Pa. cops fatally shoot homeowner who had pulled gun on intruder

[salt&battery]

We don't know anything for sure, and certainly not that. If the story is correct, he didn't even know exactly where the man was, and was simply firing his weapon blindly to scare him off. That's tough to support.


Look, I'm going to ask really nicely, pretty please, that you stop making strident and unsupported accusations about the police.
Those officers will probably have to account for every single shot each of them fired. If you've ever looked at an investigation scene (which this is or will be) the bullet strikes are all found and marked. It will be QUITE obvious how many shots the officers fired and where they went. The bullets can even be recovered and ballistic matched to which officer's gun fired each one.

And there's no point in lying about it. By nearly every measure I can think of, the scenario as given is a justifiable shoot decision. Mr. Thompkins probably didn't intend to shoot at the police, but the fact is (or at least seems to be from what we know) that he WAS shooting at the police. It sure sucks he didn't meant to, but the police didn't, very clearly, act inappropriately in response. Bad luck, but not wrongdoing.

But seriously, stop making these wild anti-cop accusations. It doesn't help us here, and it paints you in a pretty poor light.

Using hyperbole like this makes it look like you're deliberately missing the point.

I'd assume you've never been in a live-fire shoot house where there were friendlies mixed in with the hostile targets? Never realized to your horror that you'd just killed "people" you didn't notice before you fired? It's eye-opening.

YES, you are responsible for what happens to every bullet you fire. Know your target and what's behind it. Your target is Sleazy Eddie the robber, but if there's a group of kids playing on the sidewalk behind him, you'd better be VERY aware of what you're about to do. Nobody on the planet's going to give you a pass for killing one of them accidentally.

in the Orlando shooting the police chief said that people in the club may have been shot by the police. as far as I know they have yet to say how many times they fired. I never found out the number of shots they fired

 

[Sam1911]

a garbage mans job more dangerous then a cops job cab drivers roofers loggers fishermen even a kid working 3AM at a 7-11 is worse.

I didn't say that's not so, and I know that very well. It completely misses the point.

However, we don't order garbage men or fishermen or 7-11 clerks to intervene in domestic disturbances, stop drunk drivers, or race to try and prevent someone from being murdered -- to USE FORCE on other human beings as part of their duty. No one in society is allowed to choose to use force and/or cooerce another citizen to do something as cab driver or logger. But we hire and swear officers to do just that -- use force, following department policy and training -- to enforce the law and protect the innocent when possible.

Since we're ordering these officers to use force, often deadly force, in the line of their jobs and duty, we have to give them certain special authorities to do so, and then protect them from civil trials for things that happen when force is employed.

 

[Sam1911]

in the Orlando shooting the police chief said that people in the club may have been shot by the police. as far as I know they have yet to say how many times they fired.

So? That's actually a really good example of why we try to protect police officers with indemnification and heightened authority. The officers did what they had to do, what their commanders instructed them to do, to try to intervene, stop the killer, and minimize the loss of innocent life. Some innocent people may have been hit and possibly even killed by shots from those officers that over-penetrated the bad guy, or even missed him. That is tragic. Its something that would haunt an officer forever to realize had happened. But a terrible thing was happening and they needed to act. Not trying to stop that guy was not an option, even facing the grave risks of hurting or even killing an innocent. Releasing all the details about innocents hurt or killed by shots from police weapons, in the terrifying effort to try and stop a mass killing, would only cause the pain and grief to be that much worse for both the surviving victims, their families, and the officers who responded.

If you think that's a case of police lying or covering up something, that's just rotten.

(And, if you were someone who was involved and possibly hit by police gunfire, you'd probably already have a pretty sizeable settlement check to compensate for pain and suffering, the way things go these days.)

I never found out the number of shots they fired

Did you file a freedom of information act to be given that information? Did you appeal to the court in that jurisdiction to unseal those records?

Can you think of a reason why it matters?

 

[salt&battery]

So? That's actually a really good example of why we try to protect police officers with indemnification and heightened authority. The officers did what they had to do, what their commanders instructed them to do, to try to intervene, stop the killer, and minimize the loss of innocent life. Some innocent people may have been hit and possibly even killed by shots from those officers that over-penetrated the bad guy, or even missed him. That is tragic. Its something that would haunt an officer forever to realize had happened. But a terrible thing was happening and they needed to act. Not trying to stop that guy was not an option, even facing the grave risks of hurting or even killing an innocent. Releasing all the details about innocents hurt or killed by shots from police weapons, in the terrifying effort to try and stop a mass killing, would only cause the pain and grief to be that much worse for both the surviving victims, their families, and the officers who responded.

If you think that's a case of police lying or covering up something, that's just rotten.

(And, if you were someone who was involved and possibly hit by police gunfire, you'd probably already have a pretty sizeable settlement check to compensate for pain and suffering, the way things go these days.)

Did you file a freedom of information act to be given that information? Did you appeal to the court in that jurisdiction to unseal those records?

Can you think of a reason why it matters?

I only brought that up because before you said they had to account for every shot fired

 

[OC-Trainer]

The police in Ogden, Ut. did a no knock Swat attack on a residence. One officer was not wearing his body armor and was killed by the home's owner.
It seems they invaded the wrong address?

This is 100% false.

hate to know what happened to that guy afterwards

He committed suicide while incarcerated.

 

[salt&battery]

This is 100% false.



He committed suicide while incarcerated.

that is exactly what I meant . suicide??? a guy named stewart an army veteran in Utah shot 6 cops in a no knock raid killed one and critically wounded 4 others. are you saying that did not happen?

 

[OC-Trainer]

that is exactly what I meant . suicide??? a guy named stewart an army veteran in Utah shot 6 cops in a no knock raid killed one and critically wounded 4 others. are you saying that did not happen?

No. I'm saying Dog's version of it didn't happen. Which is par for the course from him.

I'm very familiar with the case.

 

[salt&battery]

No. I'm saying Dog's version of it didn't happen. Which is par for the course from him.

I'm very familiar with the case.

I think you are the one not being honest. that was a no knock raid and cant deny what happened . those raids are no good for the cops or the people in the house and should be banned

 

[OC-Trainer]

I think you are the one not being honest. that was a no knock raid and cant deny what happened . those raids are no good for the cops or the people in the house and should be banned

The facts of the case are public. A simple Google search will provide them and will show that the statements in his post are false.

Or you can just ask him to provide a link that supports his statements. Good luck with that....

 

[barnbwt]

The National Association of Police Chiefs is against expanded gun rights for citizens

You mean the ones appointed by the Mayors Against Illegal Guns? Go figure.

TCB

 

[Dog Soldier]

hate to know what happened to that guy afterwards

Wow! They tried to charge him with murder. Have not heard how it is going.

 

[Kleanbore]

I believe if you in your own house under a threat you can fire as many shots as you want but the "authorities" do not.

Neither a civilian defender nor a law enforcement agency would be justified in using more force than what is immediately necessary to stop an attacker,

 

[Dog Soldier]

The problems develop when Police become political.

 

[Dog Soldier]

hate to know what happened to that guy afterwards

Salt & Bat, I use my ignore button. There are members who like to argue and contribute nothing.

 

[Snyper]

It happens. And events like this will happen more frequently as we get Justice to start rehabilitating reformed felons' gun rights (right now the program is entirely defunded/inert), since those folks typically come from & return to very crime-ridden areas, as no doubt was the case here.

TCB

That only applies to Federal charges.
Rights can still be restored for state charges.

 

[Sam1911]

I only brought that up because before you said they had to account for every shot fired

And they do.

But not to you, or to a reporter. Details of exactly what shots were fired and where they went (ok, especially in a case as simple as the one we're discussing, but sure perhaps more difficult in a chaotic mass scene like Orlando) will be determined and recorded. But that info isn't going to be just given out to the public for VERY good reasons. The families of victims don't want the details of how bullets entered their loved ones splashed all over the news. Police departments don't need the mass public vilifying the officers for perceived mistakes.

IF wrongdoing is found during investigations, the relevant details will be subpoenaed by the court. Then the people who need to know, will know, but those records will almost certainly remain sealed from general view. Kind of like how if some guy hangs himself in his garage, the police don't release the photos from the scene to be published in the local paper. Society has determined that such things aren't appropriate to put out in the hands of the general public.

This is getting deeper and heading off topic.