Hard to watch

[Chucky]

This guy is 1 inch taller (6'1') and only 10 lbs heavier (250) lbs than I am an the girl is like 120 lbs and he kicks the crap out of her because she cut his booze off as he was intoxicated. I don't blame the on lookers for not readily getting involved. I would have to say that this guy warrants use of deadly force to stop him from killing her. Oh! did I mention he is a Chicago cop off duty. This video is hard to watch and I saw it on GMA this morning and still want a piece of this guy. Not a good way to start a day. BTW not anti cop just anti asshole in this case.

http://video.nbc5.com/player/?id=83968

[BadBoynMD]

This guy is 1 inch taller (6'1') and only 10 lbs heavier (250) lbs than I am an the girl is like 120 lbs and he kicks the crap out of her because she cut his booze off as he was intoxicated. I don't blame the on lookers for not readily getting involved. I would have to say that this guy warrants use of deadly force to stop him from killing her. Oh! did I mention he is a Chicago cop off duty. This video is hard to watch and I saw it on GMA this morning and still want a piece of this guy. Not a good way to start a day. BTW not anti cop just anti asshole in this case.

http://video.nbc5.com/player/?id=83968

DEADLY force to stop a 6'1" 250 DRUNKEN idiot? Are you SERIOUS? You don't blame the on lookers for not readily getting involved? Wow, that whole statement is just outstanding.

As for cops, as sad and shocking as it is, their just like anyone else. They have attitudes, various disorders, etc. Some of course, like this arse in the video are much worse than others and slip through the cracks and get hired on.

[Chucky]

Badboy are you armed? If you are then you would understand that statement. You have the right to use deadly force if you fear for your life or the lives of innocent others. As far as the onlookers go they appeared somewhat smaller and who knows how impaired. They also may have been scared Sh#tless of this guy as he wasn't playing tag with this little chick.

"Use of deadly force" is often granted to police forces when the person or persons in question are believed to be an immediate danger to people around them. For example, an armed man in a shopping mall shooting at random without regard to the safety of the people around him, and refusing or being unwilling to negotiate, would likely warrant usage of deadly force, as a means to prevent further danger to the community. In the United States this is governed by Tennessee v. Garner, which said that "deadly force...may not be used unless necessary to prevent the escape and the officer has probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a significant threat of death or serious physical injury to the officer or others." In Australia, it has recently been proposed that police officers should have this power when a person might in the future pose a threat to others (see Australian Anti-Terrorism Act 2005).

In general, all armed bodies, be they the police or military or some offshoot thereof, have the ability to issue authorization for the usage of such force

[BadBoynMD]

Badboy are you armed? If you are then you would understand that statement. You have the right to use deadly force if you fear for your life or the lives of innocent others. As far as the onlookers go they appeared somewhat smaller and who knows how impaired. They also may have been scared Sh#tless of this guy as he wasn't playing tag with this little chick.

"Use of deadly force" is often granted to police forces when the person or persons in question are believed to be an immediate danger to people around them. For example, an armed man in a shopping mall shooting at random without regard to the safety of the people around him, and refusing or being unwilling to negotiate, would likely warrant usage of deadly force, as a means to prevent further danger to the community. In the United States this is governed by Tennessee v. Garner, which said that "deadly force...may not be used unless necessary to prevent the escape and the officer has probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a significant threat of death or serious physical injury to the officer or others." In Australia, it has recently been proposed that police officers should have this power when a person might in the future pose a threat to others (see Australian Anti-Terrorism Act 2005).

In general, all armed bodies, be they the police or military or some offshoot thereof, have the ability to issue authorization for the usage of such force

Wow, I REALLY pray you are not armed? I, can tell from this and the previous statement that you're an example of lack of training. That's not you're fault, it's the company you work for.

However, let me break this down for you so you may understand. Pay attention you MIGHT learn something here.

1. That's fine and dandy that you mention the laws of police officers use of deadly force. However, as a security officer you are not even CLOSE to being granted the immunity that police officers have when it comes to use of force, especially deadly force. You can't use deadly force just because you're scared. Fear of your life is bascally the subject having a weapon that can take you out of this work (i.e, knife, gun, baseball bat, pole). A guy being 10lbs heavier than you is not going to get you justified for shooting him. I've seen female officers take down guys this size.

2. There are STEPS in the process so to speak in the use of force. The first step is your mere PRESENCE all the way down to deadly force.

Step 1. Your mere presence

Step 2. Your VERBAL commands to STOP (while identifying yourself)

Step 3. Hands on

Step 4. Use of chemical spray agents (pepper/oc spray), use of a expandable baton (and yes there are levels with the use of a baton)

Step 5. DEADLY force.......

This steps can happen in a matter of seconds and differ from state to state, but are basically the same. There is no weapon being used that I could see. Therefore again, deadly force is not the first option. If that was a first option, you know how many MORE shootings we'd have? This is the reason why police officers spend months and month training before they are cut loose on their own.

If you would have shot this man just, because he was beating a female, do you realize how hard you would be up S creek without a paddle? EVEN worse this being a off-duty police officer? Even though he was in the wrong for beating a female, every cop would have you on their S-list. Your name would be known as a cop killer. Hell take a bar stool and take his legs out.

If you're armed.. please.. please... invest in some classes on defensive tactics and firearms tactics.

[kingsman]

Number one...
This is Chicago, the city and Illinios, the state where they don't let off duty officers have guns. They do not issue CCW to anybody as far as I know.

Number two...
Wanna bet the patrons knew the guy was an off duty cop, and knew better than to get involved less when more cops show on the scene they find themselves on the wrong end of a club?

[BadBoynMD]

Number one...
This is Chicago, the city and Illinios, the state where they don't let off duty officers have guns. They do not issue CCW to anybody as far as I know.

Number two...
Wanna bet the patrons knew the guy was an off duty cop, and knew better than to get involved less when more cops show on the scene they find themselves on the wrong end of a club?

Um, where did you get your facts on Chicago, IL cops NOT being allowed to possess firearms off-duty? Especially sense police officers (local, state and federal) can carry their duty or authorized firearm ANYwhere in the United States????? However, you are correct as Illinois does not issue carry permits, however citizens must have a firearms owner id card to eve possess a firearm.

Well, obviously if they are responding someone would have called, and said there is a "DRUNKEN" OD officer beating the barmaid, with patrons trying to stop him. Once the police arrived they would start giving verbal commands, and if you obey them, you most likely won't see that end of the "club".

[Bill Warnock]

With worldwide media attention now, I'd bet they will not be able to brush this off as "boys will be boys" and take action. Assumption is he will be fired and sued for aggravated battery by the bar lady and the other innocent civilian sucked into this vortex.
Enjoy the day,
Bill

[Black Caesar]

Number one...
This is Chicago, the city and Illinios, the state where they don't let off duty officers have guns. They do not issue CCW to anybody as far as I know.

Chicago Pd allows Officers to carry off duty , Before 1995, they HAD to carry, now it's a choice. What Chicago won't do is certify Retired PD Officers to carry under HR218 , which has ticked off everyone from FOP to the Boy Scouts lol.

From the 1st Article:

Chicago has changed its guidelines to let officers decide themselves whether to carry guns off-duty, and most big-city police forces have similar policies.

From the 2nd article:

Retired Chicago Police officers will be getting letters in the mail soon saying the city won't certify them to carry guns -- a move that angers the head of the local Fraternal Order of Police. Congress passed the Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act of 2004 to allow retired and off-duty officers across the country to carry concealed weapons. But the city is worried about the liability of allowing retired cops to carry guns when they haven't gone through refresher training or undergone mental and physical fitness evaluations. The city also is concerned about the lack of a national database of retired officers authorized to carry guns. . . . The letter to retired Chicago cops says "until these areas of concern are addressed by federal legislation, the Department has declined to adopt new procedures for qualifying retired officers to carry a firearm." . . . Under the city's interpretation of the federal law, the city can't bar out-of-town retired officers from carrying guns if they have been certified by agencies outside Chicago. But the city believes the federal government can't force the city to certify retired officers here if it chooses not to

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Um, where did you get your facts on Chicago, IL cops NOT being allowed to possess firearms off-duty? Especially sense police officers (local, state and federal) can carry their duty or authorized firearm ANYwhere in the United States????? However, you are correct as Illinois does not issue carry permits, however citizens must have a firearms owner id card to eve possess a firearm.

The Law Enforcement Officer's Saefty Act (LEOSA, known as HR218) specifically says an officer can carry off duty anywhere in the United States if the officer's department allows it, which matches what many states do in the same regard (like here in Texas, the law says peace officers can carry off duty, but the officer's department can say "no you can't" and thats that, you can still carry with a CCW license though).

Some department say "you can carry off duty in this state, but not outside it". If you work for that department and violate that policy by carrying out of state without a CCW, you won't suffer any criminal sanctions for carrying off duty if you're covered by LEOSA, but that Dept. can fire you if they find out, and theres nothing you can do about it.

[Black Caesar]

DEADLY force to stop a 6'1" 250 DRUNKEN idiot? Are you SERIOUS? You don't blame the on lookers for not readily getting involved? Wow, that whole statement is just outstanding.

What Chucky said is actually correct. A guy don't have to have an AK-47 for you to use Deadly Force. A guy that big beating someone that small can kill easily, and you can use deadly force to protect the 3rd person in that case.

It's why smaller women could (theoretically) use deadly force in situations where a larger man couldn't. Same thing with multiple assailents, 3-4-5-6 guys cold beat you to death and take your gun if you are carrying one, so even though none of them are armed, you'd be justifyed in doing what you need to to keep that from happening.

[Black Caesar]

This guy is 1 inch taller (6'1') and only 10 lbs heavier (250) lbs than I am an the girl is like 120 lbs and he kicks the crap out of her because she cut his booze off as he was intoxicated. I don't blame the on lookers for not readily getting involved. I would have to say that this guy warrants use of deadly force to stop him from killing her. Oh! did I mention he is a Chicago cop off duty. This video is hard to watch and I saw it on GMA this morning and still want a piece of this guy. Not a good way to start a day. BTW not anti cop just anti asshole in this case.

http://video.nbc5.com/player/?id=83968

Goes to show anyone can be stupid. The guy should spend lots of time in jail.

What gets to me is that this incident if nothing but fodder for the people who are really anti-cop.

[N. A. Corbier]

What Chucky said is actually correct. A guy don't have to have an AK-47 for you to use Deadly Force. A guy that big beating someone that small can kill easily, and you can use deadly force to protect the 3rd person in that case.

It's why smaller women could (theoretically) use deadly force in situations where a larger man couldn't. Same thing with multiple assailents, 3-4-5-6 guys cold beat you to death and take your gun if you are carrying one, so even though none of them are armed, you'd be justifyed in doing what you need to to keep that from happening.

Not to mention that in most states, if not all, a citizen has the same "authority" to use deadly force as a law enforcement officer. Only because they can use deadly force to protect the life of themselves or another, or to stop a felon in flight (very few states allow this anymore for police, but may allow it for citizens who aren't bound by 4th Amendment rules...)

[Chadly]

I see several victim/offender subject factors here.

1) Male Vs Female
2) Size
3) Special Abilities
4) Weapons (Plenty of Glass Bottles)

My opinion, Deadly Force would've been Justified, in protection of the Bartender.

[BadBoynMD]

Not to mention that in most states, if not all, a citizen has the same "authority" to use deadly force as a law enforcement officer. Only because they can use deadly force to protect the life of themselves or another, or to stop a felon in flight (very few states allow this anymore for police, but may allow it for citizens who aren't bound by 4th Amendment rules...)

I'm only saying as a last resort only, not the first option.

[DMS 525]

I say someone should have gone up and thrown a bucket of ice cold water in the face of that SOB, then bent that bucket over his head!!! What a jerk.

It really sickens me, that arrogant, aggressive assholes like this guy get jobs as police officers. Is Chicago that hard up?

[BadBoynMD]

I say someone should have gone up and thrown a bucket of ice cold water in the face of that SOB, then bent that bucket over his head!!! What a jerk.

It really sickens me, that arrogant, aggressive assholes like this guy get jobs as police officers. Is Chicago that hard up?

As sad as it is... some idiots slip through the cracks and get hired on.