7 ms·

Not to defend what the police have been doing overall during this protest, but in this specific incident you can see the protestors beating a police officer on

by dx87 7y ago

Not to defend what the police have been doing overall during this protest, but in this specific incident you can see the protestors beating a police officer on the ground, and the protestor who got shot was swinging a metal pipe at the police officer that shot him.

sigzero 7y ago
Context is everything.
nodea2345 7y ago
Full context is police officers often beat protests during arresting. Sometimes they just fight each other. Anyway, I think the officer have better choices than attempting to kill the kid(shot in chest is obvious willing to kill).
- LandR 7y ago
  I think anytime you shoot a gun at one someone you are shooting to kill, shoot to maim feels like it would be practically impossible outside of movies. But I might be wrong, I've never shot a gun.
  - geggam 7y ago
    This concept you can shoot to maim is silly. Hitting a man is hard if you practice shooting. In a chaotic situation with adrenaline its even harder. Shooting to hit is all you can do.
    - jacobush 7y ago
      The police in Sweden is trained to shoot to maim, but only in somewhat controlled situations, such as someone wielding a knife approaching officers from a distance. First warn verbally, then fire a warning shot, then fire at the legs. When there is no margin left, fire to stop. (Which means in practice, often death.) https://polisen.se/om-polisen/polisens-arbete/polisens-befogenheter/hur-ofta-anvander-polisen-skjutvapen/ https://polisen.se/om-polisen/polisens-arbete/polisens-befog...
      - geggam 7y ago
        The only way this sort of training would work IMO would be with sociopaths or psychopaths who dont have the huge adrenaline jump from emotional attachment to other humans.
        jacobush 7y ago
        I don't understand this notion. The training is exactly to make people just respond with how they were trained, automatically. This is also how the military works. Since you just do it, you aren't as likely to ponder what will happen to the human in the cross hairs. These thoughts come afterwards.
        geggam 7y ago
        Never had a person in your cross hairs i take it ?
      - LandR 7y ago
        THis might be a stupid question, but where are Warning shots fired? Are they fired close to the target, but far enough away to miss? Can this only be done if there is no one behind the target, are they shot into the sky? If so is their no danger of bullets hitting people falling back down? Or do they lose enough speed on the downward arc to be safe? Or is the chance of a warning shot hitting someone innocent so staggering low that it isn't worth worrying about?
        dx87 7y ago
        I live in the USA, and the only place I've ever seen warning shots being recommended was by the military in Iraq when civilian vehicles would drive too close to a convoy. If a gun is used, it's because you feel that your life or someone elses is in imminent danger. Warning shots can ricochet and kill someone, and bullets can still come down with lethal force if a warning shot is fired into the air. Shooting to maim is possible if the situation allows for it, but warning shots can end up killing someone besides the intended target.
  - NoInputSignal 7y ago
    I'm not taking a side on this specific situation, but shooting at a limb in a high stress, crowded situation would not be a wise shot. You would likely miss--and hitting someone that was not your target would not be good. Another comment mentions training for center of mass, and I would assume that's what they do. Let's say 80% of your shots constitute a "tight grouping", 20% being somewhere other than where you were aiming. Aiming for the middle of the body would likely mean you have a very high success rate of hitting your target individual. Aiming for the shoulder/leg/arm (each one harder than the last to hit) you are looking at a very low success rate of hitting your target. If you choose to use your weapon, I would hope you are confident you will hit your target and only your target.
  - samastur 7y ago
    And yet somehow Slovenian police manages to do just that (shoot to maim, usually leg), on very rare occasions when it has to use a gun and warning shot didn't suffice.
mlevental 7y ago
https://www.reddit.com/r/HongKong/comments/dbqsfl/video_shows_moment_shots_fired_at_tsuen_wan/ https://www.reddit.com/r/HongKong/comments/dbqsfl/video_show... shows cop ran into the crowd and had a clear exit path (not necessary to shoot to remain safe)
- dx87 7y ago
  It looks to me like he ran in to try and protect the police officer that was surrounded on the ground, and didn't fire until he was attacked. I don't know the context around this specific event, but it doesn't look like the "police officer runs in and shoots child protestor" narrative that is being pushed on reddit.
vnchr 7y ago
The police are allowed to shoot someone in the leg. Lethal force is not the only option with a firearm.
- tyingq 7y ago
  Curious if there's any place where this is common. I assumed everyone trains center mass. Also, there's a femoral artery in your leg... you'll be just as dead if that gets hit.
- kube-system 7y ago
  Any use of a firearm is potentially lethal and should be treated as such. The precision necessary for the scenario you are proposing is not physiologically possible during an active conflict.
- ptero 7y ago
  Different police units are trained for different rules. Somewhere it is a verbal warning, warning shot, shot in the leg, shot to kill. Sometimes it is just a verbal warning and a shot to kill. Not defending the police in this specific case (I do not know the details), but blaming an officer for following the sequence he has been trained for is misplacing the blame. My 2c.
  - radmarshallb 7y ago
    I highly doubt any officers anywhere are trained to fire a warning shot, much less a precise disabling shot in the leg. When you fire your weapon, it is with the intent to kill.
- MichaelApproved 7y ago
  Citation needed. Which police force trains their officers to shoot people in the leg? My understanding is that, if you need to shoot someone, there’s an immediate threat. You shoot for the largest target, so you won’t miss and so you do the most damage. If you aim for the leg, you’re likely to miss. Even if you hit the leg, there’s a femoral artery in there. If you hit that person will bleed out in just a few minutes.
woutr_be 7y ago
I've been fairly critical of protestors before, but in this instance, you can see the police going in for a fight, already heavily outnumbered. I'm not sure what they expected to happen, but the officer drew his gun almost instantly and shot a high school kid at point blank range. There's been other instances today where police was just looking to fight protestors, and as soon as they realized protestors weren't having any of it, they drew their guns and shot in the air. There's a difference between an officers' life being in danger, and the officer stupidly putting his life in danger.
- dmix 7y ago
  > There's been other instances today where police was just looking to fight protestors And protestors obviously looking to fight police. They swarmed the other officers partner who was being beaten on the ground and he was next. I find it shocking so many people were expecting him to just take it the beating or 'run away' and leave his partner there. There's a very good argument for having police on the streets when there's protestors running around throwing petrol bombs and swinging metal pipes. This is basic civil society 101 stuff. I'm not convinced the solution to China's totalitarianism is random street violence and property destruction by teenagers.
  - heavyset_go 7y ago
    > I find it shocking so many people were expecting him to just take it the beating or 'run away' and leave his partner there. When you're a public servant, this should be expected of you. Especially when the crime you're trying to brutalize members of the public for is "exercising freedom of expression"
    - muzika 7y ago
      This is a case of self defense
  - woutr_be 7y ago
    > And protestors obviously looking to fight police. They swarmed the other officers partner who was being beaten on the ground and he was next. While true, protestors can't just resort to drawing their guns and firing warning shots. Police have a civil duty to uphold the law and be professional, not to go out fighting protestors and then flash their guns to scare them away when they're losing.

by dx87 7y ago

sigzero 7y ago

Context is everything.

nodea2345 7y ago

Full context is police officers often beat protests during arresting. Sometimes they just fight each other. Anyway, I think the officer have better choices than attempting to kill the kid(shot in chest is obvious willing to kill).

LandR 7y ago
I think anytime you shoot a gun at one someone you are shooting to kill, shoot to maim feels like it would be practically impossible outside of movies. But I might be wrong, I've never shot a gun.
- geggam 7y ago
  This concept you can shoot to maim is silly. Hitting a man is hard if you practice shooting. In a chaotic situation with adrenaline its even harder. Shooting to hit is all you can do.
  - jacobush 7y ago
    The police in Sweden is trained to shoot to maim, but only in somewhat controlled situations, such as someone wielding a knife approaching officers from a distance. First warn verbally, then fire a warning shot, then fire at the legs. When there is no margin left, fire to stop. (Which means in practice, often death.) https://polisen.se/om-polisen/polisens-arbete/polisens-befogenheter/hur-ofta-anvander-polisen-skjutvapen/ https://polisen.se/om-polisen/polisens-arbete/polisens-befog...
    - geggam 7y ago
      The only way this sort of training would work IMO would be with sociopaths or psychopaths who dont have the huge adrenaline jump from emotional attachment to other humans.
      - jacobush 7y ago
        I don't understand this notion. The training is exactly to make people just respond with how they were trained, automatically. This is also how the military works. Since you just do it, you aren't as likely to ponder what will happen to the human in the cross hairs. These thoughts come afterwards.
        geggam 7y ago
        Never had a person in your cross hairs i take it ?
    - LandR 7y ago
      THis might be a stupid question, but where are Warning shots fired? Are they fired close to the target, but far enough away to miss? Can this only be done if there is no one behind the target, are they shot into the sky? If so is their no danger of bullets hitting people falling back down? Or do they lose enough speed on the downward arc to be safe? Or is the chance of a warning shot hitting someone innocent so staggering low that it isn't worth worrying about?
      - dx87 7y ago
        I live in the USA, and the only place I've ever seen warning shots being recommended was by the military in Iraq when civilian vehicles would drive too close to a convoy. If a gun is used, it's because you feel that your life or someone elses is in imminent danger. Warning shots can ricochet and kill someone, and bullets can still come down with lethal force if a warning shot is fired into the air. Shooting to maim is possible if the situation allows for it, but warning shots can end up killing someone besides the intended target.
- NoInputSignal 7y ago
  I'm not taking a side on this specific situation, but shooting at a limb in a high stress, crowded situation would not be a wise shot. You would likely miss--and hitting someone that was not your target would not be good. Another comment mentions training for center of mass, and I would assume that's what they do. Let's say 80% of your shots constitute a "tight grouping", 20% being somewhere other than where you were aiming. Aiming for the middle of the body would likely mean you have a very high success rate of hitting your target individual. Aiming for the shoulder/leg/arm (each one harder than the last to hit) you are looking at a very low success rate of hitting your target. If you choose to use your weapon, I would hope you are confident you will hit your target and only your target.
- samastur 7y ago
  And yet somehow Slovenian police manages to do just that (shoot to maim, usually leg), on very rare occasions when it has to use a gun and warning shot didn't suffice.

mlevental 7y ago

https://www.reddit.com/r/HongKong/comments/dbqsfl/video_shows_moment_shots_fired_at_tsuen_wan/ https://www.reddit.com/r/HongKong/comments/dbqsfl/video_show... shows cop ran into the crowd and had a clear exit path (not necessary to shoot to remain safe)

dx87 7y ago
It looks to me like he ran in to try and protect the police officer that was surrounded on the ground, and didn't fire until he was attacked. I don't know the context around this specific event, but it doesn't look like the "police officer runs in and shoots child protestor" narrative that is being pushed on reddit.

vnchr 7y ago

The police are allowed to shoot someone in the leg. Lethal force is not the only option with a firearm.

tyingq 7y ago
Curious if there's any place where this is common. I assumed everyone trains center mass. Also, there's a femoral artery in your leg... you'll be just as dead if that gets hit.
kube-system 7y ago
Any use of a firearm is potentially lethal and should be treated as such. The precision necessary for the scenario you are proposing is not physiologically possible during an active conflict.
ptero 7y ago
Different police units are trained for different rules. Somewhere it is a verbal warning, warning shot, shot in the leg, shot to kill. Sometimes it is just a verbal warning and a shot to kill. Not defending the police in this specific case (I do not know the details), but blaming an officer for following the sequence he has been trained for is misplacing the blame. My 2c.
- radmarshallb 7y ago
  I highly doubt any officers anywhere are trained to fire a warning shot, much less a precise disabling shot in the leg. When you fire your weapon, it is with the intent to kill.
MichaelApproved 7y ago
Citation needed. Which police force trains their officers to shoot people in the leg? My understanding is that, if you need to shoot someone, there’s an immediate threat. You shoot for the largest target, so you won’t miss and so you do the most damage. If you aim for the leg, you’re likely to miss. Even if you hit the leg, there’s a femoral artery in there. If you hit that person will bleed out in just a few minutes.

woutr_be 7y ago

I've been fairly critical of protestors before, but in this instance, you can see the police going in for a fight, already heavily outnumbered. I'm not sure what they expected to happen, but the officer drew his gun almost instantly and shot a high school kid at point blank range. There's been other instances today where police was just looking to fight protestors, and as soon as they realized protestors weren't having any of it, they drew their guns and shot in the air. There's a difference between an officers' life being in danger, and the officer stupidly putting his life in danger.

dmix 7y ago
> There's been other instances today where police was just looking to fight protestors And protestors obviously looking to fight police. They swarmed the other officers partner who was being beaten on the ground and he was next. I find it shocking so many people were expecting him to just take it the beating or 'run away' and leave his partner there. There's a very good argument for having police on the streets when there's protestors running around throwing petrol bombs and swinging metal pipes. This is basic civil society 101 stuff. I'm not convinced the solution to China's totalitarianism is random street violence and property destruction by teenagers.
- heavyset_go 7y ago
  > I find it shocking so many people were expecting him to just take it the beating or 'run away' and leave his partner there. When you're a public servant, this should be expected of you. Especially when the crime you're trying to brutalize members of the public for is "exercising freedom of expression"
  - muzika 7y ago
    This is a case of self defense
- woutr_be 7y ago
  > And protestors obviously looking to fight police. They swarmed the other officers partner who was being beaten on the ground and he was next. While true, protestors can't just resort to drawing their guns and firing warning shots. Police have a civil duty to uphold the law and be professional, not to go out fighting protestors and then flash their guns to scare them away when they're losing.