@utility half
Police shootings are usually high-stress situations where adrenaline takes over an officer's response -- but some factors explain why officers shoot as many times as they do.
edition.cnn.com
I think to be able to justify that many shots they would need a very strong argument to demonstrate the person they shot was a direct threat to safety......the video shows Blake casually walking around to the driver's door with the cops walking behind him....showing no urgency to try and apprehend him. As he gets to the car they make a half hearted attempt to grab his shirt. They don't appear to be showing much urgency at all and I would argue that it doesn't appear they did all they could to try and prevent the need to use lethal force, even if they can somehow demonstrate there was an imminent threat from the guy. Blake's attorney has stated the use of seven shots was excessive and indicated he plans to make a legal argument on those grounds.... while he is clearly not a non partisan commentator, he knows the law and I'm sure he wouldn't plan a line of legal argument if he did not feel it was valid and had a good chance of success. He has clearly stated seven shots was excessive.
Look, I don't want to argue around in circles with you....let's just see what unfolds in court. Personally, I'd be very surprised if the action that was taken is judged to have been justified. If I'm wrong, I owe you a coke.
In the meantime, in relation to some of the other reasons raised in the aricle.
1. It appears to be one cop, not two firing.
2. I don't think there is any chance the cop could have missed him from that distance, so that reasoning falls a bit flat.
3. The article states they are trained to continually shoot until a threat is neutralised and not to pause. There is a clear pause between the third and fourth shot.
The third point in particular supports the view that there is a serious problem with under trained police in the US.... which is incidentally, another point raised in the article.