Can you fix the focus on a blurry photo after the fact?
The birth of Mirrorless Cameras
Pentax K-30: a pretty package of a camera
Choosing your first dSLR camera
New York City can be beautiful!
The Fujifilm Finepix X10, A Review
Choosing the Right Light Stand
Photojojo iPhone Telephoto Lens review — AudioCast
How To Buy Digital Photo Frames For An Exhibit - Part 2
Hey MAC users! A great source and an April Fool that is no joke
My week with Q
How To Become A Successful Photographer
"When the Wind Stopped" — poem with 4 photos
Tips for Textures 
Butterflies in Motion
Cast aways - saving those photographic memories
One Man Show: My 25 Years With Digital Photography
Studio, Flash, & Available Light — Three Books Reviewed
Portrait styling: dangerous pairings
Adobe Photoshop CS6 Product Managers Interview Audiocast
A gift of flowers: unfold your senses
On Set of "Love & Robots" the Film
Exhibiting With Digital Photo Frames (DPF) Part 1
Ilford Galerie Gold Fibre Silk Inkjet Paper — Audiocast
Planning “National Geographic” style photo travel
Find Inner Peace and Beauty at San Jose, California, Airport
Wilderness Travel 1 Rainforests – Essential Gear
Backlighting Basics
A Brief History Of Light & Photography: Part 3 of 3
A Brief History Of Light & Photography: Part 2 Of 3
What Moves You?
FIGURES IN MOTION: Decades of Evolving Personal Imagery in Photography, Part 7
Lomography Store, Austin, Texas — GALLERY
GALLERY — Up to $1,000 Reward for Cattle Rustlers
Taking your Portraiture Higher
The "Bible" of Time-Lapse Photography
Interview with Harold Davis — Closeup Maestro of Flowers & Water Drops
Interview with Steve Caplin — Photoshop Digital Artist, Commercial Illustrator, & Author
Easy technique to select, edit and sequence keywords for web
How much should you charge for a photograph?California Cops Criticized For Killing Man In Incident Caught On Video
A Youtube video that recorded police shooting a man to death outside a fast food restaurant in California is raising all kinds of questions.
Police were called to the scene after the man had used a crow-bar like object to shatter the windows at a Carl’s Jr. in Monterey Park.
Steven Rodriguez, 22, then stepped inside the restaurant, prompting customers to evacuate.
Then he stepped outside where he was confronted by three officers, including one who shot him with a taser gun.
But that didn’t seem to faze him as all he did was pull the darts out of his body, according to NBC Los Angeles.
He then appeared to lunge towards the officer in a threatening manner, but the video is hard to make out because it was shot behind a windshield covered in raindrops.
The video has received more than 500,000 page views and more than 12,000 comments even though it was uploaded two days ago.
The main criticism against the cops is that the officer shot him five times, then pumped him with an additional five bullets, which comes across as overkill.
Many are suggesting the cop should only have shot him in the leg or something.
But having covered the cop beat for so many years at newspapers, I know that cops are trained to kill. They are trained to shoot until the threat has been completely disabled.
That’s still not to say that perhaps they could have found another way to apprehend the man.
But then again, it is never wise to make even a hint of a threat to officers because that gives them the green light to kill you
Comments
It looks to me like cops followed procedure to a tee. Told him to stop, he didn't. Used non-lethal force, i.e. tazer to the neck, he didn't stop. He then started to swing a crowbar at a cop's head and was dropped with a full mag before he hit the ground. One less thug in the world.
Yeah, I'm not willing to take a hard line on this one. The additional 5 shots does seem a bit excessive BUT I'm not preparred to condemn them for it without a whole lot more information.
The exact circumstances aren't entirely clear and it is reasonable for the officer to believe his life was at risk..
I don't find the five additional rounds excessive at all. The first five rounds didn't drop him and he was still flailing around, presenting a threat. If someone is trying to direct potentially lethal violence towards you, you're absolutely justified shooting that person until they don't pose a threat anymore.
I agree with the general premise of your post.
Personally I'm not taking any hard lines on this yet, I need substantially more details.
Uh, the public standing around won't get a ricochet or a direct hit? Excessive.
I simply don't think we have sufficuient information to make any solid claims about excessiveness. Either for or against. And in the abscence of more information I think its fair to wait to make a decision.
"Uh, the public standing around won't get a ricochet or a direct hit? Excessive."
By that criteria officers in urban areas would never be able to fire their guns without it being excessive. Officers may be expected to take risk but they aren't expected to let themselves get killed or assaulted due to the remote chance of injuring someone with a ricochet.
I can't fault the police on this one. The guy was obviously trying to attack the cop holding the taser, who seemed to be falling backwards somewhat, and unable to quickly transition his weapon. The other cop was holding a dog and a gun, and had to make a split second decision, which may have saved his partner from a serious injury.
As to the follow up 5 shots, it is hard to say whether they were appropriate, as the suspect fell out of camera view, and we can't see what he does at that point...
"should only have shot him in the leg"
The thing is that it's much more effective to shoot someone in the torso than trying to aim precisely for their knee or foot (which moves more than a torso), because doing so increases the risk of ricochet to innocent bystanders as bullets bounce the pavement. Anytime someone is met with lethal confrontation they should be able to use any lethal force necessary to neutralize that threat, whether it be 1 bullet or five bullets. It's known that even if one shoots an attacker straight in the heart, that person still has the ability to come at them for another 15-20 seconds.
When someone has already exhibited violent behavior such as this individual did when he vandalized this business and threatened its customers, ignored commands from police officers, then taking a threatening pose within striking distance of those officers, all bets are off. I'm happy those officers or anyone else wasn't injured or killed by this lunatic.
Shoot someone in the leg and hit an artery and they can bleed to death in a few short minutes. So just because you hit them in the leg is no guarantee that the wound won't be fatal. It's not a cop show on TV, people, it's real life.
Besides, hitting someone in the leg is much harder to do than hitting them in the torso, even at point-blank range. Ever see any of those cop videos where the cop and the perp trade a dozen or more shots at close range and neither of them hits a thing? Panic and adrenaline will do that to you. Again, it's real life, not some TV show.
Cops are not trained to shoot people in the leg, and I have to agree with the reasoning. The legs are harder to hit just like the head. They are trained to shoot to remove the threat AND to shoot for center mass, ie the torso.
VERY rarely does a single shot end the threat immediately, the goal is to cause enough blood loss to make the subject lose the ability to fight.
Its unfortunate that it comes to this sometimes. My first inclination may be that 5 then 5 more might be excessive. However we need substantially more information to make any real determination and personally I'm not gonna say it IS excessive.
More video from other angles/sources would be great.
And its nice to see another poster who understands the ramifications of the "shoot 'em in the leg" mentality.
Cops were armed with taser, K-9, probably pepper spray, guns, handcuffs, asps, etc.
Looks like overkill to me, Old West mentality, kill or be killed, but were the cops' lives really in danger? At all? Maybe in danger of a contusion.
How's about a little judo to take down a dipshit with a crowbar? Why aren't cops trained in takedown moves?
Didn't need to be killed, he threatened property, not lives (from what it looked like). Hi JL, look forward to your comments.
Yeah you try a judo take down of someone who is swinging a metal bar at your head. If you watch the video, you can plainly see the bad guy was about to take a swing at the officer with the taser. It really left the second officer with no other choice.
I think the officers were too close to the guy but it was a fluid situation with the bad guy on the move so it's understandable.
I have to say that the majority of these comments were a pleasant surprise. I expected a bunch of crap about thugs with badges but even Carlos wasn't too over the top this time.
Well the video shows a much clearer view that the officers acted in a generally professional manner. If we say more of that and less unprofessional behavior it would be great.
There will always be people who will not side with the cops no matter what. I generally view their actions with a cetain suspicion, but this case is far clearer and it CAN be argued that a reasonable (perhaps even MOST) people would have felt their lives in danger. Unlike the other case with the 4 cops getting arrested by the feds for arresting a priest holding a camera and claiming they feared for their safety.. While also saying it was a camera..
Since you seem to express some doubt (e.g. "CAN be argued), what is the basis of it?
Because I don't even see how this could called a "can be argued" situation. Crow bar to the head = life in danger.
Perhaps I was unclear in my point. I was taking a position that they CAN make the case that their life was in danger. I can see that how that was worded that might have come off as doubt. I am not doubting this particular point. Instead I was trying to say that I agree with this position.
I agree with you Johnny. I think the cops were a bit too close, but shit looked pretty intense. I have no idea what was going through their heads, but I imagine it was a whole shit load of adrenaline. The cop that shot him should get a medal.
Perhaps you are coming to realize who the rational ones truly are.
The officer had a right to go home alive, his kids had a right to a father. He did not have to take a crow bar wedged in his liver. His skull crushed. Its horrible all around.
If it was me,and my family,and that guy raised a crowbar to strike me, my wife,or my kids... he would have been wearing all 9 rounds from my H&K 45!
This appears to legitimate use of force.IMHO.
My guess is that if the cops knew they were being recorded, this man either would've been threatened with arrest if he didn't hand over his phone, or arrested just for recording them.
Either way, his footage likely would've been destroyed by these officers.
While its impossible to argue what would have happened in a hypothetical, most cops in California are far better with being recorded than other states. It is a significant part of their academy training. (Of course the deputies in the train stations might be somewhat of an exception to this, but I'm talking out in open public.) Even though Calif has so many cops, you see far fewer of them here on PINAC.
It would also have been highly unwise to destroy the evidence that would clear them of any wrongdoing. So I don't agree that they would have threatened arrest for recording them. I'm sure they would have very much wanted to see the footage though.
Do you have any real world experience because I have lots of stories to share regarding CA cops not wanting to be photographed or videotaped.
Wanted to let you know that I was handcuffed (both wrists are still very much marked up even though 6 hours later) and put into the back of an LA County Sheriff's patrol unit today simply because I photographed two officers standing at the Hollywood and Highland Metro station talking to minors. Both of which, according to the officers, are illegal to photograph while in public.
So there you have it.
A loss of life is never a good thing, but the jovial attitude from the idiots wielding the camera speaks volumes about our society.
K. R, Omen, you read my mind. The guys with the camcorder seem to think they are watching "Die Hard" or something. Schmuck would be the words I use to discribe them. I can't fault the PD here, I just don't like the "directors commentary" on the video.
I think that heavy sweatshirt cost that man his life. From the video it looks like the prongs of the taser never made it through the sweater. When he pulled them out and advanced on the officer to take a swing they had no choice but to take him down.
What cost the man his life isn't the failure of the prongs to make good contact. It's the fact that he tried to take a swing at an officer with a crowbar.
His actions cost him his life, and the taser barbs don't have to penetrate very far and they DON'T even have to touch skin. The usual cop Taser the X26 only requires that the barbs are (combined) no more than 2 inches from the skin. A bulky sweatshirt could be a problem, but if anything the taser could have saved his life, which I argue is different than costing it.
The officer first tried to use his taser, when the guy lunged his partner fired. This looks like an extremely clean shoot to me, and I'd be the first to bark if it didn't appear that way.
5 shots is not excessive, especially happening that quick. That's actually quite common.
Post new comment