i fail to see the problem...
Posted on 03/29/2017 4:53:31 PM PDT by MtnClimber
A dramatic incident unfolded during a hostage standoff in Baltimore when a SWAT officer was told by his supervisor to walk into a room and execute a hostage taker.
The sergeant’s instructions are unequivocal. “I want you to walk in there and kill this guy,” he tells the shooter, Zachary Wein, who is a 14-year veteran of the Baltimore Police Department, and an eight-year veteran of the SWAT team.
“He’s high on drugs. He can kill the girl at any second,” the sergeant, who police officials declined to identify by name, continues. “I don’t see any need for less lethal.”
A bald lieutenant asks if there aren’t some other negotiating tactics available.
There are not.
The exchange is captured on body-worn cameras just seconds before Wein shoots Reno Owens in the head at 7:41 a.m. on Friday, March 24. Owens, a 39-year-old African-American man with no fixed address, was sitting on a bed with two children, aged 1 and 4 years, in his arms. He had a butcher knife with an eight-inch blade. He was talking crazy.
Police showed the video to members of the press today, but forbade audio or visual recording of it, save for a short clip of the SWAT team heading up the stairs. They will not release video publicly, according to spokesman T.J. Smith, in order to protect the children from discovering the video, years from now, and being re-traumatized.
(Excerpt) Read more at bearingarms.com ...
Premature Kojaculation.
Premature Kojaculation.
i fail to see the problem...
The correct thing is to say “you are authorized to use lethal force, if necessary” and leave it at that.
It is not normal nor healthy to expect a copper to jump into the seventh circle of hell and return undamaged.
What you see on TV is mostly false, with little time for character development. Most of the audience are just waiting for the chase scene.
Nothing to see here, move along.
That may he the exact right thing to do and to plan for but you cannot say it like that. Ya gotta leave the officer entering the ability to aize up the evolving (if they evolve) curcumstances and nake his/her own independent judgement based upon the circumstances they encounter.
At what point would the shooter have decided it was necessary? The shooter needed his order; otherwise, he would not have shot.
I cannot imagine how difficult it must be for a policeman to enter such a situation and take another human’s life. It must be quite traumatizing even though the shooter is acting for the greater good. As you indicate, it certainly can’t be as it’s portrayed on TV. Prayers for this policeman and for those children.
heh heh heh heh...
I don’t kno a whole lot about police chain of command rules, but I thought the SWAT team was to kill the bad guy when there was no other path for the regular police officers.
Kno should be know. I seem to be having sticky keys recently.
A righteous kill, IMHO.
It will no doubt be traumatizing for the 4 year old. But not nearly as much as having her throat cut by a psycho.
Just sayin’...
In my department, SWAT took orders from the top official in charge at the scene, a role that they pointedly would not assume.
The top commander set the rules of engagement, and defined when and if deadly force would be used. Many factors need to be weighed in making that decision. SWAT has many capabilities to assist in the information gathering in support of that decision making process, as well as ways of establishing communications with a barricaded subject and a range of less-lethal force options.
” Prayers for this policeman and for those children.”
YES.
Also IMO, being with his own kind (coppers) is a big help.
Having this crap in the news is NOT.
In a scenario where a subject is perceived to be in the process of, or could reasonably be believed to be about to commit a forcible felony, lethal force is always justified.
Our heroes in blue doing what they do best: neutralizing threats to innocent citizens at the risk of their own lives.
Bury the SOB in bacon.
Similar to the military, the buck stops with a commander, not the troops he commands. The order to enter and purposefully kill the perp is an example of a clear, well defined order that leaves no doubt as to the mission at hand. Indeed, the officer who did the shoot had to be crystal clear as to the intent of the order and had to be fully aware of the consequences of failure ( death or severe injury to the children).
Good call if there indeed was no other option.
These guys have my support. There indeed comes a time when a man forfeits his right to due process in the extreme circumstance of his own creation. The social compact clearly describes this equation- his rights to life liberty and due process ended when he put innocents at extreme risk and all reasonable efforts to de-escalate the situation were exhausted.
Monday morning QBs can spout criticism all week long, and they likely will, but the call was, from all information, a righteous one.
But that “if necessary” turns it into a judgement call, adds delay, etc. They already have all of the facts and know the circumstances. I'm guessing they have told him to “drop the knife” etc.
Imagine just walking into your house, opening the door and being surprised by the scene - I MIGHT say drop the knife - but I probably would just shoot the guy if I could make sure I got the drop on him before he could hurt one of my daughters.
I guess it would be more like seeing him through the window and being able to get the drop on him. Their is a local guy that stopped a shooting. Except rather than just shooting he yelled “Drop the gun”. That allowed the bad guy to shoot as well - the hero is paralyzed.
SWAT teams handle certain TYPES of incidents——and holding a hostage would be one of them.
NYPD’s ESU (what they call the SWAT) were the ones that were called out on 9-11——14 died.
.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.