Posted on 07/13/2010 3:47:06 AM PDT by marktwain
Edited on 07/13/2010 4:51:40 AM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
“Funny thing is, I would be more likely to get shot by them than a common criminal...”
That’s what concerns me greatly.
When the risk from getting shot by police for carrying a gun is greater than getting shot by a criminal.
“How about fellow civilian?”
Sounds dumb.
“Can’t stand cops who think they are in some sort of military unit.”
I imagine that people rescued from hostage situations by S.W.A.T. would feel differently.
“I imagine that people rescued from hostage situations by S.W.A.T. would feel differently.”
I would venture to say that most people who carry will not be in a hostage situation you mention above.
“I would venture to say that most people who carry will not be in a hostage situation you mention above.”
Well sure, but most people do not carry.
They were called to the scene. Unless there is some link to the caller I don't see how you can prove premeditation.
It's also hard to believe that three officers would plan together to kill a guy unless they had advance warning of the call, or they just planned to kill the next guy they confronted.
I doubt you can prove premeditation. You will likely also have trouble convicting all three of murder. Some or all of them can claim that they couldn't see clearly and assumed that since the other officers were telling him to drop the gun they made the reasonable assumption that the guy was holding a gun, and when he made a furtive movement, they fired.
If you can't prove murder beyond a reasonable doubt, then you're left trying them on manslaughter.
“Great father, great son, great family...Real Americans. My prayers go up.”
Hopefully there will be a very thorough investigation. I have a feeling the father will see to that!
Neither did “but mommy, he called me a name.” Unfortunately all the hot tempered and taser happy cops on the streets never learned that lesson.
A typical big city SWAT team deals with hostage situations infrequently compared to their main line of work - conducting no-knock raids, usually on non-violent minor drug offenders.
Absolute nonsense. Thousands of civilian, military, and law enforcement academies have run these type of drills and show the danger of someone with an edged weapon despite some distance between the suspect and offender. The behavior that you are demonstrating now, is typical of "experts" who often pop up on internet message boards. The anonymity and safety of the internet lets lots of people without a clue pretend to be an "expert" in everything from law to police and military tactics, despite the fact that they have no training, education, or experience in any of the above. It's an amazing thing to watch.
“Have either of you ever had a sit down talk with your city manager or mayor? You’d get your questions answered quite rapidly if you chose to do so.”
I was being sarcastic. I already how they afford to have so many on patrol. It is a self sustaining enterprize. Sorta like bandits, years ago, who laid in wait along side the trail to rob passersby. It’s a similar type of highway robbery operation, merely legal for a select group.
So the moral of this story is that stores and their employees shouldn't call 911 unless they want to leave themselves open for liability?
The police came into Costco expecting a crazed gunman. There was no crazed gunman but the police acted as though they had one on their hands. It seems Scott was given contradictory commands. When he obeyed the order to give up his weapon he was shot. My bet it was one of the two rookies who shot him.
An inept performance on their part. And a presumably innocent man is dead. Blame the police for their on incompetence.
http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2010/jul/12/metro-ids-officers-fatal-shooting-summerlin-costco/
Authorities said a Costco employee called 911 to report a man acting erratically in the store, damaging merchandise and carrying a pistol in his waistband. An officer approached the man, identified as Scott, then noticed the pistol and gave him verbal commands to lay on the ground, police said.
After Scott pointed the pistol at an officer, the officers fired at him, striking him multiple times, police said. He died at University Medical Center a short time later.
---------------
Doesn't seem to jive with any other reports I've seen...
“That is a ridiculous statement.”
It is ridiculous, and yet the police around the country seem intent on proving me correct each and every day.
I've found that generally cops are not opposed to law abiding citizens carrying guns. The range I used to be a member of and that taught concealed carry classes was owned and run by police officers.
It is generally the elected police chiefs that are opposed to law abiding citizens being armed.
The police are the ones that get to show up too late to stop the crimes time and time again. They know the limits on what they can do to protect people. They know they generally get to take statements and write reports, and hope the detectives track down the criminals.
>>“or write tickets to a motorist who was 8mph over because all of the traffic was”
>
>“But mommy, all the other kids were doing it too” never passed the smell test when I was growing up.
Ah, but you’re neglecting to observe that by going the speed limit the officer can also pull someone over for “impeding the flow of traffic.”
Exactly.
You are wrong. Don't believe me? Try this: http://getyourwebsitehere.com/jswb/rttest01.html
Keep in mind, this would be your reaction time, sitting safely behind a computer, WATCHING and waiting for the green light to appear. What's your best score?
If the man’s gun never came out of the holster they had absolutely no reason to kill him.
Absolutely wrong again, both from a physical threat perspective and from a legal standpoint. When you get a J.D. come back and talk to me about the law regarding the use of force.
“The only conspiracy may have happened after the fact.”
Which, if people have paid attention to the history of incidents in Las Vegas Metro PD, isn’t a stretch of the imagination.... because such tampering and cover-ups have happened in the past. They’ve made large payments in and out of court as a result.
And yet, the pattern of behavior continues... and so do the cash settlements. The taxpayers of Vegas, who are already in a financial hole, are justifiably pissed off about the pattern of payments for poor character and job performance by the PD.
Unlike some others on this thread who have general problems with LEO’s, I have a specific and historic issues with this department, who going back to the days when the NV CCW statute was first under debate in the Nevada Legislature, thought that they could a) write the laws (they can’t, legislators do that), b) when they didn’t get the language they wanted, they thought they could re-write the laws with their county/city policies, c) when it was explained to them by the legislature again that what the LVPD wanted was not supported by the law, they continued to flaunt the law.
To this day, Vegas cops hate CCW carriers.
People who have never visited Las Vegas should know that while every other Nevada county’s LEO’s are supportive of CCW’s, Las Vegas is NOT, and unless you’ve got a lawyer on speed dial, if there is an incident, you’re likely to have problems. It is an institutional issue with them, going back to the days when the LEO’s were mobbed up (along with the rest of Las Vegas), and the mob assumed anyone packing a gun was a troublemaker, to be dealt with their way. Las Vegas government and LEO’s in general have an attitude problem. A big one. And that attitude problem goes like this:
“The rules don’t apply to us.”
That applies from Harry Reid on down to the beat cops in Vegas.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.