Video of SC Officer being shot

concepthomes1 said:
One clear warning should have been all he gave. Let the dude ride the lighting. Even then, if the perp's finger was on the trigger while in his pocket, he may have clenched and shot one of his balls off.
Click to expand...

HIS problem , not mine. Maybe then he wouldn't reproduce more like him.... Win-Win...
 
I'm calling Bull Sh@ (It's Friday right?) You people commenting that he should have lit up the guy would be the first ones crying foul if the video had gone that way.

We could have been reading the chorus of "just because he didn't submit to the Crown's blah blah blah", "just cause her had a gun" And "what crime was he committing?"

Now come at me bro.
 
Last edited:
J R Green said:
I'm calling Bull Sh@ (It's Friday right?) You people commenting that he should have lit up the guy would be the first ones crying foul if the video had gone that way.

We could have been reading the chorus of "just because he didn't submit to the Crown's blah blah blah", "just cause her had a gun" And "what crime was he committing?"

Now come at me bro.
Click to expand...
For the record, I'm not saying he should have shot. I'm not sure what he should have done. All I'm saying is the taser would be a tough tool to work in this situation.
 
I believe this happened in SC 2016. The officer was too nice about it, thankfully he survived. The shooter was recently sentenced, and only got 35 years.
 
J R Green said:
I'm calling Bull Sh@ (It's Friday right?) You people commenting that he should have lit up the guy would be the first ones crying foul if the video had gone that way.

We could have been reading the chorus of "just because he didn't submit to the Crown's blah blah blah", "just cause her had a gun" And "what crime was he committing?"

Now come at me bro.
Click to expand...

I am sure if you try just a little harder you can start a fight in every single thread you enter.

Right now you are at a miserable 95% trolling rate. I think you need to bump those numbers up, son.
 
The best part is that it was from the Officer's personal camera he had attached to his glasses. His department didn't issue him one. Who knows if the guy would have gotten away with it without the film taken by the Officer.
 
$30.00 a measly $30. No since in any dept claiming there is not enough funds for cameras
 
Last edited:
Not at all making fun of the cop...

...but that's what happens when you bring a toy to a gunfight.
 
Bailey Boat said:
Hesitation almost got him killed. This is a part of the problem in today's society, officers afraid to shoot even though it's warranted. I tell you ONCE to show me your hands and when you don't you'll feel the wrath and fury of 60,000 volts. Your choice.
Click to expand...

Except the taser doesn't always work. Especially in cold climates when folks have lots of clothes on.
 
Glad to see the officer survived. Agree that he seems like a good guy, and that he went the extra mile to avoid tasing the scumbag. Sad that his department spent all the monies on that tricked out Charger and didn't have the $30 for the body-cam, but glad of the precedent this sets to dismiss the "too-expensive" line.

Disappointing that it took first-responders over 10 minutes. Apparently, his wife/sister/cousin(?) got to the scene before the fire truck. Good on Mr. Bystander for keeping Smith from going into shock...but I was thinking at the video: "apply pressure to the wound!"
 
I'm not a police man, I would have NOT had taser but service weapon at ready because of his hands concealed in jacket.
This did happen in South Carolina, the officer was shot not three, four, or five times but EIGHT times.

Each of the eight spent 9mm casings were placed on the rail of the jury box during closing,
took less then one hour for the gunman to be convicted of attempted murder, 35 years.

$30 body cam that the officer attached to his glasses put this man in prison for 35 years.
 
I agree he should have had service weapon at ready instead of taser based on suspect hand in pocket.
Taser most likely ineffective with the thick jacket he was wearing.

He was shot eight times. prosecutors placed the empty 9mm casings on the rail of the jury box.
 
Would the taser have worked through that thick jacket?
 
OverMountainMan said:
Glad to see the officer survived. Agree that he seems like a good guy, and that he went the extra mile to avoid tasing the scumbag. Sad that his department spent all the monies on that tricked out Charger and didn't have the $30 for the body-cam, but glad of the precedent this sets to dismiss the "too-expensive" line.


Yes, it was in SC. That doesn't mean Chicago isn't at least partly to blame.
Click to expand...

Huh? Was he not wearing a body cam in the footage you saw? lol

And WTF are you talking about Chicago being partly to blame for a shooting in SC?
 
HMP said:
Huh? Was he not wearing a body cam in the footage you saw? lol

And WTF are you talking about Chicago being partly to blame for a shooting in SC?
Click to expand...
He bought the bodycam himself it was not department supplied
 
HMP said:
Huh? Was he not wearing a body cam in the footage you saw? lol
Click to expand...
Yes. Bodycam that he bought himself from Amazon for thirty bucks.

HMP said:
And WTF are you talking about Chicago being partly to blame for a shooting in SC?
Click to expand...
Just getting a dig in at the OP's mistakenly attributing the shooting to the Chiraquian culture.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HMP
NKD said:
I am sure if you try just a little harder you can start a fight in every single thread you enter.

Right now you are at a miserable 95% trolling rate. I think you need to bump those numbers up, son.
Click to expand...
Yeap, yeap a lot of criticism for me but not one word about my points being wrong.

If it's a choice of being right or being respected by the "mean girls" I'll pick right.
 
J R Green said:
Yeap, yeap a lot of criticism for me but not one word about my points being wrong.

If it's a choice of being right or being respected by the "mean girls" I'll pick right.
Click to expand...

Has it occurred to you that maybe it could be YOU who is the "mean girl"?

Edit: tongue in cheek here, really enjoy your posts. Don't think yer a mean girl really.
 
Last edited:
Bailey Boat said:
There is also a "contact" Taser point on the front that if pressed against the jacket would have lit him up just as well...
Click to expand...

Drive Stun mode only works with that model TASER when the cartridge is removed. So said officer would have had to stop, remove the cartridge then tried to drive stun the guy....subsequently being shot at in the process. A drive stun likewise would have not been effective through the heavy coat.

The primary court findings for use of TASER now dictate the subject be assaulting the officer or in the officers opinion an assault is imminent (clenching fists, fighting stance, pacing etc.). You can no longer just TASER someone that is simply walking away from you or even running away or likewise simply laying on the ground tensing up and passively resisting arrest. That officer may have damn well known he wasn't justified to use that TASER and that's why he kept warning him to stop.
 
J R Green said:
I'm calling Bull Sh@ (It's Friday right?) You people commenting that he should have lit up the guy would be the first ones crying foul if the video had gone that way.

We could have been reading the chorus of "just because he didn't submit to the Crown's blah blah blah", "just cause her had a gun" And "what crime was he committing?"

Now come at me bro.
Click to expand...

For the record. Light him up.
 
Looking at the perps' clothing, I'm wondering how effective the tazer would have been.

Anybody got any insights on this?


EDIT:

I see now some others have been talking about this. Guess I shoulda read further down the comments before posting.
 
Last edited:
Just watched another video of it.

J. Tompkins is a hell of a man, in my book.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom