Feel safe with police? Would you be arrested if you were shooting a person running away

http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/nyc-crime/police-shoots-kills-man-ax-queens-article-1.1984914

Got to love the police

So this is what happened,  a guy with ax attack a officer and runs off

Other officers run after guy ? NOPE they started SHOOTING wildly at the man running off shooting the person in the back

Here's the kicker, while they were so gun ho, they also shot and now likely paralyzed or killed a innocent woman  ....

Now lets switch that around and say a Non-LEO did the same thing in the same situation... ahh you think you can get away with that?  NOT

So instead of trying to catch the perp because he was running away , first response is to shoot ?

I'm pretty sure anywhere in america if someone attacks a officer they would just start shooting and ask questions later. As far as I'm concerned thats a appropriate response.

You really dont get the full story from the article you posted.... Hit a cop in the head with a hatchet and its not a problem to start shooting at him....

Police were responding to a dispute between the man and a woman, the Post reports

“The cops yelled ‘Drop it!’” said rattled eyewitness Larry Bethune, 44, of Hollis, Queens, recalling the moment the psycho pulled a small hatchet from his jacket.
“And he lunged at one of them,” the witness remembered. “He raised his arm up high and brought it straight down on the cop’s head.

“The cop went down to the ground, face first. It was horrible. I’ve never seen anything like that on Jamaica Avenue,” he added. “The cop’s just lying there with blood pouring down his face. He didn’t move.”


The man slashed another officer's arm before two officers shot the man dead. The Post adds that the woman who was shot by a stray police bullet is in "life-threatening condition."

I wouldn't put much stock in a newspaper that would use the term "psycho" in an actual news article.

Anyway I read the story and it sounds pretty crazy, even if the cops "couldn't say" where they shot the suspect, because that part is "not made clear." I have to question that part of the story as well. Why would they say they "couldn't say" where? I guess this is the part of the story where the cops also have to cover their ass because of that woman bystander.

If I were to strike a police officer in the head with an axe or hatchet I would expect to be shot if I put up even the slightest bit of resistance... in case you aren't aware... running away is a form of resistance.

That being said I would hope that had someone struck a family member of mine in the head with an axe or hatchet that I wouldn't go to jail for shooting them in the back assuming I was armed (I don't carry a gun anywhere.... so unlikely).

The only unfortunate part is a bystander was shot.

While the other shootings lately are a little more dicey, as I read this one I disagree that it wasn't justified. The man attacked a police officer with an axe and tried to run off, at that point he became a danger to the public, particularly so if he still had the axe. After reading the article I don't see where it say she tried to flee the scene but still, he attacked an officer with a deadly weapon, the only thing they did wrong as far as I'm concerned is to not shoot him when he originally advanced on them in the first place. Sorry, but sometimes police shootings are entirely justified and even if the bystander was injured, they still took the right action.

I heard more about the story in the radio yesterday. Yeah, this is one f-ed up story. Those cops did what they had to do, considering. The suspect was one of those loons declaring himself a "freedom fighter/terrorist" or sometthing on the internet.

If I slammed an axe into anyone's head then tried to run away from that person's friends who had guns, I suspect I'd be shot down, no matter the situation.

I think it's cool, the guy attacked cops, and they shot him. Good job, for law enforcement. Police do a good job of killing the ones that need to be killed.