Maybe you didn't read the part where the man, instead of staying in his car like instructed, got out and aggressively approached the officer. It's not expected for everyone to understand a cop's job, but sometimes these people are wanted criminals and will maim, kill, etc in order to escape, the vehicle could have been stolen, there's any number of circumstances. It's obvious the man was violent, or he would have complied to begin with since it was just a routine traffic stop.
No, I read that. That's not really the point I'm trying to get across. Someone aggressively approaching an officer is not a reason to immediately escalate to a life-or-death situation. Should the officer have been prepared? Yes. Used something to defend himself? Yes. Decided he needed to mortally threaten a man during a traffic stop who he had no cause to believe was armed (and who's attitude could have ranged anywhere from 'loudly yelling at officer pissed' to 'making threatening moves')? No. That he then proceeded to lose his service weapon only tops his mistakes.
Again, like I said, you don't know what his job is like, you don't know if he was in a good neighborhood or a bad neighborhood, the fact he pulled his gun means he himself felt mortally threatened, as he obviously should have since his gun was grabbed away from him and he was beat with it. Even as the man reached for his weapon he was not committed to using his full extent of force by firing the weapon. There was no reason for the man to get out of his car, I like how the victim in this crime is being accused of negligence because he pulled his gun on an obviously violent man.
Maybe you didn't read the part where the man, instead of staying in his car like instructed, got out and aggressively approached the officer. It's not expected for everyone to understand a cop's job, but sometimes these people are wanted criminals and will maim, kill, etc in order to escape, the vehicle could have been stolen, there's any number of circumstances. It's obvious the man was violent, or he would have complied to begin with since it was just a routine traffic stop.
No, I read that. That's not really the point I'm trying to get across. Someone aggressively approaching an officer is not a reason to immediately escalate to a life-or-death situation. Should the officer have been prepared? Yes. Used something to defend himself? Yes. Decided he needed to mortally threaten a man during a traffic stop who he had no cause to believe was armed (and who's attitude could have ranged anywhere from 'loudly yelling at officer pissed' to 'making threatening moves')? No. That he then proceeded to lose his service weapon only tops his mistakes.
Again, like I said, you don't know what his job is like, you don't know if he was in a good neighborhood or a bad neighborhood, the fact he pulled his gun means he himself felt mortally threatened, as he obviously should have since his gun was grabbed away from him and he was beat with it. Even as the man reached for his weapon he was not committed to using his full extent of force by firing the weapon. There was no reason for the man to get out of his car, I like how the victim in this crime is being accused of negligence because he pulled his gun on an obviously violent man.
Edit: http://www.neighborhoodscout.com/al/birmingham/crime/ Here's you a link to how safe Birmingham is.