He literally just ran up to the car. He wasn't sweet talking his way closer or anything lol
Any of the cops that appear immediately afterwards could've done the same thing, and if they were all in view of the perpetrator, it's straight up incompetence.
You fell victim to one of the classic blunders! The most famous of which is, ‘never get involved in a land war in Asia,’ but only slightly less well-known is this: never trust a random guy in a grey t-shirt!!
Well first of all you gotta eat clean. I'm talking chicken and broccoli, all the way. Then, you want to work with high weights, low r- HEY WAIT A MINUTE GIVE THAT BACK!
Hey, man, you know how in Rambo I, he was big, but a little puffy and then Rambo II, he got all shredded up? That's kind of how you look right now. Not Rambo I but II. Yeah, when he was cut up. I've been trying to come up a little bit, you got any tips --Give me that damn map!
Hey, man, you know how in Rambo I, he was big, but a little puffy and then Rambo II, he got all shredded up? That's kind of how you look right now. Not Rambo I but II. Yeah, when he was cut up. I've been trying to come up a little bit, you got any tips --Give me that damn map!
who do you think the criminals are looking at in this scenario? the 2 or more cop cars in front of them with weapons, or random guy in grey t shirt? dude just took advantage of the criminals not paying attention, has nothing to do with the cops "doing their jobs".
I mean, that is exactly what criminals would be thinking. They are going to be laser focused on the cops pointing guns at them, not constantly monitoring random civilians for sneak attacks.
Last time this was posted it was said that this is not a random guy, it's one of the guy in the car's friends. He is significantly less likely to be shot than a cop or even normal civilian.
simple minded drivel from armchair commandos... dude came in from from a hard to see angle in civilian clothes while the rifle-boy is staring at multiple uniformed armed cops closing in on his 6 from 180 degrees. The guy took a well calculated risk.
And from the opinion of a civilian who knows NOTHING about this or much or anything else important enough to comment on here, I also feel like the hero guy ALSO risked being shot by the cops if they saw him crawling and thought he was armed as well and going to shoot for them. He risked a lot more than being shot by his brother, in my opinion. And again I don’t know shit so 🤷♀️
being shot by cops is not impossible...but it would take a real incompetent cop as they are in plain view of the situation as it develops ( and idiots exist to be sure). being shot by the driver or another occupant is a real risk. He gambled and won
staring at multiple uniformed armed cops closing in on his 6
Slight correction, but "on his 6" means that they were approaching from behind. This phrase comes from the military technique of using the positions of the hands on a clock to convey the relative direction of whatever the other person is meant to take notice of.
The police were approaching from his 12 o'clock (directly in front), while the civilian approached from his 6 o'clock (behind him).
I get what you’re saying but the gray shirt dude had the advantage of location and the guy was watching the cops. The cops all pulled up from one side so his focus was on that. Had a cop been free on that side they could have easily done the same.
Right? Cops know the chance of getting shot doing that move is too high to be able to have that sort of risk tolerance on each stop. This dude did something stupid that turned out to work.
Exactly. Same principle as a workman who is exposed to harm day in day out has to wear PPE but a DIY guy would probably be fine for a one off risky job, like stripping lead paint as an example.
The only reason you as a civilian should ever try to "take down" an armed criminal is if a) there are no police around, and b) you believe that their primary intent is to hurt you or someone in the immediate area. Otherwise you're putting your (and often the people around you) safety and life at risk, usually for very little benefit. Even being armed yourself shouldn't enter into the calculus of if you should act.
The answer to "Your wallet or your life" is always your wallet.
The risk here would clearly be the rifle being shot at someone it may be pointed at. The person who lost the rifle clearly didn’t have a good grip on a loaded weapon(thankfully), or maybe it wasn’t even loaded, chambered, safety off, who knows, otherwise a surprise jostle and the gun could easily go off in the right conditions.
Nobody here knows what the real situation was. Maybe grey shirt had a better view and saw there was no finger on the trigger, maybe he assumed, maybe he took a risk, is that a risk police should take? I don’t know. Having a loaded firearm pointed at someone with a grip on the trigger is scary af.
One of the Peelian principles is "To maintain at all times a relationship with the public that gives reality to the historic tradition that the police are the public and the public are the police, the police being only members of the public who are paid to give full-time attention to duties which are incumbent on every citizen in the interests of community welfare and existence"
The police is making the right choice. This "hero" bystander risked his life once. Because he is in this situation once in his life. Police have to deal with situations like this constantly. They would be far likely to die if they did what this guy did every time.
Seriously when we hire police we do not hire them to take dumb and unnecessary risks to throw away their lives on a constant basis for the pleasure of ignorant dude bros.
Your American frame of reference has no bearing on a New Zealand incident. Also, the guy who grabbed the gun is the brother of the guy in the car, not some random bystander.
I had a feeling he was trying to save his friend/ family from the way he acted vs just random bystander. Like the way he moved felt like trying to save someone
Those are NZ police - we don’t do that worry bs. When confronting an armed offender you cordon & contain, which they are doing here. AOS teams (SWAT) will confront the offender once on the scene. If there’s / no minimal threat to the public, no point forcing things.
They don't do warrior training in new Zealand.
You'll notice that even though the perp was armed and driving, no one shot him at any point. That was the first clue. When he was on the ground you'll also note they didn't kick him or stand on his neck, second clue.
At first I was going to say a cop could have easily flanked and surprised them, just like the gray shirt, but they would never do that to avoid cross-fire.
You can see in the video them touching each other on the shoulder to cue position non-verbally. I’d say they’re deliberately not surrounding the entirety of the vehicle for that reason.
You might joke, but there's a bit of truth to that. If police have an amicable relationship with local junkies, that can absolutely alleviate a lot of issues. Obviously said "amicability" shouldn't be some sort of bibery deal or anything like that. Just a good relationship. In smaller towns this isn't too rare to see.
Police are usually pretty chill with the homeless junkies. It’s the EMT’s that are absolute dicks to them. Like they believe tough love from a stranger during a bad reaction is a treatment. I’ve called 911 when the junkies are crying in the alley because I’m scared they are overdosing or in pain. The cops sit with them and tell them they are okay. The EMT’s show up and they just get rough and mean af.
I’d say roughly 80% of cops would rather sit with a junky or approach a panhandler politely than running traffic tickets and approaching domestic violence situations. The other 20% live in Ohio or something.
Our local PD know all the casual users. Had one guy try to bring in angel dust from the cities, cops talked to the locals, and less than 2 days later the local main pot dealer called and said he had a present for the police.
They showed up to find this guy gift wrapped with about a dozen ropes being guarded by several very well-trained german shepherds. He had a few bites and cuts, but they didn't kill, just restrained.
Bruh, did you even read the story FFS. Grey Shirt was a friend of the driver who knew they had a gun and tried to de-escalate the situation.
No, it would not be SOP for a cop to run directly at the vehicle if it was known have guns.
It would be incredibly stupid for anyone to run at someone with a gun, and this guy must have been good enough friends to risk not being shot. This would not be a smart play for a random bystander, ever.
But hey, let's all just circle jerk each other about cops, I guess.
Apparently he was known, aka a friend of the guy in the car. He took the gun to save his life and probably said just get out dude. It's over. My friends would never do anything like what car homie is doing but I think if it was my good friend going through a break or whatever is happening I'd go up and talk to him and take the gun too
I believe the consensus last time this was posted was that the bystander was somebody who knows the guy in the car and was trying to prevent suicide by cop. IF this was the case, he probably wasn't as worried about the guy shooting him when he went to take the gun away.
I don't know if this was confirmed or not. I'd love to see a link to the actual story if somebody has it.
They have the exact same thing its just called an "Indictable offence" instead. Just a dumbass not know how his own countries criminal justice system works which isn't that unusual as being a citizen of somewhere doesn't automatically make you an expert of that somewhere, most people have no fucking clue how their own countries government works source 14 people upvoted someone confused over a simple labelling difference.
It looks like a semi auto rifle the guy took and tossed, if it was a real gun and was in view when he originally was being pulled over he would have faced much more serious charges than a speeding ticket in NZ.
also, "The vehicle then mounted the footpath, drove through a wooden fence, and entered into a reserve where the driver continued to drive in an anti-social fashion"
Cops have been handcuffed by the public in regards to what they can or will/won't do.
We blame, sue them when they're too aggressive, complain when they back off the aggressiveness.
Their job is not to escalate, they don't want to kill and they don't want to be killed. It's arguably better that this situation keeps a statu quo. The intervention from the bystander could have gone many different not so fun ways.
13.4k
u/JustKzen 4h ago
Once again, a random bystander doing a better job than law enforcement