Notice: viewer discretion is advised

 

Hello!

I just wanted to share this amazing YouTube video that I found not to long ago. It is about two (Texas) cops who find them self's in a shootout around the end of the video.

The video has two side by side videos of the two officers body cam.

I am so glad that none of the officers were hurt that night.

Please comment what you think of the video :)

-Ray

Wow, pretty scary stuff! That perp had a clear shot on the second officer, all he had to do was move his arm a little faster

Saw this, the guy was doing a suicide by cop. That gun was only a BB gun. Sucks :/ However, did you see how Sgt. Green pushed the silverware out of the way and watched as the suspect walked by? Pretty good move.

 

EDIT: Here's the article

Edited July 10, 201510 yr by TotalGamer713

Wow, pretty scary stuff! That perp had a clear shot on the second officer, all he had to do was move his arm a little faster

I agree,

I was amazing how fast the police responded outside.

Some wonder why they shot so many shots,  the answer is simple, when your trained to become a cop, they tell you if your ever in this type of situation, your brain will contunie to pull the trigger until your brain feels that you are safe.

Pretty interesting to be honest.

One thing I forgot to mention,

I love it how (@4:30) Sgt.Green moved the knife away from the table.

Pretty good police work to be honest.

Here in Russia the two police officers will be laid off and judged. They don't have the freedom of action than in other countries in Europe or America. Good or bad, but in America a very large number of police killings. But in this case they acted on the situation with attempted murder. So there was no other way.

The way the guy held the gun as he was pushed away, I was a little curious on how it wasn't fired in the situation until realizing it was a pellet gun. Serves em' right.

Sad that it was suicide by cop. This is an example of why we absolutely need body cameras on every police officer. You can clearly see from the video that it was justified, they had no way of knowing it was a pellet gun. In a lot of cases, the testimonies of officers after a shooting is misleading or not the whole truth, or simply their perception of events. If these officers had testified without the video, its very possible that it would have sparked needless public outrage. Compare this case to the case of Tamir Rice, and you can see the difference that video makes. Glad these officers are safe and that they have the video to prove their innocence. It just sucks that the interaction had to end that way,

While the shooting was justified, death could have been prevented if Sergeant Green had either: kept restraining the perp when he was rotated to the right (or left) and then gave the suspect a kick from behind, or just tackled the guy altogether. These officers did what they had to do, but in my opinion, they had the chance to prevent any casualties for all   of the parties involved.

While the shooting was justified, death could have been prevented if Sergeant Green had either: kept restraining the perp when he was rotated to the right (or left) and then gave the suspect a kick from behind, or just tackled the guy altogether. These officers did what they had to do, but in my opinion, they had the chance to prevent any casualties for all   of the parties involved.

Right, but if you were Sgt.Green Im sure you would of protected your life and others buy using (justified) deadly force.

Well first off, they should have handcuffed him and searched him because he was a suspect referenced to a theft case to begin with.

Edited July 11, 201510 yr by alpha30xyz

In a lot of cases, the testimonies of officers after a shooting is misleading or not the whole truth

Do you have anything to back that statement up?

While the shooting was justified, death could have been prevented if Sergeant Green had either: kept restraining the perp when he was rotated to the right (or left) and then gave the suspect a kick from behind, or just tackled the guy altogether. These officers did what they had to do, but in my opinion, they had the chance to prevent any casualties for all   of the parties involved.

So a dude pulls a gun on you and you want to keep trying to restrain him? This isn't the movies or a TV show, they don't just kick the due in the stomach and tackle him and everything is ok. The dude had a gun (later found to be a pellet gun), anyone who pulls a gun on me should expect to be met with another gun. I'm not going to wait for a suspect to get the first shot off before I open fire. It is easy for people to sit at their keyboard and watch a video 20 times and say what they would have done (especially if they have never been in that kind of situation) but when you are out there on the street you make these decisions in fractions of a second. Hesitate or make the wrong decision and you might not make it home that night. Bottom line, the officers met deadly force with deadly force which is how it should be.

Do you have anything to back that statement up?

People lie (yes, even cops). Sometimes, cops claim that a suspect was reaching for their gun, or claim that the suspect was reaching for a gun of their own. That's not always true. In rare cases, cops plant evidence. Legally speaking, it is beneficial to an officer in a justified shooting to have a video.

Well first off, they should have handcuffed him and searched him because he was a suspect referenced to a theft case to begin with.

You are 100% correct. I think that was the only mistake I saw in this video.

Do you have anything to back that statement up?

So a dude pulls a gun on you and you want to keep trying to restrain him? This isn't the movies or a TV show, they don't just kick the due in the stomach and tackle him and everything is ok. The dude had a gun (later found to be a pellet gun), anyone who pulls a gun on me should expect to be met with another gun. I'm not going to wait for a suspect to get the first shot off before I open fire. It is easy for people to sit at their keyboard and watch a video 20 times and say what they would have done (especially if they have never been in that kind of situation) but when you are out there on the street you make these decisions in fractions of a second. Hesitate or make the wrong decision and you might not make it home that night. Bottom line, the officers met deadly force with deadly force which is how it should be.

While many of the points in your arguments are based on the straw-man fallacy, I agree with your overall message. If the officers had to shoot, they should shoot. I am just saying that there were other ways to handle the situation.

Do you have anything to back that statement up?

So a dude pulls a gun on you and you want to keep trying to restrain him? This isn't the movies or a TV show, they don't just kick the due in the stomach and tackle him and everything is ok. The dude had a gun (later found to be a pellet gun), anyone who pulls a gun on me should expect to be met with another gun. I'm not going to wait for a suspect to get the first shot off before I open fire. It is easy for people to sit at their keyboard and watch a video 20 times and say what they would have done (especially if they have never been in that kind of situation) but when you are out there on the street you make these decisions in fractions of a second. Hesitate or make the wrong decision and you might not make it home that night. Bottom line, the officers met deadly force with deadly force which is how it should be.

Love your statement bro :)

There might be bad cops out there that ruin it for the good ones, but these cops did the right thing.  Cops have to make split second decisions, they can't look at things in the future.  People criticize cops way too much and act like they know everything 100% of the time and can prevent every single situation.  They're human.  How many times have you messed up yourself? A lot.  Now try making those decisions in milliseconds.  They had no way of knowing that was a pellet gun.

Well first off, they should have handcuffed him and searched him because he was a suspect referenced to a theft case to begin with.

Not everyone needs to be handcuffed. Sometimes handcuffing a person will result in them not wanting to cooperate because they feel they are already under arrest. Also, they probably didn't want to handcuff him in the bathroom because it is a confined place with not a lot of room to fight if he decided to resist...or pull a pellet gun from his waistband.

People lie (yes, even cops). Sometimes, cops claim that a suspect was reaching for their gun, or claim that the suspect was reaching for a gun of their own. That's not always true. In rare cases, cops plant evidence. Legally speaking, it is beneficial to an officer in a justified shooting to have a video.

Yes I know people lie, but you said "in a lot of cases" as if cops lie most of the time.

While many of the points in your arguments are based on the straw-man fallacy, I agree with your overall message. If the officers had to shoot, they should shoot. I am just saying that there were other ways to handle the situation.

I am just tired of people criticizing an officer's split second decision, especially when that decision was the correct one. I have always said that in the public's eyes no matter what an officer does somebody will always come in and say "well they should have done this" or "I would have done it this way" and 99% of the time it is the people with no actual training or experience in law enforcement that say those things. It just goes to show that the police will always be wrong no matter how they handle the situation. If the officers shot him then people will say they should have used a taser, if they tased him people would say they should have used OC spray, if they used OC spray people will say they should have went hands on, if they went hands on people will say they should have talked the suspect down.

Not everyone needs to be handcuffed. Sometimes handcuffing a person will result in them not wanting to cooperate because they feel they are already under arrest. Also, they probably didn't want to handcuff him in the bathroom because it is a confined place with not a lot of room to fight if he decided to resist...or pull a pellet gun from his waistband.

Yes I know people lie, but you said "in a lot of cases" as if cops lie most of the time.

I am just tired of people criticizing an officer's split second decision, especially when that decision was the correct one. I have always said that in the public's eyes no matter what an officer does somebody will always come in and say "well they should have done this" or "I would have done it this way" and 99% of the time it is the people with no actual training or experience in law enforcement that say those things. It just goes to show that the police will always be wrong no matter how they handle the situation. If the officers shot him then people will say they should have used a taser, if they tased him people would say they should have used OC spray, if they used OC spray people will say they should have went hands on, if they went hands on people will say they should have talked the suspect down.

I disagree, they had plenty of room and there were also two of them. It also doesn't matter if there is no cooperation. Officer safety is priority. Safety before investigation.

I disagree, they had plenty of room and there were also two of them. It also doesn't matter if there is no cooperation. Officer safety is priority. Safety before investigation.

Have you ever fought with someone in a confined space before? I am willing to bet you have ever had to detain someone who is resisting arrest much less in a confined space. I can tell you from experience that it sucks and that bathroom is not a lot of space at all. What if they had tried detaining him in the bathroom and he pulled the same stunt? You know why that shooting went so well? Because the male officer was able to push the suspect a good enough distance away. If that had happened in that bathroom there would have been a lot less space and a much higher chance of someone other than the suspect getting injured. The way they handled it was textbook procedure and a perfect example of how it should have been handled. These are the kinds of videos they showed us in the police academy and told us to do what they did.

Fine, then have him step outside that bathroom and cuff him. Or at least pat him down. Let me tell you this, if they told him to put his hands on the wall and they were both there, like they were in the video, and he reached for something in his waistband, they could both easily over power him and push him into the wall and prevent that from happening. You don't have to necessarily do it in a bathroom, but take him to a place where had room while maintaining constant eye contact. Right outside the bathroom or even front door would be fine, but I am trained to do it asap.