MovieChat Forums > First Blood (1982) Discussion > Justified or MURDER

Justified or MURDER

posted 9 months ago by DrRed (551)
13 replies | jump to latest

Gault shoots at Rambo while he is hanging from a cliff. Can the police kill an unarmed man just because he is "on the run" and get away with it as a justified shooting?

A short while later the Sheriff and all the deputies are yelling at Rambo from the top of a cliff.
He is unarmed and has his hands up. The only thing he does is take a couple of steps back and argues with them a little bit. And they all open fire on him. Again: Can the police kill an unarmed man just because he is "on the run" and get away with it as a justified shooting?

Now, some of them may realize they did something wrong and try to cover it up, but, in the movie, except for David Caruso's character and the helicopter pilot, they seemed to believe they were doing the right thing.
So, assuming that they told the story exactly as depicted on screen, except that they kill Rambo instead of him getting away, would they have been charged with Murder?

[–] millsey72 (10935) 9 months ago

It only can be considered murder if Rambo was black

[–] ShogunofYonkers (78505) 7 months ago

No, the Police are held to a higher standard. ‘Shoot To Kill’ is a bit dramatic, I doubt that’s even an order unless dealing with terrorists or armed bank robbers.

I think the First Blood police department was just pissed that Rambo beat up the whole squad before escaping.

Seriously, that’s extremely embarrassing and a real shit show.

[–] Kendricks (2241) 7 months ago

"No, the Police are held to a higher standard. ‘Shoot To Kill’ is a bit dramatic, I doubt that’s even an order unless dealing with terrorists or armed bank robbers."

No, they are not held to higher standards, the law does not differentiate between cop or civilian, all that matters is if using deadly force was justified or not. Police always shoots to kill - or rather to neutralize. But to achieve neutralization (in a safe manner) it basically requires (potential) kill shots. That's why it is called application of deadly force, death is the expected outcome. Police around the world also learn to shoot for the center mass. Any "why didn't they just shoot him in the leg!" calls are from people too retarded to grasp the reality of these situations.

All that aside, what is shown in Rambo would clearly have been in violation of the law, there was no justification to shoot at him, let alone try to kill him. Even him being a fleeing felon did not justify this specific attempt on his life.

[–] ShogunofYonkers (78505) 7 months ago

Right. No shit.

[–] [deleted] 7 months ago

[deleted]

[–] Mustang (5569) 7 months ago

I think Caruso's character would have leaked it if they had of killed him.

It starts by the Sheriff being on a power trip in the first place. Rambo is just passing through town wanting a meal and the Sheriff arrests him. It all escalates from there.

[–] Tam87 (1592) 7 months ago

You're right, he would've leaked it. He already leaked it that Galt was abusing Rambo in the prison.

Good to see Caruso's character Mitch get a mention, he always stood out to me when I watched this movie as a kid. Such a memorable character, played really well by the actor. Rambo gave him no mercy in the end, though.

[–] Mustang (5569) 7 months ago

In the end Mitch wears the uniform of Rambo's enemy, it's not personal, he just needs to be eliminated!

They needed a character that would point out that Rambo is a veteran and an elite soldier. It always struck me as odd that in a backwater town the Sheriff would be against a combat vet. It would have been more in keeping if it was a college town and the ex hippy sheriff decided to make some kind of aggressive anti soldier statement etc.

Usually the remote towns are conservative.

[–] Tam87 (1592) 7 months ago

In the end Mitch wears the uniform of Rambo's enemy, it's not personal, he just needs to be eliminated

That's right. No mercy from Johnny boy!

always struck me as odd that in a backwater town the Sheriff would be against a combat vet

It was never really explained why Teasle hated Rambo so much. The book, which I haven't read, claims there was some tension because Teasle was a Korean vet and was jealous that they were ignored in favor of Nam vets. The film also says Teasle is determined to keep his town clean of "undesirables" like Rambo.

It would have been more in keeping if it was a college town and the ex hippy sheriff decided to make some kind of aggressive anti soldier statement etc.

I'd guess the sheriff's department in that town don't respect vets who are drifters like Rambo, but do respect veterans if they wear a suit or worked a respectable job in that town. As Teasle says to him when he drops him off "get a hair cut and a bath". It's mostly what he looks like and what he's doing, and that's why he's a target, as opposed to his past as a soldier.

[–] GreenGoblinsOck8 (7977) 5 months ago

Actually, in the novel Teasle isn't jealous of Rambo being a Vietnam vet. His reaction to finding out is wondering why Rambo hadn't told him. Also unlike the movie, he listens to Trautman and ends up feeling bad for how he treated Rambo.

[–] Tam87 (1592) 5 months ago

Interesting points about Teasle in the book, I didn't know that, he sounds like a completely different character. I enjoyed Brian Dennehy's portrayal, it was the best thing about the film along with Crenna.

[–] Tam87 (1592) 7 months ago

If Rambo was a serial killer or terrorist that was on the run, then no they would not be charged with murder whether they shot him when he was giving himself up or not.

If he was just an escapee then shooting him when giving himself up would be murder, I'm sure they'd be charged as such with testimony from Mitch and the chopper pilot.

[–] strntz (12773) 5 months ago

Rambo was a jerk, but there would be no justification of shooting Rambo when he was totally defensive.

In the old days, there used to be a bounty placed on some criminals that was "dead or alive". It's not done anymore but even when it was, it was still something that needed to go through the court systems. Even if Rambo's crime was murder and not vagrancy and this happened decades earlier, no judge issued a "dead or alive" on him, so Gault had no right to try to shoot him.

If Gault managed to kill Rambo, he'd need to rely on the chopper pilot and Mitch to keep their pie holes shut.