Man with knife on streetcar at Dundas and Grace, shot by police
- Thread starter Shrugged
- Start date
I don't want to debate the details of this situation because I just can't see the situation well enough on that video.
I am just saying in general at ten feet or so a knife is a lethal weapon. You can run and plunge it into someone's chest in maybe three seconds at that distance.
Why they didn't back off or whether it was really ten feet or what I cannot tell from the video.
Whatever.
Cops can make up their own story. shoot first. answer questions later.
usually thats what they do.
remember that polish guy in british columbia?
'he resisted arrest'
'he came at us with a stapler'
'he came at us with a knife.'
until someone presents videotape evidence that tells the opposite story...
then the police try to bury the evidence.
amazing examples of the law.
The police acted appropriately in this situation, according to Canadian Law on the subject. TO cops don't carry tazers, so it's a non-argument.
Here's a little graphic for context, for those of you who are not in the know:
As you can see, the officers acted in a manner that was Subjectively Reasonable in this situation. It's easy to pull an armchair analysis but it looks different from the front line.
Here's a little graphic for context, for those of you who are not in the know:
As you can see, the officers acted in a manner that was Subjectively Reasonable in this situation. It's easy to pull an armchair analysis but it looks different from the front line.
Let's recap what happened here
1. Crazy man wields a knife on a public transit vehicle presenting an extremely dangerous situation for any member of the public
2. The police arrive
3. Crazy man is no longer a threat to anyone's safety
Hopefully it is incentive for those stupid enough to carry a weapon to re-evaluate the need for it.
For the bleeding-heart liberals who have immediately jumped to the premature conclusion the Police acted with excessive force:
a) The TTC is now that much safer for you and your family to use
b) The incident will be properly investigated. The police take discharging their weapons very seriously.
Hopefully you will never really need a policeman, however you are protected from violence everyday by their presence on our streets
1. Crazy man wields a knife on a public transit vehicle presenting an extremely dangerous situation for any member of the public
2. The police arrive
3. Crazy man is no longer a threat to anyone's safety
Hopefully it is incentive for those stupid enough to carry a weapon to re-evaluate the need for it.
For the bleeding-heart liberals who have immediately jumped to the premature conclusion the Police acted with excessive force:
a) The TTC is now that much safer for you and your family to use
b) The incident will be properly investigated. The police take discharging their weapons very seriously.
Hopefully you will never really need a policeman, however you are protected from violence everyday by their presence on our streets
You've been watching too many Hollywood movies I think. This situation reminds me of a Flashpoint episode (they need to bring that show back) that dealt with this exact subject.
I'd like to know the criminal history of the man in question and what exactly happened i.e. how did the police get involved if the streetcar was empty? Did the man threaten the driver with the knife or someone outside the streetcar? Lots of questions that the SIU will investigate.
I believe dreamblade is right in that once the cops exhaust all other options, they have to use lethal force so shooting someone in the leg is not an option.
Remember that guy who was cutting the throats of subway passengers a few months ago? So, does anybody think that a man waving a knife is not a danger?
If I have a gun, and am being threatened with great physical harm by somebody armed with a lethal weapon, or who is even just clearly way stronger than me and has me trapped in a position where I might suffer severe injuries, and if I have no easy means of escape, and if I can get to that gun, I will shoot that person as many time as it takes to be sure he is no longer a threat.
I'll take my chances on a self-defence plea while being still alive.
If I was a cop in the same situation, its my duty to protect others as well as myself, so I am not allowed the luxury of escape. Then if its him or me.....it's him every time, and without hesitation!
The issue would be level of threat. The other person's colour or nationality would not enter into it at all.
Just sayin'.
I'll take my chances on a self-defence plea while being still alive.
If I was a cop in the same situation, its my duty to protect others as well as myself, so I am not allowed the luxury of escape. Then if its him or me.....it's him every time, and without hesitation!
The issue would be level of threat. The other person's colour or nationality would not enter into it at all.
Just sayin'.
While its nice to have the police represented on this board, don't you think you should wait until the SIU investigation is complete, officer, before you declare innocence?
Yeah, that's who I was referring to. Totally shameful that Kashkar got off on 'not criminally responsible.'This woman would agree
Which means he will be confined in a max security nut house indefinitely, instead of prison. The law has ALWAYS been that those who are totally, delusionally psychotic are not found guilty, but rather are hospitalized. It goes back to the old days when murderers were hanged and the judges balked at hanging a person who was so mentally ill that he could not have realized what he had done.
