Off-duty police officer shoots armed robbers dead while holding baby in other arm

[Deleted]

I'm assuming cops are rational and not just shoot people who aren't actually attacking them.

Lmao. If you point a gun at someone you are attacking that person.´
Even in most liberal countries that gives you the right to kill that person on the spot.

If you are in this situation you are free to wait for the robbers to shoot, its your life.

- - - Updated - - -

You mean killing someone in self defense and there is many country's with laws that disagree with you. Guess what, you live in one of those country's.

I am struggling to think of one country that does not allow lethal force if someone points a gun at you and threatens you. I am not sure there
even is one.

[Doctor Amadeus]

Urgh... you must be a pretty simple minded person. -.-;

Nah, I simply have a mind and it works and I use it, which is more than I can say for the guy in the video.

[Elba]

You mean killing someone in self defense and there is many country's with laws that disagree with you. Guess what, you live in one of those country's.

How is murdering someone that is not attacking you self defense?

Lmao. If you point a gun at someone you are attacking that person.´
Even in most liberal countries that gives you the right to kill that person on the spot.

If you are in this situation you are free to wait for the robbers to shoot, its your life.

How often do I have to repeat myself? Unless you are psychic you don't know if the other person will shoot. Which means when you shoot them you are acting not on facts but on feelings. You should not be allowed to murder someone over the imaginary scenarios in your head but only be allowed to kill someone over cold hard facts. Until the other person starts shooting there is no definite proof of their intention to shoot.

I am struggling to think of one country that does not allow lethal force if someone points a gun at you and threatens you. Not sure there is one.

How si the law an argument? Slavery was legal.

[Jtbrig7390]

How is murdering someone that is not attacking you self defense?

Pointing a gun at someone BY LAW is a life threatening action that someone can defend themselves by any means. Your feelings don't change laws sorry.

[Deleted]

Nah, I simply have a mind and it works and I use it, which is more than I can say for the guy in the video.

And how do you know both the father and the baby wouldnt be dead if didnt us his gun?
Go on youtube and watch some videos where compliance failed miserably, it happens a lot in south america.
That is also the reason why passing judgement should be done very carefully. Situations like this, even for law enforcement, are always very very tricky and often happen in seconds.

I love when people with 25k posts (sitting on the internet all day) pass judgement on people in an extreme life or death situation.

The truth is. You are nothing in life, you have never done anything to give you the right to judge anyone.

[Doctor Amadeus]

How is murdering someone that is not attacking you self defense?



How often do I have to repeat myself? Unless you are psychic you don't know if the other person will shoot. Which means when you shoot them you are acting not on facts but on feelings. You should not be allowed to murder someone over the imaginary scenarios in your head but only be allowed to kill someone over cold hard facts. Until the other person starts shooting there is no definite proof of their intention to shoot.



How si the law an argument? Slavery was legal.

Because I watched Cobra with Sylvester Stallone

[The Oblivion]

How were they a threat? They wanted money. You can shoot when they actually threaten your life.

no, they deserved death. and they got it

[Doctor Amadeus]

And how do you know both the father and the baby wouldnt be dead if didnt us his gun?
Go on youtube and watch some videos where compliance failed miserably, it happens a lot in south america.
That is also the reason why passing judgement should be done very carefully. Situations like this, even for law enforcement, are always very very tricky and often happen in seconds.

I love when people with 25k posts (sitting on the internet all day) pass judgement on people in an extreme life or death situation.

The truth is. You are nothing in life, you have never sone anything to give you the right to judge anyone.

Lol how do you know they wouldn’t have bought the kid a pony and given the money back?

Conjuring and paranoia maybe mom needed to leave her kid in a car with the windows rolled up in 90 degree weather. Guess what I don’t fucking need to. I know you don’t fire a gun one handed putting the very kid in harms way you swear you are just trying to protect.

But yeah keep watching my post count. That will win your argument.

[TheFirstOnes]

Some people: He endangered the Baby, he killed 2 armed ROBBERS that wanted money, and people are calling the totally known threat FILTH?! Facists.

Other people: The Cop did the right thing at the right time, even when off duty.

Me: I agree with the people saying that the Cop did the right thing.

Like, guys, how is there anything wrong with this situation? People were stealing money while ARMED, the Cop (Even though he was an Off-Duty Officer) was STILL an Officer, and had the job done. He had no time to put the Baby somewhere, so he had to make a move on. Now, the Robbers are dead, the Cop did his duty protecting the constitution, and now the World is less 2 scumbags.

You can't defend the robbers here. I don't even know why you'd think that.

- - - Updated - - -

Simple: The person who, in any situation, fires the first shot, is the one in the wrong.

- - - Updated - - -



You cannot murder someone for something that might or might not happen. Unless you are psychic you do not know if the other person will shoot you.

Self defense should be based on facts not feelings.

"The one who shoots first is in the wrong".

So, if someone is pointing a gun into someone's face, and another guy decides to defend the victim by shooting the man pointing the gun out to the Victim's face's first, then that's makes them in the wrong?

What?

[Smellyflute]

Why does Elba think his opinion on this subject is a fact? While I don't condone the guy carrying his child in a fire fight, ultimately I think it was a high stress, extremely volatile situation where every second mattered, and he reacted to protect his children. It wasn't like he picked up his child to engage in the gun fight, it developed while he was holding the child. And to those of you saying put the child down, you can't just put a child down at that age, and leave it unsupervised. It could have been trampled to death.

I find this whole tug of war on the subject pretty hilarious though. You can argue that the first person to shoot is the wrong one, and if that moral code works for you, more power to you, I hope it doesn't ever cause you grief. But I promise you that if you have a gun pointed at me or anyone else with my child in the room, I will kill you. I will not wait to see if you are bluffing. You stopped bluffing the moment you pulled out that gun. I will protect my child, and you will stop being a threat. If you do not wish to be perceived as a threat, do not pull a gun out.

[TheFirstOnes]

Ouch! Those poor baby ears!

Gun's are that fucking loud, come on now. Even for a Baby, he'll still hear perfectly.

- - - Updated - - -

Why does Elba think his opinion on this subject is a fact? While I don't condone the guy carrying his child in a fire fight, ultimately I think it was a high stress, extremely volatile situation where every second mattered, and he reacted to protect his children. It wasn't like he picked up his child to engage in the gun fight, it developed while he was holding the child. And to those of you saying put the child down, you can't just put a child down at that age, and leave it unsupervised. It could have been trampled to death.

I find this whole tug of war on the subject pretty hilarious though. You can argue that the first person to shoot is the wrong one, and if that moral code works for you, more power to you, I hope it doesn't ever cause you grief. But I promise you that if you have a gun pointed at me or anyone else with my child in the room, I will kill you. I will not wait to see if you are bluffing. You stopped bluffing the moment you pulled out that gun. I will protect my child, and you will stop being a threat. If you do not wish to be perceived as a threat, do not pull a gun out.

This is why I don't go to these threads all the time. People usually make weird statements that don't make the slightest bit of logical sense. So, because of that, I avoid them.

[Daedius]

"The one who shoots first is in the wrong".

So, if someone is pointing a gun into someone's face, and another guy decides to defend the victim by shooting the man pointing the gun out to the Victim's face's first, then that's makes them in the wrong?

What?

These dopes would rather see innocents die first before action being taken on these criminals, by their logic... that's the pure blind delusion some of these SJWs possess, and just argue for the absolute sake of it to stroke their misplaced morality ego. Preventing any deaths is all well and good, but if that isn't an option I'd rather see dead criminals over a single innocent being lost.

[TheFirstOnes]

These dopes would rather see innocents die first before action being taken on these criminals, by their logic... that's the pure blind delusion some of these SJWs possess, and just argue for the absolute sake of it. Preventing any deaths is all well and good, but if that isn't an option I'd rather see dead criminals over a single innocent being lost.

Pretty much this, right here.

[berkwaz]

This is child endangerment/abuse, imo. He should have put the child somewhere safe, then engaged if it was necessary.

he tried to call time out so he could but the bad guys didn't listen *facepalm

He

[Saphyron]

First, off everyone please ignore Elba he is a known troll.

Second as a Dane. Who only touched guns while part of the military training in my youth and lives in a country where shooting comes at the most monthly.
While he might have done something different in hindsight I say its good he shot them before they might have shot him and his baby. Self-defense over everything.

Now in Denmark, this most likely wouldn't have happened because A) it's bloody hard to get a gun, and B) it's bloody hard to get a gun.

[Alcan]

He only pulled when the robber pointed the gun and him and his child. After a few shots, the robbers ran outside. He then gave his wife the child and proceeded to follow them. It usually helps to read the article and watch the video. It was very apparent self defense.

- - - Updated - - -

That isn't the debate, the question is about the OP and circumstance therein, this dude was a moron and put his own kid in jeopardy or greater threat.

- - - Updated - - -



Well if you knew anything about guns you would know it isn't fucking hindsight, so yes please keep demonstrating your ignorance, never mind the morals of someone putting their own kid in danger of eating a bullet.

Dude it says in the article that he only pulled once the robbers pointed their guns at him. Its pretty clear in the video too as he goes from holstered gun to firing it in a matter of milliseconds.

[snplisk]

It seems to me like there are two types of people in this thread. The first are the ones living in a fantasy world where this guy should have hit pause, put the baby away safely, and waited until they shot him before returning fire because 1 bullet isn't enough to take down your whole health pool and you want to be sure.

The other group of people is pretty much everyone else, these are normal people living in the real world. They recognize that these thugs are already committing armed robbery which means they have little regard for the law and no problem using violence, this already puts the likelihood of them shooting you through the roof. They also recognize that there are many instances where armed thieves shoot and kill innocent people for no reason even if they are getting exactly what they want, whether it's because they are jacked up on adrenaline and have a twitchy trigger finger or because they are a sick fuck and enjoy it. There is no pause button, there is no "hold on kind sir let me put my kid away safely", etc... there is only the roughly 5 seconds to act, after which your life could potentially be over.

As a member of the second group, I can confidently say that this man did what he had to do in order to protect himself and his family. Honestly society should be thanking this man for taking out the trash.

[Zephyr Storm]

Hypocrite much, I guess your opinion changes based on the thread you are in.

And I quote.

Dude! That’s comedy gold right there! Nice catch! Lol

- - - Updated - - -

You should also see someone about your passive aggressive remarks about putting things up peoples backsides over your overly emotional clearly delusional take on a dude shooting up a place one handed with his kid in his hands.

NO, now if he had ducked for cover, you know places himself between any fucking danger not in frame that actually might have made more sense.

Rrrrrriiiiigggghhhhhhttttt.

I really want to find this fantasy land y’all are living in.

[Polyxo]

What, like this?

[Jtbrig7390]

Dude! That’s comedy gold right there! Nice catch! Lol

Right

/10char