Bystander Killed by Officers...

This Mr. Nunn was hit six times - some of which were hits to the head, face, and stomach and he is alive? What caliber were these guys shooting? They must've been just grazing shots that caught him in the head and face. That lady was unlucky. Too bad.
Click to expand...

Actually, no, they did not have to be grazing shots. Just because something is shot in the head does not mean they die. Heck, since the guy was seated when the officers shot at him, a face shot with downward trajectory from the standing cops can easily result in a direct penetrating wound to the face where the projectile ends up passing below the cranium.

The guy's actions might have been what led up to his wife's death as he apparently started the fight, but the officers are still responsible for every round they fire even if they have the right to use lethal force.
 
The guy's actions might have been what led up to his wife's death as he apparently started the fight, but the officers are still responsible for every round they fire even if they have the right to use lethal force.
Click to expand...
+1

11 rounds?? are you kidding me?? good lord.
Click to expand...
+1
 
Ms. Dermody and her daughter sat on a separate couch a few feet away. After letting the officers into the apartment, Ms. Johnson sat on a seat on the other side of Mr. Nunn.
Click to expand...

Plans-36169.jpg
 
Just my $0.02, but I would try to move others who are not necessarily a threat yet into another area prior to attempting the takedown. But without knowing exactly when the BG pulled the pellet gun, it is just an idea on my part.

In Iraq, we separated the target from other males from the women and children after clearing a house. If soldiers in a war zone can do it, why not cops in an American city? There were enough of them there to do that.
 
It's Saturday, so this must be critique-the-police-shooting day. Since I don't know the facts, I'll stay out of that debate.

Here are some facts I am aware of and will comment on:
  • Mrs. Johnson, Mrs. Johnson's teenaged child, Ms. Dermody, and Ms. Dermody's small child were in an apartment at 4:15 AM (as in - wee hours of the morning).
  • Mr. Nunn entered the apartment some time after the 3:30 AM robbery and before the 4:15 AM shootout.
  • Mrs. Johnson and Ms. Dermody nearly certainly knew that Mr. Nunn had possession of something that looked like a gun.
  • Unless held against their will, Mrs. Johnson and Ms. Dermody had an opportunity to distance themselves and their children from Mr. Nunn.
Mrs. Johnson and Ms. Dermody acted like imbeciles. If they cared at all about their children or if they had the collective IQ of a parakeet, Mrs. Johnson and Ms. Dermody would have done everything in their power to get themselves and their children as far away from Mr. Nunn as possible. Instead, when the cops arrived, everyone was sitting around acting like one big, happy, innocent family.
 
*FACT*

These "officers" are not being held to the SAME standards as any other citizen.

Why are "officers" so damn *afraid* of one set of laws for everyone?
 
I wasn't there, dont know the positioning of the furniture etc so cant comment on any of that. But the moral of the story seems to be that...it's probably a bad idea to let a group of cops into your home regardless of the circumstances. If anything whatsoever goes wrong or makes the officers fearful, the people and not the cops will suffer the consequences.

Not a slam on the cops at all, just reality.
 
*FACT*

These "officers" are not being held to the SAME standards as any other citizen.
Click to expand...

*FACT*

Ordinary citizens are not obligated to enter an unfamilier house to arrest an armed robbery suspect.

It's amazing how all of these "experts", who have never been shot at or had to use their weapon under stress, feel entitled to tell those who have what they did wrong.
 
These "officers" are not being held to the SAME standards as any other citizen.

Why are "officers" so damn *afraid* of one set of laws for everyone?
Click to expand...

Can you post links to some cases where a "non-officer" was held to a different standard?
 
What I hoped to add or show with my posts to this thread is two fold.

1) A news article is hardly the thing to base hard fast opinion on. It's a sampling of information/misinformation put together quickly (and put together by a business, meaning it's a product designed to sell. To be successful, it needs to sell interest).
A Police report on an incident such as this can run 10-50 pages for the initial report. The followup investigation/reports can run to the hundreds. That is detail. A quick news article is not.

2) As much as it may anger/annoy some factions here, unless you've been-there-done-that, you are often ill equipped to fully understand the complexities of given situations. This thread has born that out several times (some from posters honest enough to admit it. Commendable, and all to rare on the Internet where "chest thumping high flying super ninja commandos" reign supreme).

It does seem to be many of the same MMQB's who jump in on a thread of this sort to instantly assign blame (usually to "the Police"). Questions (posed as such) and speculation are fine. But to state "A, B, thus C" based on a news blurb is worse than baseless hyperbole, it's irresponsible.

jmho
 
Theebadone, I believe you're confusing Ms. Dermody with Mrs. Johnson. Mrs. Johnson, the one sitting on the same couch as Mr. Nunn, wasn't shot. Ms. Dermody was.
 
11 rounds?? are you kidding me??
Click to expand...
and
These "officers" are not being held to the SAME standards as any other citizen.
Click to expand...
Confronted with someone apparently shooting a gun at me, I would have shot until the slide locked back on an empty magazine. Since there were 3 cops involved in the shooting, I was amazed that they showed so much restraint in only firing a total of 11 shots. However, it was a little disappointing that only 55% of the shots found their mark.
 
+1 for cactus

and 11 rounds is very few considering it was 3 cops firing ...... that is only 3.66 rounds per cop, I would probably empited my mag if someone drew on me an fired in a confined space like that and I thought it was a real gun.
 
"Confronted with someone apparently shooting a gun at me, I would have shot until the slide locked back on an empty magazine. Since there were 3 cops involved in the shooting, I was amazed that they showed so much restraint in only firing a total of 11 shots. However, it was a little disappointing that only 55% of the shots found their mark."-sorry, quote wasn't working.

I think it is pretty good that they got hits with 55% of their shots. While still not great, under stress I don't think that I have recently seen shooting that good.
 
Shooing

Sounds a lot like the CF in Houston where a cop shot another cop and then 4 or 5 other cops shot the unarmed house holder 10 or 15 times.
I really do not have much faith in the training of many cops, too many very embarassing episodes.
I have had at least 8 leo's in my family, including a T&SWCA range inspector, most of them had a low opinion of the average cop, too. :eek:
 
Cops should be expected to exercise restraint, even when under fire. I've heard way too many cases recently where cops open fire and spray the area with dozens of rounds with many hitting houses, bystanders, even other cops, yet still manage few, if any, effective hits on the intended target (Compton, anyone?)

Sure, cops should value their safety and take reasonable measures to protect it, but they shouldn't value their safety above that of the public at large. If they do, then I'd strongly suggest they look into another line of work, preferably one not involving deadly weapons.
 
Sure, cops should value their safety and take reasonable measures to protect it, but they shouldn't value their safety above that of the public at large.
Click to expand...
As in, if you were being shot at in the local 7-11 you would be remiss to return fire until all enemy weapons were inspected for type and caliber, all non-combatants were removed from the scene, all windows boarded and all walls checked for ability to stop a handgun round?

C'mon, people. This is silly. The guy pointed a weapon (pellet gun or not) at armed cops. He fired at them. They returned fire. There was collateral damage. It's a tragedy, but it's hardly a case of incompetence.

Anybody replying to one of these threads should first be obligated to attend a good force-on-force class. It's nothing like square range on paper and steel. You'll fire far more rounds than you might think in an encounter. And you'll miss far more than you'll admit on this Forum.
Rich
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top