Protests over BART shooting turn violent

ReverendHellh0und · Jan 8, 2009

Khayembii Communique said:
It's kind of difficult to say that it was an accident when he unbuttoned his holster, removed the gun from his holster (which is quote obviously not a taser, and certainly not handcuffs), took the safety off his gun (by this time he probably would've noted that he was holding a gun and not handcuffs, as handcuffs don't have a safety), aim and fire.

Glocks do not have a traditional saftey. I have seen this sort of accidental missfire on the range.

The "Saftey" is on the trigger:

There is no "positive action" required other than hitting the bang switch with your booger hook to make bang....

Either it was intentional or the guy is a ****ing moron; either way, it should be tried as murder.

Why the hell are BART cops carrying guns anyways? It's BART, it's San Francisco, ffs!

Why murder?

Dr_Patrick · Jan 8, 2009

Reverend_Hellh0und said:
Glocks do not have a traditional saftey. I have seen this sort of accidental missfire on the range.

The "Saftey" is on the trigger:

There is no "positive action" required other than hitting the bang switch with your booger hook to make bang....

Holy ****, it's on the trigger?! That's a brilliant place to put it. :doh

ReverendHellh0und · Jan 8, 2009

dclxvinoise said:
Holy ****, it's on the trigger?! That's a brilliant place to put it. :doh

This is but one of the reasons I despise Glocks especially for police officers. "glock" is a big part of the equation why this man is dead and an officer's life is ruined.

Dr_Patrick · Jan 8, 2009

Reverend_Hellh0und said:
This is but one of the reasons I despise Glocks especially for police officers.

I don't blame you.

I had no idea they even made a gun with a safety on the trigger.

Shewter · Jan 8, 2009

One reason I dislike Glocks and similar firearms like the XD.

They've got another safety feature similar to field 1911's where the back of the grip has a pressure strip... But once again, if you are holding the gun it's fire-ready.

Convince police to use something more stable... But it won't work, Glocks are delivered in boxes at far less than cost.

Dr_Patrick · Jan 8, 2009

Reverend_Hellh0und said:
"glock" is a big part of the equation why this man is dead and an officer's life is ruined.

So you really think it was an accident? Why would he even need to draw his gun in the first place?

I'm willing to give the police the benefit of doubt in certain situations, but in this one and from the video I saw absolutely no reason for him to even draw his gun. The guy was down. The police certainly aren't infallible or incapable of doing wrong.

bhkad · Jan 8, 2009

Reverend_Hellh0und said:
Glocks do not have a traditional saftey. I have seen this sort of accidental missfire on the range.

The "Saftey" is on the trigger:

http://www.gunblast.com/images/Glock26/DSC03047.jpg

There is no "positive action" required other than hitting the bang switch with your booger hook to make bang....

[/QUOTE]

The safety on the trigger indicates the user won't have his finger in the trigger guard unless he intends to fire. But when you put thousands of rounds downrange a month in practice, drawing and firing become 'automatic' and part of muscle memory and you can fire before you realize what you've done.

ReverendHellh0und · Jan 8, 2009

dclxvinoise said:
So you really think it was an accident? Why would he even need to draw his gun in the first place?

I guarantee you it was an accident. Stupid hurts.... It makes no sense that this cop would purposefully do this.

Here is another wonderful "glock" example:

YouTube - DEA Shoots Himself

Now that you know how Glocks work you can see how this happened,.

Why would he draw his gun? I can't answer you that. I would not have if that were me, I lose my strong hand while grappling.

I think he made a tragedy of preventable errors....

ReverendHellh0und · Jan 8, 2009

bhkad said:
The safety on the trigger indicates the user won't have his finger in the trigger guard unless he intends to fire. But when you put thousands of rounds downrange a month in practice, drawing and firing become 'automatic' and part of muscle memory and you can fire before you realize what you've done.

This is one reason why prefer the 1911, Carried cocked and locked, and the thumb rides the saftey when firing, one must use a positive action to fire it.

Khayembii Communique · Jan 8, 2009

This is but one of the reasons I despise Glocks especially for police officers. "glock" is a big part of the equation why this man is dead and an officer's life is ruined.

How the hell does this even work? How can that be considered a "safety"?

azura28 · Jan 8, 2009

Hatuey said:
YouTube - Bart Police shooting in Oakland KTVU report

I really want somebody to tell me this cop was acting in self defense when there were 3 policemen on top of the unarmed 'suspect' already.

It's inexcusable! This is flat-out murder - it shows the the fat-ass slowly getting to his feet and shooting him in the back - and I don't care if he was stupid enough to think it was his tazer? Why would you shoot a subdued man on his stomach with a tazer from a standing position? No way - this moron better go down.

bhkad · Jan 8, 2009

dclxvinoise said:
Like I said, rioting almost always turns into complete chaos and anarchy. It comes with the territory.

But, it should be noted, there is a recipe for riots and they all happen the same way. The police are aware of this recipe. They may not be able to prevent the rioting but they know the anatomy of riots.

Dr_Patrick · Jan 8, 2009

Reverend_Hellh0und said:
I guarantee you it was an accident. Stupid hurts.... It makes no sense that this cop would purposefully do this.

Here is another wonderful "glock" example:

YouTube - DEA Shoots Himself

Now that you know how Glocks work you can see how this happened,.

Why would he draw his gun? I can't answer you that. I would not have if that were me, I lose my strong hand while grappling.

I think he made a tragedy of preventable errors....

Oh, come on! There's only so many excuses one can make for someone in this type of situation. It seems pretty absurd to me to assume that this was an accident. The guy could have a screw loose, who knows? Cops are people too and are capable of doing wrong. I could see how it happened by accident if there were just cause for him to have his gun drawn, but there was absolutely no reason for it. The guy was down. There are bad cops out there who abuse their authority.

ReverendHellh0und · Jan 8, 2009

azura28 said:
It's inexcusable! This is flat-out murder - it shows the the fat-ass slowly getting to his feet and shooting him in the back - and I don't care if he was stupid enough to think it was his tazer? Why would you shoot a subdued man on his stomach with a tazer from a standing position? No way - this moron better go down.

Where is the "malice aforethought"?

Cops are trained to use tasers for much less than this these days.

Shewter · Jan 8, 2009

Reverend_Hellh0und said:
This is one reason why prefer the 1911, Carried cocked and locked, and the thumb rides the saftey when firing, one must use a positive action to fire it.

I quite like FN's safety features including a decocker.

The other unfortunate thing about the glock is that after a while (and without proper maintenance) the trigger gets REALLY lose. So it's easy as hell to just squeeze one off.

That coupled with the horrible safety design makes for some pretty bad situations.

Police here USED to carry Barretta 92/94's. /nostalgia

bhkad · Jan 8, 2009

azura28 said:
It's inexcusable! This is flat-out murder - it shows the the fat-ass slowly getting to his feet and shooting him in the back - and I don't care if he was stupid enough to think it was his tazer? Why would you shoot a subdued man on his stomach with a tazer from a standing position? No way - this moron better go down.

I'm sure he'll "go down." But you are not well informed of the facts. I'll put your question to you.

Why would you shoot a subdued man?

Why in front of other officers and hundreds of BART train witnesses with cell phone cameras?

It makes no sense for him to have done it intentionally.

But he will pay. His life is ruined.

Dr_Patrick · Jan 8, 2009

bhkad said:
I'm sure he'll "go down." But you are not well informed of the facts. I'll put your question to you.

Why would you shoot a subdued man?

Why in front of other officers and hundreds of BART train witnesses with cell phone cameras?

It makes no sense for him to have done it intentionally.

But he will pay. His life is ruined.

I have an even better question. Why would he pull his gun on an unarmed man who was subdued?

Maybe the guy doesn't have all of his ducks in a row. I think that's far more likely than suggesting that it was an accident considering the circumstances.

ReverendHellh0und · Jan 8, 2009

dclxvinoise said:
Oh, come on! There's only so many excuses one can make for someone in this type of situation. It seems pretty absurd to me to assume that this was an accident. The guy could have a screw loose, who knows? Cops are people too and are capable of doing wrong. I could see how it happened by accident if there were just cause for him to have his gun drawn, but there was absolutely no reason for it. The guy was down. There are bad cops out there who abuse their authority.

Wait so you think it is much more likely that he was a "nuttball" than this was an accident? :shock:

What evidence do you have to support that?

Khayembii Communique · Jan 8, 2009

I have an even better question. Why would he pull his gun on an unarmed man who was subdued?

There's a ton of reasons a cop would pull a taser on someone they are trying to and/or have already subdued, none of which are really legitimate, but that doesn't really justify that he intentionally shot the guy.

And besides, who would shoot someone in front of a crowded subway on purpose? That's stupid. Cops that usually do this are smart enough not to do it in front of witnesses (that they can't trust, so other cops are excluded) or involving incriminating evidence. That is why we have only seen a handful of these cases exposed, and why they are so sensational.

Dr_Patrick · Jan 8, 2009

Khayembii Communique said:
There's a ton of reasons a cop would pull a taser on someone they are trying to and/or have already subdued, none of which are really legitimate, but that doesn't really justify that he intentionally shot the guy.

And besides, who would shoot someone in front of a crowded subway on purpose? That's stupid.

Oh come on. He knew it wasn't his taser. The guy was already subdued. There was no reason for a taser. He shot the guy and didn't look at all stunned by what he did, which he would if it were an accident. He holstered his weapon and went about his business.

And like I said, maybe the guy has mental issues or didn't think about the consequences at the time. If people thought about the full consequences of their actions all of the time there would be very little crime. Unfortunately, that's not the case.

ReverendHellh0und · Jan 8, 2009

dclxvinoise said:
I have an even better question. Why would he pull his gun on an unarmed man who was subdued?

Maybe the guy doesn't have all of his ducks in a row. I think that's far more likely than suggesting that it was an accident considering the circumstances.

Watch an episode of cops, Guns get pulled like that ALL THE TIME.....

Dr_Patrick · Jan 8, 2009

Reverend_Hellh0und said:
Watch an episode of cops, Guns get pulled like that ALL THE TIME.....

So what? It doesn't excuse it or make it necessary. There was absolutely no reason for it considering that the guy was subdued and unarmed.

Seriously, some of you guys actually defending this cop should consider applying to be on his legal team for the inevitable litigation. You guys keep coming up with reasons and excuses like nobody's business. :lol:

bhkad · Jan 8, 2009

Khayembii Communique said:
How the hell does this even work? How can that be considered a "safety"?

The weapon won't discharge accidentally UNLESS the finger pulls the trigger.

Even if you drop it, it won't 'go off.'

ReverendHellh0und · Jan 8, 2009

dclxvinoise said:
So what? It doesn't excuse it or make it necessary. There was absolutely no reason for it considering that the guy was subdued and unarmed.

I agree, does not mean that this is not how many are trained.

Like I said, I wouldn't as you lose your strong side hand and introduce a deadly weapon into the mix.....

As for Tasers, I think many police rely too heavily on them today. It is a great tool, but this should not replace other policing methods.

He made a huge mistake, his tools did not help him.

americanwoman · Jan 8, 2009

Reverend_Hellh0und said:
Watch an episode of cops, Guns get pulled like that ALL THE TIME.....

Yes they do. But cops are supposed to be trained to know when and how to use them. Out of all the episodes of cops and all the times they do pulls gun, not once has there ever been an accident.

I think most people are making alot of assumptions here, we will never know for sure if it was an actual accident or not, but that's the guys story and he is sticking to it. No matter what, he did the crime and he should do the time.

Protests over BART shooting turn violent

I don't respect you.

Androgyne

I don't respect you.

Androgyne

Androgyne

I don't respect you.

I don't respect you.

Well-known member

Androgyne

I don't respect you.

Androgyne

I don't respect you.

Androgyne

I don't respect you.

Androgyne

I don't respect you.

dangerously addictive