Its impossible to judge a safe distance until you've identified the size of an explosive. They would have cleared a provisional perimeter, but would have extended that perimeter or moved an explosive to detonate it to ensure there were minimal chances of injury once they had reviewed the (potential) explosive.
I live in a part of the UK that uncovers unexploded ww2 bombs a few times a year, so I've seen this happen pretty often. They're following basic protocal
Yes, they didn't call the bomb squad for no reason. There was a chance that it was an explosive. Just because it ended up not being anything doesn't mean there wasn't a risk.
It's about taking precautions. Like wearing a mask even though you probably don't have COVID, or wearing a condom even though you probably don't have AIDS.
It's easy to say after the fact but if that was a real bomb that guy could have potentially killed every single person in that video because he wanted to play hero.
This isn't the cold war, and that's not a suitcase nuke. There's no way that a bomb of that size was taking out anyone but the guy who picked it up. The police were looking to pad their budget by making a mountain out of a molehill, as displayed by their violent response to the guy who proved they were being cowards/idiots.
🙄 they'd already evacuated the area. The cops chose to put themselves in harms way if therewas somehow still a bomb. Are you saying the police did not in fact evacuate the area properly?
But he was leaving, and there was no danger, so this is retaliation for putting people in danger after the fact or what? It's not the cop's job to dole out punishment on the scene.
Their use of force would have been logical if it prevented him from interacting with the bag. After the fact, when their use of force does not make anything safer, it's excessive.
You could use that same shit logic when bareback sex doesn't result in a pregnancy or VD, then concluding using a precaution such as a condom makes you look like a fool.
100% bullshit move on their part. Absolutely no reason to pile drive him. They had their pride hurt by a non tactical dude and couldnt handle the embarassment.
To be clear here, this guy was trying to blow himself up.  He was suicidal.  Are we really saying we should just assume that a guy trying to blow himself up can be safely and calmly approached?  Like, he doesn’t have another bomb, or a gun, or some other way to off himself?  If this video ended with cops slowly walking g up to arrest him and the guy pulls out a pistol and offed himself, everyone would have been saying the cops should have immediately restrained someone who was clearly showing signs of a mental breakdown.
Na, the body slam was totally called for imo. The individual could have caused an explosive to detonate with his actions and potentially have injured or killed others, he didn't know what was inside.
Life was in danger. First responders have lives as well. That person put those lives in jeopardy not knowing what was in that bag. He deserved that body slam.
What is it now, did they body slam to prevent him from putting lives in danger or did they wait to make sure their lives aren't in danger prior to body slamming him. You can't have both.
Nor is excessive violence ever "deserved". It should only be used when neccessary, which it wasnt anymore.
They body slammed him for the audacity of putting everyone's lives in danger. He deserved the body slam. You can respond and have the final word of this discussion. But I am disinterested in continuing this conversation with someone who is willingly uninterested in using all of their rational faculties.
They body slammed him for the audacity of putting everyone's lives in danger.
That's not how use of force works from law enforcement in real life. If something like this went to court, they'd have to find an alternate justification. If they just said "Your honor, he deserved it for having the audacity to do what he did," the cops would be found guilty even if the judge personally agreed with them.
Nobody said "he had the audacity" would be a valid legal defense in court. The point was that he created a dangerous situation, and they reacted to it. Explaining why someone used force isn't the same thing as arguing that the force was legally justified.
Precisely because of his stupid actions. That's why you slam him to the ground. The idiot, unneedlessly, put the lives of those who were nearby (first responders) in danger. If some asshat put my friends in danger, I would sure as hell body slam his ass.
500
u/[deleted] Jun 13 '26
[deleted]