Murder by Cops, again - Part 2

Status
Not open for further replies.
A

AUTiger73

New member
Continuing the discussion of the Police Raid in Lebanon, Tennessee, as per the following link:
http://www.tennessean.com/sii/00/10/06/shooting06.shtml

"Innocent Man Dies in Police Blunder"

Having read the comments in the original thread I would like to add my comments and address specific questions to the LEOs as it pertains to this case.

First, I must agree with "lendringer" post in that this case lacks intent and premeditation, therefore would not meet the legal requirements for a murder conviction.
However, based on the information we do have,
there is apparently an extreme amount of negligence which would warrant manslaughter charges.

However, my point is that it would have been a murder charge if the resident had been successful in his use of deadly force to defend his home. Nobody in the police department would have said it was a "disservice to the citizen" to charge him with murder.

This brings me right to the point. LEOs need to answer these questions:

(1) Should there be any ACCOUNTABILITY for such negligence ???

(2) Assuming you agree that there should be some form of accountability, SHOULD THE POLICE BE ACCOUNTABLE TO THE SAME DEGREE AS A CIVILIAN for negligent actions causing someones death ??? And IF NOT, WHY NOT ???

(3) Does a citizen have a right to use deadly force to stop home invasions when there is NO LEGAL WARRANT to justify entry?

(4) Why should we think the police will police themselves? i.e., Internal Affairs Investigation, State Bureau of Investigation?
Why not an exterior independent bi-racial review committee of ordinary citizens?

Seriously, I would like to hear your thoughts on these questions?
____________________

It is not my intent to just bash law enforcement professionals. The Sheriff of my county is a close personal friend and I had a good rapport with the Sheriff before him. The Sheriff is accountable to the voters. By constrast, the local police chief is not directly accountable to the voters, and that department's relationships with the community is problematic in my town.

Wheelgunner6: I'm sorry you think we are a bunch of cop wannabe's. As an administrator of the "government's schools" in my area, I have enough problems of my own !!! I know it is easy to become frustrated and cynical when you have to put-up with all the bureacratic BS and politics we face everyday.

Someone made a comment about "you can't believe what you read in the newspaper" - Why is that? In the Tennessee case this is clearly articulated. After a short carefully worded press release by the Police Chief, it is NO COMMENT. The news media works with the information they can develop. Without full disclosure by the Police Department the media will print what they have to report. The full story could actually be worse ... and based on what the police have released so far, it looks bad.
Let's face it, after weeks of surveilance and only 2 houses on the street and the COPS GET THE WRONG HOUSE ??? Or did the news report get that wrong?

I hope all LEOs will at least address the 4 questions numbered above. I would like to know where we stand on these issues.
__________________
Just noticed the New Hampshire statehood quarter has the motto: LIVE FREE OR DIE.
How many of us are really willing to backup that declaration? Only by the grace of God did some of us survive. A salute to all our veterans.
 
Just so I can maintain my status as a 'meddlesome twit', I'll point out that even some private LEO email lists are now discussing this sad case, and referring to it as a 'black eye' for LEO's. I suppose those LEO's are twits as well.

There was a case noted in the original thread where a no-knock was performed on a guy who strapped explosives to his body. You know, if these events were limited to dangerous felons that would be one thing. It's the 'we gotta go in before he flushes a baggie down the john' situations that are really galling.

This is really pretty simple - these events drive a wedge between LEO's and the citizens who support you. If you don't care about that wedge, then no policy change is in order. If you do care about that wedge, then let's get back to employing this kind of force when it is absolutely required. SWAT tactics seem to have become too common in some parts of the country. And, it is clear that some LEO's really enjoy this adrenaline rush.

I hope none of us ever face this threat in our own homes. This idea that you can focus quickly enough in the middle of the night to realize it is cops who are breaking down your door is really pretty optimistic.

Regards from AZ
 
Just so ya know, I've avoided the previous thread on this subject here, since I've read so many threads already on other LEO and gun boards.
So I am answering your questions with that in mind.
1 and 2- We ARE accountable. As a matter of fact, we are MORE acountable than you would be as a citizen in a deadly force incident, since we often face both state, federal and civil charges, etc for "excessive force" based on force used under color of authority . Look at Rodney King..not a shooting trial true, but when they couldn't get those guys at the state level, they nailed them at the Federal level.
As far as the individual officer who shot the guy, it would depend on the frame of mind he had. Did he believe he was in the right house? If I were going in a house on a raid and was met by a guy with a gun in what I felt was a situation threatening to me, and wound up shooting him, I should not face murder charges. If things turn sour like the wrong address, well, that muddies the waters then. Still, you have to look at the frame of mind of that officer AT THE TIME S/HE PULLED THE TRIGGER.
3- A citizen has the right to meet perceived aggression with force, even deadly physical force, in their own home. That law is the same across the country, bar none. Does the person have the right to fire at identified officers during the course of a warrant execution? No.
4- There is a process to the investigation of any incident. The first step will be the internal investigation. I am sure that with the amount of press this incident has received, there will be additional investigation by outside agencies. Do not begrudge the agency its own investigation; it needs to look into the incident.
 
All this passionate slamming of LEO's is all based on a news account, thats right , a news account. Just slam the jail doors tight anyway right ?

I shudder at the thought of working the old ghetto's and projects I used to work. If your a worker its only a matter of time before you get involved in something where the media , and probably your boss's and Politicians, hang you out to dry.

The real truth is that this kind of thing can happen very easily. Ive seen it happen to better cops then me , its a combination of bad luck and circumstances. "Boom" you shoot an innocent by mistake, it can happen that fast. Its like an accidental discharge , eventually you get enough experience to realize it can happen to anyone , even yourself. Its Human error , not a crime, but human error.

With some jobs all that happens is a computer gets broken ; With our job someone can get killed, especially if they shoot a shotgun at you.

I , and every other honest cop here , has to tell you that it could have been any of us that was given that wrong address. People always lie about us not ID-ing ourselves but in this case maybe they just didnt hear it. I know that if someone points a shotgun at me they are dead , end of story.

Im not going to answer this Tiger character's questions cause he is a anti-LEO inciter and rather ignorant. But I dont think this kind of thing is all that unusual, except that someone died. Mistakes happen all the time the system sucks , we are bigger victims of it then you are.

Stop treating this incident, whatever happened! , as another reason to dig up your AP's from the back yard and clean your "cop entry rifles".

Its a trajedy , even if it happened like the media say's , a trajedy.

And its Sunday.....Im personaly going to pray for all involved. Try it sometime....................WG6
 
Sorry tcsd - I'm afraid you don't see the forest for trees.

In the Rodney King case, the Feds were necessary because of the blue wall defense.

In Diallo, apologists again rationalize the action.

If in either set of circumstances

a. 23 citizens stopped someone speeding in their neighborhood and when the dude refused to allow citizens arrest - beat him like King was - they would be toast.

b. If 4 civilians, hearing there was a rapist in their neighborhood, charged up to a guy entering his house (yelling Citizen's Arrest or whatever) and they hosed him when he reached for his wallet - they would be toast.

I've read the apologists too much. Internally, as Jeff points, out - you guys know it is a mistake. But most won't admit it in public.

Expidiency doesn't make it anymore. A no-knock can guarantee that the officer is correctly identified.

These guys went to the wrong house. If that is proven, the homeowner has little responsiblity to comply (it might be stupid not too - but that is another story). The police if it found that they no-knocked and charged in with weapons - should be charged with manslaughter.

Police have it easy than civilians. Stop the ingroup whining about supervision and Rodney. It is disengenuous. No civilian could have done a Rodney or Diallo and had so much support. Even after a Louima you saw some to the blue wall. They go to jail too, thank God.

No no-knocks unless to stop grievous bodily harm. A knock and yell for 5 sec. at night is not correct identification.
 
Enoch:
Sorry you disagree.
23? there MIGHT have been 23 officers at the King incident, but I dont believe so. That's stretching the numbers a bit to include everyone who was involved, even in some minor role.
Diallo was justified under the circumstances. American Handgunner has an interesting article this month on that shooting, although it doesn't shed any new light on it for me. You ought to read it if you haven't done so already.
Louima was definetely out of the bounds of reasonableness; that officer is in prison now as I recall.
We as officers DO NOT have it easier, sorry to differ with you. We might be given a wider latitude to act in deadly force situations because we are expected to confront the problem rather than flee, but we do NOT have it any easier. As I mentioned earlier, officers face state, federal and civil penalties. I don't see how thats being any easier on us.
 
After opening my mouth a couple of times on this thread, have decided there exists the publicized :rolleyes: information that there was some erroneous information placed on the warrant given to the officers...

Let's weigh that out, in fairness here.

OK, so the officers go to do their job, presumably to perform a warrant to search for drugs, etc, at a given home, only their given the wrong address. Never mind that another officer may have known it was a different address. Perhaps (s)he wasn't there at the time, I dunno.

OK, now the stage is set for disaster.

Wrong address information given to officers going into an arrest suspecting the worst. They confront a man, who might have been armed what do they do?

So the deed is done, and another innocent person is dead because of someone else's incompetence. Do we as citizens not have the burden then to discover where the incompetence began?
Who made out the warrant, signed it, issued it to the officers on the detail. How many people have verified that the addreee on the warrant, is indeed, the correct address?
Apparently the process failed here. Perhaps it's not done at all. Might explain why we hear and read, of so many examples of this occuring.

Why is this man dead, and what's going to be done about it? Who's accountable for this whole damn screw-up? I would say the person who placed the wrong address on the warrant. Why? Because of their failure to be absolutely correct in the information, someone is dead.

If that were to happen to a doctor or pharmacist, giving, wrongly filled a prescription, and someone dies, what happens?
Yeah, a lawsuit, and someone loses their license to practice. Some times they goto jail, sometimes not.
That's ultimately up to a Jury, depending upon whether the local, or State Attorney, acts upon the information, and makes it known that such behavior will not be tolerated in their district, or State!

And herein starts the process. Because without pressure from the public to do something, and make it known that such mishandling of critical processes is total, and complete incomptetnce, it will continue to happen.

How many people were involved in this process of obtaining a warrant, and issuing it? Who dropped the ball? Who sill be given responsibility for this mans death?

Will it be the original investigating officers?(They presumably gave the correct address)
Will it be their superiors?(acted up[on their officers information)
Will it be the Judge who signed the warrant?(acting upon faith of the LEO)
Will it be OIC of the warrant being issued?(again, faith in the previous parties up to that point)
Will it be the original criminal offenders who were responsible for the whole investigation?(committing criminal activities for the sake of profit)

I won't be the Judge, unless called upon for Jury Duty.

[This message has been edited by Donny (edited October 08, 2000).]
 
All the more reason to stop the infringement of firearms ownership by Joe Q. Public.

If I remember my stats correctly, the police are 11x more likely to shoot the wrong person than the civilian in the midst of the situation.

Sounds like a good argument to disarm the police...

------------------
John/az
"When freedom is at stake, your silence is not golden, it's yellow..." RKBA!

See The Legacy of Gun Control film at: www.cphv.com

Do it for the children...
 
tcsd and wheelgunner, you make good points.

1/2: Regarding accountability, I think LEO's get whipsawed both ways. On one hand, they get second-guessed constantly, and their behavior in dangerous situations is sometimes examined with a microscope. That's necessary because of their responsibilities, but it is certainly a tough way to live. OTOH, it appears in situations like this that not enough is done to punish the people involved in these bad raids .... very rare that you ever hear of LEO's being brought up on manslaughter charges in such a situation.

As far as the frame of mind of the officer at the time he shot this innocent man, I sure would hope he's decided he is at the right address long before he goes in the door. Asking himself that question as an innocent homeowner raises a shotgun seems like criminal timing.

3: Fortunately, I've never been awakened by someone crashing in my door at 3am. But golly ... you guys seem pretty optimistic about the perceptions of sleepy homeowners. I'm sure some do lie about the ID, but really, this is almost funny ... you guys get confused and end up at the wrong houses sometimes, and then you don't believe the homeowners (often awakened from a deep sleep)aren't sure you're cops! Besides, we've heard numerous reports of BG's screaming the same damn thing. Put yourselves in our shoes ... we don't have very good choices either, do we?

4. Regarding the police investigating themselves, it seems you can find evidence both ways.


Donny gets to the heart of this. Everytime we discuss this subject, we understandably get a few LEO's that believe we hate cops. We don't hate cops ... we hate the overuse of SWAT teams and 'dynamic entries' for insufficient cause. Often, the individual LEO's involved did the best they could in a bad situation. The point is, they often should never have been in that situation.

I agree with the prayer advice ... unfortunately, that is the only thing that can help John Adams now.

Regards from AZ
 
A 'government school admistrator' turns into an 'expert wrongful death lawyer' just by reading a newspaper article and declares the officers involved guilty of murder? Sounds to be like your trying to administrate some 'bovine feces'
 
Without wishing to deflect anyone from the specifics associated with this incident, perhaps I can show that these incidents are typical of police forces everywhere. Here in England, the police are not routinely armed, our force chooses to have one "area" car containing two officers and their weapons which is on call at any time, their weapons are kept in a locked container readily accessible between the seats and must not be taken out unless the situation demands it, weapons carried are either .38 Mod 10's or Glock 17's and MP5's, Sig P226 and the HK53 carbine are also sometimes used. In spite of these tight restrictions we have had our trigger happy firearms officers engage and kill the following "threats" :

1. Man with broken leg waving a crutch out of a window at them annoyed at their presence in his street at night.

2. Pregnant woman being used as a shield by an escaping felon.

3. Man who waved a stick in a plastic bag at armed officers.

4. Unarmed man attempting to steal vehicle.

No officers were in any way disciplined for the above, the usual "get out" is that the officer in question simply states in the following enquiry that he believed his life was in danger and opened fire in accordance with standing Police instructions. The question I usually ask myself at this point is, why should they be subject to any less stringent criteria for the use of lethal force than we are.

If I was in the US and shot the neighbor's kid when he was trying to retrieve his football from my garden at night because I believed he was an armed intruder intent on entering my property, would my belief that my life was in danger get me, or you, out of the quicksand, well, we know the answer to that one already.

The moral of the story here would appear to be that it is better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6. You homeowners need to look into taking the 5.56 or 7.62 option, body armor is tricky stuff to get past.

Mike H
 
After reading the responses by the LEO's I predict this is what will happen - the no-knock mistakes made by the cops will turn into - "If civilians didn't have guns then the cops wouldn't have to shoot them in their own home". Simply another version of "it's for their own good".
I myself have never seen cops support CCW's. They think they are the only ones that can have guns. And violating your rights is also "for your own good", after all, if your not doing anything wrong then why should you need rights? Isn't that right LEO's.
 
Gitarmac, a lot of the Moderators of The Firing Line are LEO's or ex'LEO's.

Now you've seen LEOs who support CCW.

LawDog
 
gitarmac,
If you want to debate this like everyone else that is great. But don't make accusations and try to lure the LEOs here into a flame war with you. Why don't you think before you type.

John/az2,
There is a big difference between LEOs doing there jobs and the average citizen. The nature of a LEO's job put them in the position of getting into situations that NO citizen will face. I suggest you do a simulator used by police departments if you can, you will see what I am talking about. Stats don't mean crap. Anyone can do a study and churn out stats that look bad. Look at all the anti-RKBA stats out there that piss us all off. I guess by looking at those all private ownership of guns shuld be terminated. Stats don't mean anything unless you look at the circumstances of each action.

[This message has been edited by mrat (edited October 08, 2000).]

[This message has been edited by mrat (edited October 08, 2000).]
 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by mrat:
John/az2,
There is a big difference between LEOs doing there jobs and the average citizen. The nature of a LEO's job put them in the position of getting into situations that NO citizen will face. I suggest you do a simulator used by police departments if you can, you will see what I am talking about. Stats don't mean crap. Anyone can do a study and churn out stats that look bad. Look at all the anti-RKBA stats out there that piss us all off. I guess by looking at those all private ownership of guns shuld be terminated. Stats don't mean anything unless you look at the circumstances of each action.
[/quote]

Mrat,
Done the simulator. Very educational. My post was tongue-in-cheek, and really had nothing to do with no-knocks. It's the pre-emptive laws, punishments, and rulings that really irk me, as there is no victim, until "they" create one. Yes, each case needs to be looked at on an individual basis.

I believe that good stats mean something. Look at John Lott's book "More Guns, Less Crime". Don't those stats mean something? And they seem to hold their own...

Anyway, I thought you all would find this of interest:

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Drawing The Line

By

Leroy Pyle



The role of the police officer in the quest for individual rights is a common topic for many in the activist community. I am often challenged with the demand for my personal interpretation of certain constitutional rights, or to define my response to a hypothetical situation. Typically, the question is, "If the [government leader] ordered you to go door-to-door to confiscate firearms, what would you do?"

Such confrontations are not unusual for a law enforcement officer, as their role in society often places them on that "thin blue line" separating adversaries. Early in my career, I worked the Oakland Induction Center and Berserkely riots, separating those for or against the Vietnam conflict. Over the years, volatile issues of drugs, Black Panthers, unions, KKK, sexual preferences, and abortion provided ample "working" opportunities to learn both sides of many arguments. Most officers share those or similar experiences.

Ironically, both sides get angry when the police maintain neutrality. Everyone wants some assurance that the police are on "their side" of the issue. As evidenced, the majority of my dealings with "radicals" were on the Left, and causes supported by the media. The press has always been quick to criticize the police, regardless of facts.

As a gun rights supporter, the growing hostility directed at law enforcement by gun rights activists is disappointing. There have been some serious abuses, of course, but I view the exaggerated judgment of ALL police by isolated violations with the same contempt that judging ALL gun owners by a Columbine tragedy warrants. It works for the Left and the media, so maybe it should be expected from the Right.

As my good friend Joe Horn put it, "They view us, American citizens, cops, as the enemy. What's new? The Left calls us Pigs, the Right calls us Nazis. Way kewl ... Seig! oing, SEIG, oink, SEIG, oink..."

Where do I define that middle? Where do I draw the line? Simply put, I do not believe that house-to-house confiscation will ever occur. My experience as a California gun owner leads me to believe that "they" don't care about taking your guns. It is your children and their children who will find it increasingly unpopular and uncomfortable, if not impossible, to obtain a firearm.

I owned ARs and HKs at the time the Roberti-Roos Assault Weapons Control Act of 1989 went into affect. I had recently purchased a brand new AR-15 to use in a Police Rifle Instructor Course, but as an employee of the infamous Chief McNamara, as well as an outspoken critic of his role as HCI spokesperson, thought it prudent to abide by the new law. I registered mine.

But I was in the minority when it came to registering the newly identified "assault weapons." The vast majority of owners ignored the law. Most police officers that I knew ignored the new law. Until threatened prohibition made semi-auto rifles so desirable, police officers were probably in the majority as ownership goes. All my career, I remember that every officer had a long gun or three to backup that revolver we always carried.

They didn't come. There has been no attempt during the ensuing years to seize the unregistered "assault weapons." And the CA laws worsened to include one grossly abusive government act that resulted in a retroactive assignment of certain firearms to the prohibited list. Letters were sent to the registered owners informing them of the change of status. Again, the majority of registered owners ignored the law.

They didn't come. They don't care about our guns. It is our children's guns and our children's children that they are legislating against.

But if you insist on my answer and that of every police officer I have ever seriously discussed the issues with, I am confident there would be mass refusal to obey such orders, and serious defections prior to enactment. I recognize this to be a real disappointment to the many frustrated activists who are begging for a fight and hope to get it on right now with the easiest, most visible (and traditional) target, the cops. But cops are not the enemy. Confiscation won't happen.

It won't happen because while certain activists try to blame the police, the school teachers and librarians are depriving the next generation of the patriotic lessons of history and poisoning their minds against individual rights and responsibilities. The NEA and virtually all teachers organizations don't need jack-boots to plan and coordinate their anti-gun agenda for the coming years, intended to stomp the Second Amendment into oblivion.
It won't happen because while certain activists try to blame the police, religious organizations and leaders of every denomination are actively demonizing firearms and their owners at every opportunity. They don't need barricades or teargas to herd the crowds into their places of worship to indoctrinate them in the ways of anti-self defense.
It won't happen because while certain activists try to blame the police, your family doctor is quietly informing your spouse and children that firearms in your home is a health problem. The American Medical Association doesn't need a baton to beat the media into submission, they just promote anti-gun "research" that is published in their "prestigious" papers and passed to the news media for public consumption.
And it won't happen because while certain activists try to blame the police, the media is reporting this anti-police rhetoric to the teachers, the churches, the doctors, and your community leaders as an example of how extreme we are! And that is where you might remember the value of the admonishment against wearing cammies in public. If you are one of those who believe the police are to blame for your firearms laws, you might just as well put on your NRA cap, crude T-shirt, and cammie pants, and march on city hall. The bravado of anti-cop rhetoric is accepted as the norm regulars on discussion lists, but to the citizens we should be recruiting stands out like a set of cammies at a press conference. I don't question their sincerity or concern for Second Amendment Rights, but I would prefer that more people consider the example of "wearing cammies in public" and the perception involved when venting their frustrations on the police.

Law enforcement can be a valuable ally in the fight for individual rights and The Second Amendment. Cops are traditionally conservative, and are as repulsed by the abuses in government as anyone might be. They are as offended by the highly publicized police abuses as gun owners are offended by the highly publicized firearms abuses. There is that tendency to paint with a broad brush in both cases, and there is a common enemy in the media and on the Left.

If "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" might be considered an acceptable aphorism, gun owners would be wise to look at the law enforcement experience in preparation for their own future. Especially as the concealed carry laws become the norm of the future. It has become common practice for the media and Leftist community "spokespersons" to immediately condemn any police action, and especially the use of a firearm, without regard for the facts, truth, or accuracy in the reporting. Cops have always been an easy target for the media when it comes to "making" the news. Cops and guns do share the common problem of being easy targets for the media, who all too often prefer the quick emotional rhetoric to any attempt at facts or accuracy.

It has been my observation that too many Internet "news" websites are mimicking their commercial brothers! If you condone the media assumption that EVERY police use of force is suspect, what do you expect the reaction to be to YOUR use of a firearm. A move towards a mutual understanding of this media generated phenomenon could be beneficial to both law enforcement and gun owners if they chose to work together as gun owners. For a good example of a gun owner being railroaded by the news media, visit http://www.2ampd.net/Articles/jerad_kruse.htm.

My friends and I at The Second Amendment Police Department, www.2ampd.net, are working to dispel the myth that cops are anti-gun. As career police officers, we are very well aware that cops ARE gun owners and share the respect for firearms as the valuable personal defense tool that they are. I would not expect to modify the behavior of the more extreme among us, but only caution and encourage the majority against the negative tactics that are all too familiar on ABC, NBC, and CBS.

There are times when government abuses, using the police or not, should be railed against. I will guarantee the full support of The Second Amendment Police Department in the condemnation of abusive government or police tactics when they occur. We will join you in the condemnation of any and all "police state" tactics that seek to remove the community identification of the local officers in favor of an ominous federal umbrella.

All I ask in return, is cooperation from the majority of gun owners to consider the ramifications of repeating some of the rhetoric passing as news on the Internet. I am sure that an attempt at tempering the inflammatory rhetoric relating to the working police officers will result in a more positive approach to the average citizen and especially law enforcement officers who are more apt to be your friends and neighbors, and eventual contributors to www.2ampd.net.
[/quote]
http://www.2ampd.net/Articles/pyle/draw_the_line.htm

------------------
John/az
"When freedom is at stake, your silence is not golden, it's yellow..." RKBA!

See The Legacy of Gun Control film at: www.cphv.com

Do it for the children...

[This message has been edited by John/az2 (edited October 08, 2000).]
 
Wheelgunner says: "'boom'you shoot an innocent by mistake..... it's human error, not a crime, but human error."

I like that "human error" bit. I'll remember it when I run over a kid walking home from school or something.
I'll tell her parents, their attorney, etc. "Sorry, not a crime.. just human error. Maybe someday you'll get enough experience to realize it could happen to anyone."

You'd better get your position a little more ironclad than this before you start slinging labels like "ignorant" towards members of this board.
 
Somebody help me out here.

The TFL mission statement is to;
Promote the responsible use and ownership of firearms and advance camaraderie of those of a like mind in that shared endeavor.

Okay so I embellished the latter in part. I looked for the official mission statement and was unsuccessful in locating it.

The point remains...we are all here for the same reason....our shared love for firearms and our inalienable right to own them. I to have srtong feelings regarding the subject of law enforcement and how the "job" should be performed. There is nothing that anyone can say to me that would alter those views. I would like to think that I am open minded enough to entertain opposing views and possibly learn from those. But, regardles of how strongly any of us feel about our own perspectives there is little one may say to the other to permanently change our preconceived notions on the subject. Certainly the system is flawed. Of that I think we all, LEO's and so called "civilians" can agree. But those sentiments nor our perspective differences will never be solved here. Our focus should rather be on our shared interest and common goal; The promotion of responsible gun ownership and the preservation of that right. Paticularlly at this time in history (yes everything that happens today will be a part of history tomorrow) our common need is that perservation.
That is not to say that these are not pertinent and vital issues faced by comtemporary society, of which we, obvuously, are a part of. But please let us keep our focus here in this arena where it belongs.

Now, I personally believe that Gore is a liar (who doesn't, including Tipper), that the .45 ACP is a far superior cartridge to the 9X19 and that Glocks should only be placed in the dishwasher on the top shelf with the machine set to the China/crystal setting for cleaning. :p

------------------
Gunslinger

I was promised a Shortycicle and I want a Shortycicle!
 
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Jordan:
Wheelgunner says: "'boom'you shoot an innocent by mistake..... it's human error, not a crime, but human error."

I like that "human error" bit. I'll remember it when I run over a kid walking home from school or something.
I'll tell her parents, their attorney, etc. "Sorry, not a crime.. just human error. Maybe someday you'll get enough experience to realize it could happen to anyone."

You'd better get your position a little more ironclad than this before you start slinging labels like "ignorant" towards members of this board.[/quote]

You`re right, it isn`t normally a crime.
 
Wow Wheelgunner,
You really have a few chips on your shoulder, don't you. Talk about twisting what people write.....

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Wheelgunner6:
The real truth is that this kind of thing can happen very easily. Ive seen it happen to better cops then me , its a combination of bad luck and circumstances. "Boom" you shoot an innocent by mistake, it can happen that fast. Its like an accidental discharge , eventually you get enough experience to realize it can happen to anyone , even yourself. Its Human error , not a crime, but human error.[/quote]

So, you break down my door, awaken me from a sound sleep, and since I truly believe that you are an intruder with intent to harm me and mine, I shoot you. Just a mistake, right? Just like an accidental discharge, right? Just human error, right? Hardly! Your buddies would either execute me on the spot, or at the very least I'd be facing murder one. But, If YOU accidently kill an innocent, we're suppose to just shrug it off, and say "it's OK, he didn't mean it". Can you say "Elitist"?

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>
People always lie about us not ID-ing ourselves.....
[/quote]

Someone in a sound sleep is suppose to hear you yell "police" as you're breaking down their front door. Half the time, I don't even hear my alarm clock for two or three minutes, yet I'm suppose to, in my sleep, hear you identify yourself through my bedroom door, down my hallway, down my stairway, and the other side of my front door. Someone is living in a dream world.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>
Im not going to answer this Tiger character's questions cause he is a anti-LEO inciter and rather ignorant.
[/quote]

Yeah, just another one of those meddling twit Citizens telling you how to do your job. Hate to break it to buddy, but us meddling twit Citizens happen to be your REAL BOSSES. If we don't like the way you do your job, or the policies you endorse, we have every right to tell you so.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>
But I dont think this kind of thing is all that unusual, except that someone died. Mistakes happen all the time the system sucks , we are bigger victims of it then you are.
[/quote]

Of course, the dead home owner isn't a "victim", he's a "mistake". If the system really sucks, why are you so intent on defending it?

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>
Stop treating this incident, whatever happened! , as another reason to dig up your AP's from the back yard and clean your "cop entry rifles".[/quote]


Where in the world do you get this stuff from? We criticize an abuse of power, and you immediately accuse us of wanting to shot cops. Do you think we're insane?!!! Nobody here is talking about deliberately shooting cops. We're discussing the very real possibility, that some night we may think we are defending our homes from an invasion of Goblins, only to find out too late that it's misguided cops. This should never be a concern for any Citizen of these United States, but the polices you defend, make it a very real possibility. Why can't you seem to understand the stress these polices place on the gun owning public. The fact that we even have the need to discuss these scenarios, truly infuriates me! THIS SHOULD NOT BE!!!!
 
The belief that police get away with more stuff than the average citizen has always amazed me. As a case in point I receive a monthly newsletter from the Texas Commission on Law enforcement Standards and Education. TCLEOSE is the governing body responsible for police certification and training in the state. This month they have suspended or revoked 122 officers. If you are a jailer or peace officer. You work at the whim of TCLEOSE. TCLEOSE will automatically suspend a police officer's license for anything greater than a traffic ticket. They will voluntarily suspend you for just about anything at all. (does not have to be criminal) You cannot work without that license. Bounce a hot check? (class B) 6 months to a year. (Class A), up to five years. Felony? forget it. PC crimes such as domestic violence? Wife's divorce lawyer get a restraining order against you? You're revoked. You can be suspended for as little as failure to inform them within five days of a traffic ticket. There is no appeal process, they won't even tell you it's under consideration. You'll just come in to work one day, and Suprise! You're unemployable. How many of you face that in your everyday job? The questions asked above are good ones, and the answers already given I completely agree with, with one addition. Oversight already exists. It is your responsibility. Don't like the actions of police in your area? Get involved. (Hint. posting here with comments about "Cop Killer bullets" is not getting involved.) I left AR15.com because some idiot was calling for folks to shoot officers in the back when they attempt to serve warrants. I would really hate to see TFL degenerate to that level. A good friend of mine was suspended Sept 1st. His crime? Failing to take the state mandated "Cultural diversity" course. No pay since then. Of course some people might think that recovering from heart surgery gives him an excuse. Not the state. Yeah, we get away with a lot.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top