Shoot-to-Kill... Yes or No?

[cardero]

So if let's say Ted Bundy was running from an officer.....he had no gun but they wanted him real bad. Would they shoot or not? And would they shoot to kill?

If there is no weapon displayed by the criminal then there should be no reason to draw a weapon. I do not believe that a policeman can threaten to shoot a criminal or shoot in the air. You pursue them on foot or call for backup or you may be able to use your nightstick to apprehend them.

 

[Buttercup]

If there is no weapon displayed by the criminal then there should be no reason to draw a weapon. I do not believe that a policeman can threaten to shoot a criminal or shoot in the air. You pursue them on foot or call for backup or you may be able to use your nightstick to apprehend them.

This makes sense. And even though they would hate to lose contact of the criminal....this procedure ensures civilians don't get hurt in the process as well.

 

[PetShopBoy88]

This makes sense. And even though they would hate to lose contact of the criminal....this procedure ensures civilians don't get hurt in the process as well.

And, since people are innocent before the law until proven guilty, it would not be good to shoot an "innocent" man (ie, one who is running).

 

[kai]

It happens here too, kai. People make mistakes, some of them probably unavoidable, and some of them just due to too much adrenaline.

That's why the training for policemen in when to use and when not to use a gun is so critical. As well as filtering out those who show poor judgment in a crisis.

i agree the training is critical

 

[ChrisP]

I'm in favour of superhero's. They always get the Bad Guy. Noone ever gets crushed by falling dump trucks or trapped in a burning building while they're around either.

 

[Ody]

I'm in favour of superhero's. They always get the Bad Guy. Noone ever gets crushed by falling dump trucks or trapped in a burning building while they're around either.

Not to mention we don't have to worry about godzilla anymore with Supaman

 

[niceguy]

If you are pursuing a subject who the authorities believe and has been reported as armed and dangerous, it would probably be a good idea to have your weapon drawn and ready. Regardless, when you have your weapon drawn (and you are a policeman) there is a strong possibility that you will have to bring someone down by killing them.

And what if that info is wrong? A gun can be small and if you take the time to look if the suspect realy has one, you can end up dead. This is so hard. And for a possible suicide bomber, it's even worse. A suicide bomber that know that they are suspected may use their device so stopping them for a search may not be an option. Evacuating bystanders may arise suspicion. Even risking killing an innocent by a "shoot first and be sorry later" policy may fail if the bomber have connected their device to a "Dead man's switch" that automatically detonates the device if they are taken down.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dead_man's_switch

So far thou I have only seen they use of that trick in movies twice, in the Terminator 2 movie a guy had rigged a bomb to go off when he dies (he is dying at the time and hold out long enough for the cops to flee). Another example was in a movie I cannot remember the title of but the bad guy held out a bottle of nitroglycerin.

In any case, I served a few months in the swedish military as most swedish males does and I was instructed to when doing guard duty to fire at the legs of an attacker if possible. Leathal response was of cource permissable if neccessary thou. I was at the time equipped with a submachine gun so "hitting the legs" are a lot easier with a stream of bullets then a simple pistol can accomplish. I also had a baton of some reason but I cannot understand why, If I carry a SMG I will make sure the bad guy doesn't take it from me so I will hold on to it, thus I cannot use the baton. I would rather melee with the butt of the SMG then the baton, at least as long as I still got ammo in the gun.

 

[c0da]

Could you expand a bit on the idea you're trying to get across? Does the terrorist have a gun? What type scenarios are you asking about?

Yes, sorry.

I refer to situations where the police believe there is a suicide bomber who needs to be killed immediately by a shot to the head, because a shot to the shoulder or mid-riff may not be enough to stop the person setting off his bomb. In the UK, it has been called 'Operation Kratos' by the anti-terrorism section of the police force.

 

[Willamena]

Do you think Shoot to Kill is a necessary risk in helping fight terrorism, or an unecessary risk that can (and has in one case) lead to the wrong person being killed.

What of the third option? That it is a necessary risk in helping fight terrorism that may lead to a wrong person being killed?

I'm of the second option, though.

 

[Ryan2065]

Yes, sorry.

I refer to situations where the police believe there is a suicide bomber who needs to be killed immediately by a shot to the head, because a shot to the shoulder or mid-riff may not be enough to stop the person setting off his bomb. In the UK, it has been called 'Operation Kratos' by the anti-terrorism section of the police force.

Those people probably have more training than the average police officer when it comes to guns and I could see them carrying more accurate guns than the average police officer.

My dad was a Chicago cop and a marine and he was taught by both to shoot to kill whenever you feel it necessary to actually draw your weapon. My dad worked in the worst district in Chicago but oddly enough he never had to draw his weapon... He was shot at a few times but he never drew his weapon in those situations. I know I would have =)

 

[cardero]

And what if that info is wrong? A gun can be small and if you take the time to look if the suspect realy has one, you can end up dead. This is so hard. And for a possible suicide bomber, it's even worse. A suicide bomber that know that they are suspected may use their device so stopping them for a search may not be an option. Evacuating bystanders may arise suspicion. Even risking killing an innocent by a "shoot first and be sorry later" policy may fail if the bomber have connected their device to a "Dead man's switch" that automatically detonates the device if they are taken down.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dead_man%27s_switch

So far thou I have only seen they use of that trick in movies twice, in the Terminator 2 movie a guy had rigged a bomb to go off when he dies (he is dying at the time and hold out long enough for the cops to flee). Another example was in a movie I cannot remember the title of but the bad guy held out a bottle of nitroglycerin.

In any case, I served a few months in the swedish military as most swedish males does and I was instructed to when doing guard duty to fire at the legs of an attacker if possible. Leathal response was of cource permissable if neccessary thou. I was at the time equipped with a submachine gun so "hitting the legs" are a lot easier with a stream of bullets then a simple pistol can accomplish. I also had a baton of some reason but I cannot understand why, If I carry a SMG I will make sure the bad guy doesn't take it from me so I will hold on to it, thus I cannot use the baton. I would rather melee with the butt of the SMG then the baton, at least as long as I still got ammo in the gun.

I think different agencies have different policies on the matter, I also think that the depending on the circumstance this decision may personally differ with each individual officer. An officer who doesn’t want to kill but just wants to maim the culprit may be a poor shooter and could end up killing someone by accident. There have been many cases where policeman found themselves in trouble for shooting a criminal who was only taking out his wallet. Agencies are determined to train officers in the prevention of these mistakes. In the case of a suicide bomber, it has been my understanding from the news reports about the man in Britain, who was “supposedly” concealing a bomb on his person and was needlessly shot dead, that the protocol is that you do not shoot a person who is wired with a bomb.