Previous Post
Next Post


TTAG commentator Joe sent us a link to this YouTube video of an Officer Involved Shooting outside Carl Jr.’s restaurant in Monterey Park, California [as reported by]: “The man did not swing the pipe at the officer. When are these people going to understand that if the man had successfully swung the pipe at the officer we would have a dead man and a dead officer? A pipe bender to the skull is deadly, this is not Nerf.” A few minutes later, our correspondent sent a second electronic missive. “What in the world is wrong with the passengers in the car that filmed this? They laugh when the man is shot. Not that he didn’t present a deadly threat the the officer, but it should be sad to anyone when a human being is killed, even when the death is justified.” Amen.

Previous Post
Next Post


  1. I don’t think their laugh was in the comical sense. Its the same kind of laugh that comes over you when you see a really good action scene on a movie. I believe the guy deserve what he got, one less punk out of the street and the best part of all no free meals.

    The cop that the blow was intended for had a very hard time drawing his pistol as you can see on the video due to having just used the pepper spray so the other officer with the dog did was was necessary to protect the live of a citizen and a fellow officer. And the amount of shot fire were exactly what was needed to take the perp down. Not one round extra was wasted. You have to shoot till the threat stops and while the threat is up is most definitely not stopped.

  2. Looks about right. Couldn’t listen to the audio while sitting at work, but it looks like the shooting was justified.

    Civilians seem to think in terms of symetrical force. If the assailaint doesn’t have a gun, a shooting isn’t justified. But a weapon is a weapon is a weapon. A pipe, knife, rock, kills. And even with out a weapon in hand, many a thug have spent hours in the yard lifting weights. Big, strong, fast and violent. Lots of stories of cops being beaten to death.

    The gun isn’t there to put the cop on equal footing with the bad guys. Its to give them a decisive advantage for when things count.This poor schmuck with the pipe got what he was looking for. Trouble. With a capital .40SW.

    • Well, this *was* in Southern California. I can forgive the cameraman’s ignorance. And if I had to guess, I’d say at least a third of the people commenting over on YouTube probably received all their knowledge of shootings from movies.

      Unrelated, but what’s with the cop carrying gangsta style until the shooting? Not trying to be a dick, just trying to see if there was a valid reason for it.

      • Try the gansta style carry for just a moment in your hand and then try the normal more know carry. Which creates a bigger obstruction of your target?

        He was giving himself a better view of the armed target until he felt its was needed to shoot.

      • chris its the natural position your hand makes when pointing. he had the dog leash in one hand and the gun in the other it at a certain point it stops being about perfect form and more about whats comfortable ergonomics. secondly if you try shooting one handed in a isosceles stance or weaver stance you will notice your hand will natural cant inwards.

      • For one hand shooting (something K9 officers should be spending a LOT of time training on), a slight gangsta cant with the weapon helps a lot.

        Stand up and throw a punch. Is your fist oriented vertically? No, it has about a 45 degree rotation. This is the natural extended orientation of the hand and forearm. Holding a pistol vertically goes against this natural orientation.

        Now, holding the pistol at a 90 degree angle is also very stupid, but is actually (bio-mechanically speaking) more logical than the vertical orientation most often used.

  3. What the heck is wrong with nervous laughter? Most people do that.

    And the guy should be laughed at anyway. It’s not sad when a person who needs killing gets his reward.

    • “It’s not sad when a person who needs killing gets his reward.”

      Sure it is Skyler. I will not lose many tears over the man, but it’s still very sad. That man was somebody’s cute little boy once upon a time.

      The years of bad choices – or one choice in a life of otherwise good ones – culminating in an untimely death is sad. Indeed he threw his life away, but a human being and all he could be is gone forever and while society might have a net gain, it is incomprehensibly sad.

      I think the laughter was brought about by the fact that the videographer’s are looking at it as a big movie or video game. It will probably sink late what an awful thing they saw.

      • Someone’s little boy…

        Cry me a river. Life has consequences. If you let your kid go THAT far down the rabbit hole of criminality that he is swinging weapons at the cops (and high enough to take a taser to the face without flinching), this is the ending you should be expecting.

        This country needs to stop being such a bunch of overly sensitive apologists before we just full-up become the bloody UK.

      • +1

        “There, but for the Grace of God, go I.”

        If we loose empathy, even with the guys we have to kill, then we have lost our humanity.

        Will it stop me from shooting a BG? No. But I will continue to mourn the necessity, and the waste of a life that had the potential to be a blessing instead of a curse.

      • Not apologizing for anyone, and from what I can see, the guy had it coming. I still think it can be both very sad and perfectly just at the same time.

        I’m complicated that way.

      • Thanks Graybeard – I was thinking of God’s grace when I wrote that. I understand GA Koenig’s sentiment, and share it to a degree. But, I have sons and grandsons, all of whom have to make decisions independent of me, as I had to independent of my parents.

        • Your welcome.

          Having worked in and around the criminal justice system for more than two decades, & having a lot of contacts in the LE brotherhood, I know that most cops – all good, long-time cops – harbor no hatred toward the folks they by necessity have to deal with on a daily basis.

          Same deal with my now-deceased WWII-vet father, who had to battle his way across Europe and lost a lot of buddies to the Germans, and his attitude toward Germans post-WWII. Not everyone can maintain that in wartime, but he did.

        • +1
          from a different post, and also different circumstances (re: stfu after a shooting), if me I would #1) attempt to speak with a priest/clergy first, and then #2) lawyer.

          guess it would all be determined on circumstances, but certainly at some point very soon after, directly dealing with the spiritual aspect of my actions would require attention.

          please do not think my comments are against the action(s) done, I would not hesitate to fire…. but then too, my post is not directly commenting on this incident (police shooting vs citizen shooting). hope I did not veer too far OT in my post.

      • Tim, I believe the operative word in your logic is WAS.

        I have conversed with many who use the human being argument. Both anti-gun advocates as well as those who are not against guns, but do not feel a gun is right for them.

        At one function many years ago, a mixed group of pro and anti advocates as well as undecided were having a discussion, when a woman stated that she did not own a gun because she could never shoot anyone.
        I asked if she thought she would be able to shoot if she knew her life would end if she did not.
        She stated that, No she could not because she would know that the person she was going to shoot was someone’s son.
        I asked her if she was not someone’s mother, daughter, wife, sister, aunt, cousin, friend.
        If she were murdered would these people not grieve for her.
        Her reply was,” Well, I just know I could’t do it.”

        I agree with you, the above mentioned lady and many others that have made these same statements, he WAS someone’s cute little boy once upon a time.
        Adolph Hitler, Charlie Manson etc. were someone’s cute little boys once upon a time.
        But I believe when you stop being humane you cease to be human.
        When I hear of someone killed while committing an inhumane act, I never give any thought to the person killed.
        My first thought is the hope that the potential victim was spared.
        My next thought is for the many others ( possibly including myself ,my family, the above mentioned lady and those who believe as she does ) who will be spared inhumane treatment at the hands of this individual.

        Beyond that I give it no thought.

      • Ron –

        Indeed – was is the operative term. I am as prepared mentally as I can be to use deadly force. God forbid I should ever have to end someone’s life, I actually hope I would be humane enough to grieve.

        Death is an end – for the Christian, it means whatever one’s relationship with God is finalized at that moment. A man living can find redemption – when he is dead he faces only judgement and reward. One can infer that a man ready to swing a pipe-bender at a cop has not found peace with his Savior.

        I am a sinner, and I am glad when a sinner mends their ways. Conversely it is sad – at least I ought to find it sad – when a sinner’s chance at redemption is finally gone.

      • re: the laughter…. that’s what I thought initially, before watching the vid ( ie: movie director stating, cut-print-we’ll add a laugh track in editing).

        post watching it, nervousness…. and, the fact & knowledge that these young men will be the heart and soul of our country soon, maybe a decade? maybe a bit more time.

        yes, I too am sure that being a witness to a shooting will catch up with them, give it a day or two, this will affect them, in one way or another.

        I AM surprised that, as other police came on-scene, they did not notice a car with 3 dudes, and to at least get their names, for statement(s) later.

  4. It’s not a pipe, it appears to be a door entry tool or ice axe.

    Cop #1 was a tool for not having a weapon drawn. Cop #2 (K9) reacted appropriately. You could sorta argue that the additional five rounds weren’t strictly necessary, but either way.

    • At first glance the “second” series of shots appeared to be with the bad guy down, but i watched it again and it looks like the first 5 just spun the guy around but that he was still standing. I wonder if that was .40 or 9mm that they hit the guy with?. The K9 officer did good, the other officer WAS a tool for running up that close to the guy then pepper spraying him without a gun or at least a tazer in hand.

  5. Looks like that kid wanted a suicide by cop by the way he was winding up. Hard to feel sorry for someone looking to be killed.

  6. It was a righteous shooting because, as we all know, the penalty for failure to obey the police is immediate death.

    Only ten rounds fired? They usually shoot about seventy.

    • No, it was a righteous shooting because the consequence for attempting to strike an officer with a deadly weapon is as many shots as it takes for you to stop. Very simple.

      • Unfortunately Ralph’s sarcastic post is pretty spot on for the official attitude in most media covered police incidents I’ve seen. Your response unwittingly supports him in the use of the word “officer” instead of “person”, “human”, or “citizen”. The attitude that the police are free to escalate the smallest act of disrespect by a citizen to the point of death because they are “officers” is what I’m talking about. It’s that attitude that’s responsible for the large amount of hate they get directed at them. Not necessarily applicable here, but usually the standard MO for today’s uniformed thugs.

  7. The weapon was a conduit bender, very similar to an ice axe yet not nearly as sharp. It appears to me that “cop #1” had deployed his TASER, and hesitated to draw his firearm. Without “cop #2″‘s action, his hesitation could have cost him his life.

    “Decisive, effective action, in the moment, is the only way to stop violence.” -Me

  8. Ten shots – two volleys of five each.

    What would become of one of us law-abiding CCW holders that emptied ten rounds into some guy carrying a pipe?

  9. It’s a shame when anyone has to die anywhere.

    That being said, I wonder how the DA’s office would analyze this video if it was a CCW holder who was caught in a situation like this, where someone charged him with a sledgehammer. The DA would probably not have approved of the shots taken after the initial 5 [i.e. when the BG had his back turned to the officers]. The DA, watching the video without his adreneline rushing, would probably charge the CCW holder.

    I really wish that permit holders and LEO’s had the same standards when it comes to defensive shootings.

  10. I think private citizens would be held to a much higher standard for deadly force. If we punched his ticket because he turned towards us with a conduit bender we would need Ralph and his friends to keep us out of jail. The cops used their toys first and should have gone to the dog second. The first cop put himself in a bad position to begin with.
    WE are all armchair quarterbacking this but they really peppered that guy and I think they used excessive ammo on him.

  11. Now that I have dried my tears, it is sobering to think that it took a second volley of 10 shots to end the threat.

    The dude was definitely winding up to take a swing at the cop who was distracted by putting away his pepper spray. I wonder if the perp saw this moment of distraction as an opportunity to swing.

    Self defense tip – drop it like its hot.

  12. The “videographer” (loose interpretation of a cell phone user) unfortunately was watching his own live movie and reacted as he would if in a theater eating popcorn. For MANY, MANY young people, they are disconnected from the REALITY of death, derived from movies and video games. The sounds, smells and sight of death just are not ingrained on most people.
    I can’t weigh in on the officers in the video. Tough job …. tough decisions …. You have to be in their shoes.

  13. Good riddance.One less waste of breath sucking up taxpayer dollars in a cell somewhere scheming his next scam.The loss of human life shouldn’t be trivialized, but that is not what is taking place when a piece of human scum has trivialized himself with a life of crime.

    The officers gave the goblin an opprotunity to surrender and explain his actions in court.

    Instead the perp decided to attack an armed officer of the law with a pipe , with predictable consequences.If you wreck your car trying to beat a freight train across the tracks, no one will cry for you at the wake.Walk in front of a city bus and odds are you will be injured. Attempt to attack any officer and you risk a reception of hot lead. Can’t say any of this was unjustified.

    For what it is worth vis a vis the laughter on the part of the video maker, some people react to a severely stressful situation via outbursts of laughter or humor-izing the situation. When I was at a house party years ago someone walked into the event threatening to “F someone up” with a .38 revolver, which caused a mass exodus from the party .I was outside with a female companion who kept giggling even though she was visibly scared shitless. I wouldn’t believe it if I didn’t see it myself.It was the catalyst for me to research and begin my journey toward concealed carry, as id prefer to not to have my life flash before my eyes in stark terror of realizing I was screwed for being unarmed ever again.

  14. Officer safety my ass, this was murder!
    The BG was indeed posturing threatening towards the Officer (that just pepper-sprayed him directly in the face) – obviously the dumbest thing he could have done.
    I support the second officer decision not to wait for the alleged BG to actually take a swing and shoot, more than once. Even on that distance a single shot to the center mass is too risky. The the alleged BG is way too close to both of the cops and with a potentially lethal tool primed for deployment (yes it is not raised, but I have seen baseball players take a swing from that half-cocked position he’s in, and swung to the head, that would still have the capacity for lethal results).
    But at this point my support for Judge Dredd here ends!
    Does he double tap the alleged BG and take a quick break to see the (perceived) attack continues? No, he unloads half his magazine. So he keeps shooting until he “perceives” the alleged BG is in fact breaking off his attack. Let’s give him all the benefit of the doubt and say his training told him to do just that, and in the heat of that moment and hopped on the adrenaline… So now the alleged BG has been stopped from his (perceived) attack, been obviously hit, wounded, twisted around, is retreating away from both cops and the lethal force deployed against him (what would you do if being riddled with holes). In short the alleged BG is responding in every way, shape and form as a valid (self-defense) shooter should intend, but that’s who we are watching here at work.
    Judge Dredd proceeds to judge, sentence and execute the alleged BG, right on the spot. After realizing that the first burst of bullets did not kill the alleged BG, he unloads the second half of his magazine (at least partially into the sentenced BG’s back from what can be seen on the video) to finish the job. At this point it very much looks, that the shooters intention from the first shot never was to repel an attack but to kill. Even actual BGs such as murderers and rapists get first the courtesy of one of those circus shows they call trial around here.
    This would certainly get everyone else claiming this to be a self-defense shooting into the slammer for murder, well, unless you belong to that esteemed first class of citizens lording over us… “Death. Court’s adjourned.” (Judge Dredd)

  15. It’s not right, but, I think these kids laughed b/c their brain is hardwired from all the video games….like when you play against friends and beats them, everyone laughs b/c something happened and there is the disconnect b/c they know it’s not real…however the actions mimick the false, but the brain interprets it the same. Its the same reason all these people go see slasher flicks and whatever and laugh etc. but if they saw some dude in real life all hacked up they would puke.

  16. This nervous, nearly-hysterical bantering and joking reminds me of the kind of inappropriate laughter many people experience immediately after surviving an extremely dangerous, traumatic experience.

    I joked just like this after walking away from a motorcycle accident that could have messed me up badly, and I laughed like an imbecile after fighting off a vicious Rottweiler (and stabbing it repeatedly in the eye with a broken Bic pen) while walking to campus one morning. Did I think those events were funny? Hell no; I felt like screaming or running or pissing my pants, but instead I laughed and cracked stupid jokes and tried not to throw up until I came down from the fight-or-flight rush.

    Ask Massad Ayoob: people experience psychological trauma in many different ways, and post-shooting emotions can run the gamut from depression to elation to aggression to wildly inappropriate humor. I think we should give these kids a break, and hope they get some trauma counseling. I’m glad I wasn’t there to see what they did.

  17. What do you mean, “He didn’t present a threat to the officer’?! He turned, raised the pipe bender to his chest, and then stepped toward the officer who maced him in a “boxer skip” stance, which to ME suggested he was getting ready to swing at the officer “in an agressive manner”. I’d have shot him, too! Look, I like what you guys mostly say on this website, but you guys got it WAAAY wrong on this one. To be certain, you SHOOT UNTIL THE THREAT STOPS, even it that’s 10 times! And, yes, he COULD HAVE released the dog, but a K-9 is only ONE TOOL available to the officers in this scenario, but in my opinion the dog could NOT get there as fast as could the 10 rounds. So, watch it again in slow motion, THEN comment.
    Later, Stephen W.

  18. The video arguably shows a justifiable shooting. The most disturbing truth for viewers should be the dull cruelty of the man behind the camera. If you live in Southern California, know that there is a morally bankrupt mass of jackals at your gate. Weened on gangsta rap and MTV, they are prepared to laugh at your suffering and to inflict pain without reflection.

  19. I timed the shots from beginning to end at roughly 3 seconds. That is not a lot of time for all the decisions suggested that these officers made. In my training, I was taught to shoot until the threat is over and the bad guy is either down or has surrendered. I imagine that their training is similar. In 3 seconds, I’m thinking they were concentrating on their aim, the suspect’s reaction to being hit and little else. Having watched the video about a dozen times, I would have shot him multiple times myself. Especially since he took a TASER hit to the face with no effect. As to rejoicing over taking out a bad guy? No, the taking of any human life is serious stuff. Protecting the lives of others is also serious stuff. Hopefully I will never have to experience this, but that will not keep me from being prepared to do what I have to in order to protect my family and myself, should I ever face a bad guy that won’t stop or move on.

  20. I watched a similar video of a similar incident in London. A disturbed man was flailing a sword around him surrounded by Police. He was eventually subdued sans gun fire. The comment made by the videographer was that the man would have been dead within a minute. In the US video why did they bring a dog if they were going to shoot him?

    • This was a K-9 Officer. ALL officers (even K-9 Officers) respond when an “armed public disturbance” call goes out over the air. Supposedly, the Carl’s Junior employee said over the phone, “…some guy is trying to hit people in the head with a pipe”. A “pipe” (it was actually an aluminum tubing bender, but it weighed about 5 pounds) is considered a “deadly weapon” in most jurisdictions, because you CAN kill someone with it, if you hit them in the head. Even if you “maim” someone with a pipe, that is still committing a “forceable felony which is dangerous to life”, and deadly force can be used to stop that action.
      A K-9 Officer CAN NOT release his dog, unless a threat becomes “dangerous to human life or property”, so the officer did not release the dog because the man was walking away (clearing being non-agressive / non-compliant). However, as soon as the man turned around, and adopted a “fighting pose” (boxer’s skip, facing the officer, movement toward the officer, pipe at the ready), he became an agressive/defiant subject holding an object which could be used to take a life. And, because the dog could not get there as fast as could the BULLETS, the K-9 officer chose to release bullets, instead of his dog.
      Also, I can guess the cops in Britain subdued the sword-weilder, because they DIDN’T have guns. I’m all for “negotiating until the cows come home”, and I OFTEN did that to knife-weilding subjects on the street, in mental institutions, and in prisons, but, I’d HATE to be the guy who had to go in first on a sword-weilding man!


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here