Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

Cody Dawg · Oct 1, 2006, 10:21 AM

Black man shot 110 times during apprehension.

Okay, so he's a cop killer and the dead officer leaves behind a wife and three children - he was killed on her birthday and I feel terrible for her and their families - and he deserved the death penalty in my opinion if that is what was determined by a court of law

But, he didn't deserve to be shot 110 times by police when they finally spotted him and they claim he was going to try to shoot them with a gun.

I just think this is BS and that every officer who fired should be investigated. 110 fatal shots to this guy? That isn't enforcing safety via the law, it's vengeance, and vengeance from cops is crossing the line when a judge and jury should make that call, not cops shooting him to death because they're pissed off.

Am I off base here? I just think it's wrong.

subego · Oct 1, 2006, 10:27 AM

Only 68 bullets hit, and it was a SWAT team, so they were probably using automatic weapons.

It doesn't really matter, dead is dead, but from what I know about the proper use of automatic weapons, this isn't a situation where it was the proper tactic to empty out clip after clip.

BlueSky · Oct 1, 2006, 10:39 AM

I think 102 would have been a more appropriate number of rounds.

Montezuma58 · Oct 1, 2006, 10:58 AM

Originally Posted by subego

It doesn't really matter, dead is dead, but from what I know about the proper use of automatic weapons, this isn't a situation where it was the proper tactic to empty out clip after clip.

What would you do? Shoot him once then go poke him with a stick and hope he's dead and doesn't shoot back?

subego · Oct 1, 2006, 11:10 AM

Originally Posted by Montezuma58

What would you do? Shoot him once then go poke him with a stick and hope he's dead and doesn't shoot back?

I would take controlled, precise shots.

You know, the type that would let me assess the status of my target before I shot again.

moodymonster · Oct 1, 2006, 11:30 AM

does look like they set out to kill him, but given the circumstances did they have a choice?

there were nine officers firing, most likely all using automatic weapons - the two officers that hit him fired 68 rounds - possibly one clip each from their main weapons, and 8 rounds from one officer's sidearm.

Buckaroo · Oct 1, 2006, 11:32 AM

"I suspect the only reason 110 rounds was all that was fired was that's all the ammunition they had," Judd said. "We were not going to take any chance of him shooting back."

Ten SWAT officers surrounded Freeland on Friday as he hid underneath brush and a fallen tree in a rural area. Authorities say he raised Williams' gun at them, prompting nine of the officers to fire.

Buckaroo · Oct 1, 2006, 11:34 AM

He actually deserved 111 rounds of 9mm, and one 50cal round, but they didn't have the 50cal available.

Buckaroo · Oct 1, 2006, 11:38 AM

The victims:

Williams' autopsy was also returned Saturday, showing he had been shot eight times. The deputy had not been wearing a protective vest, but authorities said that would not have helped, since shots hit him in his right leg and behind his right ear, among other places.

Diogi, the German shepherd who was Williams' canine partner, was also killed in Thursday's shootout. An examination of the dog's body showed he had been shot once in the chest.

Authorities said deputy sheriff Doug Speirs was fired at several times by the suspect, and shot once in the leg, though he is no longer hospitalized. A sergeant and an officer from the Lakeland Police Department were also fired at, authorities said.

subego · Oct 1, 2006, 11:54 AM

Originally Posted by moodymonster

the two officers that hit him fired 68 rounds

Are you sure this is right? Nine guys fire and only two guys hit? The two guys who do hit... hit 68 times?

Originally Posted by Buckaroo

Ten SWAT officers surrounded Freeland on Friday as he hid underneath brush and a fallen tree in a rural area. Authorities say he raised Williams' gun at them, prompting nine of the officers to fire.

12 rounds per officer, I guess that isn't too bad, but I kind of get the feeling they all may not have had visual contact when they started firing. Once the shooting started, other officers probably started firing in the general area. I don't think you'd normally do this because you will either shoot someone you didn't mean to hit, or run out of ammo and be screwed when you actually do see the guy.

Who knows though, they were out in the middle of nowhere and had him outnumbered 10:1. That's more than 600 rounds of ammo to get one guy. Running out probably wasn't on their minds.

[OT] This made me think of Doofy for whatever reason. Where'd he get to? He was moving or something, right?

marden · Oct 1, 2006, 12:24 PM

Originally Posted by subego

I would take controlled, precise shots.

You know, the type that would let me assess the status of my target before I shot again.

If you are in a controlled situation, MAYBE.

There's something called the Dead Man's 10 seconds. You shoot until you KNOW he won't shoot again.

From what I saw on TV it was in a wooded area and if he was trying to hide from them then they might not have been able to know for sure whether he was or wasn't or if or what. So, you keep firing.

moodymonster · Oct 1, 2006, 04:41 PM

Originally Posted by subego

Are you sure this is right? Nine guys fire and only two guys hit? The two guys who do hit... hit 68 times?

according to the article, two officers were suspended - presumably they're the only ones who hit -

once shooting starts, I'd imagine everyone with a gun would open fire also. Firing 30 rounds from a gun that can do 800 rds/min is only a second or so of trigger pull.

I gues you'd have to take the shooting in context of similar shootings to determine whether the police over reacted or not. Ultimately shooting is to take the threat down - number of rounds to do that is irrelevant.

Spliffdaddy · Oct 1, 2006, 05:25 PM

Wonder if the guy was guilty.

I don't trust cops.

dcmacdaddy · Oct 1, 2006, 08:21 PM

OK, these guys are members of the SWAT team and it seems not a one of them was a sharp-shooter? WTF is up with that? They've got him surrounded and one or two of their guys can't get in a head shot or a decent body shot? Sounds like a combination of adrenaline, panic, and vengeance if you ask me. But still, they've got the guy surrounded and one officer can't tap out a few single shots from their automatic weapon into this guy? Something doesn't seem right.

Spliffdaddy · Oct 1, 2006, 08:25 PM

If the only witnesses were 9 cops - we'll never know the real facts of what happened.

I've never met a cop that told me the truth.

subego · Oct 1, 2006, 08:28 PM

Originally Posted by marden

If you are in a controlled situation, MAYBE.

There's something called the Dead Man's 10 seconds. You shoot until you KNOW he won't shoot again.

From what I saw on TV it was in a wooded area and if he was trying to hide from them then they might not have been able to know for sure whether he was or wasn't or if or what. So, you keep firing.

I had missed the part where it said there were 9 officers firing when I first skimmed the article, and imagined a more probable 4 or 5. After moodymonster said there were 9 officers firing, I revised my analysis. 12 shots per officer isn't too bad.

I would say 12 shots in 10 seconds is likely controlled. If it was only 4 officers it would be 27 shots in 10 seconds. This is not controlled.

As I also said, somewhat in line with what you are saying, my best guess is that only a few of the officers were in a position to make controlled and precise shots and did so, those who were not in that position fired in the general area, perhaps indiscriminately.

A million other things may have happened as well. Some brush may have propped him up even though he was dead. Who knows?

ghporter · Oct 1, 2006, 08:32 PM

My reaction was "The SWAT team needs more time at the range."

The guy refused to show one hand-which apparently had a gun in it. He made a threatening move toward a BUNCH of cops who he probably KNEW though he'd killed one of their brother cops. Not surprising at all.

You have to remember that police officers usually treat each other as literal brothers. If someone hurts a cop ALL cops feel strongly about it. Plus this individual had led the officers on a merry chace in a car and then on foot through the woods. They found him BY STUMBLING OVER HIM. They DID give him the chance to surrender, but he didn't.

Looking at it from this angle: guy knows he's believed to be a cop killer, guy refuses to surrender and refuses to show he's unarmed, and then LUNGES at a bunch of cops pointing guns at him? No problem at all.

Spliff, why don't you trust cops? This situation seems pretty darn cut-and-dried to me.

subego · Oct 1, 2006, 08:42 PM

Originally Posted by moodymonster

Firing 30 rounds from a gun that can do 800 rds/min is only a second or so of trigger pull.

Part of my original point is that it's generally not procedure to rip into an individual on full-auto. As fun as it is to watch in movies, IRL you're fighting too much recoil. You burn ammo and don't hit what you're aiming at. It's counter productive.

Now, if what you want to do is get that individual to keep their head down, that's what full-auto is for.

Of course, hitting someone 68 times is a way to keep that person's head down too. Whatever works.

Spliffdaddy · Oct 1, 2006, 08:46 PM

I don't trust cops because they lie in order to do their job. They can't be honest because that would make their job difficult. I've been lied to by cops *everytime* I've been in contact with one. I've been threatened by cops, I've had my home searched without a warrant, I've been belittled by cops that found a pair of panties in my car after an illegal search, and I've been railroaded by cops who thought I'd done something that I didn't do.

I personally know 3 people that I grew up with who later became cops. They were probably the 3 most crooked people I ever knew.

When I hear that somebody shot a cop, my first thought is "I wonder what the cop did to the guy to make him shoot."

Spliffdaddy · Oct 1, 2006, 08:50 PM

I wouldn't be surprised if the dude with 68 bullet holes in him was a drunken homeless guy holding a can of lima beans.

paul w · Oct 1, 2006, 08:56 PM

Originally Posted by Spliffdaddy

I don't trust cops because they lie in order to do their job. They can't be honest because that would make their job difficult. I've been lied to by cops *everytime* I've been in contact with one. I've been threatened by cops, I've had my home searched without a warrant, I've been belittled by cops that found a pair of panties in my car after an illegal search, and I've been railroaded by cops who thought I'd done something that I didn't do.

I personally know 3 people that I grew up with who later became cops. They were probably the 3 most crooked people I ever knew.

When I hear that somebody shot a cop, my first thought is "I wonder what the cop did to the guy to make him shoot."

I'm convinced it's insitutional. I believe most cops are good people, who mean to do a good job. But my experience is every police department protects its own. Period.

I was involved with civil cases in both Oakland and New York against police officers (just as an observer - to take pictures). The thing they had in common was the wall of silence and the refusal to speak out against one of their own. You can get away with nearly anything as a police officer. And the lawyers and people who dare to cross them fear for their life in their community. For real.

They act as if they are above the law, which essentially they are.

Spliffdaddy · Oct 1, 2006, 08:58 PM

Well, the Klan is a brotherhood and the mafia is a brotherhood....

olePigeon · Oct 1, 2006, 09:00 PM

Originally Posted by Spliffdaddy

I don't trust cops because they lie in order to do their job. They can't be honest because that would make their job difficult. I've been lied to by cops *everytime* I've been in contact with one.

Too bad you can't see that clearly when it comes to politics.

Cody Dawg · Oct 2, 2006, 06:22 AM

I agree 100% with Spliffdaddy. I've got a police chief living two houses down from me and he came over one night and we were complaining about a situation with a driver who speeds on our street every single day and he said, "Well, he's going to have a little visit from some of us [cops] this week and I can guarantee he won't speed by your house again. We can sure make his life a little hell if he doesn't want to drive like an old lady around here."

Okay, thanks. But, the way he said it was creepy, you know?

Anyone who doesn't think that cops don't push their weights around is just stupid, in my opinion. Of course they do. To BE a copy you have to have a bully mentality, you know?

Oh, and anyone who thinks that pumping 110 rounds into this guy to "take him down" and that it's okay is ignoring the issue that this guy was brutalized. It's NOT okay to do that.

marden · Oct 2, 2006, 06:57 AM

Originally Posted by Cody Dawg

I agree 100% with Spliffdaddy. I've got a police chief living two houses down from me and he came over one night and we were complaining about a situation with a driver who speeds on our street every single day and he said, "Well, he's going to have a little visit from some of us [cops] this week and I can guarantee he won't speed by your house again. We can sure make his life a little hell if he doesn't want to drive like an old lady around here."

Okay, thanks. But, the way he said it was creepy, you know?

Anyone who doesn't think that cops don't push their weights around is just stupid, in my opinion. Of course they do. To BE a copy you have to have a bully mentality, you know?

Oh, and anyone who thinks that pumping 110 rounds into this guy to "take him down" and that it's okay is ignoring the issue that this guy was brutalized. It's NOT okay to do that.

I think the word should go out far and wide. Kill a cop, EXPECT to get brutalized. Or worse.

RAILhead · Oct 2, 2006, 09:00 AM

Yes, you're WAAAAAAAAAAY off base.

The end.

marden · Oct 2, 2006, 09:13 AM

Originally Posted by RAILhead

Yes, you're WAAAAAAAAAAY off base.

The end.

No. YOU are off base. If your police force isn't doing a good job stand up and do something about it so that you CAN have the attitude I have.

If your cops are all true blue and good devoted public servants and one of them is killed by a perp there should be no doubt in your mind that they deserve being defended and supported by the public.

If someone did anything to our cops I'd want the perp to suffer the greatest pain possible before being killed. And I'd want the word to get around.

Mithras · Oct 2, 2006, 09:47 AM

Yeah, but the guy killed a dog, too. Jerk.

marden · Oct 2, 2006, 09:51 AM

Originally Posted by Mithras

Yeah, but the guy killed a dog, too. Jerk.

Yup. Officer Diogi.

Cody Dawg · Oct 2, 2006, 09:57 AM

Oh, yes. Let's all BECOME THE LAW.

We'll all go out and buy guns and shoot and kill the people that we THINK deserve it. Maybe we'll gather in little groups, the Citizens Police Auxiliary, and we'll just BECOME the law and blow people away - take target practice at people - whenever we feel like it.

Sort of like the cops that like to taser and shoot people (a lot of them minorities) because they don't get out of their cars fast enough or because they reach for their wallets.

marden · Oct 2, 2006, 10:06 AM

Originally Posted by Cody Dawg

Oh, yes. Let's all BECOME THE LAW.

We'll all go out and buy guns and shoot and kill the people that we THINK deserve it. Maybe we'll gather in little groups, the Citizens Police Auxiliary, and we'll just BECOME the law and blow people away - take target practice at people - whenever we feel like it.

Sort of like the cops that like to taser and shoot people (a lot of them minorities) because they don't get out of their cars fast enough or because they reach for their wallets.

We ARE the law. When the LEO's are assaulted I take it personally. When your police force is reliable and honorable and well trained and committed and one of them is killed the public have to stand behind their force.

And sometimes people do move too slowly. They are trying to think of how they are going to try to escape or overpower or evade the LEO. Being tasered is usually not fatal. It will teach em a lesson to move their ass next time.

Cody Dawg · Oct 2, 2006, 10:16 AM

You are way off base.

You are no Republican, that's for sure.

marden · Oct 2, 2006, 10:19 AM

Originally Posted by Cody Dawg

You are way off base.

You are no Republican, that's for sure.

Here come da judge, here come da judge. Cody's in da courtroom, here come da judge.

Dakar · Oct 2, 2006, 10:21 AM

Originally Posted by marden

Here come da judge, here come da judge. Cody's in da courtroom, here come da judge.

Pot, kettle, black, eh?

marden · Oct 2, 2006, 10:22 AM

Originally Posted by Dakar

Pot, kettle, black, eh?

Linky?

Cody Dawg · Oct 2, 2006, 10:23 AM

You're probably one of those people who has a warrant out for your arrest in one state or another, marden.

Dakar · Oct 2, 2006, 10:23 AM

Stinky?

marden · Oct 2, 2006, 10:26 AM

Originally Posted by Cody Dawg

You're probably one of those people who has a warrant out for your arrest in one state or another, marden.

You're probably one of those women who haven't got a clue.

marden · Oct 2, 2006, 10:27 AM

Originally Posted by Dakar

Stinky?

You win.

Cody Dawg · Oct 2, 2006, 10:29 AM

When is the next time you're changing your ID here, marden? Just like your name in real life you have to change it every once in a while?

marden · Oct 2, 2006, 10:37 AM

Originally Posted by Cody Dawg

When is the next time you're changing your ID here, marden? Just like your name in real life you have to change it every once in a while?

You strike me as someone who is really a democrack at heart. Doesn't know what she's talkin about. Makes idle threats. Tries to tell people what's best for them. Never thinks before flying off the handle. Always says I'm sorry because they always have something to be sorry about. You think you know who I am. But you know NOTHING.

Keep it up and I'll prove how little you know. Or better, YOU'LL prove how little you know.

Cody Dawg · Oct 2, 2006, 11:02 AM

Oooh.

Is that a threat? You're going to "prove" how little I know - on an anonymous forum?

What a loser.

CRASH HARDDRIVE · Oct 2, 2006, 11:35 AM

Cage fight!

Dakar · Oct 2, 2006, 11:45 AM

Originally Posted by CRASH HARDDRIVE

Cat fight!

Reowrr

paul w · Oct 2, 2006, 12:26 PM

Originally Posted by marden

Keep it up and I'll prove how little you know.

"Cody...I am your father!!!"

RAILhead · Oct 2, 2006, 01:07 PM

Originally Posted by marden

No. YOU are off base. If your police force isn't doing a good job stand up and do something about it so that you CAN have the attitude I have.

If your cops are all true blue and good devoted public servants and one of them is killed by a perp there should be no doubt in your mind that they deserve being defended and supported by the public.

If someone did anything to our cops I'd want the perp to suffer the greatest pain possible before being killed. And I'd want the word to get around.

Dude, what are you talking about? Cody said she thought 100+ rounds into the guy was too much, totally bypassing the idea of the SWAT team using automatic weapons. She then asked if her opinion was way off base, and I said it was.

They could have shot him 500 times as far as I'm concerned.

RAILhead · Oct 2, 2006, 01:11 PM

I'm beginning to think that Cody and Monique are the same person.

I miss the old Cody.

Cody Dawg · Oct 2, 2006, 01:22 PM

I'm not Monique. Speaking of which, after her suicide thread in the other part of the Lounge no one has heard from her.

I think that the guy deserved to put to death - the legal way - that's all.

I think like Spliffdaddy in that I think that cops are out of control.

Snipers are trained to get the guy with a shot or two, not 110 shots.

If this had been a situation where the cops had cornered this guy and helicopters and television cameras were watching the situation you can bet that those cops wouldn't have fired 110 rounds. No way. The public backlash would have been enormous despite the fact that the guy was a piece of human trash.

I don't trust cops, just like Spliffdaddy.

Spliffdaddy · Oct 2, 2006, 07:53 PM

It's a long story, but for a few minutes I made two cops raise their hands over their heads and beg me not to shoot them.

I should have shot them. Since I only had a pellet gun.

Millennium · Oct 2, 2006, 07:59 PM

Standard law-enforcement operating procedure is that if you have to fire your weapon, you make damn sure your target is not getting back up. 110 bullets seems excessive at first glance, but if this is what it takes for the team to be secure that the guy isn't coming back, then I don't plan to argue that. Not when the target is someone known to have no qualms about shooting back.