←back to thread

Protester shot in chest by live police round during Hong Kong protests

(www.reddit.com)
628 points nodea2345 | 8 comments | 01 Oct 19 11:19 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source | bottom
Show context
program_whiz ◴[01 Oct 19 13:26 UTC] No.21125050[source]▶
Sure, the kid was swinging at the officer, and I suppose that warrants the officer acting in self-defense. But another question is, what are the protesters supposed to do? The government has all the power, and can simply snuff out any resistence. If you just stand in the streets, they really don't care, they are going to take your freedom. Imagine if the US suddenly had a dictator that just decided they were going to take all property rights and freedoms like that -- I think taking to the streets, and even resorting to violence might be necessary (otherwise the powers-that-be have no reason to listen to a bunch of people standing in a street hundreds of miles away).
replies(21): >>21125109 #>>21125130 #>>21125159 #>>21125323 #>>21125359 #>>21125396 #>>21125728 #>>21125946 #>>21126113 #>>21126194 #>>21126243 #>>21126597 #>>21128682 #>>21129125 #>>21129256 #>>21129285 #>>21129663 #>>21130428 #>>21131160 #>>21131429 #>>21140974 #
goblin89 ◴[01 Oct 19 18:08 UTC] No.21128682[source]▶
> warrants the officer acting in self-defense

I question the appropriateness of using a firearm with conventional lethal ammunition.

A rubber bullet in lower body would have had enough stopping power. What happened looks like a blatant violation of any reasonable protocol law enforcement would be supposed to behave in accordance with under the circumstances.

replies(1): >>21128764 #
1. mieseratte ◴[01 Oct 19 18:15 UTC] No.21128764[source]▶
> A rubber bullet in lower body would have had enough stopping power.

No, it wouldn't. I've sustained worse injuries than a rubber bullet and remained fighting.

A bat to the head is a lethal assault. Using a firearm against such an assailant is completely justified.

This has nothing to do with pro / anti CCP feelings. As far as I'm concerned the CCP should be eliminated.

Your assertion is devoid of any reality.

replies(2): >>21129208 #>>21129287 #
2. goblin89 ◴[01 Oct 19 18:55 UTC] No.21129208[source]▶
> remained fighting

Without interruption? Then I stand corrected.

I imagine the point would be to confound, give the time to extract the officer from immediate danger, not to immobilize the attacker entirely with a rubber bullet.

(And you’re right, I should not have phrased that as an assertion not being an expert in the field.)

3. tsegratis ◴[01 Oct 19 19:01 UTC] No.21129287[source]▶
Shooting to kill a 16yr old instead of getting beaten up is justified??

Not where I'm from

--

The only way to end such confrontation is simplistically to love your enemy; or at least stop being quite so mean ;)

Edit: I've never been shot or faced those injuries, but I've certainly been in worse situations than that police officer. So just on that basis that I'm judging his actions

replies(2): >>21129440 #>>21132092 #
4. goblin89 ◴[01 Oct 19 19:17 UTC] No.21129440[source]▶
> instead if getting beaten up

To be fair, the comment you’re responding to is implying worse outcome than getting beaten up, claiming that the kid & his weapon posed lethal danger to an officer who was defenseless on the ground at the moment.

I do agree with the sentiment though

5. mieseratte ◴[01 Oct 19 23:41 UTC] No.21132092[source]▶
It takes one blow from a bat to the head to die. Yours is asking someone to risk death death, not a beating.

Were it simple fists I’d wonder what lack of training these officers have. Weapons are another matter.

replies(2): >>21143286 #>>21195724 #
6. goblin89 ◴[03 Oct 19 03:24 UTC] No.21143286{3}[source]▶
What about aiming not in the chest at least? Would a bullet in a foot have enough stopping power, without being so short of lethal outcome?
replies(1): >>21143361 #
7. dragonwriter ◴[03 Oct 19 03:35 UTC] No.21143361{4}[source]▶
> Would a bullet in a foot have enough stopping power, without being so short of lethal outcome?

Not reliably, which is why every organization that carries and trains with guns trains center of mass shots except for specialized marksmen training for specialized circumstances, who tend to train harder but even more lethal shots.

When you are using a gun, the choices for reliable stopping are nearly identical to those for maximum fatality. If you aren't justified in killing someone, you have no business firing a gun at them, and if you are justified in firing a gun at someone, aiming anywhere in the limbs doesn't make it nonlethal, it just raises the risk to yourself and bystanders by making the outcome less certain.

8. tsegratis ◴[08 Oct 19 18:53 UTC] No.21195724{3}[source]▶
Thanks @goblin89, you are right

Sorry @mieseratte, what you say is true. I exaggerated. Looking at the videos now though the boy was armed with a swimming float as a shield and a relatively thin white (plastic??) pole. It's true that that could still cause a lot of damage

But I wasn't there, and if someone is facing a baseball bat (and others in the crowd had hammers) to the head then you are right, that is a different ball game to what I was hoping for