To Protect and to Serve II

#5,976
#5,976
Rasputin_Vol said:
If we exchange fire on my property, can I chase them off as I'm firing away at them in hot pursuit. Can adrenelin rush be my excuse?
Click to expand...

I would recommend letting the liability of pursuing an armed felon remain with the cops, especially when if gunfire is involved. You're ultimately responsible for EVERY shot you fire, regardless of where you are but, chasing them beyond your property is risking legal trouble.

However, if you're in your home and someone breaks in, if you so choose, shoot them. You're well within your right.
 
#5,977
#5,977
orangeblood79 said:
I would recommend letting the liability of pursuing an armed felon remain with the cops, especially when if gunfire is involved. You're ultimately responsible for EVERY shot you fire, regardless of where you are but, chasing them beyond your property is risking legal trouble.

However, if you're in your home and someone breaks in, if you so choose, shoot them. You're well within your right.
Click to expand...

So again I ask, putting this shoot out in context with the question I asked, would a civilian be given the same leniency under similar conditions... even if the burglar of your home was escaping but trading fire with you as you chase them?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#5,978
#5,978
Rasputin_Vol said:
So again I ask, putting this shoot out in context with the question I asked, would a civilian be given the same leniency under similar conditions... even if the burglar of your home was escaping but trading fire with you as you chase them?
Click to expand...

You understand the difference in the powers that law enforcement is given, especially when attempting to apprehend an armed felon, and the fundamental difference between them and a citizen, right?

No one is feigning responsibility here, law enforcement is more responsible for every shot they take than a common citizen, due to their training and powers given to them.
 
#5,979
#5,979
orangeblood79 said:
You understand the difference in the powers that law enforcement is given, especially when attempting to apprehend an armed felon, and the fundamental difference between them and a citizen, right?

No one is feigning responsibility here, law enforcement is more responsible for every shot they take than a common citizen, due to their training and powers given to them.
Click to expand...

Lol what? How many people have cops shot on the ground or running away or unarmed or detained? And all that results in a rare indictment and even rarer conviction. Meanwhile you shoot a guy in your house and the DA will explore every angle to have you indicted.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#5,980
#5,980
orangeblood79 said:
You understand the difference in the powers that law enforcement is given, especially when attempting to apprehend an armed felon, and the fundamental difference between them and a citizen, right?

No one is feigning responsibility here, law enforcement is more responsible for every shot they take than a common citizen, due to their training and powers given to them.
Click to expand...

Hook, line, and sinker.
 
#5,981
#5,981
DancingOutlaw said:
Lol what? How many people have cops shot on the ground or running away or unarmed or detained? And all that results in a rare indictment and even rarer conviction. Meanwhile you shoot a guy in your house and the DA will explore every angle to have you indicted.
Click to expand...

Yeah that was just about the most out of touch with reality thing I may have ever heard. A cop can execute a crying, drunk, unarmed father that’s surrounded by a swat team in a hotel hallway, begging for his life whose only crime was disobeying the dickhead’s 15 different contradicting, ludicrous commands. He can do this with a rifle that has “you’re f**ked” etched into the side. And he can do the whole freakin thing on video and walk away a free man.

I’m just gonna assume the second part of that post was a joke. The only damn thing most law enforcement are responsible for after shooting somebody is where they’re gonna take their family on their paid vacation.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#5,982
#5,982
Negligence versus reasonableness.

Prove the officer's actions were negligent and you have a case. Prove that they acted reasonable in a situation and the police are covered.

In THIS situation, the officer's conduct did not exceed the circumstances that he was dealt, he was in a deadly situation and needed to end the threat and he did so without harming anyone else.
 
#5,983
#5,983
Cdywolfe said:
Yeah that was just about the most out of touch with reality thing I may have ever heard. A cop can execute a crying, drunk, unarmed, father that’s surrounded by a swat team in a hotel hallway, begging for his life with a rifle that has “you’re f**ked” etched into the side of it on video and walk away a free man.

I’m just gonna assume the second part of that post was a joke. The only damn thing most law enforcement are responsible for after shooting somebody is where they’re gonna take their family on their paid vacation.
Click to expand...

That officer is f'ed and he should be. That was a BAD BAD BAD shoot. Period. But notice I didn't say a f'ing word about that situation.

What else ya got?
 
#5,985
#5,985
orangeblood79 said:
That officer is f'ed and he should be. That was a BAD BAD BAD shoot. Period. But notice I didn't say a f'ing word about that situation.

What else ya got?
Click to expand...

Two things...

1. The majority of your brothers also said nothing. That’s the problem.

2. Your opinion on that situation is irrelevant to how childish and stupid your comment about law enforcement being held more responsible for every shot than an average citizen is. You’re attempt to avoid my point was cute though.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#5,986
#5,986
That punk is a free man (a stretch to calm him a man actually). Anybody not wearing a badge would be serving 25 to life right now for responding to that level of threat with deadly force.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#5,988
#5,988
Cdywolfe said:
Two things...

1. The majority of your brothers also said nothing. That’s the problem.

2. Your opinion on that situation is irrelevant to how childish and stupid your comment about law enforcement being held more responsible for every shot than an average citizen is. You’re attempt to avoid my point was cute though.
Click to expand...

You're getting personal here, so I'll attempt to remain civil. Just stop bring a sarcastic a hole, I haven't done anything to deserve the vitriol.

1. That shooting wasn't being discussed until you brought it up. I responded. If the other LEO's in here haven't pipes in, they're smarter than I am because I avoid these discussions with you, Ras and DTH like the plaugue but I got sucked in this time so...yaaaay.

2. I said that because that's what I believe and that's how I conduct myself, or try my damnedest to, on a daily basis. If I've avoided anything on here, or tried to, it was deliberate. I loathe these conversations because they ultimately turn into something where I end up getting bashed on here because I'm a cop (who's stupid enough to engage in these conversations) who also happens to believe in our system of government.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#5,989
#5,989
You’re probably right about remaining civil. I stand by everything I said but definitely could’ve presented it in a nicer package.
 
#5,990
#5,990
orangeblood79 said:
In THIS situation, the officer's conduct did not exceed the circumstances that he was dealt, he was in a deadly situation and needed to end the threat and he did so without harming anyone else.
Click to expand...

Here's my point though, that can be supplemented with a "this time he wasn't negligent."

Had a stray round found an innocent bystander, we wouldn't be talking about how well he was trained or how the situation ended. Now, because it didn't, he's a hero. This time. And it sets a real bad precedent going forward as any Barney Fife can see that and say "hell yeah, I could do that!" You and I both know it. There are idiots amongst the ranks that would try some stupid crap like that.

Did the shoot meet the objective reasonableness standard? Yes...probably...but...conditions weren't as optimum as they could have been given the situation. And yes, I know conditions aren't optimum most of the time, but this one certainly was right on the thin edge of wrong. My objective standard?

He was firing on a moving vehicle from a moving vehicle. Through glass. And under stress which has shown to make accuracy suffer. Worse still was the fact his windshield is now getting much harder to see out of. Even with a big honkin target like an SUV, the potential for errant rounds to not hit the target is extremely high. Furthermore, at one point, he took both hands off the wheel to get a steady firing platform.

Umm, what?

Racing down a road trying to get an accurate sight picture to fire from a moving vehicle on a moving vehicle through a vision impaired windshield and you remove your hands from the wheel of the car? I don't care how smooth the roadway is, that's a huge, and avoidable, risk he shouldn't have taken.

Furthermore, he was at one point alongside the perp's vehicle. Pitt that mother****er. They don't put those ramming guards on your vehicles for aesthetics only. He was in a prime position to pull off the perfect Pitt and furthermore, with the completion of said Pitt, would have had his engine block between him and the perps. Get out and light those mother****ers up at that point.

No, there's a whole lotta lessons learned from this one. Mainly "don't ****ing do this, sport, it can end on a real bad note." I don't care how much training one has had on firing through a windshield, the sum of the individual parts in this one made me cringe.

Look, this is a former cop saying this and attempting to be objective and even giving some benefit of the doubt. I'm not some cop hater that questions everything that happens, but damn, guy, this one shouldn't be held up as a textbook anything nor defended by anyone in the blue.

He got real lucky in my opinion.
 
#5,992
#5,992
There's a legitimate argument that can be made for discontinuing the pursuit as opposed to the officer's actions that ultimately ended it. Shooting the suspects was A way to end it, not THE way.

Ultimately, the safety of the public is the deciding factor. Should the department stop the pursuit, what is the likelihood of them being caught at a later time and does that likelihood exceed the risk of using deadly force on two armed felons spraying bullets in a crowded metro area?

This situation escalated so quickly that it would be extremely difficult to make that decision that quickly.

There are NUMEROUS Supreme Court cases that have involved deadly pursuits. I can't recall one that ended like this. Who knows, this may wind up in front of SCOTUS...
 
#5,993
#5,993
I don't think anyone is arguing the pursuit should have been stopped, but I do think most will argue against the pursuing officer in this case not adding to the potential carnage by what he did.

Like I said, he got lucky. He's a hero for it (in some eyes), but we certainly have a lot of lessons learned from this one.
 
#5,994
#5,994
Grand Vol said:
I don't think anyone is arguing the pursuit should have been stopped, but I do think most will argue against the pursuing officer in this case not adding to the potential carnage by what he did.

Like I said, he got lucky. He's a hero for it (in some eyes), but we certainly have a lot of lessons learned from this one.
Click to expand...

Like I said before, I think this will be used in training for years and years as an absolute last resort, even as an example of luck overcoming good training.

I don't know.

Back to your other post (TYFYS), I don't like the idea of the PIT simply because of the likelihood of the suspects still having control of their gun and continue to fire off rounds at me, after the PIT. It's it an option, definitely, but I wouldn't want to be that close and increase the risk getting shot.


A friend of mine was in LV on that day and said that the location of the pursuit was heading right for the strip...like just a mile away or something like that. If true, that definitely would have played a factor in the amount of time a decision needed to be made.
 
#5,996
#5,996
Grand Vol said:
I don't think anyone is arguing the pursuit should have been stopped, but I do think most will argue against the pursuing officer in this case not adding to the potential carnage by what he did.

Like I said, he got lucky. He's a hero for it (in some eyes), but we certainly have a lot of lessons learned from this one.
Click to expand...

Similar shootings have occurred in the past...quite frequently I may add. This one is on video. What most in this echo chamber thread fail to understand is real life can get violent fast and when it’s captured on video the squeamish hidden agenda people screech and crow that they know more than the actual person embroiled in the incident.

The what ifs and why didn’t questions are all good, and necessary. LE is always trying to get better, always. Perfection is unattainable but not trying is always worse. In Ras’ world we get their tag and pick them up at church or if we stop pursuing them we’re equally incompetent because they kept going and killed 9 girls walking home from school.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#5,999
#5,999
tim said:
Similar shootings have occurred in the past...quite frequently I may add. This one is on video. What most in this echo chamber thread fail to understand is real life can get violent fast and when it’s captured on video the squeamish hidden agenda people screech and crow that they know more than the actual person embroiled in the incident.

The what ifs and why didn’t questions are all good, and necessary. LE is always trying to get better, always. Perfection is unattainable but not trying is always worse. In Ras’ world we get their tag and pick them up at church or if we stop pursuing them we’re equally incompetent because they kept going and killed 9 girls walking home from school.
Click to expand...

All I'm asking is of a civilian would be given the same leniency if they are in pursuit of a burglar or someone exchanging fire with them.

It really isn't a complicated or loaded question.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement

Back
Top