More Cop Fails

Off Topic
61

[quote]DBCooper wrote:

[quote]WN76 wrote:

[quote]DBCooper wrote:

[quote]WN76 wrote:

[quote]angry chicken wrote:
Whatever. If cops were actually held ACCOUNTABLE when they actually shot and killed innocent people, then there would be less shootings. If you CHOOSE to be a cop and you CHOOSE to have a family, then don’t use that as a fucking excuse to kill innocent people. No one “forces” a person to become a police officer. Those that choose to do so should be held to a HIGHER standard, not just a “reasonable” standard.
[/quote]

Cops choose to be cops, and some choose to have families, yes. The woman who was shot and killed chose to point her gun at a police officer. The cop who shot, had the choice of killing her, or being killed. I don’t know how you can fault him for protecting his own life. Should he have just stood there and took fire from her?

What would have been the most suitable course of action?

For the record, the fact that these guys were cops doesn’t matter. If anyone threatens your life, you should have the right to protect it. That goes for anyone. [/quote]
The point is that we expect cops to not make the mistake of killing an innocent person, period. Who knows what the actual particulars of this case are, but one thing remains clear and that is that a person seeking protection from the police was instead killed by them.

If police officers are given the powers to carry guns and detain people and all that stuff that the normal citizen cannot do or cannot do without much difficulty, then they should be held to a higher standard than the rest of the population. We don’t know that this woman pointed her gun at the officers or not and I don’t think anyone coming from a neutral position would take the officers’ statements to that effect as evidence in and of itself.

The woman most likely did not make things easy for the police to deal with, but I place the burden of responsibility for properly handling this situation on the shoulders of the police, due to the higher standard we should hold them to. In this case, had they handled the situation properly there is no doubt in my mind that a person who had no intention of willingly shooting the police and who did NOT fire upon them would not be dead right now.

By default, I think it is more than fair to place the blame on the police for shootings that happen under similarly questionable circumstances.[/quote]

I don’t think anyone argued that cops shouldn’t be held to a higher standard. That doesn’t mean waiting until fired upon from a person before returning fire. By then it’s too late. Action is always faster than reaction. If they point at you, and hit you with their first shot, there is no reaction. If someone points a gun at me, the show is over for one of us.

It doesn’t matter that she called the cops. They could have received a call to the house to pick up some fresh baked apple pies that the old lady made for the department. When they showed up, she pointed a gun at them and wouldn’t put it down. It’s a fucked up situation for sure, but that doesn’t change the reality of the threat.

How do you know her intent? She had already fired the gun and was pointing it at the cops. Anything could have happened.

If by blame, you mean a homicide investigation should take place to gather all the facts and determine if this was a clean shoot, then I agree with you. They’re not guilty until proven innocent.

I think there is a lot of arm chair quarter-backing going on from people who don’t have experience in this area.

[/quote]
How many cops do you know who followed protocol to a T and still ended up shooting an innocent person? Is it safe to say that when an innocent person is shot by the cops that SOMETHING, no matter how small, was done wrong on the part of the police?

If they did everything right, and their ultimate responsibility to the public is to protect and serve, then how in the hell is it possible that they ended up shooting an innocent 80-something year-old?[/quote]

Let’s clear up something. Everyone keeps saying she was “innocent”. Innocent of what? She pointed a gun at someone and the other person shot first. I’m not saying she’s a criminal, but let’s not pretend that she was some bystander who was not involved.

Sometimes you do everything right and the end result is still miserable.

62

[quote]WN76 wrote:

[quote]groo wrote:

[quote]WN76 wrote:

[quote]groo wrote:

[quote]WN76 wrote:

[quote]angry chicken wrote:
I want to drill down on one important perception: being a cop is considered to just like being a firefighter, an EMT or other public servant. It’s considered by many to be just another “blue collar” job. It’s NOT. I’m an electrician, I work a blue collar job. My job can be dirty, dangerous and I’ve been to the hospital several times over the years as a result of work accidents. A carpenter is blue collar job. Plumbers, painters, brick masons, tin-knockers, iron workers, steam fitters, etc… are blue collar jobs. Fire fighters and EMT/first responders are blue collar jobs. These are not desk jobs, most of these jobs have an element of danger, some more than others, and they all require lifting, acquired skills/training and you are not guaranteed to stay clean on your shift. Most of them are well paying, and you can earn a comfortable living working them.

NONE of these jobs empower you to shoot other people. NONE of these jobs empower you to beat someone down for “not complying” with your orders. NONE of these jobs empower you to DETAIN someone against their will, and beat them if they object to being detained. That’s a HUGE difference, but cops are regularly lumped together with the rest of us blue collar workers. [/quote]

So you’re upset about public perception of police? I agree there is a difference between police and plumbers. What does that have to do with anything?

If a plumber was walking down the road and an old lady pointed a gun in his face, I would expect him to use as much force as necessary to prevent her from killing him.

?[/quote]
What if some police executed a no knock warrant and it turns out they hit my house by mistake and I shoot a few of them because I see guns. Would that be ok? Or perhaps should I notice they are in uniform and only slightly more dangerous than old maude across the way with her handgun.
After all with nowhere near the same training(and lets be lol real about the actual level of firearms proficiency and discipline most regular leo has) I’d likely be expected not to kill them.

Obviously a high stress situation but have a bit of discipline and maybe hang in there a while before shooting down some old lady.[/quote]

Even with a no knock warrant, you go in announcing yourself and wearing uniforms which make you easy to identify.

Would it be OK? I don’t think this woman’s death is “OK” but with the given information so far, I think the officers should be cleared of any wrongdoing. If guys came into your house with guns and didn’t announce themselves as cops and you shot a few, well, you could have a defense.

If this lady was walking around her yard with a pistol, I’d expect the officers to take cover and order her to drop it. From the sound of it, they arrived and heard gunfire, took cover, ordered her to drop the weapon, she pointed it, they fired. It’s ugly, but there wasn’t really any other choice.

[/quote]
I differ on that there was no other option. I think that regular police, particularly ones that don’t come from a military background have terrible weapons discipline.

Its telling that you think kicking down my door and announcing you are the police should be enough that I a regular citizen should be able to determine immediately that your gang colors(I keed I keed) are the ones associated with the government and not shoot someone whereas those we choose to invest with more power get to plea to no other choice old lady had to go.

[/quote]

Police should have extensive firearms training. Some departments don’t have the budget for it. You get what you pay for. I train as much as I can outside the department, as do many officers.

Well, if you don’t get it when you see the uniform, and you don’t get it after the cops tell you their cops, then you’re not getting it and if you truly believe they’re not cops and take a shot, you have to face the consequences of your actions.

If you end up in a Mexican Standoff with police in your living room, it would be wise to drop your weapon. That is all.

[/quote]

Lets be real. Regular LEO has no significant fire discipline. Lets say we stuck an average to good infantry unit with the task of taking down the old lady and the order was given that no shots were to be taken until actively fired upon. The old lady wouldn’t have been killed in the same fashion. It could still have went poorly if she opened up on the members of the unit but they would not have fired first. Thats what I mean by poor discipline. I would expect enough fire discipline to not proactively fire upon an old lady.

What do you think the over/under will be on the settlement that gets paid to the ladies family?

63

[quote]groo wrote:

[quote]WN76 wrote:

[quote]groo wrote:

[quote]WN76 wrote:

[quote]groo wrote:

[quote]WN76 wrote:

[quote]angry chicken wrote:
I want to drill down on one important perception: being a cop is considered to just like being a firefighter, an EMT or other public servant. It’s considered by many to be just another “blue collar” job. It’s NOT. I’m an electrician, I work a blue collar job. My job can be dirty, dangerous and I’ve been to the hospital several times over the years as a result of work accidents. A carpenter is blue collar job. Plumbers, painters, brick masons, tin-knockers, iron workers, steam fitters, etc… are blue collar jobs. Fire fighters and EMT/first responders are blue collar jobs. These are not desk jobs, most of these jobs have an element of danger, some more than others, and they all require lifting, acquired skills/training and you are not guaranteed to stay clean on your shift. Most of them are well paying, and you can earn a comfortable living working them.

NONE of these jobs empower you to shoot other people. NONE of these jobs empower you to beat someone down for “not complying” with your orders. NONE of these jobs empower you to DETAIN someone against their will, and beat them if they object to being detained. That’s a HUGE difference, but cops are regularly lumped together with the rest of us blue collar workers. [/quote]

So you’re upset about public perception of police? I agree there is a difference between police and plumbers. What does that have to do with anything?

If a plumber was walking down the road and an old lady pointed a gun in his face, I would expect him to use as much force as necessary to prevent her from killing him.

?[/quote]
What if some police executed a no knock warrant and it turns out they hit my house by mistake and I shoot a few of them because I see guns. Would that be ok? Or perhaps should I notice they are in uniform and only slightly more dangerous than old maude across the way with her handgun.
After all with nowhere near the same training(and lets be lol real about the actual level of firearms proficiency and discipline most regular leo has) I’d likely be expected not to kill them.

Obviously a high stress situation but have a bit of discipline and maybe hang in there a while before shooting down some old lady.[/quote]

Even with a no knock warrant, you go in announcing yourself and wearing uniforms which make you easy to identify.

Would it be OK? I don’t think this woman’s death is “OK” but with the given information so far, I think the officers should be cleared of any wrongdoing. If guys came into your house with guns and didn’t announce themselves as cops and you shot a few, well, you could have a defense.

If this lady was walking around her yard with a pistol, I’d expect the officers to take cover and order her to drop it. From the sound of it, they arrived and heard gunfire, took cover, ordered her to drop the weapon, she pointed it, they fired. It’s ugly, but there wasn’t really any other choice.

[/quote]
I differ on that there was no other option. I think that regular police, particularly ones that don’t come from a military background have terrible weapons discipline.

Its telling that you think kicking down my door and announcing you are the police should be enough that I a regular citizen should be able to determine immediately that your gang colors(I keed I keed) are the ones associated with the government and not shoot someone whereas those we choose to invest with more power get to plea to no other choice old lady had to go.

[/quote]

Police should have extensive firearms training. Some departments don’t have the budget for it. You get what you pay for. I train as much as I can outside the department, as do many officers.

Well, if you don’t get it when you see the uniform, and you don’t get it after the cops tell you their cops, then you’re not getting it and if you truly believe they’re not cops and take a shot, you have to face the consequences of your actions.

If you end up in a Mexican Standoff with police in your living room, it would be wise to drop your weapon. That is all.

[/quote]

Lets be real. Regular LEO has no significant fire discipline. Lets say we stuck an average to good infantry unit with the task of taking down the old lady and the order was given that no shots were to be taken until actively fired upon. The old lady wouldn’t have been killed in the same fashion. It could still have went poorly if she opened up on the members of the unit but they would not have fired first. Thats what I mean by poor discipline. I would expect enough fire discipline to not proactively fire upon an old lady.

What do you think the over/under will be on the settlement that gets paid to the ladies family?

[/quote]

Infantry are trained to fire when TOLD to. Who tells the police to fire? It’s their own discretion. Are you telling me that police in America are responsible for more atrocities than US troops overseas?

64

[quote]groo wrote:

[quote]WN76 wrote:

[quote]groo wrote:

[quote]WN76 wrote:

[quote]groo wrote:

[quote]WN76 wrote:

[quote]angry chicken wrote:
I want to drill down on one important perception: being a cop is considered to just like being a firefighter, an EMT or other public servant. It’s considered by many to be just another “blue collar” job. It’s NOT. I’m an electrician, I work a blue collar job. My job can be dirty, dangerous and I’ve been to the hospital several times over the years as a result of work accidents. A carpenter is blue collar job. Plumbers, painters, brick masons, tin-knockers, iron workers, steam fitters, etc… are blue collar jobs. Fire fighters and EMT/first responders are blue collar jobs. These are not desk jobs, most of these jobs have an element of danger, some more than others, and they all require lifting, acquired skills/training and you are not guaranteed to stay clean on your shift. Most of them are well paying, and you can earn a comfortable living working them.

NONE of these jobs empower you to shoot other people. NONE of these jobs empower you to beat someone down for “not complying” with your orders. NONE of these jobs empower you to DETAIN someone against their will, and beat them if they object to being detained. That’s a HUGE difference, but cops are regularly lumped together with the rest of us blue collar workers. [/quote]

So you’re upset about public perception of police? I agree there is a difference between police and plumbers. What does that have to do with anything?

If a plumber was walking down the road and an old lady pointed a gun in his face, I would expect him to use as much force as necessary to prevent her from killing him.

?[/quote]
What if some police executed a no knock warrant and it turns out they hit my house by mistake and I shoot a few of them because I see guns. Would that be ok? Or perhaps should I notice they are in uniform and only slightly more dangerous than old maude across the way with her handgun.
After all with nowhere near the same training(and lets be lol real about the actual level of firearms proficiency and discipline most regular leo has) I’d likely be expected not to kill them.

Obviously a high stress situation but have a bit of discipline and maybe hang in there a while before shooting down some old lady.[/quote]

Even with a no knock warrant, you go in announcing yourself and wearing uniforms which make you easy to identify.

Would it be OK? I don’t think this woman’s death is “OK” but with the given information so far, I think the officers should be cleared of any wrongdoing. If guys came into your house with guns and didn’t announce themselves as cops and you shot a few, well, you could have a defense.

If this lady was walking around her yard with a pistol, I’d expect the officers to take cover and order her to drop it. From the sound of it, they arrived and heard gunfire, took cover, ordered her to drop the weapon, she pointed it, they fired. It’s ugly, but there wasn’t really any other choice.

[/quote]
I differ on that there was no other option. I think that regular police, particularly ones that don’t come from a military background have terrible weapons discipline.

Its telling that you think kicking down my door and announcing you are the police should be enough that I a regular citizen should be able to determine immediately that your gang colors(I keed I keed) are the ones associated with the government and not shoot someone whereas those we choose to invest with more power get to plea to no other choice old lady had to go.

[/quote]

Police should have extensive firearms training. Some departments don’t have the budget for it. You get what you pay for. I train as much as I can outside the department, as do many officers.

Well, if you don’t get it when you see the uniform, and you don’t get it after the cops tell you their cops, then you’re not getting it and if you truly believe they’re not cops and take a shot, you have to face the consequences of your actions.

If you end up in a Mexican Standoff with police in your living room, it would be wise to drop your weapon. That is all.

[/quote]

Lets be real. Regular LEO has no significant fire discipline. Lets say we stuck an average to good infantry unit with the task of taking down the old lady and the order was given that no shots were to be taken until actively fired upon. The old lady wouldn’t have been killed in the same fashion. It could still have went poorly if she opened up on the members of the unit but they would not have fired first. Thats what I mean by poor discipline. I would expect enough fire discipline to not proactively fire upon an old lady.

What do you think the over/under will be on the settlement that gets paid to the ladies family?

[/quote]

Are you proposing martial law?

Who knows. Settlements are sometimes easier to pay out than to fight. Means nothing.

65

[quote]WN76 wrote:

[quote]DBCooper wrote:

[quote]WN76 wrote:

[quote]DBCooper wrote:

[quote]WN76 wrote:

[quote]angry chicken wrote:
Whatever. If cops were actually held ACCOUNTABLE when they actually shot and killed innocent people, then there would be less shootings. If you CHOOSE to be a cop and you CHOOSE to have a family, then don’t use that as a fucking excuse to kill innocent people. No one “forces” a person to become a police officer. Those that choose to do so should be held to a HIGHER standard, not just a “reasonable” standard.
[/quote]

Cops choose to be cops, and some choose to have families, yes. The woman who was shot and killed chose to point her gun at a police officer. The cop who shot, had the choice of killing her, or being killed. I don’t know how you can fault him for protecting his own life. Should he have just stood there and took fire from her?

What would have been the most suitable course of action?

For the record, the fact that these guys were cops doesn’t matter. If anyone threatens your life, you should have the right to protect it. That goes for anyone. [/quote]
The point is that we expect cops to not make the mistake of killing an innocent person, period. Who knows what the actual particulars of this case are, but one thing remains clear and that is that a person seeking protection from the police was instead killed by them.

If police officers are given the powers to carry guns and detain people and all that stuff that the normal citizen cannot do or cannot do without much difficulty, then they should be held to a higher standard than the rest of the population. We don’t know that this woman pointed her gun at the officers or not and I don’t think anyone coming from a neutral position would take the officers’ statements to that effect as evidence in and of itself.

The woman most likely did not make things easy for the police to deal with, but I place the burden of responsibility for properly handling this situation on the shoulders of the police, due to the higher standard we should hold them to. In this case, had they handled the situation properly there is no doubt in my mind that a person who had no intention of willingly shooting the police and who did NOT fire upon them would not be dead right now.

By default, I think it is more than fair to place the blame on the police for shootings that happen under similarly questionable circumstances.[/quote]

I don’t think anyone argued that cops shouldn’t be held to a higher standard. That doesn’t mean waiting until fired upon from a person before returning fire. By then it’s too late. Action is always faster than reaction. If they point at you, and hit you with their first shot, there is no reaction. If someone points a gun at me, the show is over for one of us.

It doesn’t matter that she called the cops. They could have received a call to the house to pick up some fresh baked apple pies that the old lady made for the department. When they showed up, she pointed a gun at them and wouldn’t put it down. It’s a fucked up situation for sure, but that doesn’t change the reality of the threat.

How do you know her intent? She had already fired the gun and was pointing it at the cops. Anything could have happened.

If by blame, you mean a homicide investigation should take place to gather all the facts and determine if this was a clean shoot, then I agree with you. They’re not guilty until proven innocent.

I think there is a lot of arm chair quarter-backing going on from people who don’t have experience in this area.

[/quote]
How many cops do you know who followed protocol to a T and still ended up shooting an innocent person? Is it safe to say that when an innocent person is shot by the cops that SOMETHING, no matter how small, was done wrong on the part of the police?

If they did everything right, and their ultimate responsibility to the public is to protect and serve, then how in the hell is it possible that they ended up shooting an innocent 80-something year-old?[/quote]

Let’s clear up something. Everyone keeps saying she was “innocent”. Innocent of what? She pointed a gun at someone and the other person shot first. I’m not saying she’s a criminal, but let’s not pretend that she was some bystander who was not involved.

Sometimes you do everything right and the end result is still miserable.[/quote]
Well, when I personally say “innocent” I just mean that she isn’t the person the police were there to apprehend or whatever. I’m not referring at all to her actions, although I can’t speak for anyone else.

And we don’t really know that she pointed a gun at anyone at all. I may be mistaken, but I didn’t get the impression from the article that she fired the gun out the window when the police were there either. So she may be innocent of that anyways. The ease at which the police could corroborate a story that she pointed the gun, combined with the incentive for them to do so if she did NOT, is enough to discount the officers’ statements on the matter. I’m not saying they’re lying, only that circumstances are such that any conclusion has to be drawn independent of their statements. Either that or the victim’s relatives who say she would never point a gun at the police are given the same credibility, in which case they cancel each other out anyways.

I understand that something miserable can still happen when everything is done right, but the point is that these sorts of events seem to happen far too frequently. Perception may not be reality, but regardless, the police should be held to a higher standard, namely that when they do everything right, miserable shit better not happen to non-criminals at their hands.

Is that a lot to ask, perfection in difficult, complicated situations with a 100% success rate? Considering what the consequences of a mistake by the police can be, no, it is not a lot to ask at all.

That’s why higher standards should be in place in terms of hiring police officers, training them, independent oversight of them, accountability and so on. And I don’t think it helps matters if police don’t feel they should be held to an “unrealistic” standard. If a standard that high is clearly in place, it serves to keep those with less than noble intentions or with delusions of grandeur or naivety about the job from trying to become a police officer in the first place.

66

[quote]WN76 wrote:

[quote]groo wrote:

[quote]WN76 wrote:

[quote]groo wrote:

[quote]WN76 wrote:

[quote]groo wrote:

[quote]WN76 wrote:

[quote]angry chicken wrote:
I want to drill down on one important perception: being a cop is considered to just like being a firefighter, an EMT or other public servant. It’s considered by many to be just another “blue collar” job. It’s NOT. I’m an electrician, I work a blue collar job. My job can be dirty, dangerous and I’ve been to the hospital several times over the years as a result of work accidents. A carpenter is blue collar job. Plumbers, painters, brick masons, tin-knockers, iron workers, steam fitters, etc… are blue collar jobs. Fire fighters and EMT/first responders are blue collar jobs. These are not desk jobs, most of these jobs have an element of danger, some more than others, and they all require lifting, acquired skills/training and you are not guaranteed to stay clean on your shift. Most of them are well paying, and you can earn a comfortable living working them.

NONE of these jobs empower you to shoot other people. NONE of these jobs empower you to beat someone down for “not complying” with your orders. NONE of these jobs empower you to DETAIN someone against their will, and beat them if they object to being detained. That’s a HUGE difference, but cops are regularly lumped together with the rest of us blue collar workers. [/quote]

So you’re upset about public perception of police? I agree there is a difference between police and plumbers. What does that have to do with anything?

If a plumber was walking down the road and an old lady pointed a gun in his face, I would expect him to use as much force as necessary to prevent her from killing him.

?[/quote]
What if some police executed a no knock warrant and it turns out they hit my house by mistake and I shoot a few of them because I see guns. Would that be ok? Or perhaps should I notice they are in uniform and only slightly more dangerous than old maude across the way with her handgun.
After all with nowhere near the same training(and lets be lol real about the actual level of firearms proficiency and discipline most regular leo has) I’d likely be expected not to kill them.

Obviously a high stress situation but have a bit of discipline and maybe hang in there a while before shooting down some old lady.[/quote]

Even with a no knock warrant, you go in announcing yourself and wearing uniforms which make you easy to identify.

Would it be OK? I don’t think this woman’s death is “OK” but with the given information so far, I think the officers should be cleared of any wrongdoing. If guys came into your house with guns and didn’t announce themselves as cops and you shot a few, well, you could have a defense.

If this lady was walking around her yard with a pistol, I’d expect the officers to take cover and order her to drop it. From the sound of it, they arrived and heard gunfire, took cover, ordered her to drop the weapon, she pointed it, they fired. It’s ugly, but there wasn’t really any other choice.

[/quote]
I differ on that there was no other option. I think that regular police, particularly ones that don’t come from a military background have terrible weapons discipline.

Its telling that you think kicking down my door and announcing you are the police should be enough that I a regular citizen should be able to determine immediately that your gang colors(I keed I keed) are the ones associated with the government and not shoot someone whereas those we choose to invest with more power get to plea to no other choice old lady had to go.

[/quote]

Police should have extensive firearms training. Some departments don’t have the budget for it. You get what you pay for. I train as much as I can outside the department, as do many officers.

Well, if you don’t get it when you see the uniform, and you don’t get it after the cops tell you their cops, then you’re not getting it and if you truly believe they’re not cops and take a shot, you have to face the consequences of your actions.

If you end up in a Mexican Standoff with police in your living room, it would be wise to drop your weapon. That is all.

[/quote]

Lets be real. Regular LEO has no significant fire discipline. Lets say we stuck an average to good infantry unit with the task of taking down the old lady and the order was given that no shots were to be taken until actively fired upon. The old lady wouldn’t have been killed in the same fashion. It could still have went poorly if she opened up on the members of the unit but they would not have fired first. Thats what I mean by poor discipline. I would expect enough fire discipline to not proactively fire upon an old lady.

What do you think the over/under will be on the settlement that gets paid to the ladies family?

[/quote]

Infantry are trained to fire when TOLD to. Who tells the police to fire? It’s their own discretion. Are you telling me that police in America are responsible for more atrocities than US troops overseas?
[/quote]
Dude thats such a fucking strawman. Yah your own discretion is a shit directive if thats your rules of engagement(which it isn’t). Especially if your discretion tells you that the perceived threat is great enough in this case you should kill the old woman. Probably should take a job where you aren’t called upon to make life and death choices.

67

[quote]Ripsaw3689 wrote:

[quote]angry chicken wrote:
If you CHOOSE to be a cop and you CHOOSE to have a family, then don’t use that as a fucking excuse to kill innocent people. [/quote]

What the fuck man? Who gets a badge to shoot innocent people that you are sworn to protect?

On topic, the article said the old lady never used the gun before…WHY DOES SHE HAVE A FUCKING GUN IF SHE DOESN’T KNOW HOW TO USE IT? Especially if she is hard of hearing and unable to see well.

The officer was right in shooting her when she pointed a gun at them and did not comply with their demands.

[/quote]

This is america

Errryyyybody get guns bro

68

[quote]WN76 wrote:

[quote]groo wrote:

[quote]WN76 wrote:

[quote]groo wrote:

[quote]WN76 wrote:

[quote]groo wrote:

[quote]WN76 wrote:

[quote]angry chicken wrote:
I want to drill down on one important perception: being a cop is considered to just like being a firefighter, an EMT or other public servant. It’s considered by many to be just another “blue collar” job. It’s NOT. I’m an electrician, I work a blue collar job. My job can be dirty, dangerous and I’ve been to the hospital several times over the years as a result of work accidents. A carpenter is blue collar job. Plumbers, painters, brick masons, tin-knockers, iron workers, steam fitters, etc… are blue collar jobs. Fire fighters and EMT/first responders are blue collar jobs. These are not desk jobs, most of these jobs have an element of danger, some more than others, and they all require lifting, acquired skills/training and you are not guaranteed to stay clean on your shift. Most of them are well paying, and you can earn a comfortable living working them.

NONE of these jobs empower you to shoot other people. NONE of these jobs empower you to beat someone down for “not complying” with your orders. NONE of these jobs empower you to DETAIN someone against their will, and beat them if they object to being detained. That’s a HUGE difference, but cops are regularly lumped together with the rest of us blue collar workers. [/quote]

So you’re upset about public perception of police? I agree there is a difference between police and plumbers. What does that have to do with anything?

If a plumber was walking down the road and an old lady pointed a gun in his face, I would expect him to use as much force as necessary to prevent her from killing him.

?[/quote]
What if some police executed a no knock warrant and it turns out they hit my house by mistake and I shoot a few of them because I see guns. Would that be ok? Or perhaps should I notice they are in uniform and only slightly more dangerous than old maude across the way with her handgun.
After all with nowhere near the same training(and lets be lol real about the actual level of firearms proficiency and discipline most regular leo has) I’d likely be expected not to kill them.

Obviously a high stress situation but have a bit of discipline and maybe hang in there a while before shooting down some old lady.[/quote]

Even with a no knock warrant, you go in announcing yourself and wearing uniforms which make you easy to identify.

Would it be OK? I don’t think this woman’s death is “OK” but with the given information so far, I think the officers should be cleared of any wrongdoing. If guys came into your house with guns and didn’t announce themselves as cops and you shot a few, well, you could have a defense.

If this lady was walking around her yard with a pistol, I’d expect the officers to take cover and order her to drop it. From the sound of it, they arrived and heard gunfire, took cover, ordered her to drop the weapon, she pointed it, they fired. It’s ugly, but there wasn’t really any other choice.

[/quote]
I differ on that there was no other option. I think that regular police, particularly ones that don’t come from a military background have terrible weapons discipline.

Its telling that you think kicking down my door and announcing you are the police should be enough that I a regular citizen should be able to determine immediately that your gang colors(I keed I keed) are the ones associated with the government and not shoot someone whereas those we choose to invest with more power get to plea to no other choice old lady had to go.

[/quote]

Police should have extensive firearms training. Some departments don’t have the budget for it. You get what you pay for. I train as much as I can outside the department, as do many officers.

Well, if you don’t get it when you see the uniform, and you don’t get it after the cops tell you their cops, then you’re not getting it and if you truly believe they’re not cops and take a shot, you have to face the consequences of your actions.

If you end up in a Mexican Standoff with police in your living room, it would be wise to drop your weapon. That is all.

[/quote]

Lets be real. Regular LEO has no significant fire discipline. Lets say we stuck an average to good infantry unit with the task of taking down the old lady and the order was given that no shots were to be taken until actively fired upon. The old lady wouldn’t have been killed in the same fashion. It could still have went poorly if she opened up on the members of the unit but they would not have fired first. Thats what I mean by poor discipline. I would expect enough fire discipline to not proactively fire upon an old lady.

What do you think the over/under will be on the settlement that gets paid to the ladies family?

[/quote]

Are you proposing martial law?

Who knows. Settlements are sometimes easier to pay out than to fight. Means nothing.
[/quote]

Being deliberately obtuse part of the training?

No I am stating the discipline and training that is expected of soldiers in zones of combat should be expected of people in a paramilitary group acting on domestic soil.

The fact that you talk about the extensive training of local leo shows that your view on this is fucking ludicrous. Qualifying a couple times a year is pretty rough I know.

69

[quote]groo wrote:

[quote]WN76 wrote:

[quote]groo wrote:

[quote]WN76 wrote:

[quote]groo wrote:

[quote]WN76 wrote:

[quote]groo wrote:

[quote]WN76 wrote:

[quote]angry chicken wrote:
I want to drill down on one important perception: being a cop is considered to just like being a firefighter, an EMT or other public servant. It’s considered by many to be just another “blue collar” job. It’s NOT. I’m an electrician, I work a blue collar job. My job can be dirty, dangerous and I’ve been to the hospital several times over the years as a result of work accidents. A carpenter is blue collar job. Plumbers, painters, brick masons, tin-knockers, iron workers, steam fitters, etc… are blue collar jobs. Fire fighters and EMT/first responders are blue collar jobs. These are not desk jobs, most of these jobs have an element of danger, some more than others, and they all require lifting, acquired skills/training and you are not guaranteed to stay clean on your shift. Most of them are well paying, and you can earn a comfortable living working them.

NONE of these jobs empower you to shoot other people. NONE of these jobs empower you to beat someone down for “not complying” with your orders. NONE of these jobs empower you to DETAIN someone against their will, and beat them if they object to being detained. That’s a HUGE difference, but cops are regularly lumped together with the rest of us blue collar workers. [/quote]

So you’re upset about public perception of police? I agree there is a difference between police and plumbers. What does that have to do with anything?

If a plumber was walking down the road and an old lady pointed a gun in his face, I would expect him to use as much force as necessary to prevent her from killing him.

?[/quote]
What if some police executed a no knock warrant and it turns out they hit my house by mistake and I shoot a few of them because I see guns. Would that be ok? Or perhaps should I notice they are in uniform and only slightly more dangerous than old maude across the way with her handgun.
After all with nowhere near the same training(and lets be lol real about the actual level of firearms proficiency and discipline most regular leo has) I’d likely be expected not to kill them.

Obviously a high stress situation but have a bit of discipline and maybe hang in there a while before shooting down some old lady.[/quote]

Even with a no knock warrant, you go in announcing yourself and wearing uniforms which make you easy to identify.

Would it be OK? I don’t think this woman’s death is “OK” but with the given information so far, I think the officers should be cleared of any wrongdoing. If guys came into your house with guns and didn’t announce themselves as cops and you shot a few, well, you could have a defense.

If this lady was walking around her yard with a pistol, I’d expect the officers to take cover and order her to drop it. From the sound of it, they arrived and heard gunfire, took cover, ordered her to drop the weapon, she pointed it, they fired. It’s ugly, but there wasn’t really any other choice.

[/quote]
I differ on that there was no other option. I think that regular police, particularly ones that don’t come from a military background have terrible weapons discipline.

Its telling that you think kicking down my door and announcing you are the police should be enough that I a regular citizen should be able to determine immediately that your gang colors(I keed I keed) are the ones associated with the government and not shoot someone whereas those we choose to invest with more power get to plea to no other choice old lady had to go.

[/quote]

Police should have extensive firearms training. Some departments don’t have the budget for it. You get what you pay for. I train as much as I can outside the department, as do many officers.

Well, if you don’t get it when you see the uniform, and you don’t get it after the cops tell you their cops, then you’re not getting it and if you truly believe they’re not cops and take a shot, you have to face the consequences of your actions.

If you end up in a Mexican Standoff with police in your living room, it would be wise to drop your weapon. That is all.

[/quote]

Lets be real. Regular LEO has no significant fire discipline. Lets say we stuck an average to good infantry unit with the task of taking down the old lady and the order was given that no shots were to be taken until actively fired upon. The old lady wouldn’t have been killed in the same fashion. It could still have went poorly if she opened up on the members of the unit but they would not have fired first. Thats what I mean by poor discipline. I would expect enough fire discipline to not proactively fire upon an old lady.

What do you think the over/under will be on the settlement that gets paid to the ladies family?

[/quote]

Infantry are trained to fire when TOLD to. Who tells the police to fire? It’s their own discretion. Are you telling me that police in America are responsible for more atrocities than US troops overseas?
[/quote]
Dude thats such a fucking strawman. Yah your own discretion is a shit directive if thats your rules of engagement(which it isn’t). Especially if your discretion tells you that the perceived threat is great enough in this case you should kill the old woman. Probably should take a job where you aren’t called upon to make life and death choices.

[/quote]

Cops use a force continuum, not an ROE card. A gun is a gun. It doesn’t matter who is pulling the trigger. She was capable of firing it, and it was pointed at the officers involved. They had reasonable belief of death or grievous bodily harm.

It’s not a strawman. It’s to help you understand that using the infantry in a policing role is a terrible idea. It was you who made the comparison.

70

[quote]groo wrote:

[quote]WN76 wrote:

[quote]groo wrote:

[quote]WN76 wrote:

[quote]groo wrote:

[quote]WN76 wrote:

[quote]groo wrote:

[quote]WN76 wrote:

[quote]angry chicken wrote:
I want to drill down on one important perception: being a cop is considered to just like being a firefighter, an EMT or other public servant. It’s considered by many to be just another “blue collar” job. It’s NOT. I’m an electrician, I work a blue collar job. My job can be dirty, dangerous and I’ve been to the hospital several times over the years as a result of work accidents. A carpenter is blue collar job. Plumbers, painters, brick masons, tin-knockers, iron workers, steam fitters, etc… are blue collar jobs. Fire fighters and EMT/first responders are blue collar jobs. These are not desk jobs, most of these jobs have an element of danger, some more than others, and they all require lifting, acquired skills/training and you are not guaranteed to stay clean on your shift. Most of them are well paying, and you can earn a comfortable living working them.

NONE of these jobs empower you to shoot other people. NONE of these jobs empower you to beat someone down for “not complying” with your orders. NONE of these jobs empower you to DETAIN someone against their will, and beat them if they object to being detained. That’s a HUGE difference, but cops are regularly lumped together with the rest of us blue collar workers. [/quote]

So you’re upset about public perception of police? I agree there is a difference between police and plumbers. What does that have to do with anything?

If a plumber was walking down the road and an old lady pointed a gun in his face, I would expect him to use as much force as necessary to prevent her from killing him.

?[/quote]
What if some police executed a no knock warrant and it turns out they hit my house by mistake and I shoot a few of them because I see guns. Would that be ok? Or perhaps should I notice they are in uniform and only slightly more dangerous than old maude across the way with her handgun.
After all with nowhere near the same training(and lets be lol real about the actual level of firearms proficiency and discipline most regular leo has) I’d likely be expected not to kill them.

Obviously a high stress situation but have a bit of discipline and maybe hang in there a while before shooting down some old lady.[/quote]

Even with a no knock warrant, you go in announcing yourself and wearing uniforms which make you easy to identify.

Would it be OK? I don’t think this woman’s death is “OK” but with the given information so far, I think the officers should be cleared of any wrongdoing. If guys came into your house with guns and didn’t announce themselves as cops and you shot a few, well, you could have a defense.

If this lady was walking around her yard with a pistol, I’d expect the officers to take cover and order her to drop it. From the sound of it, they arrived and heard gunfire, took cover, ordered her to drop the weapon, she pointed it, they fired. It’s ugly, but there wasn’t really any other choice.

[/quote]
I differ on that there was no other option. I think that regular police, particularly ones that don’t come from a military background have terrible weapons discipline.

Its telling that you think kicking down my door and announcing you are the police should be enough that I a regular citizen should be able to determine immediately that your gang colors(I keed I keed) are the ones associated with the government and not shoot someone whereas those we choose to invest with more power get to plea to no other choice old lady had to go.

[/quote]

Police should have extensive firearms training. Some departments don’t have the budget for it. You get what you pay for. I train as much as I can outside the department, as do many officers.

Well, if you don’t get it when you see the uniform, and you don’t get it after the cops tell you their cops, then you’re not getting it and if you truly believe they’re not cops and take a shot, you have to face the consequences of your actions.

If you end up in a Mexican Standoff with police in your living room, it would be wise to drop your weapon. That is all.

[/quote]

Lets be real. Regular LEO has no significant fire discipline. Lets say we stuck an average to good infantry unit with the task of taking down the old lady and the order was given that no shots were to be taken until actively fired upon. The old lady wouldn’t have been killed in the same fashion. It could still have went poorly if she opened up on the members of the unit but they would not have fired first. Thats what I mean by poor discipline. I would expect enough fire discipline to not proactively fire upon an old lady.

What do you think the over/under will be on the settlement that gets paid to the ladies family?

[/quote]

Are you proposing martial law?

Who knows. Settlements are sometimes easier to pay out than to fight. Means nothing.
[/quote]

Being deliberately obtuse part of the training?

No I am stating the discipline and training that is expected of soldiers in zones of combat should be expected of people in a paramilitary group acting on domestic soil.

The fact that you talk about the extensive training of local leo shows that your view on this is fucking ludicrous. Qualifying a couple times a year is pretty rough I know.
[/quote]

I said they SHOULD receive extensive training, not that they do.

71

This is my favorite of the relatively recent killings by the way. Where the deputy is let off because of his claims the father was acting irrationally. So he killed him because of the risk he posed to his daughters if he drove off with them…as opposed to the oh I don’t know unquantifiable harm seeing your father shot and killed a few feet from you would cause.

The best is how the news stories move from calling them the girls to his daughters and as more details about him come out…oh you know that he was a beloved marine and regularly worked out with his daughters and prayed with them before school came out…that the irrational actions he took became more murky and undefined and we end up with one dead dad and a huge wrongful death suit that the wife will likely win…along with a deputy that gets off scott free on a murder.

72

[quote]DBCooper wrote:

[quote]WN76 wrote:

[quote]DBCooper wrote:

[quote]WN76 wrote:

[quote]DBCooper wrote:

[quote]WN76 wrote:

[quote]angry chicken wrote:
Whatever. If cops were actually held ACCOUNTABLE when they actually shot and killed innocent people, then there would be less shootings. If you CHOOSE to be a cop and you CHOOSE to have a family, then don’t use that as a fucking excuse to kill innocent people. No one “forces” a person to become a police officer. Those that choose to do so should be held to a HIGHER standard, not just a “reasonable” standard.
[/quote]

Cops choose to be cops, and some choose to have families, yes. The woman who was shot and killed chose to point her gun at a police officer. The cop who shot, had the choice of killing her, or being killed. I don’t know how you can fault him for protecting his own life. Should he have just stood there and took fire from her?

What would have been the most suitable course of action?

For the record, the fact that these guys were cops doesn’t matter. If anyone threatens your life, you should have the right to protect it. That goes for anyone. [/quote]
The point is that we expect cops to not make the mistake of killing an innocent person, period. Who knows what the actual particulars of this case are, but one thing remains clear and that is that a person seeking protection from the police was instead killed by them.

If police officers are given the powers to carry guns and detain people and all that stuff that the normal citizen cannot do or cannot do without much difficulty, then they should be held to a higher standard than the rest of the population. We don’t know that this woman pointed her gun at the officers or not and I don’t think anyone coming from a neutral position would take the officers’ statements to that effect as evidence in and of itself.

The woman most likely did not make things easy for the police to deal with, but I place the burden of responsibility for properly handling this situation on the shoulders of the police, due to the higher standard we should hold them to. In this case, had they handled the situation properly there is no doubt in my mind that a person who had no intention of willingly shooting the police and who did NOT fire upon them would not be dead right now.

By default, I think it is more than fair to place the blame on the police for shootings that happen under similarly questionable circumstances.[/quote]

I don’t think anyone argued that cops shouldn’t be held to a higher standard. That doesn’t mean waiting until fired upon from a person before returning fire. By then it’s too late. Action is always faster than reaction. If they point at you, and hit you with their first shot, there is no reaction. If someone points a gun at me, the show is over for one of us.

It doesn’t matter that she called the cops. They could have received a call to the house to pick up some fresh baked apple pies that the old lady made for the department. When they showed up, she pointed a gun at them and wouldn’t put it down. It’s a fucked up situation for sure, but that doesn’t change the reality of the threat.

How do you know her intent? She had already fired the gun and was pointing it at the cops. Anything could have happened.

If by blame, you mean a homicide investigation should take place to gather all the facts and determine if this was a clean shoot, then I agree with you. They’re not guilty until proven innocent.

I think there is a lot of arm chair quarter-backing going on from people who don’t have experience in this area.

[/quote]
How many cops do you know who followed protocol to a T and still ended up shooting an innocent person? Is it safe to say that when an innocent person is shot by the cops that SOMETHING, no matter how small, was done wrong on the part of the police?

If they did everything right, and their ultimate responsibility to the public is to protect and serve, then how in the hell is it possible that they ended up shooting an innocent 80-something year-old?[/quote]

Let’s clear up something. Everyone keeps saying she was “innocent”. Innocent of what? She pointed a gun at someone and the other person shot first. I’m not saying she’s a criminal, but let’s not pretend that she was some bystander who was not involved.

Sometimes you do everything right and the end result is still miserable.[/quote]
Well, when I personally say “innocent” I just mean that she isn’t the person the police were there to apprehend or whatever. I’m not referring at all to her actions, although I can’t speak for anyone else.

And we don’t really know that she pointed a gun at anyone at all. I may be mistaken, but I didn’t get the impression from the article that she fired the gun out the window when the police were there either. So she may be innocent of that anyways. The ease at which the police could corroborate a story that she pointed the gun, combined with the incentive for them to do so if she did NOT, is enough to discount the officers’ statements on the matter. I’m not saying they’re lying, only that circumstances are such that any conclusion has to be drawn independent of their statements. Either that or the victim’s relatives who say she would never point a gun at the police are given the same credibility, in which case they cancel each other out anyways.

I understand that something miserable can still happen when everything is done right, but the point is that these sorts of events seem to happen far too frequently. Perception may not be reality, but regardless, the police should be held to a higher standard, namely that when they do everything right, miserable shit better not happen to non-criminals at their hands.

Is that a lot to ask, perfection in difficult, complicated situations with a 100% success rate? Considering what the consequences of a mistake by the police can be, no, it is not a lot to ask at all.

That’s why higher standards should be in place in terms of hiring police officers, training them, independent oversight of them, accountability and so on. And I don’t think it helps matters if police don’t feel they should be held to an “unrealistic” standard. If a standard that high is clearly in place, it serves to keep those with less than noble intentions or with delusions of grandeur or naivety about the job from trying to become a police officer in the first place.[/quote]

I agree with mostly everything you’ve written. The public deserves to have good police officers who are held to a high standard.

What would the incentive be for gunning down an elderly lady who wanted help? That’s what is bugging me. I believe the officers feared for their lives and reacted accordingly.

73

[quote]groo wrote:

This is my favorite of the relatively recent killings by the way. Where the deputy is let off because of his claims the father was acting irrationally. So he killed him because of the risk he posed to his daughters if he drove off with them…as opposed to the oh I don’t know unquantifiable harm seeing your father shot and killed a few feet from you would cause.

The best is how the news stories move from calling them the girls to his daughters and as more details about him come out…oh you know that he was a beloved marine and regularly worked out with his daughters and prayed with them before school came out…that the irrational actions he took became more murky and undefined and we end up with one dead dad and a huge wrongful death suit that the wife will likely win…along with a deputy that gets off scott free on a murder.[/quote]

Despicable.

74

[quote]groo wrote:

This is my favorite of the relatively recent killings by the way. Where the deputy is let off because of his claims the father was acting irrationally. So he killed him because of the risk he posed to his daughters if he drove off with them…as opposed to the oh I don’t know unquantifiable harm seeing your father shot and killed a few feet from you would cause.

The best is how the news stories move from calling them the girls to his daughters and as more details about him come out…oh you know that he was a beloved marine and regularly worked out with his daughters and prayed with them before school came out…that the irrational actions he took became more murky and undefined and we end up with one dead dad and a huge wrongful death suit that the wife will likely win…along with a deputy that gets off scott free on a murder.[/quote]

The deputy who shot the Marine was also a former Marine. Didn’t you say that military personnel had superior fire control?

75

[quote]sam_sneed wrote:

[quote]groo wrote:

This is my favorite of the relatively recent killings by the way. Where the deputy is let off because of his claims the father was acting irrationally. So he killed him because of the risk he posed to his daughters if he drove off with them…as opposed to the oh I don’t know unquantifiable harm seeing your father shot and killed a few feet from you would cause.

The best is how the news stories move from calling them the girls to his daughters and as more details about him come out…oh you know that he was a beloved marine and regularly worked out with his daughters and prayed with them before school came out…that the irrational actions he took became more murky and undefined and we end up with one dead dad and a huge wrongful death suit that the wife will likely win…along with a deputy that gets off scott free on a murder.[/quote]

Despicable.
[/quote]

That’s pretty fucked up. Why did they make no attempt to arrest the UNARMED man? Can you now shoot someone for driving dangerously with kids in the car?

76

[quote]Steel Nation wrote:

[quote]sam_sneed wrote:

[quote]groo wrote:

This is my favorite of the relatively recent killings by the way. Where the deputy is let off because of his claims the father was acting irrationally. So he killed him because of the risk he posed to his daughters if he drove off with them…as opposed to the oh I don’t know unquantifiable harm seeing your father shot and killed a few feet from you would cause.

The best is how the news stories move from calling them the girls to his daughters and as more details about him come out…oh you know that he was a beloved marine and regularly worked out with his daughters and prayed with them before school came out…that the irrational actions he took became more murky and undefined and we end up with one dead dad and a huge wrongful death suit that the wife will likely win…along with a deputy that gets off scott free on a murder.[/quote]

Despicable.
[/quote]

That’s pretty fucked up. Why did they make no attempt to arrest the UNARMED man? Can you now shoot someone for driving dangerously with kids in the car?[/quote]

From the sound of it, the officer didn’t have control over the situation. Should have never let the guy get back into the car.

77

[quote]Steel Nation wrote:

[quote]sam_sneed wrote:

[quote]groo wrote:

This is my favorite of the relatively recent killings by the way. Where the deputy is let off because of his claims the father was acting irrationally. So he killed him because of the risk he posed to his daughters if he drove off with them…as opposed to the oh I don’t know unquantifiable harm seeing your father shot and killed a few feet from you would cause.

The best is how the news stories move from calling them the girls to his daughters and as more details about him come out…oh you know that he was a beloved marine and regularly worked out with his daughters and prayed with them before school came out…that the irrational actions he took became more murky and undefined and we end up with one dead dad and a huge wrongful death suit that the wife will likely win…along with a deputy that gets off scott free on a murder.[/quote]

Despicable.
[/quote]

That’s pretty fucked up. Why did they make no attempt to arrest the UNARMED man? Can you now shoot someone for driving dangerously with kids in the car?[/quote]

There’s a video of a Vet acting bizarre at a traffic stop. During the stop, the Vet goes back into his truck to retrieve his M1. He ends up gunning the officer down in a very disturbing manner. It could have been prevented if the officer had control of the situation.

78

[quote]WN76 wrote:

What would the incentive be for gunning down an elderly lady who wanted help? That’s what is bugging me. I believe the officers feared for their lives and reacted accordingly.[/quote]

I think what bothers me about this story (and the one about the guy in a wheel chair shot at an inpatient facility a few weeks ago) is while the cops may be justified in shooting, the death of this old lady was by no means inevitable.

I don’t know what the cops were told by the dispatcher, but if they knew that the homeowner were an old lady and that she may be armed, I can’t help but think the cops should’ve approached the situation differently.

They were justified in shooting, but they put themselves in that position through choices they made. Maybe a better trained cop wouldn’t have gotten himself in to a situation where he was forced to shoot the homeowner.

79

[quote]WN76 wrote:

[quote]Steel Nation wrote:

[quote]sam_sneed wrote:

[quote]groo wrote:

This is my favorite of the relatively recent killings by the way. Where the deputy is let off because of his claims the father was acting irrationally. So he killed him because of the risk he posed to his daughters if he drove off with them…as opposed to the oh I don’t know unquantifiable harm seeing your father shot and killed a few feet from you would cause.

The best is how the news stories move from calling them the girls to his daughters and as more details about him come out…oh you know that he was a beloved marine and regularly worked out with his daughters and prayed with them before school came out…that the irrational actions he took became more murky and undefined and we end up with one dead dad and a huge wrongful death suit that the wife will likely win…along with a deputy that gets off scott free on a murder.[/quote]

Despicable.
[/quote]

That’s pretty fucked up. Why did they make no attempt to arrest the UNARMED man? Can you now shoot someone for driving dangerously with kids in the car?[/quote]

From the sound of it, the officer didn’t have control over the situation. Should have never let the guy get back into the car.
[/quote]

The article said that 3 or 4 other deputies arrived on scene a few minutes before the shooting occurred. I don’t see any possible way that this is a clean shoot. The guy never threatened the police or tried to hurt anyone, other than endangering his own kids with his driving.

I’m not saying the guy had the purest intentions (WTF was he doing with his young girls driving recklessly at 4am?), but he gave them no reason to shoot him.

80

[quote]Steel Nation wrote:

[quote]WN76 wrote:

[quote]Steel Nation wrote:

[quote]sam_sneed wrote:

[quote]groo wrote:

This is my favorite of the relatively recent killings by the way. Where the deputy is let off because of his claims the father was acting irrationally. So he killed him because of the risk he posed to his daughters if he drove off with them…as opposed to the oh I don’t know unquantifiable harm seeing your father shot and killed a few feet from you would cause.

The best is how the news stories move from calling them the girls to his daughters and as more details about him come out…oh you know that he was a beloved marine and regularly worked out with his daughters and prayed with them before school came out…that the irrational actions he took became more murky and undefined and we end up with one dead dad and a huge wrongful death suit that the wife will likely win…along with a deputy that gets off scott free on a murder.[/quote]

Despicable.
[/quote]

That’s pretty fucked up. Why did they make no attempt to arrest the UNARMED man? Can you now shoot someone for driving dangerously with kids in the car?[/quote]

From the sound of it, the officer didn’t have control over the situation. Should have never let the guy get back into the car.
[/quote]

The article said that 3 or 4 other deputies arrived on scene a few minutes before the shooting occurred. I don’t see any possible way that this is a clean shoot. The guy never threatened the police or tried to hurt anyone, other than endangering his own kids with his driving.

I’m not saying the guy had the purest intentions (WTF was he doing with his young girls driving recklessly at 4am?), but he gave them no reason to shoot him.[/quote]

This doesn’t look like a clean shoot because the officer could have prevented him from getting back into his vehicle. The officer should have intervened sooner, so that the victim did not have the means to harm the young girls. Guy was probably a Vet who needed some help.