What kind of cops would happily kick in doors for unconstitutional gun confiscation? This kind right here.

https://twitter.com/BFriedmanDC/status/1202961963137093632

I don't count using occupied vehicles for cover as "human shields." 

That's a hyperbolic description.  The Cops were not using the occupants as shields.

They shot 2  civillians.
360 field of fire
Engagement in stopped rush hour traffic
Using civillian occupied vehicle as cover

Cluster fuck all around. I expect more from LE even under stress.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

My only goal the few times I've been shot at is to not die... If that means cover behind an occupied vehicle, than so be it... I'm going home that night, I got a family.

My only goal the few times I've been shot at is to not die... If that means cover behind an occupied vehicle, than so be in... I'm going home that night, I got a family.

and screw the innocent civilians that just happen to be in their vehicles in the wrong place at the wrong time? Serve and protect, what a fucking joke (and yes I've been shot at many times in Vietnam so I know what it feels like). Cops are paid to put their shit on the line and not endanger civilians by drawing fire to them. Sorry those cops are frigging idiots plain and simple.......

and screw the innocent civilians that just happen to be in their vehicles in the wrong place at the wrong time? Serve and protect, what a fucking joke (and yes I've been shot at many times in Vietnam so I know what it feels like). Cops are paid to put their shit on the line and not endanger civilians by drawing fire to them. Sorry those cops are frigging idiots plain and simple.......

I understand what you're getting at, but I'm not sure if shtf my actions would be much different.

and screw the innocent civilians that just happen to be in their vehicles in the wrong place at the wrong time? Serve and protect, what a fucking joke (and yes I've been shot at many times in Vietnam so I know what it feels like). Cops are paid to put their shit on the line and not endanger civilians by drawing fire to them. Sorry those cops are frigging idiots plain and simple.......

Given the attitudes/responses of some of the people on this forum who religiously defend Judge Dredd type police related shootings, you are not going to get much sympathy from those "shoot first and ask question later" fascist goons on this forum.

You are totally 100% correct though.  Police officers are there to uphold the law and have a right to defend themselves, but must be held to a higher standard and not risk the lives of the people they are there to serve and protect.

Given the attitudes/responses of some of the people on this forum who religiously defend Judge Dredd type police related shootings, you are not going to get much sympathy from those "shoot first and ask question later" fascist goons on this forum.

You are totally 100% correct though.  Police officers are there to uphold the law and have a right to defend themselves, but must be held to a higher standard and not risk the lives of the people they are there to serve and protect.

I haven't given an opinion on the actions of the police.

My opinion was on the phrase choice "human shield" in the title.

Fascist goons?  LOL!!

My opinion was on the phrase choice "human shield" in the title.

Picking nits again. 
Using a shield with innocent humans in it between them and the gun fire.

Did you see them trailing behind the moving vehicle drawing fire while the (probably) panicking driver was moving forward basically trying to push the car in front to get away from the gun fire.

and screw the innocent civilians that just happen to be in their vehicles in the wrong place at the wrong time? Serve and protect, what a fucking joke (and yes I've been shot at many times in Vietnam so I know what it feels like). Cops are paid to put their shit on the line and not endanger civilians by drawing fire to them. Sorry those cops are frigging idiots plain and simple.......

Well said mrgaf !

Picking nits again. 
Using a shield with innocent humans in it between them and the gun fire.

Did you see them trailing behind the moving vehicle drawing fire while the (probably) panicking driver was moving forward basically trying to push the car in front to get away from the gun fire.

You should educate yourself on what human shield actually means before lecturing me on how I "nit pick".

Human shield is a military and political term describing the deliberate placement of non-combatants in or around
combat targets to deter the enemy from attacking these combat targets.

If we ignore the fact the police are not military combatants, you're saying the police deliberately put the civilians in harms way in order to deter the criminals from shooting at the police.   

Putting another person between you and someone shooting at you might like a "human shield" situation, but that's not what the phrase means.

If anything, the police were putting bystanders at risk by engaging in a fire fight with that many people in the line of fire.

Words are hard for some people.

I think flaps human shield is used as a phrase rather than its litteral meaning.

Like i posted earlier, even under stress, im sure PD are trained enough to not use an occupied vehicle in traffic as cover. I could understand if it wasnt in traffic and they didnt know someone was inside.

But its obvious there were many cars stopped in the road and they were occupied.  Did they pick the car with the least amount of occupants in it? Was that even a thought?

Although many shootings are evaluated in heinsight, this one is not treated the same.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

Rule #4 of Gun Safety:

Be sure of your target and what’s beyond it.

Seems to me they are guilty of violating this rule. The big question is did they violate any laws and/or their training?

I don't count using occupied vehicles for cover as "human shields." 

That's a hyperbolic description.  The Cops were not using the occupants as shields.

The cops knew the vehicle would draw fire.  If not using it as a shield, they were exposing the occupants to unnecessary risk.

Rule #4 of Gun Safety:

Be sure of your target and what’s beyond it.

Seems to me they are guilty of violating this rule. The big question is did they violate any laws and/or their training?

Cops routinely shoot the place up.  A short while ago, BI HPD shot up a truck in a crowded KTA shopping center in Hilo.

Not being shot at, just trying to stop what they "thought" was a suspect.  Sprayed away and never hit anything but a stop sign.

Cops routinely shoot the place up.  A short while ago, BI HPD shot up a truck in a crowded KTA shopping center in Hilo.

Not being shot at, just trying to stop what they "thought" was a suspect.  Sprayed away and never hit anything but a stop sign.

Not knowing enough about law enforcement, and in particular this agency, it would be beneficial to know what their policies are in this type of situation and if they were followed or broken.

Not knowing enough about law enforcement, and in particular this agency, it would be beneficial to know what their policies are in this type of situation and if they were followed or broken.

Dont kill the hostage sums it up.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

Dont kill the hostage sums it up.

I would think the "go home safe at the end of your shift" is the prime policy of most cops.

Cops routinely shoot the place up.  A short while ago, BI HPD shot up a truck in a crowded KTA shopping center in Hilo.

Not being shot at, just trying to stop what they "thought" was a suspect.  Sprayed away and never hit anything but a stop sign.

Just more evidence of how the "shoot first and ask questions later" attitude among an increasing number of law enforcement in Hawaii has gone too far, especially in the case where the people being shot by law enforcement are unarmed.

BUT WAIT, the segment of fascist goons on this forum who always defend such shootings by law enforcement by saying that they felt in mortal danger and had to unload their firearms to protect themselves WILL DISAGREE with you.

The cops knew the vehicle would draw fire.  If not using it as a shield, they were exposing the occupants to unnecessary risk.

You're talking "cover", not "shield".

Human shielding is putting civilians around military targets to prevent the enemy from attacking those targets out of (1) their reluctance to kill civilians, and (2) their wish to avoid the public backlash that attacking a civilian area might draw.

Human shields are used to prevent an attack, not to protect you during an attack.  If the attack is happening, then the human shield failed.  Your intent is not to survive the attack, but to prevent the attack altogether.

It seems like semantics, but you can't assume the words means one thing when they obviously apply to a more specific scenario.

Cops routinely shoot the place up.  A short while ago, BI HPD shot up a truck in a crowded KTA shopping center in Hilo.

Not being shot at, just trying to stop what they "thought" was a suspect.  Sprayed away and never hit anything but a stop sign.

You should elaborate on just how crowded that KTA area really is. That time of day the fast food drive-in lines are about 20
minutes long. Virtually all the parking is used up. Traffic backs up into the streets waiting to get in to the area.
Target rich, environment,  you bet!  They did catch the woman later at her home, DUH!  This is an island.
Kind of hard to disappear here.