tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32768818.post5375272594896193767..comments2024-03-24T18:18:35.272-05:00Comments on BALLSEYE'S BOOMERS: Stabbed Officer Gets Up And Chases Her Attacker...Glenn Bhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16677859688487279914noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32768818.post-76752098037290582752016-12-09T22:28:56.908-06:002016-12-09T22:28:56.908-06:00He is still threat, he poses an imminent threat t...He is still threat, he poses an imminent threat to her if she catches or gets close to him and she was chasing him. He also poses an imminent threat, in the mind of any reasonable law enforcement officer (based on training and or experience) to anyone he approaches since he is armed and just tried to kill the officer by stabbing her repeatedly. He is not only a fleeing felon but an escaped violent felon (and that last just adds the icing to the cake, so to speak, but is not necessary in making the decision to shoot him). If she last saw him in possession of a weapon that even adds more to the officer's justification to shoot him. This is not a case of a driver being pulled over and being shot in the back for no reason - this in not even a case of a mere fleeing felon - this is the case of an escaped convicted violent felon - who just attempted to kill a police officer to avoid arrest - who is armed and who is desperate - who still poses an imminent treat of great bodily harm or death to others and who is attempting to evade arrest. Sure he wound up in essence giving up from the sound of it but as he was fleeing, probably refusing to obey commands to stop, still possibly armed as far as the officer knew, just tried to kill her, and headed toward other people - a school with children there no less - he posed (in the mind of a reasonable person with proper training or knowledge of such) an imminent threat of serious bodily harm and or death to others.<br /><br />An officer does not have to be certain he is going to harm someone but needs reasonable suspicion or probable cause (depending on jurisdiction) to use deadly force against him and there was more than enough of both to do so. It is not easy shooting someone, let alone killing them, and it is quite possible she had other reasons for not taking aim at him - like children in the playground being in the line of fire BUT had she shot him, she would have in all likelihood been found completely legally justified to have done so.<br /><br />All the best,<br />GBGlenn Bhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16677859688487279914noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32768818.post-23696503743984257142016-12-09T18:51:44.872-06:002016-12-09T18:51:44.872-06:00If he is running away, then can she use lethal for...If he is running away, then can she use lethal force? I mean, he is no longer a threat.......B https://www.blogger.com/profile/10586046436233366155noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32768818.post-35259770347360324452016-12-09T13:29:13.254-06:002016-12-09T13:29:13.254-06:00Maybe she had the same thought processes as the Ch...Maybe she had the same thought processes as the Chicago PD officer who was beaten almost to death before she was saved by fellow officers: She did not want her family or her department to go through the hell that comes these days when an officer shoots a felon. <br />We can sneer at her actions and call her names (you didn't, I'm just saying), but the OSU copper who killed the terrorist is now being vilified by activists, and the city of Minneapolis's plan to hire fifteen police officers is being protested as an "act of violence against the [you know which] community."Old 1811https://www.blogger.com/profile/09079719195789200332noreply@blogger.com