Posted on 09/20/2017 12:03:00 PM PDT by ColdOne
A federal appeals court in Seattle ruled Tuesday that police can only use force proportional to the threat they face, seriously damaging the Seattle Police Departments ability to use firearms.
The ruling from the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the use of force reforms put in place by federal mandates under the Obama administration that required police to use only objectively reasonable force, proportional to the threat or urgency of the situation, the Associated Press reports. The unanimous ruling strikes down a lawsuit filed by a group of more than 120 Seattle officers in 2014 who claimed that the strict reforms infringe on an officers right to self defense and the Second Amendment.
The City of Seattle has a significant interest in regulating the use of department-issued firearms by its police officers, Judge William Hayes wrote, adding that the policy did not impose a substantial burden on plaintiffs right to use a firearm.
(Excerpt) Read more at dailycaller.com ...
No, it means that police should be held to the same standard as Joe Q. Citizen when determining whether the use of deadly force was justified under the circumstances.
Will that be predetermined before they hit the scene?
When dealing with a dangerous, armed criminal, ‘If you snooze, you loose’
Just throwing this out there. So, a fella standing twenty or so feet from an officer that has his weapon drawn, beaded on the suspect holding a knife....why can't the cop pop a cap in the guyz thigh? Perhaps a couple.
Would this not halt the threat? Is it really necessary to take someones life when it can be avoided? I realize not every situation fits this scenario, but I've seen a few videos where officers killed a person holding a knife...and they really didn't have to.
I know there are those folks that will come at me with...whah whah whah, dah cop wants to go home too-woo-woo.
Psssst! newsflash, not every cop is a straight arrow folks. There is about 10% of every segment of society that are bad apples. Even law enforcement.
Well considering they gunned down an unarmed Downs Syndrome guy in a movie because he wanted to see the movie again and didn’t have a ticket. He was with a caregiver as well. The guy was on the very edge of DS towards the childlike.
A perennially favorite tactic of the political left.
Aiding and abetting the criminal class from the bench. As if that made it legit.
Not really. With the absence of malice laws, unless an officer says "I hate kikes" before he offs somebody, he's not going to jail.
This does tighten some procedural rules, and more officers may be fired than now.
Cops have brought this on themselves. They have consistently and repeatedly protected the bad actors in their midst.
I keep waiting for an entire city police force to quit. Just walk off the job and tell the mayor and/or city council that if they are not given the power to enforce the law, then the mayor and the city council can take over.
So these brave judges will be on the streets, enforcing laws now? Refuse to comply.
I see a real opportunity for nunchuk and throwing-star trainers...
Yup. The rules should be the same for police as any other citizen.
Force with like force doesn't win any battles.
The rule on center of mass shooting was created because in most immediate danger situations shooting at a moving target and hitting the target are 2 different things. Watch the knife videos about having 3 seconds at 20 feet to live if the knifeman wants you dead and thats if you have your gun pointed.
Rocks, bottles, and batteries at a riot?
Yes. All should watch the videos showing how quickly a person with a knife can cross 20 feet and kill you, or a cop, before you or the cop can draw a weapon. Or use the weapon you are already holding in your hand.
I believe we must give our police certain powers of escalation.
No, because the knife is a deadly weapon and so is a gun.
You can’t use a deadly weapon for a non-deadly threat, nor can you use it a non-deadly manner i.e. shoot to would. Either the threat is great enough to justify deadly force or it’s not, there is no middle ground.
Because if we allow cops to shoot to wound, some of those victims will invariably die and lawsuits will follow. Worse if shoot to wound was a standard, eventually cops will be shooting to wound non-deadly threats. It would create legal quicksand that would mire law enforcement in endless litigation over every weapon use.
What was wrong with the slogan:
“Some people just need killin’”?
Even better, shoot the knife out of their hand. Then keep shooting the knife making it skitter down the street out of the perp's reach. Maybe even turn their backs on the perps and use a hand mirror to aim.
Having seen Cops qualify at a range, I would venture to say center mass at 20 feet would be hard enough for many Cops to hit on a moving target.
“So, now they have to take a knife to a knife fight?”
No, but now they can’t call it ‘reasonable force’ when they shoot someone for recording them on a cell phone.
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.