Weaver wrote:Very clear case of suicide by cop. From the moment he exits the vehicle he appears to be taunting the cops to shoot him - then he makes it necessary by making bold, aggressive moves like an attempt to draw a weapon. The second time he tries he gets shot.

He's holding his arms well out to his sides when he exits the vehicle, not holding weapons. Contrary to your earlier claim, he's obviously not charging anyone - he's not moving that fast.

Then as soon as he moves his arms towards his jacket they shoot him dead. This is extremely similar to the Tamir Rice situation, and much less clear cut than the Michael Brown case. I'm guessing it won't contribute to a "white lives matter" movement, though.

Personally I tentatively consider it justified, but barely. My main concern is that they were earlier stopped by a police car, and wait there for five or ten minutes without any police walking up to arrest them or give them a ticket or anything, before driving off. If you're going to pull someone over, shouldn't you tell them what they are doing wrong?

It should be noted that the cops worked to save his life after shooting him, and after making sure there were no other threats from the armed occupants of the vehicle. Good sign of professionalism there.

After waiting at least two minutes, possibly much longer, for him to bleed out? I don't necessarily blame them but it's hardly to their credit. If you really want to save someone's life, you don't let them bleed out first.

If you are engaged in a shootout with an armed suspect, you wait until you think the situation is secure and safe before approaching to render aid. Whether that takes two minutes or two hours is irrelevant - in fact, with two other armed suspects and multiple guns on scene, 10 minutes seems about right to sort things out.

Also, it should be noted, Warren Dew, that it was not MY claim that he charged cops - that was the assertion of one of the others arrested there, countering claims he had his hands up. It was the best info available prior to the video release.

As to other questions - yes, you keep your ambulances well back in the "cold zone" during such operations, and it may indeed have taken time to get them up to the scene after things were secured.

The FBI agents may or may not have been EMTs - I personally doubt it, but think it's likely they at least have some trauma care training - it isn't rocket science. That said, being hit with multiple bullets fired by trained shooters is pretty non-conducive to survival - best way to avoid dying from gunshots is not to get shot in the first place.

Warren Dew wrote:

Weaver wrote:Very clear case of suicide by cop. From the moment he exits the vehicle he appears to be taunting the cops to shoot him - then he makes it necessary by making bold, aggressive moves like an attempt to draw a weapon. The second time he tries he gets shot.

He's holding his arms well out to his sides when he exits the vehicle, not holding weapons. Contrary to your earlier claim, he's obviously not charging anyone - he's not moving that fast.

Then as soon as he moves his arms towards his jacket they shoot him dead. This is extremely similar to the Tamir Rice situation, and much less clear cut than the Michael Brown case. I'm guessing it won't contribute to a "white lives matter" movement, though.

Just how is this similar to the Tamir Rice situation? Did Tamir Rice threaten violence if LEOs pointed weapons at him? Had Tamir Rice been in any kind of seige situation? Was Tamir Rice previously stopped by police and then driven away from them? Did he attempt to drive past a police road block nearly mowing someone down? Did he then exit a vehicle and make no obvious sign of surrender despite it being blatantly fucking obvious that LEOs were attempting to arrest him as part of the bunch of armed protesters from the siege up the road? Given his previous threats, is it really fair to expect LEOs to consider him to be definitely armed and prepared to use firearms in exactly this situation, unlike Tamir Rice who had no previous correspondence with police?

Personally I tentatively consider it justified, but barely. My main concern is that they were earlier stopped by a police car, and wait there for five or ten minutes without any police walking up to arrest them or give them a ticket or anything, before driving off. If you're going to pull someone over, shouldn't you tell them what they are doing wrong?

At this point we don't know what was said or not said at the first stop. Given the previous warnings from the group, would you fancy walking up to their car or would you prefer to hang back and ask them to get out one at a time? I'm guessing that's the option LEOs went for and that the occupants declined their offer before fleeing.

After waiting at least two minutes, possibly much longer, for him to bleed out? I don't necessarily blame them but it's hardly to their credit. If you really want to save someone's life, you don't let them bleed out first.

They didn't attend to him for more than 10 minutes.
Don't know if you've ever done any first aid training but every single course I've done from cub scouts, military, to health care professional, spanning over 35yrs..... 1st principle, don't become a casualty yourself, check the scene for danger. There's still a car with armed, hostile, uncooperative suspects right next to your casualty. They need making safe first before he gets treated. That might seem callous but it's the way the training goes. It took over 10 mins to get the others out of the car and to check the situation was safe.
You want to blame anyone for the delay in him receiving medical care, don't look at the guys following their training, look at the actual cause of the delay, those presenting the risk.

Warren Dew wrote:

Weaver wrote:Very clear case of suicide by cop. From the moment he exits the vehicle he appears to be taunting the cops to shoot him - then he makes it necessary by making bold, aggressive moves like an attempt to draw a weapon. The second time he tries he gets shot.

He's holding his arms well out to his sides when he exits the vehicle, not holding weapons. Contrary to your earlier claim, he's obviously not charging anyone - he's not moving that fast.

Then as soon as he moves his arms towards his jacket they shoot him dead.

Not really - after he puts his arms down he seems to make a series of movements with his hands near his body, and it's not until he turns around that he gets shot.

Warren Dew wrote:Personally I tentatively consider it justified, but barely. My main concern is that they were earlier stopped by a police car, and wait there for five or ten minutes without any police walking up to arrest them or give them a ticket or anything, before driving off. If you're going to pull someone over, shouldn't you tell them what they are doing wrong?

Given the video was from a helicopter, we don't have any sound so we don't have the whole picture.

Warren Dew wrote:

It should be noted that the cops worked to save his life after shooting him, and after making sure there were no other threats from the armed occupants of the vehicle. Good sign of professionalism there.

After waiting at least two minutes, possibly much longer, for him to bleed out? I don't necessarily blame them but it's hardly to their credit. If you really want to save someone's life, you don't let them bleed out first.

Doesn't first aid training in the USA point out as step one that the first priority is the safety of the first aider? It certainly does over here.

I can't see many people putting a desire to save his life above a desire to preserve their own, in a situation where the vehicle contained people of dubious rationality who were likely to be armed and who'd just seen someone they knew shot.

Warren Dew wrote:

Weaver wrote:Very clear case of suicide by cop. From the moment he exits the vehicle he appears to be taunting the cops to shoot him - then he makes it necessary by making bold, aggressive moves like an attempt to draw a weapon. The second time he tries he gets shot.

He's holding his arms well out to his sides when he exits the vehicle, not holding weapons. Contrary to your earlier claim, he's obviously not charging anyone - he's not moving that fast.

Then as soon as he moves his arms towards his jacket they shoot him dead. This is extremely similar to the Tamir Rice situation, and much less clear cut than the Michael Brown case. I'm guessing it won't contribute to a "white lives matter" movement, though.

Personally I tentatively consider it justified, but barely. My main concern is that they were earlier stopped by a police car, and wait there for five or ten minutes without any police walking up to arrest them or give them a ticket or anything, before driving off. If you're going to pull someone over, shouldn't you tell them what they are doing wrong?

It should be noted that the cops worked to save his life after shooting him, and after making sure there were no other threats from the armed occupants of the vehicle. Good sign of professionalism there.

After waiting at least two minutes, possibly much longer, for him to bleed out? I don't necessarily blame them but it's hardly to their credit. If you really want to save someone's life, you don't let them bleed out first.

Oh for fuck's sake.

monkeyboy wrote:

The_Piper wrote:It looked like there was a dog at the roadblock, in the aftermath. Why not have an ambulance there I wonder? Not only for the suspects but for officers involved who may have been injured.

This all depends how long they had to prepare the roadblock, how practical it is to have ambulances covering each route out of the place 24/7 just in case etc.
As Jesse points out though, I wouldn't be wanting to put an ambulance crew anywhere near the scene until all the shooting is over. If you consider the weapons these guys had available to them, there could have been a monster shoot out.

That's why I wondered if there were an ambulance(s) nearby, the chance of a monster shootout with these particular suspects.

Warren Dew wrote:
Personally I tentatively consider it justified, but barely. My main concern is that they were earlier stopped by a police car, and wait there for five or ten minutes without any police walking up to arrest them or give them a ticket or anything, before driving off. If you're going to pull someone over, shouldn't you tell them what they are doing wrong?

Would you walk up to a car knowing that the people in the car are armed and part of a militia?
There's no audio to the video, so I can't tell if they were given commands over a speaker.

ElDiablo wrote:

Warren Dew wrote:
Personally I tentatively consider it justified, but barely. My main concern is that they were earlier stopped by a police car, and wait there for five or ten minutes without any police walking up to arrest them or give them a ticket or anything, before driving off. If you're going to pull someone over, shouldn't you tell them what they are doing wrong?

Would you walk up to a car knowing that the people in the car are armed and part of a militia?

Moreover, a militia that had explicitly threatened lethal violence towards cops?

The incentives in this situation are disturbing to me.

Clearly the law enforcement involved wanted to prevent another Waco or Ruby Ridge (which in turn motivated the Oklahoma City bombing), and so were reluctant to use force to resolve the situation (despite the clear illegality of the militia's actions). That's good in a way: I've criticised law enforcement before for escalating rather than de-escalating potentially violent situations.

But what does this say to protesters generally?

Contrast this with the handling of things like the UC Davis "Pepper-Spray Incident", and you're left with the feeling that protesters are getting preferential treatment for being violent and/or threatening.

Which is surely the reverse of what any civilised society wants.

The most immediate way I can think of to reverse this perverse incentive is to throw the fucking book at the members of the militia after the fact.

Yep, I'm not convinced it will happen though. There is huge pressure from the NRA money men (among others including weirdos like the three %'ers) to kinda let this go, against a huge pressure from most Oregonians to slap this hard. Someone has more money.

Ammon Bundy referenced early on in this thing that he had people 'with deep pockets behind him'. It's worth while thinking about who those people are, and why they were willing to pay him to do this.

Warren Dew wrote:Then as soon as he moves his arms towards his jacket they shoot him dead. This is extremely similar to the Tamir Rice situation, and much less clear cut than the Michael Brown case.

Could you show the videos of where Rice and Brown vowed they'd rather die than be put in prison, because I don't remember seeing them. Thanks in advance.

I heard on the radio this morning the remaining militants are due to surrender in a few hours' time.

A link for more info:

The four people still occupying the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge in eastern Oregon say they will surrender on Thursday morning following a tense overnight standoff with the FBI. The feds surrounded the compound on Wednesday night, and their negotiations with the armed militants were streamed for hours on YouTube. According to the New York Times, the occupiers said they wouldn't shoot first, but they threatened to open fire if if the agents released tear gas. "They don’t want a peaceful resolution, they want to kill us," Sandy Anderson, one of the occupiers, said in the live feed.

Meanwhile, Cliven Bundy, whose son Ammon Bundy led the occupation, was arrested on Wednesday night at Portland international Airport en route to Burns.

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/20 ... iers.html#

Warren Dew wrote: This is extremely similar to the Tamir Rice situation...

It's not even close to the Tamir Rice situation. This character, who was known to be armed and had threatened violence against LEO's, was given the opportunity to surrender. They didn't jump out of their vehicles and immediately execute the guy, as they did with that kid.

It will be interesting to see if the 4 idiots who are left will do suicide by cop.

Should Thursday morning there about now, no?

Yes. It's 9:58 a.m. right now.

Live here. One last guy refusing to leave.
http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/live ... ife-refuge

So glad to see that Craven Bundy is facing charges as well!