It Wasn't Police Brutality

A couple of weeks ago I wrote about a local story involving the shooting of an alleged armed robber - shot by the police 18 times - and how I thought the police were justified. Wow - did I receive hate email! Everyone thinks 18 shots are "excessive" and "brutal."

First off, isn't armed robbery brutal? Excuse me, alleged armed robbery.

Next, isn't it just plain stupid to wave guns at cops? Isn't there some personal responsibility required?

Let's look at the facts, then we'll get to the update.

• (Name withheld)allegedly robbed Passport Pizza at gun point
• He led police on a car chase
• At the conclusion of the car chase, he fled his car with a gun in hand
• It turns out the gun was actually a BB gun
• The BB gun looked like a standard issue lethal weapon
• Police officers, multiple times, ordered him to drop the gun and get on the ground
• He ignored them and pointed the gun at an officer
• Five police officers fired multiple times, hitting him 18 times

Ok, here's the update, then we'll look at analysis:

The Macomb County Prosecutor's Office said Thursday that five township police officers were "justified in the use of deadly force" in the shooting of a 35-year-old Mt. Clemens man, according to Clinton Township police.

The officers have been on administrative leave since the Jan. 27 incident.

Most people wrote emails saying the cops should have shot the gun out of his hand. Since 18 shots seems to make people upset, let's analyze why the police were justified:

1. Police can't shoot the alleged perp in the hand and disable him for three reasons. First, this was a life-and-death situation according to the information they had at the time. This man had, according to their information, just committed armed robbed at a store (a violent crime, not some jay-walking ticket). He had a gun. Second, he pointed the gun at them. Officers are trained to shoot at the center-of-mass and continue shooting until the threat has ended. Third, if the cops could just shoot the gun out of his hand, trial attorneys would be all over the township with lawsuits. The police may not discharge a firearm except to end the threat by firing at the center-of-mass.
2. He pulled a gun on five cops... 18 shots means each officer fired three to four times. Since the "double tap" isn't taught anymore, even among civilian self-defense classes, there is no way three or four shots from an officer can be construed as "overkill." Sure - there were 18 shots total, but that came from FIVE police officers.
3. All five officers had to fire. You can't have one guy shoot and the rest watch.
4. He pulled a gun on cops (felony) after fleeing in a car chase (felony) - after an (alleged) armed robbery (felony).
5. After Clinton Township officers shot (name withheld), deputies from the Macomb County Sheriff's Office shot him with a Taser because he was still holding the gun after being shot.
6. He didn't die on the scene. The police really did shoot until the threat had ended.
   
7. Witnesses corroborate the police version of the story.
8. So what if it was a BB gun? That is irrelevant. This man created his own problem when he produced a threat to police. Imagine if this happened in your house. You walk downstairs and this guy pulls out a gun, you shoot him, the cops come and find out it was a BB gun. Do you go to jail for murder or did you have reasonable belief this guy was going to shoot?

It wasn't police brutality. It was legitimate self-defense and appropriate action taken by policemen put in a potentially life-threatening situation based on all the information they had. Case closed.

As a sidenote, I personally want to thank all the LEOs out there for working to keep our streets safe.