TexasCHLforum.com

ELB wrote:

allisji wrote:

C-dub wrote: ...
I don't know about the case that you're referring to, ...

Probably this one: http://texaschlforum.com/viewtopic.php? ... cy#p552682

In my mind and I'd guess that most here are in agreement, the two situations are sufficiently different that they should not be comparable... Of course, we always underestimate the ability of the anti-gun forces to try to lump all of these incidents under the broad umbrella of "gun violence". It's hard to fault a police officer for killing an active shooter, but the man in OK seemed to make an unwise decision when he returned to and killed his offender.

I know that I would not want to be the police officer in that situation considering the Anti-Police environment that exists today within large groups like BLM and antifa.

crazy2medic wrote:This raises a question, suppose following a shoot out you have a wounded bad guy and a wounded good guy, as a paramedic I would go to the wounded good guy and render whatever medical assistance I could, but I would have a concern with the wounded bad guy doing something while my attention was on the care of the wounded GG, is a coup de grace ever justified?
Never leave a wounded enemy at your back!

As a paramedic, are you trained in how to prioritize patients, and how does this type of scenario fit that training?

Lena wrote:My partner stabbed in kidney area 2-3 times bad guy shot 3 times center chest 5' distance 9mm Win Silvertips.
They transported the shot thug 1st I never forgot that.
The thug did not survive and was DOA. Partner recovered after surgeries and long rehab time.

If the responders didn't suspect that your partners injuries were life-threatening, then they may have been following protocol to attempt to treat the patient with life-threatening injuries first (I use the term patient, because he was clearly not a victim). I would also be angry that they would treat a dangerous criminal before they would treat an innocent victim of a stabbing attack with very real injuries. Very glad to hear that he recovered.

C-dub wrote:I have no sympathy for those two terrorist wannabe used to be's.

Here's what stuck out to me from that article. Suspects were DOWN, but still twitching, so they get shot some more. Okay.

SWAT arrives on scene and because the, probably dead, suspects won't comply with their commands get shot some more. Okay, but didn't an OK pharmacist get jail time for that or something pretty close to that?

I don't know about the case that you're referring to, but it seems like it would be very situation dependent. It does raise the eyebrows to read that they continued firing until all movement had ceased. In this case they are clear to indicate the elevated concerns that the pair could be carrying IEDs and could operate them even after being taken down by gunfire.