by Jack
The most correct answer to our police puzzler is C. Soaps, Libby, Toby, Tina, Pie you all got it right. Congrats!
Once the shooting has started police have a duty to act without delay and use whatever force necessary to stop the shooting in the quickest possible time. Seconds could mean the difference between life and death.
Remember the Columbine Shooting? The police grossly erred in this situation and it was inexcusable. They knew there were shots being fired, and they chose to hold back and set up a perimeter and wait for more personnel. This was appropriate for a hostage or barricaded situation, but not for an ongoing shooting situation. Their delay cost lives. The very first two or three officers on the scene should have sought out and engaged the shooters.
Back to our question. It’s never necessary to order the shooter to drop his weapon when he is in the process of shooting, however this might happen as a diversion tactic while other police get into a good shooting position. A good position would avoid, or at least limit, the danger to others in the line of fire.
Police are taught in the academy that you shoot to kill…99.9% of the time this means shooting center mass with as many shots as needed to stop the shooter. An officer may windup wounding the shooter, but I assure you it was not intentional. If you deliberately shoot to wound and the bad guy gets in another shot and kills someone, then you have to live with that and the department is wide open to a lawsuit.
The shooters age and intentions have no bearing in this situation.
How did you do, are you good cop material?
Would you like to see other related questions posed a couple of times a month here?
Maybe we all should have waited for the answer and then we could have all gotten it right.
All I have to add is (audible fart).
LOL….Juanita!
People say I’m fulla hot air – little did they know!
have a good one Jack and all!