I don't understand why everyone is automatically for the preservation of life, no matter how terrible. PEOPLE NEED TO DIE. It HAS to happen in order for the progression of things. He did something stupid and got shot. BE GLAD IT WASN'T YOU.

Suddenly I'm much more afraid of those seemingly joking death threats you've sent me...

Why? Is he an Australian cop?

I'm glad you, or people who think like you aren't law enforcement officers. This kind of thinking gets officers killed. Never mind that this is all hindsight.

no, he lives in my state and threatened to kill me many times

Do you actually think they were acting cautiously? The dual knife wielding temper tantrum was going to get one of the several cops there? I'm not saying there isn't a circumstances where I'd shoot the kid, but this sounds like a bunch of green cops who couldn't calm a kid down. I certainly don't know, but from the way the story plays out, it doesn't sound like they were standing next to the kid when they decided to open fire.

He could of been like us normal sane people who spend all day on the computer! But really, Why was the "happy", little lad who was just a "scared little boy" stealing from a shopping center? And what does his mother say to that?

Calm him down how? By the looks of it, the kid meant business.

It was a powder keg situation. Every bad ending could have happened.

I'm sure they needed to shoot to kill, eh? Pop him in the kneecap? Have a guy in a vest go in and subdue the 102 pound kid? Shoot him with a beanbag gun?

Shoot to injure? Really? Sorry, but no. That's not how it works, ever. As a police officer, if you intend to use your gun, you are going to shoot to kill every single time. Shooting someone in the kneecap would require hitting a small and potentially moving target, greatly reducing the chances of successfully hitting the person. An injured person who was a threat is still a threat.

Also, knives go through vests like they're nothing. Furthermore, no officer would get closer to the suspect and get with in the kill range of a weapon that a person is holding.

I get a bit annoyed when people are like "why didn't they shoot his leg instead?"

"why didn't they just shoot the knife out of his hand?"

I do understand that that isn't what you're saying kIRBY, but I have heard it before.

If I was going to do it I'd have done it by now. No worries.

Hurrah for hindsight, expert marksmanship, estimations and assumptions about police departments?

Considering they were already in a stand off, using foam and stuff like that, anyone who's gone hunting could lay out and pop the kid somewhere safe. I don't think shooting to kill was valid here if they've got the time to fire warning shots and tear foam. I'm not all hippy "preservation of life" here, I just think it sounds suspiciously stupid.

So now cops need to carry hunting rifles so they can shoot knives out of people's hands or shoot them in the knee cap. Got it.

... I genuinely don't see how that's all that unreasonable? I know a multitude of officers who carry rifles in their trunk, I'm pretty sure most of Duluth's officers do, if not just the 4 or 5 I know. Furthermore, if it's a standoff situation, don't you have time to set that up? I just don't see how, in this situation, the cops ever felt they needed to open fire. Something either had to have happened that we don't know yet, or they're green and freaked out.

They need to get tasers ASAP.

Or better training with their truncheons/nightsticks?

Honestly, yeah. They could've probably beat the **** out of the kid, instead.

Maybe they thought the kid had a bomb or something...

.......................holy ****.

That was done by a trained marksman from the SWAT team with a scoped rifle.

I know. I just posted it cuz it was cool.

They probably weren't using sniper rifles. Really, it's no big loss.

How much experience do you have while shooting under stress?

Kneecap shots are for the movies, not actual police work. Center mass = biggest target. Shoot to stop the threat, not to 'disable', 'injure' or 'slow' the threat.

Just pointed out to make sure people get that not every cop can just pick up a rifle and do something like that since people here continually suggest that shooting a weapon out of someone's hand is a viable option most of the time.

When dealing with guns, there should be no ambiguity that they are being used to kill. You don't want a whole bunch of, "Oh I was actually aiming for the leg, but I killed him," situations. That kind of ambiguity just gives police too much leeway to abuse their power, even in the best of police forces.

When a firearm is deployed against an individual, it is considered deadly force- it doesn't matter which body part is targeted. Incidentally, you could kill someone by shooting them in the leg.

What threat was a 102 pound kid with a couple of steak knives? I'm really failing to see a situation in my head where you've got time to try a few different methods to calm some kid down, but you don't have time to get a beanbag gun, a taser, or just have a big guy wearing a couple pieces of Kevlar step on him. That'd be like shooting me dead because I threatened to run someone over with my wheelchair. Oh, it's okay because I'm a skinhead.

Do you know why they do?

So they can kill those motherf***ing Moose when they stand in the middle of the road.

Like I have said before, the worst crime to ever happen in Duluth was somebody had their ice fishing gear stolen.

Kevlar is not knife proof. In fact, it provides very little protections against sharp stabbing objects. Beanbag guns are not standard issue equipment. The department in question didn't have tasers.

A knife is a knife. If someone comes at you with a knife, you tell them to stop and they know you have a gun, and they still come at you, that means it's with an intent to harm you. If it comes to between the risk of getting a knife in my throat, eye, or any other part of my body or shooting you, I'd shoot you.



Unless I am immobilized and lying on the ground with my throat in the path of your wheel, you hitting me with your wheelchair is an annoyance, not a threat on my life.

You fail to see why threatening an officer's life after they've warned you to stop with guns drawn on you is considered a reason for an officer to protect themselves. I'm really not sure if it's possible to reason with that.

"Getting stabbed" is not in my job description. As pointed out above, Kevlar is NOT going to save you from a knife- and even if it did, we don't wear Kevlar suits and full-face helmets.

If you have police with guns pointed at you and they tell you to drop the knife..your best course of action would be to drop the knife. It is very simple: don't be stupid- don't get shot.

He's a 15 year old kid throwing a temper tantrum! He's doesn't think he's in trouble! He's stupid and young and immature. Unless the officers were actually within knifing distance, or an officer got close and the kid turned on him, or something like that, I don't know why officers would just unload on a kid. Maybe that did happen, or maybe it didn't, but I got the impression that it was a bunch of police officers at a mall, guns drawn at some kid while he twittled knives around and screamed about his terrible life. If something else happened, I'm wrong. If that was the case however, I'll make the argument that a different protocol should be developed so something like that doesn't have to happen.

(I think it's important to note that I don't think what the police did was unlawful or incorrect, or not part of their job, but I just don't think it was necessary if it was a distanced standoff with a temperamental kid holding knives.)

Um, no kirby that would be nothing like it at all.
This is someone waving knives around, grinning and ignoring other attempts to stop him.
They used pepper spray, they told him to drop the weapons, he kept going.
That right there makes him dangerous.
And it doesn't matter how old he was, or how much he weighed, a small 12 year old girl with a knife can still kill someone.

I'm sorry, but when you have cops with guns POINTED AT YOU, that's a big clue that you're in trouble...or something pretty close, no?

I don't know anyone that would just shoot someone when another option is readily available. Then again, I wasn't there. I'm also not familiar with use of force laws over there.

The officers have to take action to protect the public as well. They can't let anyone waving a weapon around do so just because they can stand back and not be threatened by a knife.

Eh? The idea I'm getting from your posts is that the teenage in question is just a kid going through a phase, a part of normal(ish) teenage drama. Thus I must say that I don't see how threatening police with large knives and deciding to attack with intent on harm is a fairly average part of growing up.

If you were the police and you received word that a young teenage is threatening to stab people, you would expect that he would react when a gun is pointed to him, no? Many other criminals know when to wise up and sit down when a firearm is pulled. So do you honestly think a normal police officer would expect to grab things such as a bean bag gun, armored vest and other items?

I mean, would you expect an officer doing a traffic stop carry tear gas? Would you expect a cop, responding to a complaint of domestic violence, carry a electrified riot shield? At least they used pepper spray so there was an attempt to cool down the situation with a show of force.