Did anyone see the video of those policemen railing that SUV with bullets yesterday?

[faraway]

"Thats the price you pay for living in a big city"....

Not everyone has the means or circumstances to live where they want. No doubt many in Compton would leave if it were possible.
Does that price include potentially having your house fired into as a convenient 'berm'. And are we to assume that ones child, wife or simple visitor to that house is also included in the price?
The RO's in this mess, acted irresponsibly. If this same event were transposed to being some 'civilian' who opened up under a mistaken perception of SD, and emptied an AK or Beretta or etc, then a hue and cry would be raised to have the him hung...Or worse. But seemingly, for some,a uniform excuses conduct beyond a proper response.
Very disturbing, both the initial event and some of the responses to it.
Fortunately, much of what we say here is just conjecture, or anonymous chest beating, so mayhaps it's less important than it initially appears.
Or more so, insofar as this is a public forum.

 

[Doug.38PR]

Wow, I sure set off a chain reaction of discussions with this thread.

A few thoughts came to mind listening to these various responses.

1) Police are the ones (not all but there is a a strong attitude out there among police, polititans and citizens) that think they are the only ones who are "qualified" and "safe" to own guns that if any one of us (citizens) own so much as a pocket knife we are seen as some vicious dangerous criminal. I carry a gun and went through the CHL class and all but if my coat (or yours) gets blown the wrong way in the wind and someone sees the gun, the police can seize my gun and even file charges if they so desire...and depending on how the political judge "feels" at the moment or how emotionally hyped the jury is put selected from a basically gun scared culture (not based on objective law but on feeling) I could get into trouble. But, as one other poster put it, these cops can spray a neighborhood with 120 rounds and get a slap on the wrist. Frankly, now that I have a CHL, I don't even like being treated by the law as some kind of special privliged person that has a responsibility over everyone else. (I'm told that is it is possible for someone to charge me in a law suit if I don't use my gun when they think I should have in a situation) It all creates an elitist mentality over something that is a basic human right. The right of self defense. It is a responsibilty and a right to carry a weapon, not something the state gives you or takes away from you. Personally, I think everyone old enough ought to be permitted to carry a gun without a license and carry open if they think it prudent. Some in here may think that extreme but to me it's just the basic right of self defense. Personally, it is our responsibility first and foremost to defend ourselves and neighbors not the police (especially not if they are like these guys in the video ) I'm not anti-cop or anything but they (police and polititans) shouldn't be anti-people. This video shows that police are even LESS qualified to carry a gun than any citizen they may complain of in their current state of arrogant thinking.

2) This incident makes a good case for police to switch back to revolvers. They might be a little more conservative with how many shots they fire. Or at least trained how to make ONE shot count.

 

[ATW525]

I wouldn't hesitate to shoot because I had a house instead of an earthen berm behind my target.

I think that sums it up perfectly. When it's my life on the line the last thing I'm going to worry about is what accidental targets my stray rounds might hit, unless there's innocent bystanders clearly visable along the line of fire. The chance of hitting somebody if my bullet goes through a house isn't high enough to be worth risking my life over. As long as my shooting was justified, state law has this to say, "Conduct which is justifiable under this chapter constitutes a defense to any offense. The fact that such conduct is justifiable shall constitute a complete defense to any civil action based on such conduct."

No, I'm not an LEO. It's not about the priviledges of officers over the average joe... it's the right of anyone to defend themselves when they feel thier life is in immediate danger, whether they wear a uniform or not. There's few differences in the law in my state between justifiable use of force by a police officer and justifiable use of force by a civillian.

Also, taken individually, these officers fired 12 rounds each on average. How many people here carry that amount of more ammunition for thier CCW? Why do you carry so much ammo if using it is reckless and criminal?

 

[FrankDrebin]

This video shows that police are even LESS qualified to carry a gun than any citizen they may complain of in their current state of arrogant thinking.

Which citizens did "they" complain of, and who is "they"?

If this same event were transposed to being some 'civilian' who opened up under a mistaken perception of SD, and emptied an AK or Beretta or etc, then a hue and cry would be raised to have the him hung...Or worse.

Post 10 cases in the past 5 years where citizens were hung "or worse" because they fired too many rounds in a justified shooting. As I stated before, there people on this forum who think it's OK to shoot someone who doesn't stop walking toward them in a parking lot after they're told to stop. I posed info. on a Michigan State trooper charged with second degree murder for shooting an unarmed crazy guy. How does that fit with your alleged "double standard" theory? And what does their perception of South Dakota have to do with anything?? What is "SD"?? Super Danger? Sleazy Dude?? Sick Dog??

1) Police are the ones (not all but there is a a strong attitude out there among police, polititans and citizens) that think they are the only ones who are "qualified" and "safe" to own guns that if any one of us (citizens) own so much as a pocket knife we are seen as some vicious dangerous criminal.

And you have objective data to back that up, or you're just basing it on a couple of anecdotes?

 

[ATW525]

An example of a death resulting from a stray civie bullet without any charges being filed against the shooter...

March, 1995... in Franklin Township, NJ (yep, I said NJ of all places), Brenda Wolf was fatally shot by a stray bullet from her husband's gun when he attempted to stop a robbery at Jeffrey Scott Fine Jewelry. Since the shooting was justifiable, her husband wasn't charged with a crime... and in fact the ones who robbed the place were charged with felony murder for Brenda Wolf's death.

 

[FlyinGN]

the guy was not unarmed. Betcha he tossed the gun out. They found casings from his truck in the begining of the gun fight. He was also high on coke driving around the neighborhood for hours and would not stop. I say he got what he deserved.. I wish one of the cops was a better shot tho..

 

[haskell]

did you see the video

Did you see the video of all the monday morning quarterback-non LEO-I go to the range with many guns-hundreds of rounds to fire to impress the other paper safe boys. Its really amusing. Don't miss it.

 

[Double Naught Spy]

Okay, so the suspect did not have a gun (hence was not actually shooting at the cops)? That means the cop that was shot was shot by friendly fire, right? If somebody has an update on the story, I would appreciate the link.

I had a chance to shoot with an LA Sheriff's Deputy recently. I was fairly impressed with his marksmanship at distance (better than mine) and his safe gun handling. The guy I shot was was 180 different from the LA deputy seen in the video that was pointing his gun at the camera crew.

Some LEOs most definitely do get proper training, some don't. Of those that do, some retain what they learned and many don't.

 

[TheeBadOne]

Typical parade of emotions, ignorance, and judgment

It never fails to amaze me that Keyboard Commandos can instantly grasp an entire situation from 15 seconds of shakey night time video...

The lack of information never stops those determined to judge from judging. They even willing jump in the fray without consulting the limited information that is available. For instance, in the shots vs hits category. How many of the judgmental ones missed the obvious fact that Officers were shooting at the tires?

How many missed the reason the first shot was fired? (SUV tried to run over an Officer, if you have sound you can hear it's engine rev and tires squeal, shot follows immediately).
The biggest problem to overcome in a situation like this most likely will never be overcome. The simple fact that unless you've been there/done that, you can't understand a situation like this, period. You can play paint-ball, shoot paper targets on a designed course with backstops and a Range Officer, but nothing substitutes for cold, hard, grimy reality.

Some folks are hung up on "he pointed/gestured at a cameraman".

Think about this for a moment. You're in a gun fight. Gun shots are ringing out. Some are from your fellow Officers, some may be from someone else. That someone may be a vehicle occupant, or may be from someone else in the area who's taking advantage of an opportunity to take a shot at the Police. You see movement coming up on your side, where no movement should be. It's a person (hard to tell much else as it's dark), and they are pointing something at you...


This does not mean others can not comment, it just means they can not fully understand a fluid/dynamic situation and all that goes with it.

Were there mistakes made in this particular incident? Yes, you bet.


I don't think any of the Cops are saying there weren't mistakes made. But there's a world of difference between saying "I think that could have gone better" (which most LEO's are saying) and saying "LOL OMG what an idiot the cops are all fvck ups LOL OMG!!!!!" (which is what a lot of other people are saying).

All the best

TBO

 

[ATW525]

The guy I shot was was 180 different from the LA deputy seen in the video that was pointing his gun at the camera crew.

Hopefully you're referring to the deputy you shot with and not a deputy you shot...

 

[Doug.38PR]

This video shows that police are even LESS qualified to carry a gun than any citizen they may complain of in their current state of arrogant thinking.

5 out of ten policemen will tell you that they are the only ones qualified to carry guns. POLICE "professionals" are always making judgements on civilians in one article and news story after another whenever there is a breaking in someones home or a carjacking, "Well we prefer that people not shoot the 'suspect' but should try to apprehend them. Or call 911 and wait for us (professionals) to get there)." Political figures say the same thing all the time on FOX, CNN and other networks when interviewed on the subject. Think of it this way. Do they let you walk into a courthouse with a gun? No. Do they let police? Yes. They trust the police because they are "qualified" but you are not. I'm not trying to be anti-cop. Nor an I trying to blanket the whole police force with this. There are a good number of good cops out there that have common sense and still think like real people. But there is a strong mentality of this arrogant among police. You can spot it easy when they approach you. They are usually arrogant and condecending and act like they know all the answers and you are a simple fool. It's a childish "I'm in power" attitude. Whereas I've encountered good cops that will walk up to you and ask questions if they have concerns like a regular person. In other words they act like we're all adults here. Whereas the former try to act like parents or children....and they are more ready to pull their guns and use them than using good judgement. This video is a good example of it. Also, remember that video in Tenessee a few years ago, when the cops pulled this family over thinking they were some kind of robbers. They had their shotguns ready and aimed with ever step they took around the car. Forced the family out on the ground shotguns still cocked and aimed at the unarmed family. The family dog was in the car barking and jumped out. This dog was not dangerous. I could see that it was a people dog that just wanted to play and was trotting all around the car with the police and family. One kid cop with his shotgun swinging all over the place from the family to the dog, shot the dog. It's a demonstration of more of that childish overkill and panic. Also, half the blame can also be placed on the incompetent dispatcher for saying that the family were robbers, it was actually some kind of confusion about the fathers wallet that was found somewhere if I remember right.

 

[TheeBadOne]

5 out of ten policemen will tell you that they are the only ones qualified to carry guns.

Source?

Do they let you walk into a courthouse with a gun? No. Do they let police? Yes.

Police can only walk into a courthouse with a gun where they are on Official Duty (testifying in court, delivering/receiving paperwork, etc). They can not just "drop by" for kicks, nor can they carry there "off-duty".

There are a good number of good cops out there that have common sense and still think like real people. But there is a strong mentality of this arrogant among police. You can spot it easy when they approach you. They are usually arrogant and condecending and act like they know all the answers and you are a simple fool. It's a childish "I'm in power" attitude. Whereas I've encountered good cops that will walk up to you and ask questions if they have concerns like a regular person. In other words they act like we're all adults here. Whereas the former try to act like parents or children....and they are more ready to pull their guns and use them than using good judgement. This video is a good example of it.

I think the above says a lot more about you than anything else, think about it.

Also, remember that video in Tenessee a few years ago, when the cops

Who are "The Police"/"The Cops" you keep generalizing about. (again, I think that speaks more about you than anything. Bringing up other "stories" about "The Police". Same state? Safe area? Safe Department? Same Officers?)

 

[FrankDrebin]

Think of it this way. Do they let you walk into a courthouse with a gun? No. Do they let police? Yes.

I went to the Michigan Court of Appeals to support a cop who was charged, and convicted, of Second Degree Murder for hitting a high crackhead carjacking suspect in the head with his flashlight after the crackhead grabbed the cop's gun. They wouldn't let me in, in uniform, with my gun. That kind of covers both the double-standard-for cops-who-kill-in-self-defense theory AND the why-can't-we-go-into-the-courthouse-armed-when-the-cops-can complaint.....

 

[faraway]

Drebin...
You are quite aware that SD is a common abbreviation for self defence-especially on this forum. So the semantic implication of ignorance on my part is both unjustified and an intellectually shallow tactic on your part. In an allegedly intellectual discourse of this type, that kind of thing is little more than conceptually sticking out a tongue. Grow up.
On the civilian over reaction and the perception of the courts..OK a high profile case...Bernard Goetz. Personal experience, in a Colorado barrio (in which I lived for 5 years) a neighbor stitched a bangers car...however he was a former prison guard, so it was ignored by the authorities. However, those same authorities incarcerated a man who fired a Enfield rifle at some bangers who had driven past and pointed a weapon at him. So yes, from personal experience I am quite aware of the double standards regarding even firing a weapon.
And you know quite well that a 'civilian' who even shows a weapon, under most circumstances is usually subject to the tender attention of the LE interdiction and the courts invading their life.
And it's profoundly interesting that, at no point in your missive, did you address my concerns about what level of public distrust and contempt would be inveitably raised by an incident of this manner. Or is shooting up an inner city neighborhood considered an acceptable 'friendly fire'? If these idiots stray rounds had hit a kid, that child would have been just as dead as would have been the case with some idiot gang member discharging a weapon. Alas, I had believed that Law Enforcement was supposed to be held to a higher standard, and more aware of the consequences of their actions. Apparently not...
And finally, it's incidents and attitudes like the ones written of here, which leave me no regrets from having abandoned a career in the criminal justice system.
Moderators...might consider closing this thread, it's gone too far and is too polarized for legitimate discussions.

 

[ATW525]

Uh... wasn't Bernard Goetz acquitted of attempted murder?

Edit - Left out the word attempted, sorry.

 

[TheeBadOne]

On the civilian over reaction and the perception of the courts..OK a high profile case...Bernard Goetz. Personal experience, in a Colorado barrio (in which I lived for 5 years) a neighbor stitched a bangers car...however he was a former prison guard, so it was ignored by the authorities.

Uh... wasn't Bernard Goetz acquitted of attempted murder?

Yes, he was charged and it was a big trial. Guess I don't see where the "Ignored" part is on the behalf of "The Police"...

Buy the way, I'll skip hyperbole, personal bias, etc, and post a fact:

"Goetz, a 39-year-old electronics specialist, was acquitted of attempted murder and assault, but was convicted of criminal possession of an unlicensed weapon and spent 250 days in jail.

 

[ATW525]

I think you're running two examples together... Bernard Goetz and his former neighbor the ex-prison guard. The latter one is the one he said the police ignored.

I'm just not sure how Bernard Goetz fits in... he wasn't a cop... he went to trial and was acquitted of everything except possessing an illegal weapon which he spent less than 9 months incarnerated for. How does that support the double standard arguement? Heck, he wasn't even convicted on the count of possessing two other illegal firearms besides the one he used in the shooting. It doesn't sound like anybody hung him for exercising his right to self defense.

 

[OBIWAN]

In general...I think bad guys get what they deserve...but I also think the police handled this badly. Their tactics (lack of) posed more of a threat than the bad guy.

 

[FrankDrebin]

You are quite aware that SD is a common abbreviation for self defence-especially on this forum.

Actually, no I'm not, and I've never seen it used on this forum before, or if I had, just ignored it as some kind of gun guy jargon that I didn't need to know about.

As far as Goetz, I don't believe he was charged with the shooting aspect because of the first shots, but rather the "You don't look so bad, have another" coup de grace shot to the already wounded "attacker". If a cop had done that, you'd have called it an attempted execution.

However, those same authorities incarcerated a man who fired a Enfield rifle at some bangers who had driven past and pointed a weapon at him. So yes, from personal experience I am quite aware of the double standards regarding even firing a weapon.

How about posting a link for more information on that one? Not that I don't want to take your word that you're giving us all the objective facts....I believe I asked you to post 10 cases in the past half decade where a citizen was "hung or worse" for firing too many rounds in a justifed shooting. He must have been working that bolt like a madman....So far you're batting .000 because the Goetz case wasn't a justified shooting, and it wouldn't have been even if he were an off-duty cop.

 

[ATW525]

However, those same authorities incarcerated a man who fired a Enfield rifle at some bangers who had driven past and pointed a weapon at him. So yes, from personal experience I am quite aware of the double standards regarding even firing a weapon.

I was kind of curious on this one, too, given that an enfield rifle hasn't exactly been the choice of urban carry pieces since 1940's Europe. Having time to go fetch a rifle and come back to blast away at some gangers would indicate to me that he might not have been in immediate life threatening danger.