Shooting a LEO in self defense??? Hypothetical

Status
Not open for further replies.
If the officer is acting illegally and threatened your life or the life of another, sure. But this defense has been tried, by criminals, any time they have assaulted or shot at police. The situation had better be grave or you will spend a LOT of years in prison. You might even if you ARE justified. Just like the Rodney King incident, getting involved in any incident involving some one else other than yourself or a situation you know VERY well you should NOT intervene.
Crooks will yell for help and claim all kinds of stuff when they are losing a struggle. If you take his word and intervene (or her for that matter) you could get yourself in a LOT of trouble. You should question authority, you should report abuse, but getting involved in challenging or going toe to toe with an armed police officer is not a smart idea. On the other hand, if the cop IS the crook no amount of legal trouble is going to stop me from defending my life or my family.

Happy Halloween!
 
Shoot a cop?

1. Time to die
2. Time for major facial reconstruction + splints
3. Time for major jail time

Look what happened at Waco. Shoot some ATF, everybody dies.

It'd better be worth the very good chance of dying later, etc.

This topic is seriously bad karma.
 
I've read of two cases with links on THR where road rage ensued and plain clothes officers identified themselves with their guns, not their badges. Both were shot by CCW holders in response to the threat. I also think both survived, but may now have a limp. This in no way surprises me for the officers did not flash a badge, have flashing lights or any other indicator as to their law enforcement status. There was no way Joe CCW was to know they were a LEO. I hope these incidents are discussed in precincts all over America as how not to handle situations.

I'm all for following the law and not getting my bum busted by a LEO. If they're in their blues, this is a non-issue, and as most cases stated in this thread, it appears that all LEOs appeared as civilians besides the obvious rape and abuse cases provided in the links. If a plain clothes officers states he's an officer, he should be obligated to produce a badge and allow me to inspect it and contact dispatch to verify his credentials. Just shouting, stop police, isn't going to get them the respect a patrol officer gets for it could be a thugs plan to get you to submit. Anyone can do that. Fake badges are easy to come by and I've seen many a security company badge that looks like a law enforcement badge until close inspection. A simple flash isn't going to cut it.
 
Repeatedly, we see posts asserting that LEOs are people just like us. I've made posts like that before myself.

Being people just like us also implies a wide array of personal characteristics-- including malevolent and sociopathic ones in some cases.

Let’s not forget that Bobby Cutts, Jr. was a LEO.

So were those guys that beat the hell out of that woman in Chicago.


There are times when it may well be within your rights and prudent to resist the will of a LEO. They (some) can and do commit unlawful and immoral acts on occasion. I surly would not go to my grave content in the knowledge that I was a good and lawful citizen who obeyed the LEO that killed me—just like I wouldn’t with a criminal that broke into my home.


Now those are obvious examples of when not to “resist.” What may not be so obvious are things like Katrina. Because of some of the “Executive Orders” given by Parish Presidents, I found myself actually contemplating my response to any attempts to take our supplies such as gasoline.

I am NOT advocating any course of action but I came to the conclusion that I would NOT comply with an order to STEAL from us. A LEO doing that would be no different than a looter and would be treated in a similar fashion. And I was not alone in this assessment.


-- John
 
Its pretty scary that here in Illinois they dont want you to resist. It seems that the legislators put to much faith in law enforcement.
Click to expand...
An entire section of the Chicago PD was disbanded recently for engaging in home invasions, kidnappings, and the like. The ringleader was recently charged additionally with attempting to commission the contract murder of several other cops to prevent them from testifying against him. A member of that unit was previously murdered under suspicious circumstances, and the killers allegedly allowed to escape prosecution through "ineptitude" (collusion?). It's now become a Federal investigation and keeps growing.

If there's ANYPLACE on earth where you might need to use lethal force to defend yourself from criminal violence by the police, it's Chicago.
 
Zoog said:
No, lets not forget he was a wanted criminal, a fleeing felon, and had charged at and been trying to attack officers before what appears to be excessive force was used.
Click to expand...
No, let's not forget the multi-million dollar settlement, fired and prosecuted LEOs. Right or wrong, the fed.gov saw it as improper. One incorrect swing of the side-handle baton and he was a deadman.

So, given the totality of the Rodney King Experience, would that rise to the level of lawful resistance?

Rick
 
Having been around officers who have overstepped their bounds (picking fights with truckers in one situation, threatening to kill someone in another) this is one of those nightmare scenarios.

Here's a situation that occurred in my hometown. Deputy arrives at a domestic call. One of the participants is a disabled veteran who decides he doesn't want to talk to the deputy. He turns around and begins hobbling off on his cane. The deputy draws his weapon and shoots the vet twice in the back. If the deputy had walked up and decided to finish off the vet, what are the legal options for the vet's family at that moment to prevent the coup de grace? (No such round was necessary in the real world as the vet was killed by the first two rounds).

As to what happened in real life, the deputy stayed on the force (the only charge was failing to file a shooting report within 48 hours, which was dropped when the prosecutor figured out how to ban the protestors from being in front of his office). He eventually quit after his fellow officers ridiculed him for murdering the man, and he ambushed them with mace.

Got to love a corrupt local judicial system and nepotism.

There's another situation playing out around here where two brothers are charged with murdering an officer and his ride-a-long. Self-defense may come into play due to some long-standing issues between the brothers and the officer.
 
I don't have the citation handy, but the Supreme Court has upheld that the citizen retains the right of self defense against unlawful attack, even if that attack is undertaken by officers of the law.

As I recall, the case was from the 1800's, in Texas(? possibly explaining that Texas law) and the issue was that the marshall(?) sheriff(?) and posse had fired upon the person they were supposed to arrest from ambush, completely suprising the subject.

The subject returned fire, killing one or more members of the posse. After the subject was eventually captured, he was additionally charged with the murder of those members of the posse.

The long and the short of it was that the posse's attack was basically an unlawful attempt to kill the subject rather than arrest him, and that he was certainly justified in preventing his own unlawful death.

AFAIK, this case still stands in force, and has implications on no knock raids, should someone ever manage to survive returning fire in one.
 
Anyone know someone who has had off-duty cops pick a fight with him in a bar, then proceed to brawl with him and his wife?

I did.

Want to guess what happened to those cops?

Compare and contrast to what would happen to me if I went to a bar with a few buddies and started a full-on brawl where people got hurt... For that matter, that's something that has never sounded fun to me, but apparently it did to these guys.

Sure, morally, you can shoot someone who threatens your life. But pray you have plenty of witnesses who aren't cops.
 
Current case in Dallas, Texas

A woman shot a SWAT officer when he broke through a window and landed on top of her and her baby. She shot him in the throat and he has been in critical condition.

Charges have been filed that she KNEW she was shooting a police officer, though SWAT tactics are deliberatly designed to confuse, disorient, et, et.

It will be interesting to see how this sorts out. Might be a moot point if the prosecutor and judge overload her with charges and bail bond amounts until she is coerced into "settling" for a lesser charge. That's pretty common.

If you shoot a policeman, right or wrong, you better be prepared to sacrifice your life and the life and financial status of your family.
 
If you shoot a policeman, right or wrong, you better be prepared to sacrifice your life and the life and financial status of your family.
Click to expand...
If I ever have to shoot a policeman, you have a 100% guarantee that I'll be suing the individual cop (or his estate), his supervisor(s), the police department, the city and anybody else within the effective radius of a 50megaton fusion device that even KIND OF, MIGHT have some legal liability.

The ONLY reason I would shoot a cop would be because he was engaged in an unlawful attempt to kill or maim me. Those are both criminal acts and civil torts, and I would go after EVERYONE with ANY responsibility, without mercy or compassion.
 
This is a major possibility with no knock raids I'm afraid. The police (SWAT or whoever) have on multiple occasions raided the wrong locations based on bad intelligence. They just assume any honest citizens won't be armed and ready to defend themselves. Shouting "Police!" and even wearing LEO type clothes when breaking the lock on my door or coming through my window is something any band of thugs could easily do and does not in any way override a citizen's responsibility to protect themselves and their family. They need to realize that if they forcefully enter without warning they risk being fired on and if they kill an innocent person (even if that person was shooting at them in self defense) they should face murder charges. No knock warrants are serious business and they should only be undertaken in the most extreme circumstances, and the agency should be prepared to suffer the consequences if they screw up, including murder charges and being sued by victims and family.
 
The Cory Maye thing comes to mind. SWAT went to wrong address, raided, and cop got shot and killed. Seems like the cops got it wrong but Cory Maye is serving life (his original death sentence has been overturned)
 
Basically, unless the cop is going wacko and you are in immediate life-threatening danger, then NO, you shouldn't use lethal force.

I think most police are deathly afraid of what the media will do to them in reported abuse situations. Since there are dashboard cameras on all cars, the cops aren't getting away with anything. I'd much rather be in court suing the police because they roughed me up than being sued by the policeman's family in a civil suit.
 
I think most police are deathly afraid of what the media will do to them in reported abuse situations.
Click to expand...

I don't know about that. I was at a training course and one cop started talking about how since he got a complaint on his first search of a female, he realized he'd get complained about every time. So, he told the group (filled with LEOs and non-LEOs) how he uses these searches to feel up women.
 
Basically, unless the cop is going wacko and you are in immediate life-threatening danger, then NO, you shouldn't use lethal force.
Click to expand...
How about if the cop isn't "wacko" but merely involved in a criminal enterprise, like Jerome Finnegan of the Chicago PD? Should I NOT use lethal force against armed police involved in a violent home invasion with no purpose beyond THEFT?

I think most police are deathly afraid of what the media will do to them in reported abuse situations.
Click to expand...
Not in Chicago. In fact the personnel of the Chicago PD seem COMPLETELY oblivious to the possibility, nay the near CERTAINTY that they're being recorded while they commit a whole panoply of felonies, from grand larceny, to aggravated battery, to solicitation of murder, to murder itself. In fact, the single most egregious incident involved a Chicago police officer shooting an unarmed man in the head, for no reason, while standing under a transit authority video camera. And why SHOULD he be concerned? When his SWORN testimony turned out to be LIES, the Superintendent of Police, Phil Cline suspended him for thirty days... then PROMOTED him to detective, a position which he holds to this day. I'd say that rather than displaying recklessness, Detective Alvin Weems displayed a rational appreciation of the vanishingly small odds that he would face any serious punishment for KILLING someone in cold blood... as long as he was a friend of Superintendent Cline. As for "fear" of the media, another Chicago cop was recently accused of throwing a photojournalist's cameras down a street, destroying them. No, they don't seem concerned about media attention at all.
 
Jeff White:

I think you are letting your personal bias against law enforcement over ride common sense. Imagine a world where it was legal to resist arrest. Do you really want to settle all legal issues on the street with violence?

We have a thing called court. And court is where we resist arrest, if we're smart we get a lawyer to help us.
Click to expand...

When ever someone disagrees with the "Cops are always right" premise, you reply as above. Its just anti-cop bias showing again.

If it costs a man years of his freedom, financial ruin, the loss of his property, and the loyalty of friends and family... he should still shut up, submit and take the ride.

Aw shucks, he'll probably be a better man for it...right?
 
since this is supposed to pertain to guns...

Cops, being human sometimes, do stupid things just like everyone else.
Click to expand...

Why, then, does it make sense that cops are exempted from many newly proposed anti-gun laws ?

The silence is deafening when waiting to hear, from Police Officers' national organizations, or from rank and file Police Officers, who oppose not only new anti-gun laws but their own exemption from them.

Need I say "...only ones..."?
 
Having stated the above, I believe Texas law has it right...If and when a LEO uses more force than is necessary to affect an arrest, the actor may legally use equal and opposite force in self defense.

Hypothetical:

A LEO truly believes he sees a subject who he knows has warrants and is considered dangerous. The LEO acts on instinct and moves to subdue the subject without announcing he is a LEO...thinking he must subdue the subject first for "officer safety".

The problem would arise when the subject is not who the ELO believed him to be. On the way to the ground, the LEO, meaning well, breaks a finger or nose of the subject, at which time, the subject, rightfully believing himself to be under attack, uses an appropriate amount of force to prevent further injury and possibly subdue his attacker.

Would our "subject" get the benefit of the doubt when it came time to "take the ride" ?

Would he be told, when he had his day in court, that the Police Officer in question meant well and that he has no standing...that he should consider himself lucky he isn't charged with assault of a Police Officer?
 
Last edited:
Tough subject. I'm going to go along with it isn't an issue to me unless they are in uniform. In that case I would asses whether it is a case of mistaken identity or whether they really are trying to kill me on purpose (I think I heard a large black helicopter fly over). Remember that kid that sent in a phony 911 call and almost got a guy killed, or the no knock warrant that ended up in a dead grandmother and wounded cops. Only .gov and SWAT uses flashbangs so that would be a sign to get on the floor with hands on hand and wait to call the lawyer. A bump in the night followed by breaking glass? They better say they are the cops or it's going to be a FUBAR moment for everyone.
 
Tough subject. I'm going to go along with it isn't an issue to me unless they are in uniform. In that case I would asses whether it is a case of mistaken identity or whether they really are trying to kill me on purpose (I think I heard a large black helicopter fly over).
Click to expand...
"Black helicopter"? If so, it's a Chicago PD helicopter with Jerome Finnegan as the pilot, Jon Burge as the crew chief and Alvin Weems as the door gunner.

Yes Virginia, there are police departments where the officers engage in serious crimes, up to and including soliciting murder for hire. If you live in a town where such things are as alien as cannibalism, count yourself fortunate. But those things DO happen, and in some places they seem to happen frequently. In Chicago, non-criminals actually FEAR the police and with abundant good reason. Don't say it can't happen, because I can give you names, dates, places and VIDEO.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

M
  • Locked
A serious question for LEO's
2
Replies
40
Views
2K
trueblue1776
T
W
  • Locked
Self Defense Shootings
Replies
4
Views
502
Librarian
Librarian
A
  • Locked
Wisconsin shooting....self defense against it
Replies
9
Views
549
AntiqueCollector
A
I
  • Locked
Course Opportunity: Advanced Ohio Self-Defense and CHL Law - Attorney Taught
Replies
0
Views
303
IANALY
I
Trent
  • Locked
Self Defense and "Willful or Wanton Misconduct"
2
Replies
30
Views
2K
Trent
Trent
Back
Top