Officer Saves Woman From Guy Assaulting Her

The Best online firearms community in Louisiana.

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • John_

    Shooter
    Rating - 100%
    21   0   0
    Nov 23, 2013
    3,451
    113
    Hammond, LA
    Well he won't be assaulting anybody with a knife again. In Baltimore.

    Black community leaders outraged.

    “For some reason, white men are able to come out alive, in handcuffs,” said longtime Baltimore activist Bill Goodin. “Now I just don’t understand why we’ve got case after case after case with Black people being killed.”
     
    Last edited:

    John_

    Shooter
    Rating - 100%
    21   0   0
    Nov 23, 2013
    3,451
    113
    Hammond, LA
    After watching this video again this morning, and the first 25 seconds specifically multiple times, the cop was really zealous with his pistol imo. He fired a total for 13 or 14 rounds at the perp, then reloaded. And after firing 12 or 13 rounds and perp clearly away from victim, he briefly pauses and fires his last round @ vic then reloads. I mean like what threat did the perp pose after the first 12 rounds, writhing on the street 3 or 4 feet from the victim? Sure he still had knife in hand but wasn't nearly close enough to anyone to pose a direct threat. And he just absorbed multiple rounds to the torso (maybe 6 or 8 at least). Cop then fires his last round. And seems to have zero concern for the other fellow standing on the sidewalk, in the background, of the officer's line of fire. Or any possible ricochet.

    Why the pause, then the last round given the circumstances? I mean I get the use of deadly force to stop a knife wielding attacker, but why the last round fired?
    Will be interesting to see how this one plays out in the end.
     

    AdvancedLaser

    Well-Known Member
    Industry Partner
    Rating - 100%
    4   0   0
    Feb 15, 2021
    1,125
    113
    Covington, Louisiana
    After watching this video again this morning, and the first 25 seconds specifically multiple times, the cop was really zealous with his pistol imo. He fired a total for 13 or 14 rounds at the perp, then reloaded. And after firing 12 or 13 rounds and perp clearly away from victim, he briefly pauses and fires his last round @ vic then reloads. I mean like what threat did the perp pose after the first 12 rounds, writhing on the street 3 or 4 feet from the victim? Sure he still had knife in hand but wasn't nearly close enough to anyone to pose a direct threat. And he just absorbed multiple rounds to the torso (maybe 6 or 8 at least). Cop then fires his last round. And seems to have zero concern for the other fellow standing on the sidewalk, in the background, of the officer's line of fire. Or any possible ricochet.

    Why the pause, then the last round given the circumstances? I mean I get the use of deadly force to stop a knife wielding attacker, but why the last round fired?
    Will be interesting to see how this one plays out in the end.
    You're right. It was a sloppy reload. Lots of room for speed improvement.
     

    Manimal

    Get'n Duffy!
    Rating - 100%
    13   0   0
    May 27, 2007
    3,272
    113
    Louisiana
    Sloppy reload, questionable initiation of force while the innocent party was behind/underneath the perp/target, would like to see the version without the blur as it looked like the perp "got down" immediately upon command and the blur blocked the knife position before the shooting started, tough situation for anyone to be faced with.

    The chances of rehabilitating a person like the perp, that treats another human like that, is just about 0%. The end result likely saved the taxpayer millions and prevented future victimization of people.

    If a regular citizen shot a police officer who had a gun pointed at an innocent person, and kept shooting once the gun was pointed in a safe direction, not many would excuse or cheer for the citizen. Rightfully so...no special privileges, overkill is nothing to cheer about.
     

    MOTOR51

    Well-Known Member
    Rating - 100%
    72   0   0
    Dec 23, 2008
    6,342
    113
    here
    Sloppy reload, questionable initiation of force while the innocent party was behind/underneath the perp/target, would like to see the version without the blur as it looked like the perp "got down" immediately upon command and the blur blocked the knife position before the shooting started, tough situation for anyone to be faced with.

    The chances of rehabilitating a person like the perp, that treats another human like that, is just about 0%. The end result likely saved the taxpayer millions and prevented future victimization of people.

    If a regular citizen shot a police officer who had a gun pointed at an innocent person, and kept shooting once the gun was pointed in a safe direction, not many would excuse or cheer for the citizen. Rightfully so...no special privileges, overkill is nothing to cheer about.

    giphy.gif



    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
     

    thperez1972

    ESSAYONS
    Staff member
    Gold Member
    Rating - 100%
    10   0   0
    Dec 28, 2015
    5,714
    113
    Baton Rouge, LA
    Sloppy reload, questionable initiation of force while the innocent party was behind/underneath the perp/target, would like to see the version without the blur as it looked like the perp "got down" immediately upon command and the blur blocked the knife position before the shooting started, tough situation for anyone to be faced with.

    His first shots look to hit the guy's lower body. You can see the guy's legs clench after the first shots. I didn't go to school for criminal justice but I would say that is a more reasonable response than waiting for the guy to stab the woman.

    I agree, it does look like the guy "got down." Unfortunately for the guy, he got down with the knife on top of the victim. The guy with the knife was standing when the cop got out the car then, armed with the knife, got on top of the victim. I'm not sure the specific latitude, longitude, and elevation of the knife at that point would have made his actions less threatening. I don't believe the blur in that case matters much.

    You should slow the video down to .50x or .25x and watch it again.
     

    Manimal

    Get'n Duffy!
    Rating - 100%
    13   0   0
    May 27, 2007
    3,272
    113
    Louisiana
    You should be less fragile about differing opinions.

    *edit* Bullet fragments can kill too...the blur did block the hand position.

    The threat was stopped before the last round, pretty obviously, he's not going to stab someone while 6ft away and seizing.
     

    thperez1972

    ESSAYONS
    Staff member
    Gold Member
    Rating - 100%
    10   0   0
    Dec 28, 2015
    5,714
    113
    Baton Rouge, LA
    You should be less fragile about differing opinions.

    Someone pointing out issues with your post does not make that person fragile. And you're welcome to have differing opinions, even when those opinions are wrong.

    *edit* Bullet fragments can kill too...the blur did block the hand position.

    The specific position of the hand within any blur would change nothing about the correctness of the cop's reaction. When the cops pull up, the perp has a knife in his right hand and he is walking toward the victim. The victim is sitting on the ground. The cop tells the perp to get down. The perp, still armed with the knife, kneels in front of the victim then starts to lay on the victim. About 2 seconds later, the cop fired the first shot. Why did the cop wait so long despite watching the perp armed with a knife jump on the victim? Here's a screengrab of the positions of everyone and the angle of the pistol when the first shot was fired. Is it possible he didn't initiate force until he put himself in a position that minimized potential "friendly fire?" I'm not asking if that's what he did. I'm asking if you believe it's possible that's what the cop was doing. And one could easily argue the cop didn't initiate force. One could reasonably conclude the cop was reacting to the force initiated when the knife wielding perp jumped on the victim. And you seem determined for some blur to be covering up something that would or could change your opinion. At what timestamp does that blur occur?

    shot001.png

    The threat was stopped before the last round, pretty obviously, he's not going to stab someone while 6ft away and seizing.

    So other than putting the car in park before getting out of it, what, in your opinion, did the cop do right?
     

    Manimal

    Get'n Duffy!
    Rating - 100%
    13   0   0
    May 27, 2007
    3,272
    113
    Louisiana
    That is absolutely what he did, moved into a better position before firing, and that was never part of my debate. Wanting to see the non-blurred out portion doesn't mean I think the LEO was wrong, just that it would make things less questionable.

    The scumbag perp laid down exactly when and where the LEO told him to. Yes, it was on top of the victim.

    If he had moved to a clear spot he would -not- have been obeying the command to get down, and he'd have been shot...you know this. If he had thrown the knife aside and done the same thing he'd probably still be alive.

    I actually did not say that the LEO did anything wrong, except that he was overzealous in his "stopping the threat" with the last shot. That's just my opinion.

    The girl is lucky that she didn't get fragments in her.

    Otherwise, questioning something is not accusing of wrongdoing. The LEO/pro-authoritarian staff here struggles to understand that apparently, that in reality not everything LEOs do is correct or perfect...and that they can improve.

    Do I think the LEO is a murderer that deserves prison? No...not at all.

    It was a "Tough situation for anyone to be faced with."

    It's not like a LEO stopping traffic at a blind corner for non-moving offenses, so they can get extra pay through court appearance time on their check before Christmas, victimizing people for their personal gain while pretending to provide a public service with a smile. That's not tough, just unethical.
     

    pptpe45

    Well-Known Member
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Mar 29, 2012
    108
    28
    Are we overlooking that the perp started this whole affair? If he does not threaten the woman with the knife, he does not get shot. Don't feel for the perp. He took actions that put his life in danger. He is at fault for everything that transpired after his actions. And I won't get into the 9mm debate.
     

    thperez1972

    ESSAYONS
    Staff member
    Gold Member
    Rating - 100%
    10   0   0
    Dec 28, 2015
    5,714
    113
    Baton Rouge, LA
    That is absolutely what he did, moved into a better position before firing, and that was never part of my debate. Wanting to see the non-blurred out portion doesn't mean I think the LEO was wrong, just that it would make things less questionable.

    Again, at what timecode is the blur that has you so concerned?

    The scumbag perp laid down exactly when and where the LEO told him to. Yes, it was on top of the victim.

    If he had moved to a clear spot he would -not- have been obeying the command to get down, and he'd have been shot...you know this. If he had thrown the knife aside and done the same thing he'd probably still be alive.

    No, I do not know this. In fact, I would say you are probably the only one who does know this. Cops don't shoot people for not following directions. The guy could have stood there, even holding the knife, and it's unlikely he would have been shot. The guy could have slowly taken 5 steps away from the victim, even while holding the knife, and it's unlikely he would have been shot. To imply the guy was shot because he followed the cop's command to a T is just dishonest. He was shot because his actions were threatening to someone else.

    I actually did not say that the LEO did anything wrong, except that he was overzealous in his "stopping the threat" with the last shot. That's just my opinion.

    The girl is lucky that she didn't get fragments in her.

    Yes she is. But if you take a poll, I'd bet you would find that the overwhelming majority of people would prefer a little bit of fragments over a knife in the chest.

    Otherwise, questioning something is not accusing of wrongdoing. The LEO/pro-authoritarian staff here struggles to understand that apparently, that in reality not everything LEOs do is correct or perfect...and that they can improve.

    "questionable initiation of force while the innocent party was behind/underneath the perp/target"
    "would like to see the version without the blur as it looked like the perp 'got down' immediately upon command"
    "If a regular citizen shot a police officer who had a gun pointed at an innocent person, and kept shooting once the gun was pointed in a safe direction, not many would excuse or cheer for the citizen."

    So the fact the cop even pulled the trigger is questionable. And the cop shot someone who was complying with the cop's command. And he got away with everything because he's a cop. Gee, now why would anyone think you're accusing the cop of wrongdoing.

    The LEO's on here already know not everything LEO's do is correct or perfect. The only struggle is in dealing with the people who believe LEO's are never correct.

    Do I think the LEO is a murderer that deserves prison? No...not at all.

    It was a "Tough situation for anyone to be faced with."

    It's not like a LEO stopping traffic at a blind corner for non-moving offenses, so they can get extra pay through court appearance time on their check before Christmas, victimizing people for their personal gain while pretending to provide a public service with a smile. That's not tough, just unethical.

    Oh, are you referring to that non-blind blind corner right off LSU's campus?
     

    MOTOR51

    Well-Known Member
    Rating - 100%
    72   0   0
    Dec 23, 2008
    6,342
    113
    here
    Again, at what timecode is the blur that has you so concerned?



    No, I do not know this. In fact, I would say you are probably the only one who does know this. Cops don't shoot people for not following directions. The guy could have stood there, even holding the knife, and it's unlikely he would have been shot. The guy could have slowly taken 5 steps away from the victim, even while holding the knife, and it's unlikely he would have been shot. To imply the guy was shot because he followed the cop's command to a T is just dishonest. He was shot because his actions were threatening to someone else.



    Yes she is. But if you take a poll, I'd bet you would find that the overwhelming majority of people would prefer a little bit of fragments over a knife in the chest.



    "questionable initiation of force while the innocent party was behind/underneath the perp/target"
    "would like to see the version without the blur as it looked like the perp 'got down' immediately upon command"
    "If a regular citizen shot a police officer who had a gun pointed at an innocent person, and kept shooting once the gun was pointed in a safe direction, not many would excuse or cheer for the citizen."

    So the fact the cop even pulled the trigger is questionable. And the cop shot someone who was complying with the cop's command. And he got away with everything because he's a cop. Gee, now why would anyone think you're accusing the cop of wrongdoing.

    The LEO's on here already know not everything LEO's do is correct or perfect. The only struggle is in dealing with the people who believe LEO's are never correct.



    Oh, are you referring to that non-blind blind corner right off LSU's campus?

    The funny thing is that he thinks those tickets end up in a court battle making us Christmas money


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
     

    AdvancedLaser

    Well-Known Member
    Industry Partner
    Rating - 100%
    4   0   0
    Feb 15, 2021
    1,125
    113
    Covington, Louisiana
    It's not like a LEO stopping traffic at a blind corner for non-moving offenses, so they can get extra pay through court appearance time on their check before Christmas, victimizing people for their personal gain while pretending to provide a public service with a smile. That's not tough, just unethical.
    You are that same guy who calls Internal Affairs for a cop you perceive to be speeding in his unit, and then call again the next week because you dialed 911 and they weren't arriving fast enough for your liking.

    They are out there actually working and writing tickets and you dont like it but guaranteed you would see them at the local donut shop and complain they are never doing their jobs.

    If you don't like the self-perceived incorrect non moving offenses, tell us all what you have done legislatively to amend it.
     

    Manimal

    Get'n Duffy!
    Rating - 100%
    13   0   0
    May 27, 2007
    3,272
    113
    Louisiana
    I assure you that I have never called the police to help me with a problem, nor have I ever called IA on a LEO.

    I have called police for/to:
    -Report a dead body in a dumpster.
    -Report reckless drivers with unsecured children in the vehicle, where I could provide LP#.
    -Arrest a DUI that I stopped myself. (His would-be 10th DUI, police testified on his behalf, got the judge to deny my testimony, and got him a reckless operation. His lawyer is a former cop. Another cop yelled at me outside of the courtroom, because "some of those DUIs were 20 years old!" It must have been a cop or family member, and I hurt some feels. He crapped all over himself and peed into his own shoe/on his phone, because he was too drunk to get his seat belt & pants all the way off. You be the judge.)

    But go on...because that is some funny stuff lol!
     

    dwhaley929

    Well-Known Member
    Rating - 100%
    33   0   0
    Dec 14, 2016
    508
    43
    Baton Rouge LA
    I would bet that when dealing with a public that says things like "why didn't he shoot him in the leg" or "why didn't he shoot the gun/knife out of his hand", the number of shots fired and that little time gap before the last round will play big in the wrongful death lawsuit that's sure to be filed.
     

    thperez1972

    ESSAYONS
    Staff member
    Gold Member
    Rating - 100%
    10   0   0
    Dec 28, 2015
    5,714
    113
    Baton Rouge, LA
    I assure you that I have never called the police to help me with a problem, nor have I ever called IA on a LEO.

    I have called police for/to:
    -Report a dead body in a dumpster.
    -Report reckless drivers with unsecured children in the vehicle, where I could provide LP#.
    -Arrest a DUI that I stopped myself. (His would-be 10th DUI, police testified on his behalf, got the judge to deny my testimony, and got him a reckless operation. His lawyer is a former cop. Another cop yelled at me outside of the courtroom, because "some of those DUIs were 20 years old!" It must have been a cop or family member, and I hurt some feels. He crapped all over himself and peed into his own shoe/on his phone, because he was too drunk to get his seat belt & pants all the way off. You be the judge.)

    But go on...because that is some funny stuff lol!

    What's funny is your repeated reliance on some blur to makes the cop's actions questionable and your resistance to identify what blur you're referring to.
     

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    195,232
    Messages
    1,546,155
    Members
    29,172
    Latest member
    ksgunner82
    Top Bottom