GA Tech

How would the Militsiya have handled this situation?

We want to abolish the conditions that made the concept of "suicide by cop" in the first place. This situation would be handled by never happening.

I was thinking about posting about this.

Honestly on the fence about this incident.

On the one hand, a cop car got burned. I think that's cool. And it's nice that after right wing idiots panicking about my city for so long every time somebody marched, somebody finally does something like that. Chances of real shit fires happening here are low, but maybe things are changing.

On the other hand, he asked that cop to shoot him. As much as I hate cops, and as dubious as any threat here seems to have been, assisted suicide seems like a nice thing to do. Probably illegal, so pigs don't deserve special treatment, but still… nice of a cop to help out for once.

Um, sweetie.
Mentally ill individuals will always exist. Abolition of the state doesn't solve everything.
If someone who is clearly distraught starts walking up to you, threatening you with a knife, what do you do?

He had like a Swiss Army knife. Until clarification, I'm gonna say my reaction probably would not be to shoot when I could probably neutralize the threat with a thick piece of cardboard.

Also, they could have tazed. There were more than one of them, it seems like there's some other way they'd be trained to deal with this.

If street execution is the protocol, why train them at all? I could do that.

Deflection.
Did suicides in Russia or China completely stop happening after 1917/1949?
How would the revolutionary guard handle this unfortunate situation if it were to occur?
The uncomfortable truth is: the exact same way.

He had called in and said that he had a gun. For all they knew he had one in his pocket.
If you shoot him in the leg or arm you could hit a major artery and kill him even faster.
The cops didn't have tasers (which they should've) but those aren't always effective.

He also screamed "Shoot Me!" He wanted to die.

So that means he deserved to die?

Yes?
Or is assisted suicide reactionary bourgeoisie nonsense now?

Thats not assisted suicide tho.

He wanted to die.

He didn't, and even if he did it probably wouldn't justify execution.


I didn't even bring this up. They almost certainly had a non-shooting method to handle such events, and if they didn't - why not?

There were more than one of them, and just the one him.


People say this a lot.
The likelihood of hitting someone who won't be affected by it isn't high enough to mitigate the benefits of trying a non-lethal method. Worst case they accidentally kill him with it. I agree that they probably should have carried them anyhow.


I covered this in my first post. I like assisted suicide. But it's not legal in my state. Nor is it a police officer's job. This doesn't get them off the hook legally, and I have no reason to believe that it should.

The problem isnt that the dude wanted to die. The problem is that the police 'felt' that they had no choice to shoot that unarmed mentally suffering dude because they have no restraint and are trained to have no discretion or restraint.

Whatever man.

Just perplexed as to why this warrants such outrage on idpol twitter. Soviet Militsiya would've killed him the same way.

Very easy to kill someone with an exacto knife.

Here's your mistake. Idpol twitter isn't Soviet.

You are informed that someone is carrying a knife and a gun and walking around menacingly on campus…
They refuse to drop the knife and keep advancing towards you, and you don't know where the alleged gun is…
What do you do?

Dont you mean: One multi-purpose tool that contained a knife was recovered from the scene.

Because when I think deadly situation that has no solution other than defending your life by shooting the guy I think leatherman multitools.

I'm glad people are rioting and they have plenty of reason to in general but this reason in particular is dumb. Dude was mentally ill and wanted to die, he literally got exactly what he wanted. I feel no compulsion to come to the aid of his memory and try to pretend deep down he wanted to live and therefore deserved to. It doesn't matter to me at all.

see>>2087292
He had reported that the student walking around campus (which was himself) also had a gun.

Thank you. Fucking pick your battles.

Yea so?

I already answered this in my second post in this thread.

How do you clarify they don't have a gun?
Wait them to walk up to you and empty their pockets and hope they don't stab you? Or pull out the gun they claimed they had and shoot you?

How about a taser? How about you stand far away from them so that there isn't the threat that they can rapidly close the distance and use that knife they have? How about you notice that this person is mentally ill and acting erratic, and thus they don't deserve to die but to undergo counseling, receive meds, basically receive help?

They didn't know he claimed to have it, though, did they? Did he do it again once they arrived?

Anyone can call the cops and say they saw somebody with a gun.

In the immediate, the only thing pointed at them was the tool. I'd concern myself with that. Pick up a piece of cardboard, and either knock the thing out of his hand or keep him distracted long enough for my partner to tackle him.

Even better, I could use a baton. Officers here still have those.

Either way, once he's down they're free to clarify if he has a gun or not. Otherwise, if it's not visible, it's hearsay. As it stands, somewhat ironically (but not really), if he had a gun drawn and the intent to kill officers he'd probably have made it a little longer. Shame about that.

Training people just so they can go out and escalate potentially violent situations is probably not a good idea. If "put yourself in their shoes" is a valid defense for people who hold trained and paid and armed positions, then I really should get training, cash, authority, and a gun to come with indulging such a hypothetical.

In britbongland, the cops would have just bodied him with riot shields. Seriously, its that simple