A thousand LEO “have not been able to bring him in” because they have extremely strict rules of engagement. They have seen him, yet the LEO encounters have not been close enough to verify 100% that it was absolutely him so they could fire immediately. This has allowed him to quickly sprint away and disappear into the woods again. The searchers have not fired once during this entire investigation and I find their restraint admirable. Of course, it has allowed him to repeatedly escape and the search to have to drag out further. On the other hand, we don’t have innocent bystanders or random vehicles shot at wildly as in other famous manhunts.
Their lack of USING force, however, shouldn’t be mistaken as lack of HAVING force.
“A thousand LEO “have not been able to bring him in” because they have extremely strict rules of engagement. They have seen him, yet the LEO encounters have not been close enough to verify 100% that it was absolutely him so they could fire immediately. This has allowed him to quickly sprint away and disappear into the woods again. The searchers have not fired once during this entire investigation and I find their restraint admirable. Of course, it has allowed him to repeatedly escape and the search to have to drag out further. On the other hand, we don’t have innocent bystanders or random vehicles shot at wildly as in other famous manhunts.”
That restraint is nothing less than their duty. That isn’t admirable, it is how they are supposed to operate. You don’t shoot at unverified targets. This isn’t Iraq. Cops have a poor enough reputation, without adding repeats of the Dorner hunt nonsense. LE is supposed to have strict rules of engagement.
And how many times did they ‘see him’, and how many times were they wrong? Oh, and I’m pretty sure they aren’t just supposed to shoot on sight either. I know they WANT to, but they are charged with bringing him in for trial, if possible. They are not charged with executing him on sight, just because they are angry.