Why engage a person "wildly waving a gun?" If I was in a position where I had to encounter a person like that, then I would like to communicate with that person without being a vulnerable position. Being some distance away would be ideal. This would be protecting myself and hopefully assessing the situation better.
I am fine with having their guns drawn, I fully expect that. However, why get close to them without trying to communicate before? Clearly a person waving a "gun" around is not operating in a full mental capacity, so why would you want to get even remotely close to this person?
Would you get close to a person holding a hostage with a gun? Would you get close to a person robbing a bank with a gun? They could easily just shoot you, that's why you stay a distance away. So why get close to someone that can easily point a gun at you? Why put yourself at risk for no reason? Something just doesn't seem right about this situation as presented. Probably because the news does not have all the facts.
Umm, because that's their job? You wave a gun around you are a deadly threat, citizens can respond in kind.
Why did they put themselves at risk when you won't? Because that's their job.
No, but he has a point. If someone's waving a gun around or got a hostage situation going on, cops don't just dart in. They make visual contact at a safe distance, and talk to them somehow.
Have guns drawn sure, but I would've expected them to get close, guns drawn behind their squad cars for cover, and use a bullhorn to talk to him.
I mean essentially what they did was run in. What if it WAS a gun? He could've shot at them as they were getting close to begin with. So why as an officer would you just get so close that you had to open fire without even being sure of the entire situation? I mean this is just fail here.
You can blame the guy all he wants for having a garden hose that looks like a gun and pointing it at the police, but if the cops were 150 feet away, would they start shooting? Probably not? 20? Yeah.