Police shoot off-duty NYPD officer holding gun

Status
Not open for further replies.
To much is not known here, however

Why didnt the odd duty officer inform the police as soon as they arrived?
Did the regular police officers shoot as soon as they saw the off duty officer? if they did, then ide call bad shoot. If they told him to put the gun down, THEN shot, i would understand.

it seems as if they arrived, shot him immediatly...
 
Steve in PA said:
Come on, lets hear from the "experts" on this board.

Put you in the same situation. You come around the corner and see one man over another. The man on top is holding a weapon (I'll let you take your pick, gun, knife, pipe, rock, etc) and looks like he is about to use it against the other man, what do you do?? Right now, not two seconds from when you turn the corner, not sitting behind your monitor, from the second you see the above, what are you going to do???

In the case of a gun, how do you tell, from a distance, if someone is simply holding a suspect at gun point, or is "about to use it?" You can't assume the person holding the gun is going to shoot, you have to make an effort to find out before you open fire.
 
Steve in PA said:
Come on, lets hear from the "experts" on this board.

Put you in the same situation. You come around the corner and see one man over another. The man on top is holding a weapon (I'll let you take your pick, gun, knife, pipe, rock, etc) and looks like he is about to use it against the other man, what do you do?? Right now, not two seconds from when you turn the corner, not sitting behind your monitor, from the second you see the above, what are you going to do???

I assess if the person on the ground is anyone I know or care about, if not then back up, get cover, get my weapon ready, then ask what the ???? is going on.

If the person on the ground is someone I know then I would likely draw my weapon and kill the other guy.
 
I recently graduated from an Ohio police academy (passed, certified with the state, but not yet commissioned, i need to find a job with a police department), and this is my worst fear. Being on either side of this situation would be horrible. Logically, I don't want to be shot by a fellow officer, but even being the shooter... knowing that what I did was what I felt was right... the trauma would be devastating.

I hope both of these cops (shooter and shootee) make it out of this situation alright.

Also, think about this theory (since none of us were actually there, and we're just theorizing): Cop in white castle, off duty. He gets in a fight with six guys. He tells them, "Get away, I'm a cop" and draws his weapon. White Castle employee calls the cops and says, "There's an off duty police officer getting in a fight with six guys, he needs help." Cops rush to the scene. First car approaches and sees a guy holding a gun on another guy. You don't know is who. I think a reasonable person would think, "The cop is in trouble because he's fighting 6 guys, which means he's automatically going to be losing, which means the guy on the ground is the cop, which means the guy with the gun is a bad guy and is going to shoot the cop."

Think about it. Would you ever believe 6 guys would be running from one person? The shooter could easily have thought that the guy with the gun is going to shoot an off duty cop. He fired to save the life of the off duty cop. Turns out he was wrong.
 
If they told him to drop his weapon and he didn't comply that makes it the off-duty's "fault", I am sorry for his family and for the fellow officer who had to do what was apparently the right thing at the time.

Which is exactly what I and many others said we'd say before the "he was challenged" information came out.
 
We still don't have enough accurate information, to make an accurate reply to this post.. All our, he should haves, he needed to's, I would have's, if only's, etc. may as well be guesses, or farts in the wind. They mean about as much....
 
The story at this point from the NYPD is that the officer had , after completing his shift, stopped into three different bars. Then he went to White Castle where he got into ann arguement or fight with a group...The proper procedure of course is for the nonuniformed officer to immediately follow orders from the uniformed officer....Investigation continues ....
 
Glenn Bartley said:
I have not been posting here lately for a personal reason; but when I saw an article on this shooting on a local NY news website I also then wanted to see how all the armchair experts at THR would react to the tragic shooting of this officer. So I stopped by and saw this thread. As I expected, a great number of you have made up your minds on this issue as it being a bad move by the cop who fired the shots, and as far as I can see some of you used, in essence, the following concepts to bolster your particular form of reasoning:

NYC cops are less than intelligent

It Happened in NYC so what else could one expect

The cop who fired did not follow proper procedure (I wonder have you been trained by the NYPD, are you aware of their procedures)

All cops are less than intelligent

Whatever you feel is correct is the way it must have happened (I guess because you are all gurus of some sort)

The News media are the gods of truth and everything they print in an article must be absolute truth when it makes a cop look bad.

Of course there are more concepts behind your reasoning that I could mention but you get the idea. Now - read the article below and rethink (if you actually thought at all before writing the first time around) about what some of you have written here. This article (http://1010wins.com/topstories/local_story_028090932.html) was posted just about 1 hour ago at 9:53PM eastern time by a local NY radio station on its website. Sure adds some more alleged facts to the mix, doesn't it.



I am not saying the 2nd article is correct or complete but it adds much more to the mix for those of you who were so sure that:















I am not saying the second article is correct and the first is incorrect, but I am saying that anyone who made an absolute judgment based on the first article was out of line. When you look at just two added sentences in the 2nd article, I think you might be able to envision another scenario other than one in which the shooting officer did not identify himself and tell the officer who wound up shot to drop his weapon. You might also think, hey maybe there was a REALLY good chance that Officer Hernandez, who was shot, did something he should not have done when the other cop ordered him to drop his weapon and maybe, just maybe, it was because of something that INFLUENCED him.


and


I think there is still a lot more to this story that has yet met the eye of the average Joe reading a news article. For instance there was a 911 call, what did the caller tell the 911 operator about the incident and possibly about Hernandez! It also seems much more likely that the arriving officers may have followed proper procedure and that Officer Hernandez may not have followed proper procedure if the second article is correct. Do you know what is the proper procedure to follow when uniformed officers wind up on a scene and tell you “Police, don’t move” or “Police, drop the weapon” or “simply drop the gun”. Do you know what would then justify an officer shooting in such a situation where the guy being ordered to do something by uniformed police does not follow the orders. I really find myself wondering if Officer Hernandez did not follow whatever commands he may have been given, and if he did not follow proper procedure himself, if for no other reason than because he was allegedly intoxicated at the time. Give it some time before you fry anyone in this shooting, get at least most of the facts before you absolutely damn someone. Of course you can continue to speculate, but why not call it as such – speculation and guesswork based on what little you know instead of taking the low road. Can you imagine the psychological hell the shooting officer will go through, even if the officer who was shot does not die, and even if he was fully justified in shooting. I am pretty sure he doesn’t need your help in making himself feel guilt ridden whether he is guilty or not of a bad shooting, and he especially does not need your help at making him feel even more guilty if it was in fact a good shoot.

Whatever, it is a dammed shame it happened at all.

Best regards to all,
Glenn B

footnote: I kept calling the article I quoted in full 'the 2nd article' in this thread, and I was of course referring to the original post of this thread as having contained article number 1. Now that I have read that 1st post over a few more times I see that it was never quoted as being a complete article. Could it be that someone selectively editied the artcile and just placed whatever words he felt were important, or whatever he wanted to comment upon, in said post. I am not saying that Rick Reno did any wrong, I don't know if those are his sumations or a whole article verbatim, it does not really matter. Those who read that post and did not even think that it may have been paraphrased or edited made, I think, a big mistake if you condemed the actions of anyone based on that thread and your feelings alone. Maybe the best thing to do would be to keep both of the officers, the physically wounded one, and the psychologicaly traumatized one, in our thoguhts and prayers. Hopefully both will pull through this.
Amen to that.
As a NYC Court Officer we were trained in how to both issue and respond to a challenge.
As are the other 16 or so law enforcement agencies that conduct business in NYC.
I have both been challenged and issued them, and not once was there a problem.
Of course, I never took action when drunk, and usually believed that the best way to get involved was to dial 911, but hey, what does a dumb guy like me from Brooklyn know?
Hope this turns out well, and according to sevearl colums in today's Daily News, the responding officers did what they had to do, considering the circumstances.
 
Id agree theres a world of information we would need before passing judgement on those officers...however.

If they told him to drop his weapon and he didn't comply that makes it the off-duty's "fault"

This depends on how much time they gave him and how they read his body language. (and not to spin this the wrong way, but I do worry being a non leo and having to potentially use my weapon in a situation similar to that).

I can see something like this: Youve got a suspect at gunpoint, someone behind you shouts "drop the weapon", if you turn to see who it is do you get shot by a trigger-happy police man?

I should ask the question, how many convienienct store robberies altercations will an officer arrive at that are still in progress?

If its unusualy for you to find someone with a gun still holding someone else hostage when you get there (or holding them at bay as the case may be) woulndt that suggest that things are far more complex than they seem?
 
Guns and booze don't mix well, it seems......
That in essence used to be one of the commandments of firearms safety. Somehow because some legend in his own mind gunslinger decided there were only 4 primary rules, this one is today often forgotten.
 
Glenn Bartley said:
NYC cops are less than intelligent
Well, when you see them driving through stop signs and red lights all the time, nearly causing accidents and running people over, that’s the impression they give.

Glenn Bartley said:
It Happened in NYC so what else could one expect
Yeah, like the other innocent people shot by NYC cops.

Glenn Bartley said:
The cop who fired did not follow proper procedure (I wonder have you been trained by the NYPD, are you aware of their procedures)
Amadou Bailo Diallo. 4 cops, trained to take cover when approaching a dangerous suspect (which they thought Diallo was) instead stood out in the open, making an endless barage of bullets their only defense.

Timothy Stansbury. Shot by a cop who wasn't following procedure by having his gun unholstered without a clear need, and having his finger on the trigger without a clear and present danger.

It has been the pattern that innocent people die when cops don't follow procedure.

Glenn Bartley said:
Civilian witnesses told investigators they heard the patrol officers tell Hernandez to drop his gun, said the official, who asked not to be named because of the nature of the investigation.
And THAT is reliable?? Did you forget about the shooting of the Jean Charles de Menezes in London? The cops said he was running, jumped the turnstile, big coat, and none of it was true.

Personally, I think that the Yupi’k village of Hooper Bay in Alaska has it right. There, the police are forbidden to carry any firearms. In NYC, considering that more cops die by suicide than on the job, it seems like a good idea.
 
Graystar,

We were not talking about the shooting of Amadou DiAllo here or about any other shooting than the one at hand. We were discussing the particular shooting that was brought up in the original post of this thread. Now to say that the cop who fired the shots in this incident was wrong because of others who were wrong in the past is absolutely ludicrous and apparently nothing more than an attempt to flame emotions in order to try to get your opinion believed unless you can show exactly how in FACT the current situation is the same as those others. The fact is that right now you cannot do that because the facts as reported differ greatly from those other shootings. Why not stick to the facts of this particular situation in trying to judge this situation. Why not let me direct you to the current factual allegations in this case if only because you don't care about the facts in my estimation. You only seem to care about blackballing the police. Let's see if I can shed some more light on this but first let me shed some light on your apparent outlook by asking you some questions:

1) Did you mention the thousands of times that NYC cops save lives each year?

2) Did you mention the thousands of times that they protect lives, protect property, get the job done correctly, or do anything else right? (Of course you did not.)

3) When you say 'yeah, like other innocent people shot by NYC cops', did you even think of mentioning any of the countless number of so called "good shootings" in which NYC law enforcement officers have been involved wherein they used good judgment? It is pretty obvious to me you are being quite prejudice in your post. Note, I never said this was a good or bad shooting from the standpoint of whether or not the officer firing did it wrong or right; all I said was to examine the facts before absolutely condemning anyone. I guess you are omnipotent (godlike) in that you know it all already without having all the facts regarding this particular case. Wow I wish I had that capability - to get it right no matter what, even when the factual allegations seemingly indicate that this may be more complex than mentioned by you.

4) When you referred to NYC cops going through lights, do you know if they were responding (in silent mode) to a duty call or not? Do you have any knowledge at all of NYC cops actually doing this, because they certainly do respond silently in some instances.

5) And finally, do you know the additional factual allegations made in today’s NY Daily News?

The first four questions were rhetorical, the third requires an answer from you, so hurry to the NY Daily News website to read the latest article. Oh wait, I'll save you the trouble. Instead of trying to pour gasoline onto the already flaming emotions you have exhibited, I will instead, provide factual allegations that appeared in the NY Daily News article. Better than that, instead of appearing to be selecting what I want from the article, I'll post the whole thing with a link:

**********************************************************

Cop shoots cop at burger joint

One fights for life, other's traumatized


BY ALISON GENDAR, VERONIKA BELENKAYA, JONATHAN LEMIRE and ROBERT F. MOORE
DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITERS


Police scour White Castle in Tremont, the Bronx, for clues yesterday after tragic shooting in which cop unknowingly shot off-duty officer Eric Hernandez, leaving him gravely wounded.

A drunken off-duty cop holding a man at gunpoint outside a Bronx White Castle was shot three times by a veteran officer in a stunning case of mistaken identity yesterday, police and hospital sources said.
"Drop the gun! Drop the gun!" the uniformed cop yelled, repeating the warning a third and fourth time before firing and gravely wounding Officer Eric Hernandez.

The cops who confronted Hernandez, 24, a star running back on the NYPD football team, had no idea the victim was a member of the force until paramedics found the rookie's badge while treating him in an ambulance, sources said.

Mayor Bloomberg called the shooting a tragic accident, saying many unanswered questions remained about the early-morning mayhem that left Hernandez fighting for life.

"That's unavoidable in a situation where life and death decisions are made in an instant," Bloomberg said shortly after the 5 a.m. shooting, which took place less than a day after another cop dropped dead while chasing an alleged thief in Manhattan.

The uniformed officer who shot Hernandez - identified by police sources as 19-year NYPD veteran Alfredo Toro - was later treated at Jacobi Medical Center for trauma.

Hernandez, who is assigned to the 52nd Precinct, had been standing in line at the White Castle on Webster Ave. in Tremont when he was assaulted by five men and a woman, police said.

The clash, which was captured by security cameras, spilled out a side door. Hernandez chased a man he wrongly believed was one of his attackers and drew his gun, cops said.

When cops responding to 911 calls about a "man with a gun" arrived, Hernandez had young Brian Muñoz on the ground and was pointing his pistol at him, witnesses said.

"The police officer said, 'Drop the gun!' He said it four times," said witness Anthony White, 38. "The guy just turned around and pointed the gun right at the cops."


Toro fired three times, hitting Hernandez once in each leg and a third time in the abdomen, sources said. The bullets pierced major arteries, causing him to lose a significant amount of blood.

Hernandez, who had gotten off work five hours earlier, never fired.

Several minutes after the shooting, emergency workers pulled Hernandez's police shield from his pocket - and Toro crumpled to the ground in dismay, sources said.

Hernandez, who joined the department in July 2004, had a blood-alcohol level twice the legal limit, according to a source at St. Barnabas Hospital, where he was listed in critical condition late yesterday after four hours of surgery.

An off-duty cop is not allowed to carry his gun if he is drunk, according to NYPD regulations.

Hernandez - about 6 feet tall and nearly 200 pounds - had spent the night bar-hopping with a female relative, a police source said.

Yesterday's shooting was believed to be the first friendly-fire incident involving city cops since Desmond Robinson, a plainclothes officer, was wounded by an off-duty cop in August 1994. Robinson had his gun drawn on a subway platform, and the other cop mistook him for a criminal.

Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly and dozens of other cops gathered yesterday at St. Barnabas to comfort Hernandez's family and search for answers.

The cop's relatives prayed in the hospital chapel as officers rushed to donate blood.

NYPD Sgt. John Muldoon, who plays on the department football team with Hernandez, said he wasn't surprised that the cop, a Sacred Heart University grad, was fighting to survive.

"He's just tough as nails," Muldoon said. "He's the toughest kid pound for pound on the team."

Toro, meanwhile, was described as a smart, aggressive cop with 1,300 arrests to his credit. "He did everything by the book," said a police source.

Kelly said police were questioning eight people about the shooting, but none were among those who scuffled with Hernandez in the White Castle.

"This is a classic off-duty confrontation," a police source said. "They didn't know he was a cop. It's the worst possible scenario - a cop shooting a cop."


With Austin Fenner, Bob Kappstatter,
Jose Martinez, Paul H.B. Shin
and Jess Wisloski


Originally published on January 28, 2006
**********************************************************

The bold face and underlined sentences above were highlighted by me. I think those sentences add even more information than we had last night. Note in particular the one about the actions that Hernandez reportedly took when Toro told him to drop the gun. The picture I am beginning to develop is that Officer Hernandez was most likely the one at fault, although I will not say this as fact, it is the idea I am getting after having read a few different articles. of course I will not say the press has it completely right so I can only go on what I read, therefore I make no final judgment. Final judgment in this world will be made by others than myself, those who will have many more facts before them to review before passing judgment. Let us hope they do not try to use the past actions of others to condemn the actions of officer Toro, he deserves his own case to be heard based upon the actual facts of his own case.

I do have some more questions for you before I close, are you aware of Officer Toro's service record? Are you aware of any other shootings in whcih he may or may not have been involved? Are you aware if he has ever gotten it right during his career. Are you aware if he has ever gotten it wrong in his career? Are you aware of anything factual, even factual allegations or reported fact, related to this shooting that you can discuss without flaming emotions?

Just one final question from me: How long should Officer Toro have waited before Toro shot Hernandez, how many commands to drop the gun should he have made, should he have waited for Hernandez to actually fire his weapopn (and who knows that he would not have done so if he was truly as intoxicated as was reported)? If you know the answer to that, then you must be in the mind of Officer Toro or you must be all knowing/all seeing or just a whole lot smarter than most of us here. Had Hernandez shot the guy on the ground, my bet is you would have condemned him, and you still would have faulted Toro too, but instead of saying Toro shot too soon or used excessive force, you would have said he should have shot sooner. Then again, that's just my guess but at least I base it on your style of response.

Best regards,
Glenn B
 
I recall we had an argument here about the rule of "mind where you point your gun" not applying to cops... seems it does when you dont know their a cop.
The slippery slope here is justifying why it would have been a good shoot if it was a drunk civilian with the weapon, but a bad shoot because he was a drunk Leo.


Lets at least take the "off duty cop" part out of this.

So the story goes:
Someone with a CCW responds to an incident, might have been under the influence, and as events go they got shot by repsonding police officers.

...Im assuming that if this guy had a chance to talk he would have identified himself as the "good guy".
To me, on the outside, it still sounds like they were trigger happy.
 
Glenn Bartley said:
We were not talking about the shooting of Amadou DiAllo here or about any other shooting than the one at hand.
But I was only explaining why such comments are made. You made it seem like they’re just knee-jerk reactions to a bad shooting, but they’re not. There’s valid history behind such comments.

An off-duty cop is not allowed to carry his gun if he is drunk,
So there you are. We now have confirmation that this tragedy was cause by a cop, once again, not following procedure.

1) Did you mention the thousands of times that NYC cops save lives each year?

2) Did you mention the thousands of times that they protect lives, protect property, get the job done correctly, or do anything else right? (Of course you did not.)
I would very much like to see any statistics that demonstrates NYC cops saving ANY lives. And considering the rampant property crime in this city vs. the NYPD’s below-average closure rate, I doubt that much property is protected either.

They certainly were of no help when I was shot, I was burglarized, when my mom was robbed, or any other criminal acts friends and family have suffered. For my 40 years in NYC, criminals are batting 1000 against me, my family, and my friends.

And it pisses me of that Toro became upset AFTER the shooting, when he realized he shot a fellow cop. If he did nothing wrong, and the shooting was absolutely justified, then why would he be any more upset?? Why are we all assuming that Hernandez was performing his duty as a cop, and not actually getting ready to kill the guy out of rage?? The whole thing stinks of trigger-happy cops all around.
 
I'm not a cop but I have seen them work and I'm wondering

Wouldn't this be the type of call that uniformed officers in marked cars with sirens running would respond to.

I'm thinking if I have a gun pointed at someone and am not wearing anything to ID me as a fellow officer I'm going to do every thing possible to convince those cops not to shoot me long before they feel the need to tell me to put the gun down, unless I'm drunk
 
1. The flashers were not on, else Hernandez would have known it was cops telling him to drop the gun. Is this a violation of policy?

OR

2. The flashers were on, but Hernandez was a rookie --> was a young male in New York --> had an almost inate distrust of the cops --> being drunk, saw them as the "enemy". A second later, he would have realized his error, but it was too late.

OR

3. When he turned, he didn't point the gun at them, and the witness or the story was wrong. Wouldn't be the first time.
 
NYPD cops are taught early and often that firearms are inherently evil things, that must be treated as poisonous snakes. They see one, they shoot to kill. They see something that might be one, they shoot to kill. They see someone who might have a firearm, they shoot to kill. The circumstances don't matter. Unless you have a uniform, even having a firearm on your person is grounds for summary execution in NYC.

With luck the NYPD will keep offing each other and we'll be rid of the problem.
 
How many times would anyone expect a civilian ccw holder to issue the command to "drop the weapon you are pointing in my direction"?

Or ...

self-deleted
 
Last edited:
Since the NYPD refuse to treat their own officers under the same standards of law, as any other citizen; AND this "us versus them" mentality of the police that "only criminals would have a gun"... well, can't say I find any tragedy here.

Well, except for those who were being chased down the street with a looney brandishing his gun.
 
Cosmoline said:
NYPD cops are taught early and often that firearms are inherently evil things, that must be treated as poisonous snakes. They see one, they shoot to kill. They see something that might be one, they shoot to kill. They see someone who might have a firearm, they shoot to kill. The circumstances don't matter. Unless you have a uniform, even having a firearm on your person is grounds for summary execution in NYC.

With luck the NYPD will keep offing each other and we'll be rid of the problem.

It is not even limited to having a gun. Having a wallet in your hand is reason for summary execution in many districts in NYC. At least, this time, it was not an innocent citizen who was gunned down. [ hurrah for small miracles ]
 
And it pisses me of that Toro became upset AFTER the shooting, when he realized he shot a fellow cop. If he did nothing wrong, and the shooting was absolutely justified, then why would he be any more upset??
If this pisses you off, then maybe you do not understand human nature at all. he would be more upset over shoting a bad guy than a good guy, and even more upset because the guy he shot was a cop because he is on the same job. I imagine you feel no special affinity for those with whom you work, or those to whom you are close, or to those upon who your own life may have depended at one time or another. Are you realy pissed off, then you need some help to understand the way 99.9 percent of the population would feel about shooting a coworker as opposed to him being a bad guy. You really do like to play on the emotional flamming don't you!

As far a a cop causing it; yes maybe he did but not the shooter from what I have read so far although I reserve final judgement based on further review of additional factual allegations. Is a cop doing something stupid or careless a justification to take away all police firearms or to blame the shooter as your first post implied? No in either case. Are the shootings of a small percentage of innocents such as you used as examples a reason to take away all police firearms? Be careful because you are treading on this ice if you say yes, but I ask it nonetheless and please answer yes or no to that last question.
 
Lessons Learned

1) Maybe it's better to learn ALL of the facts, as best you can, before delivering a decision you may want to change later. 2) Alcohol and guns don't mix- do you think it may have affected the ODs judgement and response? 3) Now that Graystar has told us that all 13,000 LEOs in NYC are trigger happy buffoons we are fore-warned. Maybe he should move to a safer place. 4) The shooting that Graystar alludes to was judged- finally- as a clean shoot. "Suspicious" person at night in a doorway is told "Don't move!" but reaches behind him and comes out with something black in his hand- Cop shoots him- he doesn't go down (perhaps because of 9mm hardball or the suspect is leaning against the doorway) so cop shoots again, and again. His partners join in, and all shoot to slidelock. Suspect finally goes down. One of our NY Senators, as quick to judge as some of the earliest replies to this original post, calls it murder in the press (and later retracts.) 5) When I carried a badge, this situation was covered in training, and over-and-over in police publications. Rule one is: THE UNIFORMS ARE IN CHARGE! They have to be; they were sent there to control the scene. We were taught to have our ID out, and if possible, our gun put away. 6) If you are told by a Cop to "drop the gun" and your response is to point yours at him, you will very likely be shot (remember this). 7) If the guy on the ground was a good guy, and the BG had the gun, how many would criticize the RO for NOT shooting or waiting too long to shoot? 8) GB and Steve passed out some pearls of wisdom which I hope some of you absorbed. 9) It's real easy when you're home in your easy chair; it's not so easy out on the street. 10) Boy, some of you guys really like to bash cops. EJ
 
None of the news articles that have been posted as text (not as links - I did not look at any links) have stated that witnesses reported the responding police officers first identifying themselves as police. It has not been stated that the squad car had lights and/or siren turned on. It is possible that the cop that was shot did not know that police officers were on the scene; he was drunk - and he may have had auditory exclusion affecting him, as well as tunnel vision (you do remember those terms from CCW training, don't you).

It is quite possible that he thought that one of the other five assailants had returned with a weapon to re-engage him in the assault, so when he heard someone yelling at him (without complete understanding of what was being said) he turned to identify the new threat.

It is obvious from the additional information that has been supplied, that the officer who was shot was in violation of police procedure, and possibly the law as well (drunk with a firearm). It is conjecture that the shooting officer was in violation of procedure. From the information supplied so far, I suspect that both officers made mistakes in how they acted in this matter.

The one thing that is certain is that two police officers have been removed from service to the city, until they can recover from their injuries (physical and emotional). The possibility exists that one or both of them may never return to police work, as a result of this incident (not accident). I would not be surprised to hear that both officers leave service on medical retirement.

It is obvious that some of the people posting to this thread have a severe anti-cop attitude; others are more open minded; yet others have an attitude that no cop can do any wrong. The truth will eventually be determined, but the truth is not yet known, and we can not expect to learn the truth by reading early news reports (that are based on the need of the agency to publish something - anything - before their rivals in the news industry).

We (the howling pack - the mob) are the reason that news organizations rush to print with inaccurate and incomplete articles - articles that emphasize the sensational, and sacrifice the truth as being less important than the extra sales achieved by the first to print. The gun owning community is no different than any other segment of society when it comes to letting our emotions overcome common sense. We have our own bias and prejudice, and it shows in the postings we make.

I don't think speculation is necessarily wrong, as long as we identify it as such, and remain open to the truth when it finally becomes known. There is certainly no call for flame wars on matters where such little evidence has been exposed.
 
This was sad situation, but the comments that disturbed me the most were those that said if they know one of the people involved, they would assume the other guy is bad and fire. I can only assume that everyone those posters know is virtuous and good and would never do anything wrong or start a fight.

In general, I don't think LEO's should open fire without knowing what is going on on defending themselves. Even if someone gets shot before they figure it out, I still think telling LEO's they should open fire if they "think" someone is the bad guy is not good policy. If the last article was right, they didn't in this case and that is a good thing.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top