Police shooting caught on camera

[DON SVO]

Don't be mad, bro.

I get a dog is treated more or less equally, but they are also trained to do things humans cannot or will not do, whether it's catching someone or subduing them. That option was not used when it easily could have been. Cops lives are at risk all the time. If a K9 is indeed equal it too should be put in life threatening situations and do what it was trained to do. If the dog cannot subdue then yes, fire at will. Like I said, if the dog wasn't at the ready then kill him with everything available.

If the K9 is equal it wouldn't be used, since the human officers tried tasing him and he wasn't affected and still posessed the very weapon he destroyed the restaurant with. Why send in a K9 to a high-percentage casualty situation? Basically, what good does it do to basically roll the dice on the guy killing the dog, all in the name of NOT killing a violent perp? That makes no sense. If the perp lived after killing the dog, he would be jailed for eternity due to killing a LEO.

I want an officer to comment on this, I think it's correct:

You don't send the K9 in if there's reasonable belief that the perp possesses and/or may use a deadly weapon. You see K9s chasing guys down and what-not, but I've never seen a K9 sent after a confrontational perp with a weapon.

[Trick Pony]

Don't be mad, bro.

I get a dog is treated more or less equally, but they are also trained to do things humans cannot or will not do, whether it's catching someone or subduing them. That option was not used when it easily could have been. Cops lives are at risk all the time. If a K9 is indeed equal it too should be put in life threatening situations and do what it was trained to do. If the dog cannot subdue then yes, fire at will. Like I said, if the dog wasn't at the ready then kill him with everything available.

The point is, the dude was holding a deadly weapon. You don't send an officer in to take him down barehanded in that situation and you wouldn't send the dog in either. You keep referring to other options - they used the tazer and it didn't work. Once the officers have their guns out and pointed at the guy it's a deadly force situation and he forced their hand with his actions.
If I've got a gun on someone who is threatening me with an object like that and they make a move to get within striking distance and act like they are taking a swing, that person is getting shot. Plain and simple.

[SS Junk]

You have no clue and actually sound ignorant.

Don't be mad, bro.

I'd bet that if they think the perp might overpower the dog and not respond to the dog attack by submitting, they won't let the dog go. If that guy hit the dog with that hammer and killed it, you'd have a dead police K9 and a perp with 50-60 bullets in him, coming from every cop there.

I get a dog is treated more or less equally, but they are also trained to do things humans cannot or will not do, whether it's catching someone or subduing them. That option was not used when it easily could have been. Cops lives are at risk all the time. If a K9 is indeed equal it too should be put in life threatening situations and do what it was trained to do. If the dog cannot subdue then yes, fire at will. Like I said, if the dog wasn't at the ready then kill him with everything available.

[DON SVO]

the tazer is also something used to subdue idiots like that...

and in my opinion, k9's are not tools. i would much rather see that piece of shit die then that dog, not even joking.

A police dog is considered an officer, meaning they carry the same weight as a human officer. To release the dog on someone who has been ignoring commands and took a taser to the face like he got bit by a mosquito would be stupid.

The dog still should have been used. I assume the cop who had the dog is a K9 unit, but is far too attached and didn't want to see his dog get hurt. That's horse shit. The dog is trained to subdue idiots like that. If there was no dog, then sure, shoot him. Because there was another tool to use to subdue and they felt it necessary to skip that step, it's murder.

C'mon. I know you're smarter than that.

The dog subdues people by inflicting pain and fear. The dog rushes you, bites you, and keeps shaking until you submit to it out of pain and fear. The taser works by delivering enough electricity to overload your central nervous system and drop you. Why release a police dog on someone with a sledgehammer/pipe bender that laughs off a taser to the face? It would be as effective as one of the officers trying to bum-rush him and take him out. I feel pretty certain that the officers right there (taser cop and K9 cop) had a good bearing on the situation and the level of sanity posessed by the perp. Guy ignores all commands and shakes off a taser? Fido ain't getting hit with that hammer!

There lies the problem. Too many people believe a human life is magically worth less than a dog's. In some instances that can be true, however that shouldn't be up to the police to decide when they have not used all efforts to restrain soeone. They train those dogs for a specific purpose and that purpose should be exercised before lethal force is used.

I'm fairly certain they saw the guy going bonkers with that sledgehammer/pipe bender well before that video camera was turned on. I'd bet that if they think the perp might overpower the dog and not respond to the dog attack by submitting, they won't let the dog go. If that guy hit the dog with that hammer and killed it, you'd have a dead police K9 and a perp with 50-60 bullets in him, coming from every cop there.

[G..]

The dog still should have been used. I assume the cop who had the dog is a K9 unit, but is far too attached and didn't want to see his dog get hurt. That's horse shit. The dog is trained to subdue idiots like that. If there was no dog, then sure, shoot him. Because there was another tool to use to subdue and they felt it necessary to skip that step, it's murder.

You have no clue and actually sound ignorant. The K9s are actually sworn officers and treated as such. The guy was inside smashing the place up. The choice has to be made to taze or use the dog. The tazer was chosen which is more effective than the dog, it was of zero effect. Therefore when the unstable situation uses deadly or aggressive force towards anyone present its his choice to suffer the consequences. And if you watch, 5 shots dont take the guy down, he is still standing, it takes 6 more to get him down. If you think a little dog could have taken him down you are just as idiotic as he was.

[GhostTX]

The dog still should have been used. I assume the cop who had the dog is a K9 unit, but is far too attached and didn't want to see his dog get hurt. That's horse shit. The dog is trained to subdue idiots like that. If there was no dog, then sure, shoot him. Because there was another tool to use to subdue and they felt it necessary to skip that step, it's murder.

I dunno...maybe the cop was about to release the dog and the perp first lunged at the officer forcing the cop's hand?

End of story, it's the perps fault. He assaulted the store. He ignored commands. He didn't react to the tazer (oh crap, they tried to tazer me, maybe I should stop). He lunged at the officers (feint or real, who cares). His decisions led to his death.

[SS Junk]

There lies the problem. Too many people believe a human life is magically worth less than a dog's. In some instances that can be true, however that shouldn't be up to the police to decide when they have not used all efforts to restrain soeone. They train those dogs for a specific purpose and that purpose should be exercised before lethal force is used.

[grove rat]

the tazer is also something used to subdue idiots like that...

and in my opinion, k9's are not tools. i would much rather see that piece of shit die then that dog, not even joking.

[SS Junk]

The dog still should have been used. I assume the cop who had the dog is a K9 unit, but is far too attached and didn't want to see his dog get hurt. That's horse shit. The dog is trained to subdue idiots like that. If there was no dog, then sure, shoot him. Because there was another tool to use to subdue and they felt it necessary to skip that step, it's murder.

[grove rat]

if the guy can brush off a tazer, he just might be fucked up enough to take on that dog. of course we all know that those german shepherds are bad ass... but so are fucking tazers, and you see what that did to him

[SS Junk]

Oh hell...this happened in California...and here comes all the sympathizers

I sympathize too. The dog could have been let go and would've subdued that meth head in no time. I hope this is investigated further. Deadly force is to be used as a last resort. That goes for citizens and cops.

[ELVIS]

the problem was solved, why is this still news?

god bless.

[Cobraman]

Oh hell...this happened in California...and here comes all the sympathizers:

http://abclocal.go.com/kabc/story?se...les&id=8517612

Wtf? Obviously the one officer fired all ten. First officer fired five and second officer fired five? Lol

[GhostTX]

Oh hell...this happened in California...and here comes all the sympathizers:

MONTEREY PARK, Calif. (KABC) -- The amateur video of a suspect being killed outside a Monterey Park Carl's Jr. has a lot of people asking why police resorted to deadly force.

The man, identified as 22-year-old Steven Rodriguez, was shot during a confrontation with police at the main entrance to the Carl's Jr. in the 1200 block of Avenida Cesar Chavez on Monday.

The video shows Rodriguez raising a pipe toward a police officer. Two officers open fire - first five rounds, and then the second officer fires five more.

"I watched it a couple times over, and I almost felt like crying," said Mario Duarte of Monterey Park.

Duarte is the same age as the man who was killed in the shooting. Duarte says he didn't know Rodriguez, but he felt compelled to stop by the growing memorial outside of the fast-food restaurant.

"I kind of felt like I needed to come out here and pay my respects," he said.

There are many who feel like the shooting was not justified, including the suspect's father, who said he did not feel as though the officers were justified.

"There should have been another option. They didn't have to kill the guy," said Matt Kiernan of Alhambra.

The L.A. County Sheriff's Department is investigating the officer-involved shooting. They say it appears as though the officers were acting within department policy.

Police had been called because Rodriguez was smashing windows at the Carl's Jr. Moments before he was shot, one of the officers tried to use a Taser, but Rodriguez seemed unfazed, pulling the wires off his face.

Still, others wonder why the officer didn't release the German Shepherd he was holding.

"I think the dog could have handled it," said April Rodriguez of East Los Angeles.

The windows that Rodriguez smashed have been boarded up, and the restaurant has reopened.

http://abclocal.go.com/kabc/story?section=news/local/los_angeles&id=8517612

[Craizie]

The second set of shots is by the second officer who was slower to pull his firearm.

It's real easy to sit back and scrutinize when you've never been in a similar situation.
I would venture to say that you've never pointed a loaded people at someone? Am I right or wrong?

I'd actually be willing to bet he has never pointed a loaded people at someone.