I understand the logic of that, but it appears they had him cornered. And I realize he was supposedly saying things like he had deployed IEDs and perhaps they thought he had RF detonation abilities etc.
Where do you draw the line between the cops neutralizing a threat and the cops giving all the full benefit of the law? I guess confusion and disagreement as to where that line is - is what got us here in the first place. From: Bill Prince Sent: Saturday, July 9, 2016 9:06 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [AFMUG] OT Philosophical question - WRT Dallas I don't know the whole story, nor does anyone else on this list. My impression was that the guy wasn't really talking, and he'd already shot a dozen officers (at least 3 or 4 fatally). At that point, I feel that any means necessary to prevent more damage. Call it the nuclear option if you will. bp <part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com> On 7/9/2016 7:40 AM, Chuck McCown wrote: Why blow up a perp? Why not keep talking? Better to have him caged for the rest of his life IMHO.
