Browns Fan
Member
Fascinating story, please keep us updated on what happens here.
Real-Life CWP Shooting Eugene OR - Very Interesting Story
- Thread starter OregonPCR
- Start date
- Status
38SnubFan
Member
Great post Jeff! IMO your statement is not just a LEO perspective. It's a COMMON SENSE perspective!
Also, Zonamo's posting of Oregon statutes makes a great point that Jeff has already pointed out: 161.255(2) states that deadly force may only be employed against the use or IMMINENT threat of deadly force by the actor. In Mr. Winkelman's case, Winkelman drew BEFORE the BG drew. Up until Winkelman drawing his weapon, the BG had not displayed his weapon, therefore no threat of lethal force was made.
It's my opinion as well that "Winky" is just REALLY DAMN LUCKY, and not facing several criminal charges himself in relation to 161.255(2).
-38SnubFan
This statement bothers me IMMENSELY! So are we saying that the witness wasn't credible based on the fact that she's 13 years old? It's no wonder children grow up and retaliate against their parents! Especially when they witness a serious crime occur and we immediately distrust and disspell their statements as total BS!
Also, Zonamo's posting of Oregon statutes makes a great point that Jeff has already pointed out: 161.255(2) states that deadly force may only be employed against the use or IMMINENT threat of deadly force by the actor. In Mr. Winkelman's case, Winkelman drew BEFORE the BG drew. Up until Winkelman drawing his weapon, the BG had not displayed his weapon, therefore no threat of lethal force was made.
It's my opinion as well that "Winky" is just REALLY DAMN LUCKY, and not facing several criminal charges himself in relation to 161.255(2).
-38SnubFan
I don't have a problem with what Winky did. What is it we always hear when the cops shoot someone (he feared for his safety, the suspect had something shiny in his hand) They are almost always ruled "good shoots".
Everyone keeps saying he should have sat back and waited for the cops. I know in a lot of circumstances this means the suspect gets to walk away. What it seems to come down to is the "not my job syndrome", Well, maybe it is your job. I happen to believe its everyone's job. In my town it a pretty rare sight to see a Sheriff's car, we don't even have a police department. If I knew a serious felony suspect was about to walk from the scene, I would consider detaining them. I would have to evaluate the likelyhood of the suspect being captured if I didn't intervene. Come on guys, if this was "your" neighborhood, would you want these people roaming freely thru them. I know I wouldn't! I guess the DA and grand jury see things the same way in this case.
Whats the saying around hear "a little chlorine for the gene pool". A perfect example of that. The woman getting beat/raped in the street could have just as easily been Winky's daughter, or your wife or daughter. Something to think about.
Everyone keeps saying he should have sat back and waited for the cops. I know in a lot of circumstances this means the suspect gets to walk away. What it seems to come down to is the "not my job syndrome", Well, maybe it is your job. I happen to believe its everyone's job. In my town it a pretty rare sight to see a Sheriff's car, we don't even have a police department. If I knew a serious felony suspect was about to walk from the scene, I would consider detaining them. I would have to evaluate the likelyhood of the suspect being captured if I didn't intervene. Come on guys, if this was "your" neighborhood, would you want these people roaming freely thru them. I know I wouldn't! I guess the DA and grand jury see things the same way in this case.
Whats the saying around hear "a little chlorine for the gene pool". A perfect example of that. The woman getting beat/raped in the street could have just as easily been Winky's daughter, or your wife or daughter. Something to think about.
Grump
Member
All other mistakes and alleged "mistakes" aside, what would a reasonable person conclude when the suspected felon choses to face you down instead of....
just...
going BACK inside the house to call 911 on the crazy gun-weilding private citizen trying to effect an "arrest" of a crime he did not witness?
This is almost as silly as those "fleeing felon" discussions and the court decisions arising from them. As far as I'm concerned, any person who used any lethal weapon to kill a non-aggressor, and who is still armed, and who is fleeing the scene, poses a threat --during the course of flight-- of death or serious bodily injury to anyone who would happen to be "in the way" or in possession of a means to help the killer escape. Defense of others then kicks in.
IIRC, one court was willing to allow only the blessed and special law enforcement types justification to shoot a fleeing felon in the back, but only if the fleeing felon was still armed and had just taken a very special and more-valuable-than-yours life of a law enforcement officer. I have a problem with certain parts of that.
just...
going BACK inside the house to call 911 on the crazy gun-weilding private citizen trying to effect an "arrest" of a crime he did not witness?
This is almost as silly as those "fleeing felon" discussions and the court decisions arising from them. As far as I'm concerned, any person who used any lethal weapon to kill a non-aggressor, and who is still armed, and who is fleeing the scene, poses a threat --during the course of flight-- of death or serious bodily injury to anyone who would happen to be "in the way" or in possession of a means to help the killer escape. Defense of others then kicks in.
IIRC, one court was willing to allow only the blessed and special law enforcement types justification to shoot a fleeing felon in the back, but only if the fleeing felon was still armed and had just taken a very special and more-valuable-than-yours life of a law enforcement officer. I have a problem with certain parts of that.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
