…2 years ago a depressed 18 year old kid came toward our duty officer and reached into his belt line, the captain quickly pulled his weapon and shot the kid 3 times. This 18 year old had no gun, what you don’t seem to understand is that police officers don’t have to wait to see a gun.
All I have to do is convince IA that in the given situation my life and the life of people around me was in danger and he was reaching for a weapon(ie bomb or gun).
Why don’t you run a little test AZ, accost a police officer on the street, tell him “I’m goiong to kill you” then reach in to your belt line. In this state we don’t have to wait to be shot to shoot and once shot at we are not required to retreat.
Dude, WHAT county do you live in?
So, a mopey teenager(aren’t they all?) walks toward your duty officer and reaches into his beltline and gets shot? You guys sure are an edgy bunch. Was there any communication? Why did the officer percieve a threat? I hope you cowboys aren’t shooting every teenager who reaches for his wallet(also by the beltline). There has to be more to the story, do tell.
My mistake, iyt was domestic issue, kid was arguing with his mom. Duty officer(captain) was first on scene. He tells the kid turn around hands on your head and drop to your knees. Kid states fuck you I will kill you, closes distance(approximately 15-20 feet) while reaching under his shirt into his belt line. Did you know that if you do not have more than 7 yards between you and a perceived threat they can close that distance and do damage to you before you pull your gun. AZ you are just full of hate for an authority and anyone that does not fall exactly into your line of thinking aren’t you?[/quote]
In this instance I agree with snipeout, hesitation will get you killed and the officer acted appropriately. If you threaten an officer and then approach him while reaching into your pockets or beltline, you fucked up.
In this instance I agree with snipeout, hesitation will get you killed and the officer acted appropriately. If you threaten an officer and then approach him while reaching into your pockets or beltline, you fucked up.[/quote]
Nobody is disagreeing with the REAL scenario, if it is the real one(did you see it snipe?).
It was his passive-aggresive storytelling that caused a stir in the first place.
Huge difference between the two versions.
In this instance I agree with snipeout, hesitation will get you killed and the officer acted appropriately. If you threaten an officer and then approach him while reaching into your pockets or beltline, you fucked up.
Nobody is disagreeing with the REAL scenario, if it is the real one(did you see it snipe?).
It was his passive-aggresive storytelling that caused a stir in the first place.
Huge difference between the two versions.
[/quote]
I am a police officer/corrections officer in the county in which it happened. We had the kid in my jail and I live down the street from the captain who shot him. With out actually seeing it I have first hand accounts.
In this instance I agree with snipeout, hesitation will get you killed and the officer acted appropriately. If you threaten an officer and then approach him while reaching into your pockets or beltline, you fucked up.
Nobody is disagreeing with the REAL scenario, if it is the real one(did you see it snipe?).
It was his passive-aggresive storytelling that caused a stir in the first place.
Huge difference between the two versions.
I am a police officer/corrections officer in the county in which it happened. We had the kid in my jail and I live down the street from the captain who shot him. With out actually seeing it I have first hand accounts.[/quote]
No one stated otherwise. It has been said many times that the way you FIRST told the story implied that the officer was in the wrong. You didn’t add that the kid was a threat until you were called on that. That is the point he is making. Why isn’t that clear to you?
[quote]Professor X wrote:
snipeout wrote:
AZMojo wrote:
slimjim wrote:
In this instance I agree with snipeout, hesitation will get you killed and the officer acted appropriately. If you threaten an officer and then approach him while reaching into your pockets or beltline, you fucked up.
Nobody is disagreeing with the REAL scenario, if it is the real one(did you see it snipe?).
It was his passive-aggresive storytelling that caused a stir in the first place.
Huge difference between the two versions.
I am a police officer/corrections officer in the county in which it happened. We had the kid in my jail and I live down the street from the captain who shot him. With out actually seeing it I have first hand accounts.
No one stated otherwise. It has been said many times that the way you FIRST told the story implied that the officer was in the wrong. You didn’t add that the kid was a threat until you were called on that. That is the point he is making. Why isn’t that clear to you?[/quote]
What in the hell are you babbling about? In AZs’ post he asks if I saw the incident. I stated I hadn’t seen it but had first hand accounts from the police officer and convict involved.
[quote]snipeout wrote:
Professor X wrote:
snipeout wrote:
AZMojo wrote:
slimjim wrote:
In this instance I agree with snipeout, hesitation will get you killed and the officer acted appropriately. If you threaten an officer and then approach him while reaching into your pockets or beltline, you fucked up.
Nobody is disagreeing with the REAL scenario, if it is the real one(did you see it snipe?).
It was his passive-aggresive storytelling that caused a stir in the first place.
Huge difference between the two versions.
I am a police officer/corrections officer in the county in which it happened. We had the kid in my jail and I live down the street from the captain who shot him. With out actually seeing it I have first hand accounts.
No one stated otherwise. It has been said many times that the way you FIRST told the story implied that the officer was in the wrong. You didn’t add that the kid was a threat until you were called on that. That is the point he is making. Why isn’t that clear to you?
What in the hell are you babbling about? In AZs’ post he asks if I saw the incident. I stated I hadn’t seen it but had first hand accounts from the police officer and convict involved.[/quote]
Babbling? The reason you are defending yourself now is because you changed the story. I too am wondering how you left out something as vital to the story as the kid who was shot making threats. You accused AZ of having hate for authority. That wasn’t the case at all. Many of us had the same questions he asked. Questioning the actions of police officers doesn’t automatically mean cops are hated as authority figures. That is what I am babbling about.
While yesterday’s fatal shooting by federal air marshals of a disturbed man who had falsely claimed to have a bomb is a tragedy, we can at least draw some useful lessons from the episode so perhaps similar situations can be avoided in the future:
If you are on an airplane and you do not have a bomb, saying that you do doesn’t really offer much in the way of upside.
If a loved one is on medication because he is clinically insane, the time to remind him to take his pill would be any period before he gets on a plane, claims to have a bomb, and gets chased down by armed federal agents.
Informing armed federal agents that it’s okay because the man who claims to have a bomb is actually insane does not provide much comfort to the agents.
Whether you have a bomb or not, threatening to discolor the tarmac strikes an unfortunate balance in that it is insufficient to cause serious alarm but plenty sufficient to get you killed, kind of like buying a General Motors product.
Under certain circumstances, “put your hands in the air” may be the best advice you will ever get, right up there with “buy low, sell high,” “go easy on the vermouth,” and “let’s check with a couple more people on this WMD thing first.”
Possibly the most important lesson to be drawn from these events will be that learned by Osama bin-Laden himself. That is, it’s time to pack up your secret cells of non-bomb-toting bipolar terrorist agents and head on home.
In this instance I agree with snipeout, hesitation will get you killed and the officer acted appropriately. If you threaten an officer and then approach him while reaching into your pockets or beltline, you fucked up.
Nobody is disagreeing with the REAL scenario, if it is the real one(did you see it snipe?).
It was his passive-aggresive storytelling that caused a stir in the first place.
Huge difference between the two versions.
I am a police officer/corrections officer in the county in which it happened. We had the kid in my jail and I live down the street from the captain who shot him. With out actually seeing it I have first hand accounts.[/quote]
The above post was a direct answer to AZ. You, PROFESSOR, stuck your nose where it really didn’t belong. This was an answer to AZs’ specific question as to whether I witnessed the situation. This was not in defense of my post, when I leave info out, I clarify.
While yesterday’s fatal shooting by federal air marshals of a disturbed man who had falsely claimed to have a bomb is a tragedy, we can at least draw some useful lessons from the episode so perhaps similar situations can be avoided in the future:
If you are on an airplane and you do not have a bomb, saying that you do doesn’t really offer much in the way of upside.
If a loved one is on medication because he is clinically insane, the time to remind him to take his pill would be any period before he gets on a plane, claims to have a bomb, and gets chased down by armed federal agents.
Informing armed federal agents that it’s okay because the man who claims to have a bomb is actually insane does not provide much comfort to the agents.
Whether you have a bomb or not, threatening to discolor the tarmac strikes an unfortunate balance in that it is insufficient to cause serious alarm but plenty sufficient to get you killed, kind of like buying a General Motors product.
Under certain circumstances, “put your hands in the air” may be the best advice you will ever get, right up there with “buy low, sell high,” “go easy on the vermouth,” and “let’s check with a couple more people on this WMD thing first.”
Possibly the most important lesson to be drawn from these events will be that learned by Osama bin-Laden himself. That is, it’s time to pack up your secret cells of non-bomb-toting bipolar terrorist agents and head on home.
[quote]swivel wrote:
hmmm. no one has mentioned it but teh determining factor could very well be what our alert status was at teh time of shooting. anyone know ?
[/quote]
Apparently, all of the colors have been merged together to form the permanent color “BLACK”. Therefore, no matter what happens, the government can claim that were at the correct threat level.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
swivel wrote:
hmmm. no one has mentioned it but teh determining factor could very well be what our alert status was at teh time of shooting. anyone know ?
Apparently, all of the colors have been merged together to form the permanent color “BLACK”. Therefore, no matter what happens, the government can claim that were at the correct threat level.[/quote]
oh yeah, “BLACK ALERT”.
we had one of those just after katrina.
[quote]starkdog wrote:
I’m surprized that nobody’s mentioned this, but notice that there were roughly 100 people on the plane, and not 1 person did anything. If I was sitting close enough to the aisle, I would have tackled the prick, until the Air Marshalls got there. Once again, people duck their heads in the sand. [/quote]
Proof once again that most people are sheep and that they’re aren’t enough T-Men and T-Women around.
[quote]JeffR wrote:
I appreciate the sincere concern shown by some of the posters for what the Air Marshall is going through today.
He will carry this for the rest of his life.
JeffR[/quote]
For once I agree. I hope they don’t try to run this guy through on charges to make it look good. He did the job he was trained to do. If that fella had had a bomb, the guy would be a hero. Hell, I’d rather have one dead crazy bastard than a dead crazy bastard and 140 dead plane riders. He should have had his medicine, or not been on the damn plane.
[quote]swivel wrote:
Professor X wrote:
swivel wrote:
hmmm. no one has mentioned it but teh determining factor could very well be what our alert status was at teh time of shooting. anyone know ?
Apparently, all of the colors have been merged together to form the permanent color “BLACK”. Therefore, no matter what happens, the government can claim that were at the correct threat level.
oh yeah, “BLACK ALERT”.
we had one of those just after katrina.
I heard this on the news the day after it happened. I would be a little concerned if it were true that the only two people who heard him mention a bomb were the guys who shot him.
I hate to say this, but nothing else about this situation adds up to him looking suspicious enough to kill. If he was mentally ill, maybe he was nervous about the flight and felt he had to get off the plane?
