Vernal45
member
wow
If I mess up, shoot the wrong person, will i get a 30 day suspension, oral reprimand.....I kind of doubt it.
Police kill man in bed.
- Thread starter P12
- Start date
- Status
wow
If I mess up, shoot the wrong person, will i get a 30 day suspension, oral reprimand.....I kind of doubt it.
Relayer
Member
I just don't understand someone who is not an LEO comparing themselves to LEOs in shoot situations. "...If I had done that, they'd throw me under the jail..."
You're not asked to enter buildings trying to find criminals and suspected criminals who may have nothing better to do than kill you.
Now this cop may have just been looking for someone to kill, I don't know (though his record doesn't seem to indicate that). Maybe he became bloodthirsty. Maybe it was a very bad decision, with many other actions possible that could have saved the life of the dead man.
But (imho), unless you were there in the room, your showing your own bias/prejudice if you are condemning him already (regardless of what the Denver PD may have donein the past).
LEOs are constantly in a position where they are giving the bad guys the first go at killing them, and then reacting. This Denver LEO may well have made a mistake that cost an innocent man his life. I hope not, but this cannot be determined by what's been shared here.
You're not asked to enter buildings trying to find criminals and suspected criminals who may have nothing better to do than kill you.
Now this cop may have just been looking for someone to kill, I don't know (though his record doesn't seem to indicate that). Maybe he became bloodthirsty. Maybe it was a very bad decision, with many other actions possible that could have saved the life of the dead man.
But (imho), unless you were there in the room, your showing your own bias/prejudice if you are condemning him already (regardless of what the Denver PD may have donein the past).
LEOs are constantly in a position where they are giving the bad guys the first go at killing them, and then reacting. This Denver LEO may well have made a mistake that cost an innocent man his life. I hope not, but this cannot be determined by what's been shared here.
Last edited:
Vernal45
member
Did the LEO in question have a warrant to enter??? all my research says no. (I could be wrong in my research) SO, if no warrant, the LEO had no right to even enter the house, none, nada, zilch. NOW, if this is the case, and he had no legal right to enter, the this is murder, plain and simple.......And if you are I, non LEO's commit murder, we go to the big house....He should not get a pass, a lighter handling than we would, just because he is a cop, and is asked to chase criminals. Remember, no one asked him to do this job, he applied for it.
auschip
Member
No need for a warrant, she gave permission.
Vernal45
member
I stand corrected on the warrant issue, no warrant needed with consent to enter. It still does not answer the question of murder. This was a bad call on the LEO's part.
The thing is, a half-assed response like this leaves a bad taste in everyone's mouths.
If the cop was wrong, if he violated his training and department policy under the stress of the moment, and is culpable for it -- shouldn't the dead guy's life be worth more than 30 days off work and a note in the file?? A reprimand is hardly fair payment for the life of an innocent man...
If the cop was not wrong, if he did what anyone with similar training & experience would do in the same circumstance, and was therefore not culpable -- why are they issuing a reprimand at all? If that's the facts, it looks like just a political game, once again a case of the rest of the world being against the good cops. No wonder they circle the wagons!
Note I haven't taken a "side" here at all. I'm just saying that the response by the brass to issue a mere suspension and reprimand sure seems to be inflammatory ... from either side of the blue line.
pax
Do you not know, my son, with how little wisdom the world is governed? -- Axel Oxenstierna
If the cop was wrong, if he violated his training and department policy under the stress of the moment, and is culpable for it -- shouldn't the dead guy's life be worth more than 30 days off work and a note in the file?? A reprimand is hardly fair payment for the life of an innocent man...
If the cop was not wrong, if he did what anyone with similar training & experience would do in the same circumstance, and was therefore not culpable -- why are they issuing a reprimand at all? If that's the facts, it looks like just a political game, once again a case of the rest of the world being against the good cops. No wonder they circle the wagons!
Note I haven't taken a "side" here at all. I'm just saying that the response by the brass to issue a mere suspension and reprimand sure seems to be inflammatory ... from either side of the blue line.
pax
Do you not know, my son, with how little wisdom the world is governed? -- Axel Oxenstierna
artherd
member
If someone leveled a can at me under a sheet, I'd have shot them too.
mr.trooper
Member
Ill second the HORRIBLE validity of the media and suposed witnesses.
I love Indiana news...its kind of humorous some time.
Channel 22 news reported a shooting where a man used a revolver...5 minets later in the recap they reported said revolver as an "ASSAULT WEAPON". :banghead:
The same news channel reported a shooting of a police officer in Michigan where a man shot an officer in the face with a single shot from a non-descript handgun. The reporters interviewed some wana-bee gang-banger who said he heard "AUTAMATIK GUN FIRE, LIKE POP,POP,POP,POP, REAL FAST LIKE."
The media and Sheeple dont know squat. I sure wouldnt trust them any farther than i can throw them.
I love Indiana news...its kind of humorous some time.
Channel 22 news reported a shooting where a man used a revolver...5 minets later in the recap they reported said revolver as an "ASSAULT WEAPON". :banghead:
The same news channel reported a shooting of a police officer in Michigan where a man shot an officer in the face with a single shot from a non-descript handgun. The reporters interviewed some wana-bee gang-banger who said he heard "AUTAMATIK GUN FIRE, LIKE POP,POP,POP,POP, REAL FAST LIKE."
The media and Sheeple dont know squat. I sure wouldnt trust them any farther than i can throw them.
I think, one of the reasons that, there are so many "Cop-Bashers" out there, because Law Enforcement Offices/Agents scare them. Some scare the heck out of me.
Example: Girl gets mad at her boyfriend, calls the cops, and tells them he beat her. Boyfriend gets balled up and tossed in the slammer till he sees the magistrate. Magistrate says he can go home, but the police pick him up the next morning at his home and back to lockup and see a judge. The case was dismissed, because the girlfriend showed up to court with a stick that she claimed he beat her with, but the arresting officer had logged another stick as evidence already.
He lost his job because of a lie (security clearance/attendance issues because of the arrest and confinment time). You say it can’t happen? I’ll give you his name and number, so he can tell you first hand. Yeah, I know it wasn’t the LEO’s fault, but the system is set up so that on the word of one person, it can be abused, and shatter a bright career with a good company for one man. Scary stuff huh? That’s the power law enforcement/courts holds, and it’s not perfect.
I’m not a cop basher and, I shoot with many officers from my area. The one’s I know are good people, but when on the job few seem like the sort you want to be friends with. I’m reminded of something I was told once “Lead by shining example or rule by fear, are the only good ways to handle subordinates.†Guess, which one is easier to do?
Those are some reasons why I believe there is a rift between citizens and law enforcement in my opinion, and worth as much as it costs.
Example: Girl gets mad at her boyfriend, calls the cops, and tells them he beat her. Boyfriend gets balled up and tossed in the slammer till he sees the magistrate. Magistrate says he can go home, but the police pick him up the next morning at his home and back to lockup and see a judge. The case was dismissed, because the girlfriend showed up to court with a stick that she claimed he beat her with, but the arresting officer had logged another stick as evidence already.
He lost his job because of a lie (security clearance/attendance issues because of the arrest and confinment time). You say it can’t happen? I’ll give you his name and number, so he can tell you first hand. Yeah, I know it wasn’t the LEO’s fault, but the system is set up so that on the word of one person, it can be abused, and shatter a bright career with a good company for one man. Scary stuff huh? That’s the power law enforcement/courts holds, and it’s not perfect.
I’m not a cop basher and, I shoot with many officers from my area. The one’s I know are good people, but when on the job few seem like the sort you want to be friends with. I’m reminded of something I was told once “Lead by shining example or rule by fear, are the only good ways to handle subordinates.†Guess, which one is easier to do?
Those are some reasons why I believe there is a rift between citizens and law enforcement in my opinion, and worth as much as it costs.
If I am the guy sleeping in bed I would be reaching for the nightstand too. Only I would come up with a 6" .357 instead of a brewsky. And that is precicely why the combined existence of no-knock warrents and shoddy paperwork make me just a bit nervous.
I think that the gun-owning public is generally leary of this sort of thing simply because of the nightmare scenario of the police doing a dynamic entry into the wrong (read YOUR) house and the lose-lose situation that would entail.
As for asthe story above, based on the very limited information available it sounds like fairly crappy police work. These officers had the initiative and entered the situation. It was their duty to ensure that they proceeded in a manner that was safe for themselves and everyone around them. It's one thing to shoot a guy pulling his wallet on the street in low-light. Thats a situation that you don't have control of. Its a whole nuther thing to enter someones house and shoot them. If your going into a person's house you need to EXPECT people to be moving around and it is the officers job not to shoot the wrong person. If that is not possible then they have no business going into the house in the first place. There was ample time for the officers to obtain plenty of lighting to be able to identify their targets in the structure.
Anyone remember the "gunners alley" excercise with the steriotypical bad-guy pop-up targets mixed in with child carrying the balloons? You walk into a person's house while armed and you damn well better be prepared for that kid with the baloons. And it was this officer's job to know that. Now that means that the officer screwed up his job, which doesnt NECESSARILY mean it was murder but, it doesnt mean it was a "good shoot" either.
Sindawe
Member
Update.
No details on the deal reached at this point.
Wllm. Legrand
member
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2005
- Messages
- 219
FWIW, my brother in law is Denver PD.
I was informed the next morning that the DPD shooter was a "cowboy" and that it was thought to be a bad shoot.
For months the DPD did the old "Blue Shield" BS, covering their own dirty behinds, as the truth is something police rarely embrace when it indicts bad cops.
SOP. Just another reason never, NEVER trust the police. They are NOT your friend. They are NOT on your side. Another American myth.
I've had other police officers that were my friends, so to speak, then the more I learned, the less I wanted to be their "friend". Comes with having standards about the role of the State and the relationship between the people (from whom ALL POWER IS DELEGATED) and government (supposedly the servant of the people and the safeguard of their rights and property).
They look like good people. At a party they may seem like good people. But they are first and foremost agents of the State, that from which they derive their power and identity.
Denver PD is replete with corruption and cops that protect their own. The current Denver Chief is under a cloud by the rank and file because he dared to suspend a cop who threatened him and his family.
What a great bunch, eh?
Footnote: Since this episode and subsequent conversations, my brother in law and me have drifted further and further apart. That's what happens when you force people to address contradictions.
I was informed the next morning that the DPD shooter was a "cowboy" and that it was thought to be a bad shoot.
For months the DPD did the old "Blue Shield" BS, covering their own dirty behinds, as the truth is something police rarely embrace when it indicts bad cops.
SOP. Just another reason never, NEVER trust the police. They are NOT your friend. They are NOT on your side. Another American myth.
I've had other police officers that were my friends, so to speak, then the more I learned, the less I wanted to be their "friend". Comes with having standards about the role of the State and the relationship between the people (from whom ALL POWER IS DELEGATED) and government (supposedly the servant of the people and the safeguard of their rights and property).
They look like good people. At a party they may seem like good people. But they are first and foremost agents of the State, that from which they derive their power and identity.
Denver PD is replete with corruption and cops that protect their own. The current Denver Chief is under a cloud by the rank and file because he dared to suspend a cop who threatened him and his family.
What a great bunch, eh?
Footnote: Since this episode and subsequent conversations, my brother in law and me have drifted further and further apart. That's what happens when you force people to address contradictions.
Cosmoline
Member
Lone_Gunman said:
There is absolutely no doubt about that. It's one law for thee, another for me. Cop kills a man holding a soda can, they get in trouble at work. Non-cop kills a man holding a soda can, it's at least manslaughter.
Wllm. Legrand
member
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2005
- Messages
- 219
Cosmoline said:
You have that right.
One law for the rich and the "king's men" and the other for us plebians..
Oh..I forgot. We have a "Just Us" system. Guess so.
Ryder
Member
I am not a "career criminal" but even I know to communicate to an officer any move I am going to make in advance. It goes a long ways toward preventing this type of misunderstanding. Some might say that's paranoid but I think it's being smart. Why was this dead guy so unwise?
The amount of domestic violence charges that have anything to do with physical violence these days is highly questionable. How does such a charge justify a storm trooper mindset?
Mysteries abound
The amount of domestic violence charges that have anything to do with physical violence these days is highly questionable. How does such a charge justify a storm trooper mindset?
Mysteries abound
NineseveN
member
If were the guy in the bed, that would have definitely been a weapon and someone would have probably died; maybe me, but maybe a cop first. Of course, I'm not a criminal, I don't expect the police to come crashing into my place at odd hours.
If I had been the cop, I would have likely shot as well. It's double-edged sword, everyone wants to go home and hug their families...
If I had been the cop, I would have likely shot as well. It's double-edged sword, everyone wants to go home and hug their families...
crazed_ss
Member
The way I see it, cops accepted their job as Police knowing very well how dangerous it is. They need to show extra restraint and err on the side of caution, IMO. If the cop isnt 90% sure the guy has a weapon, he shouldnt take the shot. The way I see it, If you're so concerned about getting back home to your family everynight, you should NOT be a cop.. go be a computer tech or something.
NineseveN
member
crazed_ss said:
And what happens when there are no more cops under this idea? It's easy to tell someone to restrain themselves behind a computer monitor.
Oh yeah, I am something of a computer tech, though I do work for a govt agency and have security clearances, I don't have to carry a firearm as part of my assignment. So I'm not coming at you from the side of the LEO, just a practical and honest standoint from a guy that knows a lot of these folks who get paid a third of what I do to serve and protect people like you and I.
crazed_ss
Member
NineseveN said:
Well that's what they're trained for. Cops often have a lot of leeway where they have to use their own good judgement and discretion. Ive seen episodes of Cops where a LEO disarms actual armed threatening suspects without shooting. They may have been perfectly justified in shooting, but they found a way to resolve the situation without using that much force.
Of course, every situation is different and many times it comes down to the cop or the bad guy. In this soda can situation though, it seems like the cop was trigger happy.
I'm a computer tech too.. also work for the federal gov't
Out here in Cali, police can make some awesome money.. sometimes more than an entry level computer guy. LAPD starts at $51-53k.. that's a lot of cash for a young guy with only a HS diploma, even in Cali
I know most LEOs in other parts of the country dont make nearly that much.
NineseveN
member
crazed_ss said:I'm a computer tech too.. also work for the federal gov't
Oh yeah? Hmm, what branch of Govt? You can PM me if you like, we might know each other.
medic_guns
Member
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2003
- Messages
- 335
If a police officer shoots someone that poses no threat, he should be charged with murder. "Well, it looked sort of like a weapon" does not cut it. I can't believe we live in a time where cops can kick in a door, shoot an unarmed man, and not suffer some consequences for it. I hope like heck that the prosecutor nails that guy. Time for excuses to end. If the man in the bed did not have a weapon, prosecute. End of discussion. I hope NO ONE ever kicks in my door at any hour. We have home invasions around here all of the time. Sometimes home invaders dress like cops. I obey the law. There is no reason for anyone to ever kick in my door
gt3944
Member
Come on guys, whats so hard to understand..get your hands up is not that hard of a comand...most of these guys though think theyre thoug, and if theres anyone to blame, is the chiks husband not the officer..
Ryder said:
Maybe he had a startle reaction to the door flying open? Maybe he was chemically impaired? Maybe the cop never said gave a command before firing?
It's plausible to come up with scenarios in which neither said was "at fault." The decedent's prior criminal history ultimately has no more bearing on the issue than whether the cop liked Twinkies versus Ho-Hos. He was legally innocent, and the situation he found himself in was one in which anyway, whether crook or cop, might have made a furtive movement.
How many plain clothes/off duty officers have been shot because they turned towards their fellow cops with a weapon in their hand, having been so focused on one situation they didn't comprehend what was going on?
I will say it's nice to a bit more rationality on both sides than usual.
1911 guy
Member
I wasn't always anti-cop
But I'm leaning that way more and more as I get older. Mom and Dad raised me to respect the police, the police have taught me they are liars, cheats and wholly unethical with few exceptions. We are dealing here with a copo who barges into a bedroom and shoots a man over a mistaken tin can. Sounds to me like a case of a man not being able to do a stressful job under pressure or being a john wayne wannabe. Possibly both. When a citizen makes a questionable shoot, the deck is stacked against him. Hell, it's stacked against him in a righteous shoot. When a soldier is caught in questionable behavior, they are hung out to dry because of the "higher standard" ethic, which is laudable, but hypocricical given who is enforcing it. Then we have the cops. Shoot some poor bastard on a whim, come up with a lame excuse for it, get your buddies to toe the "thin blue line" and forget about it. And if you're a cop who's honest, what are you doing to drum out the crooked ones in your department? Or are you toeing "the line"?
But I'm leaning that way more and more as I get older. Mom and Dad raised me to respect the police, the police have taught me they are liars, cheats and wholly unethical with few exceptions. We are dealing here with a copo who barges into a bedroom and shoots a man over a mistaken tin can. Sounds to me like a case of a man not being able to do a stressful job under pressure or being a john wayne wannabe. Possibly both. When a citizen makes a questionable shoot, the deck is stacked against him. Hell, it's stacked against him in a righteous shoot. When a soldier is caught in questionable behavior, they are hung out to dry because of the "higher standard" ethic, which is laudable, but hypocricical given who is enforcing it. Then we have the cops. Shoot some poor bastard on a whim, come up with a lame excuse for it, get your buddies to toe the "thin blue line" and forget about it. And if you're a cop who's honest, what are you doing to drum out the crooked ones in your department? Or are you toeing "the line"?
- Status
