Kerrville Police Shooting Caught On Tape

If it was such a clean shooting nobody here would be questioning it
Click to expand...

Yeah right, on this board people are debating the effectiveness of the .25 ACP as a combat caliber, whether or not we should have nuked Japan, and if Jesse Jackson is controlled by the CIA or the reptilian alien race on the verge of invading our planet.

For everything mentioned in these forums, it has been questioned and debated.



And you said that if it was a clean shooting the other cops wouldn't have shot. The cop who shot did it the instant he percieved the man as a very dangerous threat, the man dropped instantly, what were they supposed to do, shoot into the incapacitated criminally dumb ugly bag of mostly water?
 
If he was such a threat all of them would have fired, it's common sense. Obviously the other officers didn't think they were in a life threatening situation because none of them fired.
 
Bowe.JPG


Corporal Timothy Joseph Bowe

Why don't you ask him about snap shots from a handgun?

Ask HERE















































4444.gif
tear.gif
 
Most of the people saying bad shooting are resting on 3 things:

1. He was only a threat to himself saying that he was going to kill himself. Well, as evidenced by the phone conversations he also said he'd kill cops (perhaps just to incite death by cop, but never the less). Anyways, he threatens the police... that is threat #1

2. Then you say that they didn't give him enough of a change to drop the gun and he wasn't acting threateningly. How about threatening the cops verbally then getting out of a car armed, and apparently not showing any fear of the cops? Then he disobeyed direct orders regarding the firearm. Does it matter that it's a small pistol? Would it matter if it was aimed at you or your wife?

3. Why didn't the other officers shoot if he was a danger? Well, perhaps they realized that the threat had been neutralized before they could even pull the trigger. The whole reaction time thing. Or, maybe the OIC said hold your weapons, if this guy becomes a threat, I'll take him out. Thereby putting the responsibility on himself instead of all the other public servants. Also, by doing this they avoid the "guy shot 35 times" stuff we always see on the news that people like to demonize police over.

As far as "they couldn't see the gun!". WHAT? Do people in real life also see in 160 lines of resolution, in 2D, and from only one angle?

If a man called and said he was going to kill me then later on I saw the man that left that message and he pulled a gun from his waistband I'd shoot and it would be justifiable!! There was obvious pre-meditation on the act and he drew a weapon! Who cares if he ALSO is suicidal? How does that inform the current situation regarding the threat to officers and the general public?!?!

Would it have been different he he was holding an AR15? And if so why?
 
The video is what we, on this forum, have to go by. The video is quite clear in showing that the man who was pulled over was moving very slowly and had not presented an immediate threat to the four policemen who were on the scene. The video shows that he was shot surprisingly soon, and a shot through the mouth is a bad shot, at that distance a very very bad shot. Based on the video, it was a bad shooting, that is my opinion.

There are numerous people on this thread who apparently idolize Law Enforcment. These people put cops on a pedestal, to them cops can do no wrong, they are like Gods to these people. Either that or once they have staked out a position they are incapable of further reasoning.

They appear not to realize (or want to believe) that cops are simply people, just like everyone else. Cops put their pants on one leg at a time, just like everyone else. There are people out there in cop uniforms that should not be in those uniforms - they are the kind of people who react poorly under stress. Being a cop is not for everyone just as being an athelete is not for everyone. It is for the kind of person who is naturally cool under pressure, has the ability to think clearly under stress, and to make good decisions instantly. That is not your every day Joe six pack. A good cop is not in the middle of the bell curve.

All you have to do is watch this video to realize that the cop who shot, shot surprisingly too soon, and poorly on top of that. He is not the kind of person that should be a cop, getting into stressful stiuations. The other 3 cops showed better judgement and coolness under pressure. Unless you are one of those cop worshipers that believes that all cops are Gods, the one who shot in this situation is not fit to be a cop. That puts him into the middle of the bell curve.
 
butch it's crystal clear where your bias and agenda lay. I'll ask you, for the third time, a very simple question. (I'll even provide the 3 simplest possible answers).

Q. Do you think the Grand Jury had access to more information in this case (includeing a much better video than the low quality one we've seen)?

A. 1- Yes

A. 2- No

A. 3- I don't know
 
Looks like a good, legitimate shoot to me, with instant neutralization (despite the armchair commandos saying otherwise :rolleyes: ). He's lucky to be alive.

BTW, I don't think LEOs are gods, either.
 
There are a very few people on this thread who plainly dislike law enforcement. But cannot give a truthful answer as to why. We need the brickhead and beating the dead horse smiliey choices.
 
So Butch, now shootings are to be run by the democratic process? We need to reach a general consensus and all shoot together?

So by your logic, the Diallo shooting were 4 cops fired 41 rounds is a clean shoot, cause they all thought the same and acted the same.

Cops are trained to make independent decisions.. The fact that other cops were still in the decision making process or had made different decisions does not mean the one officer's decision was wrong.
 
Still waiting for you to answer that simple question.
Click to expand...
Post 89.Grand Juries do as they are told and the prosectuor gets whatever he wants from them. It is a system without merit.
The prosecutor selects all the witnesses and other materials, and then presents them to the grand jury. Defense attorneys aren’t even allowed in same room as the grand jury, let alone permitted to put on defense witnesses, question the prosecution witnesses, or make any statements to the jurors. So grand juries nearly always just “rubber stamp” the cases brought before them. For example, in fiscal year 2000, federal grand juries voted to indict a total of 59,472 suspects and chose not to indict 29 suspects—only one out of every two thousand suspects was left un-indicted

http://www.lawcollective.org/article.php?id=46
Click to expand...

There are a very few people on this thread who plainly dislike law enforcement.
Click to expand...
Here is an extract from a couple of posts ago
Being a cop is not for everyone just as being an athelete is not for everyone. It is for the kind of person who is naturally cool under pressure, has the ability to think clearly under stress, and to make good decisions instantly. That is not your every day Joe six pack.
Click to expand...

Cops are trained to make independent decisions.. The fact that other cops were still in the decision making process or had made different decisions does not mean the one officer's decision was wrong.
Click to expand...

In my opinion three cops made good decisions and one cop made a bad decision, and that is based on watching the video.

Several people have said that he threatened to kill cops - what is the source of that information? It didn't show up in the articles that I could find. Anyone know?
 
I'll agree, and even stated earlier, that it was a bad shot (poorly aimed and executed) but I maintain that none of us have the evidence to confirm whether or not it was a bad shoot.

Even though we don't see it on the video it is entirely possible that the man had a pistol that was visible to police. The newscaster actually says in the clip we have available, apparently told to them from the family of the man who was shot, "although he had a small gun in his right hand..." What we can tell from the video is that he ignored repeated commands and just before he was shot he moved his arm. Maybe it was a harmless shift, maybe it was the first move to bring his weapon into action - we don't know, and the police on the scene had no way of knowing. Personally, I think anyone with a weapon in hand, refusing to drop it, who then makes any kind of movement with the weapon other than dropping it provides sufficient cause for others to fear for their lives.

Yes, police work is risky work, but police officers have lives away from work and families to go home to just like everybody else. A person in fear for their lives from an armed individual has the right to meet force with force.

With all the CCW people on the boards, I wonder how many would, in a similar situation, say that when an unknown person brandished a weapon at them it was sufficient cause to draw and fire. There are many different ways that may play out, and I don't want this to turn into a scenerio thread, but it is something to ask yourself about.
 
Last edited:
i'm surrounded by idiots

Tsavo and Butch50 are dolts.
1. just because you can't see the gun on the crappy MVS doesn't mean it wasn't seen in person by the officers. Based on their statements, I'm pretty sure they saw it.
2. somebody needs to explain the "reactionary gap" to you guys. Try this: get 2 cap guns and you and a friend stand 20 feet apart. One of you (cop) hold the gun pointed at the other (bad guy). Bad guy will have his gun pointed at the ground. Now, the cop can't shoot until the bad guy "poses a threat" by pointing the gun at the cop. The bad guy can raise his gun and fire at his discretion. The bad guy will get the first shot off every time, GUARANTEED!
Now your bad guy might be some schlub that's never handled a handgun before, or he might be Rob Leatham. You gonna bet your life that he's the first?
JEERS to the officer for the neck shot. I would expect a center-mass shot from a rifle. Not that there was anything malicious about it, just poor marksmanship. :barf:
 
Even though we don't see it on the video it is entirely possible that the man had a pistol that was visible to police. The newscaster actually says in the clip we have available, apparently told to them from the family of the man who was shot, "although he had a small gun in his right hand..." What we can tell from the video is that he ignored repeated commands and just before he was shot he moved his arm. Maybe it was a harmless shift, maybe it was the first move to bring his weapon into action - we don't know, and the police on the scene had no way of knowing. Personally, I think anyone with a weapon in hand, refusing to drop it, who then makes any kind of movement with the weapon other than dropping it provides sufficient cause for others to fear for their lives.
Click to expand...
Everything you say here is entirely reasonable and even probable. The problem I have with the shooting is that watching the video (my opinion) is that the shot came too soon. It came before I would have made it and it came without a single other shot. My opinion is based on what I can see in the video, and what little info there is in the reports I could find.

I still have a couple of questions that I can't answer from the video or the reports that I read.

1. Was the rifle scoped? I can not tell for sure from the video as I am not familiar with that rifle and how it looks with or without a scope. The reason I am asking is because at that range, with an average scope, the field of view would be pretty small. If the shooter was looking at the guys head through a scope I doubt if he could see his hands or anything other than his head. If the rifle was scoped it lends even more credence that it was a bad shoot, and a bad shot too.

2. Where did the information that he had threatened cops come from? What I can find says that he was talking to a cop on the phone about a charge of some kind and threatened suicide. I would like to see the information where he threatened to shoot cops if anyone knows where it is.
 
No scope

As a general rule, patrol rifles will not be scoped. Only the sniper can be trusted with such things as he has the "dope" on his zero. Further, rifles get knocked around, so after going for months being knocked around in a patrol car, the scope would probably be off anyway.
As for the info, not sure, and doesn't matter. The fact remains that he had the option to 1. leave the gun in the car. 2. not take it out of his waistband. and 3. drop it when ordered. Strike 3, he's out.
Most of the jackasses pontificating about this have no idea what it's like to strap on the vest and belt and work a beat. Until they receive some training as to combat tactics, they should keep their collective pie-holes shut on subjects in which they have no knowledge.
 
"i'm surrounded by idiots"



Well said. Too bad none of the experts in tactics and law here actually have anything to do with the field. They'd be a thrill to watch in action, I'm sure it'd be a valuable learning experience.....for somebody.
 
I can't retract my statement that the cop should have waited to shoot, because the only evidence I have is the video - and it doesn't appear as if the BG did anything life threatening at that moment, from the two-dimensional grainy footage.

I do agree though, that the bottom line is someone like myself is not qualified to determine if that officer (or any other) did the wrong thing - or the right thing - in any situation. Especially, when evidence is so limited.

I was comparing what I saw in the video, to what I may do as a CCW holder if put in the same situation - which is an entirely different animal. I'd like to think if the state of WI would allow me to carry concealed, and a similar situation arose, that I may have more restraint than what appears to be used in the video. I don't think this is an unfair assessment.

At the same time, I do not want officers waiting until they get killed - before they decide to shoot. It's a fine line.
 
"Life threatening": what does that mean? How about someone who has threatened to kill, who then ignores lawful Police orders, then reaches for a weapon ignoring the commands to not do that....does that sound threatening......
confused.gif
 
How about someone who has threatened to kill,
Click to expand...
What is the source for that "threatened to kill" ? If it is out there, I can not find it. It goes a long way towards the cops attitude in dealing with the guy that was shot, and is an important consideration. Does anyone have that source?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top