+- MacResource (https://forums.macresource.com)
+-- Forum: My Category (https://forums.macresource.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=1)
+--- Forum: Tips and Deals (https://forums.macresource.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Thread: F/U on Lakewood Police Shooting (/showthread.php?tid=88756)
Re: F/U on Lakewood Police Shooting - Don Kiyoti - 12-01-2009
billb wrote:
[quote=AlphaDog]
I strongly suspect Clemmons went out the way he wanted - suicide by cop.
+1
-but where did all the capital punishment doesn't work people go ?
Decay you beat me to it. Bill: what an asinine remark.
Alphadog, on one hand I'm glad this world is rid of Clemmons. On the other hand, he apparently got what he wanted and that bothers me. Suicide by cop is not punishment.
Re: F/U on Lakewood Police Shooting - AlphaDog - 12-01-2009
Don Kiyoti wrote: On the other hand, he apparently got what he wanted and that bothers me. Suicide by cop is not punishment.
I agree with you completely. I've been told by law enforcement officers that none of them ever want to have to use their gun, and that killing someone - even someone like Clemmons - is something that is with them forever. In a way, Clemmons victimized one more police officer before he went down, and that makes this even worse.
Re: F/U on Lakewood Police Shooting - Racer X - 12-01-2009
I was thinking the same thing.
Re: F/U on Lakewood Police Shooting - Black - 12-01-2009
vicrock wrote:
Got up this morning to the news that the suspect was shot and killed overnight in Seattle. He was wounded (as reported from the shooting) and in possession of one of the murdered officer's sidearm.
Interesting that with all the searching, the lone officer who found him was investigating a stolen car, and happened on the suspect who drew down on him, leading to the shot that killed the suspect (and saved the taxpayers a WHOLE lot of money)
Sorry if that sounds cynical, but this was the best possible resolution, IMO.
No, cycnical would be not believing a word of this story.
Signed,
Cynical
Re: F/U on Lakewood Police Shooting - M A V I C - 12-01-2009
I'm still surprised that he was able to take out four officers at once... especially them being highly trained officers.
Re: F/U on Lakewood Police Shooting - decay - 12-01-2009
i'm pretty sure it wasn't all 4 at once.
it was one at a time.
Re: F/U on Lakewood Police Shooting - M A V I C - 12-01-2009
decay wrote:
i'm pretty sure it wasn't all 4 at once.
it was one at a time.
Well, one at a time sequentially, yes. I'm still surprised that he did it fast enough one of them couldn't get their gun out.
Re: F/U on Lakewood Police Shooting - AlphaDog - 12-01-2009
M A V I C wrote:
[quote=decay]
i'm pretty sure it wasn't all 4 at once.
it was one at a time.
Well, one at a time sequentially, yes. I'm still surprised that he did it fast enough one of them couldn't get their gun out.
You haven't been keeping up. Clemmons had a gunshot wound to his abdomen that would probably have caused his death before too much longer. He got that in a struggle with the fourth officer - a struggle that had continued out the front door of the shop before the officer died. Clemmons did shoot the first two before they had a chance to react, but the third and fourth officers did not sit there like a couple of targets and were on their feet and starting to fight back before being shot.
Maybe you should do a bit of catchup reading.
Re: F/U on Lakewood Police Shooting - M A V I C - 12-01-2009
AlphaDog wrote:
[quote=M A V I C]
[quote=decay]
i'm pretty sure it wasn't all 4 at once.
it was one at a time.
Well, one at a time sequentially, yes. I'm still surprised that he did it fast enough one of them couldn't get their gun out.
You haven't been keeping up. Clemmons had a gunshot wound to his abdomen that would probably have caused his death before too much longer. He got that in a struggle with the fourth officer - a struggle that had continued out the front door of the shop before the officer died. Clemmons did shoot the first two before they had a chance to react, but the third and fourth officers did not sit there like a couple of targets and were on their feet and starting to fight back before being shot.
Maybe you should do a bit of catchup reading.
I haven't had the time. So the last two struggled, but I'm still surprised at the end result. Last I heard yesterday they still hadn't released what the murder weapon was.
Re: F/U on Lakewood Police Shooting - RAMd®d - 12-01-2009
it doesn't work as a deterrent.
Nothing works as a deterrent if not used often enough.
I'm still surprised that he was able to take out four officers at once... especially them being highly trained officers.
I'm not. Surprise holds a tremendous tactical advantage. And "highly trained" is a relative term. Even if these were SWAT officers, without intense training such as that of a special ops military unit, it's very hard to process and assess the threat, and then move faster than a previously unknown threat that already had position advantage and acquisition.
Reaction time is limited to the speed of the brain's processing ability, muscle tone, and the effects of adrenaline on the body. Being caught in an ambush and seeing partners being shot has a terrible, impeding effect on one's psyche. Without combat experience, this would almost always mean the suspect will have the advantage over an intended victim.
Add to that the fact that most police don't ever *really*, seriously consider that they will be shot. Ever. Because most are not. So it takes intense focus to return fire, especially if you or your partner are shot. Unless the shot(s) are fatal or mechanically debilitating, it's very often possible to return controlled fire before shock overcomes a shooting victim.
Unfortunately, while we can't speak to the ability of these four officers at this time, scientifically and practically speaking, it's very easy for one gunman to kill four armed officers. It could easily happen again.
And that's another tragedy altogether.