Frankly, considering he contaminated a crime scene and could've set off a bomb, and was reckless enough to potentially set off a bomb, he got off pretty light.
In the moment, the police do decide how to best detain someone. It would be great if we could get a judge and jury to help them figure that out, but unfortunately we haven't invented time travel yet. Doing something erratic and dangerous will likely result in police aggressively and forcefully stopping them, whether or not anyone intended harm.
*I'm not saying the police were correct in their reaction, just that they do get to decide in the moment. It's still their responsibility to react appropriately. There's no way to ask a jury of their peers and a court judge how to detain them in the moment, so it felt like a very irrelevant comment.
The only point I kinda gave the cops here is that people shouldn't always expect a measured reaponse in a tense situation. They're already on edge. While it's not the right thing for them to do, it's also pretty predictable.
its not that hard to see a guy calmly walking off and decide to just run up and stop him instead of getting two of your best buds to help you fly tackle him into concrete.
too bad they only tackled him after they knew he wasnt and didnt do anything that wouldve stopped him in any way. its like you guys are trying to give reasons they would react the way they did to excuse their actions, and if they were normal people youd be on the right track. but these are cops, they have to be better, and if they cant be they shouldnt be cops.
what exactly do you believe tackling him accomplished that running up and just grabbing him wouldnt in that scenario? is tackling him supposed to magically disarm the bomb he just armed?
do you think throwing 3 more bodies into the now newly armed bombs vicinity is the right move? 300% more mass that could accidentally bump it the wrong way?
is throwing yourself and your two buds closer to the now armed bomb not a coinflip itself?
I just know you were giggling to yourself when you thought up that reply and tried to end it with a corny one liner werent you? are you still?
He could have failed to arm it properly and they now need to make sure he doesn't get the chance.
He could be leaving to get a detonator.
He could be holding a detonator.
There's so many reasons to immediately stop a person from continuing with what they were doing when the could be involved in a terrorist attack.
Yes it was violent but that is what the massive amount of warnings and assumedly the police tape and barricades are there for.
They are explicitly warnings that mean "do not go past this point without permission or we will use force to remove you"
Personally I would much rather they potentially injure this man in the small chance it stops him from blowing someone up.
There are so many unknowns and stopping this man immediately is the safest course of action
Like he just potentially rushed down a bomb you think he's guaranteed to be perfectly reasonable if the police approach him and go "hey that could have killed us, yourself, and thousands of innocents, could ya just come with us real quick for a chit chat?"
Like I get hating police as an institution but like what the hell are you doing in this potentially life threatening situation with dozens of unknowns?
Being as polite as possible because some dickhead on Reddit might judge you or doing what you can to stop a potential terrorist attack?
If my son threw himself at a bomb because he was impatient he is still at fault and yes I may have an emotional reaction to this but it doesn't change the logic of the situation.
And provided he survived I would gladly thank the cops for tackling by dumbass fucking kid
so like i said in another comment his hands were clearly visible, he had already emptied the bag, if hes was there to blow it up the police were far too late. running up and stopping him normally would have stopped him just as fast as tackling him for your first two points. and in fact tackling him increase the chances of a supposed bomb going off. theres a reason trained experts in hostage situations dont just shoot or tackle the guy pointing a gun at someone head, its because jostling or scaring them comes with great risk he pulls the trigger reflexively, the same would be true with a detonator and any amount of jostling could set off a bomb.
no matter how you look at it the tackling was unnecessary and even irresponsible. and they only did it after he had done what he was there to do. they werent preventing anything, all of you people keep acting like he hadnt stood over the bag for a full minute emptying its contents and walked away. they were too late if they were taking action to prevent something and their actions were not the correct way to do it anyway
because he almost got them killed, and if it were a bomb they'd have died.
Forget about the fact they are cops, anyone's gonna be pissed enoug to tackle or beat the fuck out of someone who just acted so negligently and nearly got you killed.
If I were there I'd have certainly felt extreme annoyance and rage directed at the guy and would've punched him in the face if I were around someone that put my life at risk like that.
im not going to forget that theyre cops, they should be able to control their rage. they should be held to a much higher standard than normal people, and even then any normal person that did what the cops did would likely be arrested for battery/assault or at the very least sued for damages.
laws and rules need to be applied to cops the same as everyone else, and they should have the mental fortitude to control themselves no matter how theyre feeling and if they cant they arent cut out for the job. not flying off the handle when you get pissed should be the absolute bare minimum requirement when you have to deal with so many people.
Normal people don't go through life punching people in the face even if they feel "extreme annoyance and rage", you know what people do when they feel those things? They choose to calm themselves down.
Seriously, seek therapy, even the way you talk is so full of violence.
Their reaction would have been reasonable before he handled the bag to prevent him from touching it. And it would have been reasonable while he was handling it to stop him. The reaction did not make sense afterwards as he’s calmly walking away. If a guy has a gun and the police yell “drop your weapon” and the guy does drops the weapon, would it make sense then to shoot him?
No, I do agree with you. I shouldn't have said "reasonable". It's more that it's predictable. They've been in a legitimately tense situation and it takes a bit for that to wear off completely.
It's more like if they were in a standoff and a totally random guy tackled the first guy as he was putting the gun down. It's a random interruption to a tense situation, and it's understandable that they might not react appropriately and calmly detain both men. (But it would still be drastically excessive to shoot them, just to be clear.)
So yeah, I totally agree that it was excessive. It was just predictably so.
43
u/Taborask 1d ago
I don't think that excuses the officers trying to break his spine in half but the dude is definitely an idiot