Yes, because I don't believe a Cops role is to escalate situations. How hard a concept is that to grasp. A cop rolls on a scene of a bloody unarmed person and if the person is not attempting to harm anyone in the vicinity, you do your best not to kill him, retreating or waiting for backup if necessary.. Lives matter.
So let's say the cop backs off to his car. There are now civilians closer to this doped up nut than is the cop. Assuming he does attempt to harm one of them - what does the cop do then? Besides write up a report about how the deceased killed a girl and attempted to eat her face while the cop sat in his car, I mean.
And what's the point of calling for backup? How hard is it to sit in one's car alone? Clearly if one cop approaching a lunatic is escalation, multiple cops approaching a lunatic is escalation squared, so I fail to see how backup would help your point. Unless you're making the point that the cop should just take his ass-whoopin' and if called enough fellow cops - but not so many as to accidentally kill the "victim" - then it wouldn't be that bad an ass-whoopin'.
Yep. The eye witness explained the two taser hits did nothing and the guy went after the policeman very aggressively. The police tried to stop the guy with non-lethal force. Just like he should have.
Notice how silent the cop haters went?
Cops mess up all the time. But at least people could have the honesty to admit when they screwed up. Makes you wonder if they act like that in real life.
Yup. Personally I'm not one for recommending that cops passively allow lunatics to freely roam about, but others obviously have different opinions.