Have they learned anything about transparence. Which officer shot the gun, Where
were they, was the guy with the knife a threat and if so, what was the threat.
You can't say a man with a knife was shot by an experienced officer. That
is like saying a girl in a car scared a police officer and so he shot his gun.
Yes, if the girl was alive that might be true. But if she was dead (i.e.
Danielle Willard) then the car was no threat. Come on guys, lets make the
changes you keep talking about. I know there are bad people out there, and I
know that there is going to be police involved shootings that are justified.
But, if you want the public to stand behind you, you will have to give a little
more detail. This does not help your case as far as you wanting to get
trust from the community.
WVC police have an image problem.That said, it is good to see two things
happen:1) The officers are not afraid to shoot as necessary.2) The
Chief stands behind the use of force IF NEEDED.Let's hope the
officer used good judgment and the review is prompt and thorough.The last
thing we need is officers who are motivated by PR and become hesitant to make
Was the knife a Smith & Wesson? How about: "West Valley Police shoot
man (that was 'holding' or 'possessing') knife? Maybe
shoots is ok if they fired more than one bullet. I didn't read the article
because the headline is so, well, inaccurate and comical.
The police officer shot a man with a knife? Don't they usually use their
guns to shoot people?