawl with them. You didn't have to worry about saving the lives of anyone other than yourself, so to compare a little brawl to a firefight is ridiculous.

Those were average joe cops. Not SWAT team members jumping out of helicopters with automatic weapons. Anyone with a deathwish, who's carrying around a .38 and a shotgun needs to be taken down. If they didn't take him out, he would have taken himself out. That much is clear. He just wanted to take as many people with him as possible before the inevitable occurred. So how do you take down that kind of person? Definately not by breaking his jaw or arms. They weren't wearing Robocop suits. They have families. They don't want to die, they don't want to get shot, they don't want to be so severely injured that they have to leave the force.

As I said, it's easy to say "Pfft, they could have just hit his arms and legs!" when you're a thousand miles away. You would have done the same in their position. Everyone would have, unless they have crazy aim, don't care whether they live or die or a combination of the two.

 

[Smith]

actually i broke her arm, and her boyfriends jaw.

I really doubt two people you met in a bar were intending to kill you and everyone around you ;o. I also doubt that you being trained in the military for who knows how long qualifies you to deal with these types of situations.

So you're telling me you're going to try to stab some guy's legs and arms when he intends to kill you and everyone around him?

"He's got a gun and he's shooting everyone!"
"Don't worry, I've got a knife!"

He is better than he is. He's not out shooting random individuals for no reason. He's shooting someone to prevent the further loss of life.

I agree, and I'm changing my opinion to getting rid of the guy asap.

 

[Almighty_Gir]

Those were average joe cops. Not SWAT team members jumping out of helicopters with automatic weapons. Anyone with a deathwish, who's carrying around a .38 and a shotgun needs to be taken down. If they didn't take him out, he would have taken himself out. That much is clear.

jumping to conclusions much? who says he had a deathwish? did you ask hi... wait he is dead.

As I said, it's easy to say "Pfft, they could have just hit his arms and legs!" when you're a thousand miles away. You would have done the same in their position. Everyone would have, unless they have crazy aim, don't care whether they live or die or a combination of the two.

and as i said, before you jump to conclusions again, think about what you are saying. the only difference in the situation, is that he was being indiscriminately violent, whereas i had two people who wanted to cause ME physical harm. and suuuuure, when someone is coming at you with a knife, and a bottle, they don't have blood in mind at all, do they?

fact is, if i can keep my cool with someone who is 2 foot from me, with a LETHAL WEAPON. then a cop who is 25 foot away from someone can do the same.

http://www.sltrib.com/news/ci_5223643

read 11 and 12, the shooter didn't even see the other cops. i guess when someone can't see you coming, the only way to drop em' is with a killshot eh?

 

[Zeonix]

jumping to conclusions much? who says he had a deathwish? did you ask hi... wait he is dead.



and as i said, before you jump to conclusions again, think about what you are saying. the only difference in the situation, is that he was being indiscriminately violent, whereas i had two people who wanted to cause ME physical harm. and suuuuure, when someone is coming at you with a knife, and a bottle, they don't have blood in mind at all, do they?

fact is, if i can keep my cool with someone who is 2 foot from me, with a LETHAL WEAPON. then a cop who is 25 foot away from someone can do the same.

Man has a backpack full of ammunition. Man carries shotgun and .38. Man goes on a killing spree, with no real goal other than killing everyone in sight. Man doesn't surrender when obviously outmanned and outgunned. Man continues firefight until killed.

Right. He was just waiting for the opportune moment to say "Hey guys. Yeah, I don't want to do this anymore. Take me away."

That's the only difference you can think of? I think you're forgetting that the guy had weapons. It isn't like he was running around with a broken bottle stabbing people, and was suddenly overwhelmed by police with thompsons. They had guns, he had guns. He was trying to kill everyone in sight. Their goal was to keep him from killing anyone else. Your goal was to incapacitate a guy and...a chick because you were in a really, really bad action movie.

If you can't see the difference between someone trying to kill everyone, and 2 people trying to kick the crap out of you, there's no point in even arguing. It's easy to keep your cool when you're only thinking about yourself, but when you need to prevent mass murder, the stakes are that much higher.

If Royal Marines are taking fire, they don't try to shoot their enemies arms and legs. They aim to kill to a) save themselves and b) to save their brothers in arms and c) save innocent bystanders.

@ Your last comment: Well, I guess that just means his shotgun would have started shooting flowers at civilians then, making him completely harmless.

Caution is key. Would you want to run towards him, have him hear you, turn around and blow you away? Or would you take 50 million pot shots at his arms and legs, hoping that YOU didn't shoot any bystanders?

 

[[S]]

Axman you're forgetting a gun is different from a bottle. You kept your cool because you knew you could take them and you were trained in hand combat when they weren't. This guy had a few guns and no matter what that makes it dangerous he was shooting they wanted to take him out before he shot one of their own people which is probably why they killed him. I haven't read but sometimes cops do shoot them in the leg and then go down but keep firing then what are they suppose to do?

 

[Almighty_Gir]

ok... so the guy had 2 guns, only one of which was an automatic, and both needed reloading, both of which cases, the ammo were in a backpack, so he would first need to go into that pack to get the ammo. unless he had an auto feed device, which a. they didnt mention, and b. would only exist if he was using a heavy arm full auto machine fed rifle.

also, as i said, he never saw the other cops, who were the ones who shot him.

as for zeonix. Marines are trained to use non lethal force in all situations. killing someone is your LAST line of defence. as taking someone down non lethally, would lead to: a. intelligence, b. the means to draw out others, and c. less loss of life.

of those three, only 2 would count in this sitation, but the logic is still there. when the man is clearly out manned, out gunned, and cant even see more than half of his opponents, there really is no reason why he shouldn't still be alive, facing trial, and giving a real motive, rather than people just jumping to assumptions.

 

[[S]]

According to your theory let's say that they did try and take him down without killing him but it took them a minute longer and in that minute one of his bullets killed another person you think the Police wouldn't have people up their ass asking why they took another whole minute for him to run out of ammo before apprehending him?

 

[Almighty_Gir]

if he is using an automatic shotgun he will probably have 8-12 rounds, his pistol would have 12-15, depending on manufacture.

the shotgun would take some time before he needs to reload, but only a shot within 10 feet (give or take) would be definately lethal. the pistol ammo would run out literally in seconds. the shotgun has to be manually cocked each time he takes a shot, which would also give response time, while the pistol could be continually fired.

then, as i said, HE DIDN'T SEE A SQUAD OF POLICE BEHIND HIM!!!

 

[[S]]

It doesn't matter if they did or didn't see him they would put their or other peoples lives in danger still what if he had another pistol hidden in his coat or something and when he stopped firing and police got close he popped them in the face. You're not understanding as a marine you're trained to think only about yourself in this situation there were alot more people at risk then just you and he had a gun it could deflect of of something and kill someone they needed to react fast just because there behind him doesn't mean anything unless they were 2 feet of him they were still in danger which is why he is now dead and no on else.

 

[Optimus Prime]

For all we know they could have thought he had a bomb in his backpack, and a non-lethal shot would have give him the opportunity to detonate.

 

[Hitokiri]

as a marine you're trained to think only about yourself

Heh, S, I think Ax and any other marine would object to that statement >_>

Optimus got what I was about to say. Police had no way of knowing exactly what this guy was armed with. They likely knew he had a shotgun. They knew that they were dealing with a spree killer, that a number of people were dead/wounded, but for all they knew the backpack could've been filled with pipe bombs or something. Hell, there could've been another gunman inside the mall, these aren't always solo actions. Other than the need remove the man as a threat, there were also people inside bleeding to death. Those are two decent reasons to get in as fast as possible.

If there's any recurring fact about spree killers it's that they rarely give up and go in quietly. It's not something you do and try to get away with, or suddenly realize that you're "in over your head" or something. I don't think anyone's being presumptious in saying he planned on dying. Anyone with half a brain knows you aren't going to casually shoot up a mall and slip away like a bat in the night or something, and apparently, he wasn't mentally handicapped.

He was deemed as an immediate threat, he had already killed, he was still well-armed. I don't know what kind of communication was going on between the guys inside and the guys that, apparently, flanked him (it doesn't seem to explicitly say he didn't see them?) but if the kid was still firing his gun, it's not an assumption you want to make. You neutralize him. I think the course of action was pretty understandable.