It's just a misunderstanding, you see.....

308pirate

Gunny Sergeant
Full Member
Minuteman
  • Apr 25, 2017
    17,019
    23,979
    A small Ohio news organization said one of its photographers was shot by a sheriff's deputy Monday night while he set up to take pictures of a random traffic stop.

    Andy Grimm "had his camera in his hand" when he was shot in his side by a Clark County sheriff's deputy in New Carlisle, which north of Dayton, The New Carlisle News said in a Facebook post.

    “I just talked to Andy and he said that he is very sore, but in good spirits,” Dale Grimm, the photographer's father and published of the New Carlisle News, told Fox News. “He said the hospital expects to be releasing him Tuesday. He also stressed that he does not want the deputy to lose his job over this.”

    “This is a small town. Everybody knows everybody. It was just a terrible misunderstanding,” his father said.

    http://www.foxnews.com/us/2017/09/0...setting-up-to-take-pictures-traffic-stop.html

    There you have it folks. Don't have anything black in your hands when anywhere near a cop. You might just have signed your own death warrant......

    Un-fucking-believable
     

    Maggot

    Better to die on your feet than live on your knees
    Supporter
    Full Member
    Minuteman
  • Jul 27, 2007
    15,796
    13,221
    Virginia
    In this case, unless there is overwhelming evidence to support his shots, he needs to lose his job. That was not a 'negligent' discharge, that was a careless, even intentional one.
     
    Last edited:

    308pirate

    Gunny Sergeant
    Full Member
    Minuteman
  • Apr 25, 2017
    17,019
    23,979
    Yeah, afterall a camera looks just like a gun right?

    I guess it does when you're a shitbag scared of his own shadow and told that your main goal is to "come home safe" at the end of the shift.
     

    fdkay

    Gunny Sergeant
    Full Member
    Minuteman
  • Nov 27, 2009
    5,798
    2,534
    59
    Ingleside, Tx
    Nothing like jumping to conclusions. Open season has been declared on Law Enforcement.
    I am not excusing the Deputies actions, but how about we investigate the event first?

    It was dark. (10pm)
    It wasn't just "a camera"
    It was a camera and tripod. An unknown, long metallic object in the dark.

    If you're on the up an up, how about, notify the deputy that you are there and that you are going to photograph the encounter.

    Why would he have this sudden need to photograph a routine traffic stop at 10 pm?
    This photographer likely had an agenda and was shot because he was using "ambush" tactics.

    Again, not defending what happened, you have one side of the story and it is from the typically anti-cop press.
     

    Slash0311

    FUBAR
    Full Member
    Minuteman
  • Feb 11, 2017
    2,050
    3,774
    Southwest Indiana
    I find it very interesting that so many people jump to an automatic conclusion based off of a news article. We all know the press ALWAYS gets the facts straught and correct EVERY time.

    I'm not saying the actions were right or wrong or that this guy does or doesn't deserve to loose his job. It's just amazing to me how many people jump at the narrative being tossed by the media.

    Congratulations, you drank the cool-aid.
     

    Maggot

    Better to die on your feet than live on your knees
    Supporter
    Full Member
    Minuteman
  • Jul 27, 2007
    15,796
    13,221
    Virginia
    I find it very interesting that so many people jump to an automatic conclusion based off of a news article. We all know the press ALWAYS gets the facts straught and correct EVERY time.

    I'm not saying the actions were right or wrong or that this guy does or doesn't deserve to loose his job. It's just amazing to me how many people jump at the narrative being tossed by the media.

    Congratulations, you drank the cool-aid.

    Not at all slash. Shooting a person is a serious thing to do. I cant imagine shooting someone in that instance...granted all the info isnt there.
     

    ArmyJerry

    fukallyall
    Banned !
    Nov 22, 2012
    13,378
    21,730
    Kicking Ass Somewhere
    I find it very interesting that so many people jump to an automatic conclusion based off of a news article.

    We all know the press ALWAYS gets the facts straught and correct EVERY time.

    Well, based on video experience over the past few years Id say the media is as trust worthy as the police, with fewer defenders though

    I'm not saying the actions were right or wrong or that this guy does or doesn't deserve to loose his job. It's just amazing to me how many people jump at the narrative being tossed by the media.

    Shooting an unarmed civilian is always wrong, period. The fact you cant say that is 90% of the dam problem.

    Congratulations, you drank the cool-aid.
    Lots of cool ade drinking going on especially the blue kind.

     

    Slash0311

    FUBAR
    Full Member
    Minuteman
  • Feb 11, 2017
    2,050
    3,774
    Southwest Indiana
    Not at all slash. Shooting a person is a serious thing to do. I cant imagine shooting someone in that instance...granted all the info isnt there.

    But see, here is the problem. "I can't imagine...". Honestly, I can't either. But something, made this officer pull the trigger. We can play a "what if" game all day long but there isn't a news article out there that could paint the entire set of circumstances from that night.

    All I'm saying, is "innocent until proven guilty" applies to everyone. If a judge or jury finds this guy was negligent, then that's what the system finds. But conclusions shouldn't be drawn from a single news article.
     

    shootist2004

    Sergeant
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Mar 1, 2005
    906
    200
    67
    las vegas
    I think its obvious from what we've seen this year about 1% of cops shouldn't be cops.............
    some guys got into the academy cause their brother in law is a cop.....
    some guys are good at written tests and that's it...........
    but it takes a certain mindset and situational awareness to make those split second decisions..........
    so now Kapernick and the entire black community hate police cause one lazy cop shot
    someone in the back cause he was too lazy to chase him........
    the good cops who make up the 99% never get any credit..........
     

    2ndamendfan

    Sergeant
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Nov 10, 2010
    5,853
    8,335
    UT
    While i do understand the mistrust of the media does anyone some how think thay have twisted the facts from a guy mounting an M249 on a tripod to a camera man mounting a camera on a tripod.

    Look i support LEO as much as possible. I have a dozen or so friends in LEO. Some are the cream of the crop, top notch people. While a couple border on douche bag with an ego. As with any group of people they run the gamit of the human species on every level.

    So I try and take each incident on it's own merits and try not to dog pile on the group as a whole. Just like we don't like being dog piled on when a gun is used by a criminal.

    With that there are two cases that from my perspective raise concern that the group as a whole is being diluted by less than ideal candidates. This incident and the one a couple months ago with the Australian lady (in America).

    Both incidents at this point show a total lapse in basic saftey. You DON'T shoot at noises and you DON'T shoot at shadows. How many times have we heard of a scared shitless home owner shooting a relative (usually son or daughter) in the middle of the night. You can't do that you just can't.

    Feeling scared is NOT the same as feeling threatened nor is it the same as BEING threatened. No one wants to die, the home owner or the police officer. But the idea is not to "get the jump" on the guy. Sadly in most cases the bad guy has to get the jump on you a little. That is just the nature of it.

    If a person shoots at a "threat" being unsure if the threat is true (relying on emotional feeling) and it turns out there is NO threat well then that is man slaughter at a minimum. Regardless of the persons job description.

    The phrase "i felt threatened" is bullshit. We clam to be a society based on data and fact. Some of you are saying "wait for the investigation, wait for the facts" . Well you can't actually feel threatened. Threatened is not a scientifically recognized emotion. You either ARE threatened or you ARE NOT. If you think you are and react while it turns out you are NOT well then that is on you and is a crime.
     
    Last edited:

    Slash0311

    FUBAR
    Full Member
    Minuteman
  • Feb 11, 2017
    2,050
    3,774
    Southwest Indiana
    2nd, I agree with your ideas but since you're suggesting a "what if" (the guy shot because he was shooting at shadows or being scared) I'll throw out a "what if" going the other direction.

    "What if" the guy had been on a run earlier in the night where a bad guy threatened to blow his head off? Let's suppose, for the argument, that the bad guy drove a jeep similar to what the "reporter" was driving. Now, the officer is on a dark street on a traffic stop and sees a jeep, with a guy getting a long dark metal object out.

    Again, we have no idea what the context of these events were. All I'm saying is that I totally agree there are good cops and bad cops. I just don't have enough information from this one article to know which category this guy fits in.

    What if cats had machine guns? Would dogs fuck with the?

    What if a bird was afraid of heights?

    What if a squirrel was allergic to nuts?

    There is just too much we don't know here so let's not jump on the media narrative.
     
    Last edited:

    308pirate

    Gunny Sergeant
    Full Member
    Minuteman
  • Apr 25, 2017
    17,019
    23,979
    Nothing like jumping to conclusions. Open season has been declared on Law Enforcement.
    I am not excusing the Deputies actions, but how about we investigate the event first?

    It was dark. (10pm)
    It wasn't just "a camera"
    It was a camera and tripod. An unknown, long metallic object in the dark.

    If you're on the up an up, how about, notify the deputy that you are there and that you are going to photograph the encounter.

    Why would he have this sudden need to photograph a routine traffic stop at 10 pm?
    This photographer likely had an agenda and was shot because he was using "ambush" tactics.

    Again, not defending what happened, you have one side of the story and it is from the typically anti-cop press.

    GMAFB

    This happened in my area. The photographer works for a small town newspaper. He was doing what news photographer do: photographing things of interest in the local community. Small town newspapers have police blotters and also articles that would be considered trivial in a big city (like a deputy doing a traffic stop at 10 PM).

    What the fuck do you think would happen to me if I shot someone just because he had an "unknown, long metallic object in the dark"?

    Why is a cop owed notification that he's going to be photographed? Do they notify you that you're being recorded or filmed? How many times have we seen badge-heavy fucks knocking cameras and phones off people's hands?

    ArmyJerry is right. You guys are RAPIDLY losing the support of the people that up to now have been some of your biggest supporters.

    The shit that you posted and I highlighted in red, do you understand how fucking crazy that sounds to normal people who aren't cops? DO YOU?

    Police's actions are more and more often bordering on the inexcusable and their explanations are more and more bordering on the ridiculous.
     
    Last edited:

    MtnCreek

    Unreconstructed
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Jan 6, 2012
    10,279
    19,625
    I'm not sure about your (2AFan) thoughts on feeling threatened vs being threatened. I think it boils down to whether or not a reasonable person under the same circumstances would feel / react the same.

    The BLM types bitch about cops shooting someone that actually needs shooting (M Brown for instance). That generates hate towards cops, fuels attacks on cops and the result will be more cops shooting people they shouldn't out of fear.
     

    Slash0311

    FUBAR
    Full Member
    Minuteman
  • Feb 11, 2017
    2,050
    3,774
    Southwest Indiana
    Here again, what 308 highlighted in red is an assumption on what the cameraman was doing. Nothing more nothing less.

    Why do "we" have to jump to a conclusion and condemn this guy, either guy, right here, right now?

    We don't! Let the investigation into the incident proceed and let the system determine the results.
     

    2ndamendfan

    Sergeant
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Nov 10, 2010
    5,853
    8,335
    UT
    2nd, I agree with your ideas but since you're suggesting a "what if" (the guy shot because he was shooting at shadows or being scared) I'll throw out a "what if" going the other direction.

    "What if" the guy had been on a run earlier in the night where a bad guy threatened to blow his head off? Let's suppose, for the argument, that the bad guy drove a jeep similar to what the "reporter" was driving. Now, the officer is on a dark street on a traffic stop and sees a jeep, with a guy getting a long dark metal object out.

    Again, we have no idea what the context of these events were. All I'm saying is that I totally agree there are good cops and bad cops. I just don't have enough information from this one article to know which category this guy fits in.

    What if cats had machine guns? Would dogs fuck with the?

    What if a bird was afraid of heights?

    What if a squirrel was allergic to nuts?

    There is just too much we don't know here so let's not jump on the media narrative.

    Do you really even understand how stupid that sounds. You are actually saying that because the person might be in an area that something might have happened, driving a vehicle that is similar to a suspect vehicle and has something in his hands he deserves to get shot.

    There are 2 sides to a shooting, justified to shoot, justified to get shot. Personally both are required for the shooting to be justified for it to be a clean shoot. Because if the victim does NOT deserve to be shot when all the facts come out then in fact the shooter was never actually justified in shooting in the first place.




     

    2ndamendfan

    Sergeant
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Nov 10, 2010
    5,853
    8,335
    UT
    I'm not sure about your (2AFan) thoughts on feeling threatened vs being threatened. I think it boils down to whether or not a reasonable person under the same circumstances would feel / react the same.

    The BLM types bitch about cops shooting someone that actually needs shooting (M Brown for instance). That generates hate towards cops, fuels attacks on cops and the result will be more cops shooting people they shouldn't out of fear.

    You can feel. http://psychologia.co/list-of-human-emotions/

    Threatened is a state of being, not an emotion.

    I do concede the thought of how would a reasonable person would react. Just need a definition of "reasonable person".

     

    Veer_G

    Beware of the Dildópony!
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Jun 15, 2008
    13,000
    15,242
    SEPA
    [IMG2=JSON]{"data-align":"none","data-size":"full","src":"https:\/\/i.imgur.com\/KxZdGKT.jpg"}[/IMG2]
     

    2ndamendfan

    Sergeant
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Nov 10, 2010
    5,853
    8,335
    UT

    And in that one

    "Sgt. Ramos acknowledged Sanchez committed no crime and is not facing any charges."

    So had they killed the cellphone wielding home owner it would have been just another day on the job? These are not rubber bullets being sent down randomly. It is turning into a NASCAR debris caution situation. Shoot first, no crime committed sorry about that. Yellow flag caution is out, oh just a water bottle, sorry about that.

     

    Slash0311

    FUBAR
    Full Member
    Minuteman
  • Feb 11, 2017
    2,050
    3,774
    Southwest Indiana
    Do you really even understand how stupid that sounds. You are actually saying that because the person might be in an area that something might have happened, driving a vehicle that is similar to a suspect vehicle and has something in his hands he deserves to get shot.

    There are 2 sides to a shooting, justified to shoot, justified to get shot. Personally both are required for the shooting to be justified for it to be a clean shoot. Because if the victim does NOT deserve to be shot when all the facts come out then in fact the shooter was never actually justified in shooting in the first place.

    Never once did I say any one deserved to get shot. I was simply try to explain hypothetical circumstances that could alter the premise of the story from a different perspective other than the one the media and most here seem to jump to.

    But this is exactly what is wrong with our society today. No one wants to open their minds to other possibilities. They want everything RIGHT now spoon-fed to them. Let the media tell the "truth". Do look at the circumstances. The media says it so, then that's the truth. Nope fry the guy. Nothing to see here.
     

    supercorndogs

    Ham Fisted Gorilla
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Feb 17, 2014
    8,435
    8,925
    Colorado
    Never once did I say any one deserved to get shot. I was simply try to explain hypothetical circumstances that could alter the premise of the story from a different perspective other than the one the media and most here seem to jump to.

    But this is exactly what is wrong with our society today. No one wants to open their minds to other possibilities. They want everything RIGHT now spoon-fed to them. Let the media tell the "truth". Do look at the circumstances. The media says it so, then that's the truth. Nope fry the guy. Nothing to see here.

    And the irony, that you can't see you are doing the same thing, to the opposite extreme is priceless.

    Just because its printed doesn't make it a lie. Might want to take your foil hat off now and then. The facts of the incident are laid out well. The specifics and the abstract are not there. One thing for sure, purposefully shooting an un-armed/non-threatning bystander is a major inexcusable fuck up.



     

    Maggot

    Better to die on your feet than live on your knees
    Supporter
    Full Member
    Minuteman
  • Jul 27, 2007
    15,796
    13,221
    Virginia
    Do you really even understand how stupid that sounds. You are actually saying that because the person might be in an area that something might have happened, driving a vehicle that is similar to a suspect vehicle and has something in his hands he deserves to get shot.

    There are 2 sides to a shooting, justified to shoot, justified to get shot. Personally both are required for the shooting to be justified for it to be a clean shoot. Because if the victim does NOT deserve to be shot when all the facts come out then in fact the shooter was never actually justified in shooting in the first place.

    At this point Ill have to go with Slash, for this reason..."when all the facts come out".

    Even if he had been in the situations suggested, that does not (necessarily justify shooting. But it does offer a possible 'why'.

    When all the facts come out we will know. Until then its armchair quarterbacking.
     

    QuickNDirty

    NaN
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Apr 26, 2013
    4,652
    5,711
    location location location

    Slash0311

    FUBAR
    Full Member
    Minuteman
  • Feb 11, 2017
    2,050
    3,774
    Southwest Indiana
    And the irony, that you can't see you are doing the same thing, to the opposite extreme is priceless.

    Just because its printed doesn't make it a lie. Might want to take your foil hat off now and then. The facts of the incident are laid out well. The specifics and the abstract are not there. One thing for sure, purposefully shooting an un-armed/non-threatning bystander is a major inexcusable fuck up.

    I disagree that I'm doing the same thing. I am totally open to the idea that this guy messed up and doesn't deserve to wear a badge. If anyone reads my posts, I am just simply saying, let the investigation decide the facts rather than what the media, or some social media video shows.

    Case in point, the video of the guy "helping" in Texas. If someone is "helping" but doing something to make things worse, shouldn't officers stop that action? Then when an officer get attitude back, things escalate.
     

    JSTARSZ

    Lefty's Rule
    Full Member
    Minuteman
  • Feb 6, 2008
    1,998
    181
    Wolftown
    I have said this several times but I think we are clearly starting to see a low-level of insurgency activity in the U.S. The incipient stages of a civil war.

    Insurgencies differ in their use of tactics and methods. In a 2004 article, Robert R. Tomes spoke of four elements that "typically encompass an insurgency":[SUP][24][/SUP]
    1. cell-networks that maintain secrecy - Starting to occur - think BLM and ANTIFA (There will be other groups on the other side that will start as more pressure enters the system)
    2. terrorism used to foster insecurity among the population and drive them to the insurgents for protection - some have started (more Islamic Terrorism in our future)
    3. multifaceted attempts to cultivate support in the general population, often by undermining the new regime - these Police incidents cements this in the psyche of the American Public.
    4. attacks against the government - not quite there yet.
    Just having these debates about Policeconduct is eroding the fabric of American Society. Police are getting jumpy because of the pressure put on them which causes a reaction to the events and then issues like this occur. If we see more nurses put in handcuffs it just heightens the distrust for Law Enforcement. For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. True then and still is.
     
    Last edited:

    j-huskey

    Jafo / Instigator !
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Jul 27, 2001
    3,508
    7,920
    AL
    None
    I tried really hard to refrain from responding, really didnt want to set Jerry off.... but some facts everybody needs to consider.
    The 40-60 year old officer corps of police 95 or better % , think these shootings and events are insane. And they DO want the problems gone by whatever means necessary, up to criminal charges. Please don't lose sight of that.
    At least 50% of the 30-40 feel that way.

    However, in the last 6 years, my department of 85 has hired and lost over 80 officers who either couldn't cut it and left on their own, were asked to leave, or were fired. The majority of these 80 were 21-30 year olds.

    There is a generational problem from hell sitting out there. A number of young officers tell the 40-60 age group, "you old dinosaurs need to leave or die off" and they seem to mean it. They leave pretty quick when the dinosaurs dont take their shit and hold them accountable. The young officers do not respect anyone and to them, "it's all about me me me me me, and fuck you."

    If you think it's bad now, wait until the dinosaurs ARE gone. Just sayin...

    Now, these younger officers grew up not allowed to fight in school, gotta have teacher clean up everything, can't say anything to hurt anybody's feelings, and they don't have the interpersonal skills to be effective police.
    Uncle Sam's politically correct atmosphere of today requires departments to hire them, some places even have to hire convicted felons, and unc requires the department to "give them more chances" to succeed, and has made it harder to fire them.
    This is a reality police administrations have to deal with and it's pretty f'ing ugly.
    No, I don't have an answer, it's like dealing with some of my grandchildrens friends, they are oxygen thieves at best.

    The good part IS there are still dinosaurs mentoring younger officers and those people are holding the line people like Jerry want held. They won't be there forever though. Support these guys and girls and encourage them to stay in police work and to hold that line. Don't be the person who continues to berate them until they retire on duty and no longer give a f...
    We, the people CAN work with these officers and let them know we support them, and they will respond as expected. Please support them.

    NOW, for the loser officers that make bad news, do whatever it takes to pressure your politicians to get rid of them, do way more than bitch on an internet board..... do YOUR part.

    That's a reality some people have lost sight of.

    Anybody here understand what's coming if the local police fail , the criminals run wild and there is no law OR vigilante justice starts and gets out of hand ?
     

    Maggot

    Better to die on your feet than live on your knees
    Supporter
    Full Member
    Minuteman
  • Jul 27, 2007
    15,796
    13,221
    Virginia
    Anybody here understand what's coming if the local police fail , the criminals run wild and there is no law OR vigilante justice starts and gets out of hand ?
    Well said.

    I think some of us do and its not a reality I really want to see. Unfortunately, I think some are planning it. Charlottesville and Boston were just dress rehearsals, and interestingly enough, the #1 and #2 most historic places in America..and the ones most closely associated with American Democracy. My guess #3 will be Philadelphia, which is #3 in historic American democracy. If they can get Philly to explode, and it has before, the spark could start it expanding to other cities.

     

    fdkay

    Gunny Sergeant
    Full Member
    Minuteman
  • Nov 27, 2009
    5,798
    2,534
    59
    Ingleside, Tx
    I find it very interesting that so many people jump to an automatic conclusion based off of a news article.

    We all know the press ALWAYS gets the facts straught and correct EVERY time.

    Well, based on video experience over the past few years Id say the media is as trust worthy as the police, with fewer defenders though

    I'm not saying the actions were right or wrong or that this guy does or doesn't deserve to loose his job. It's just amazing to me how many people jump at the narrative being tossed by the media.

    Shooting an unarmed civilian is always wrong, period. The fact you cant say that is 90% of the dam problem.

    Congratulations, you drank the cool-aid.
    Lots of cool ade drinking going on especially the blue kind.

    So, shooting Michael Brown, a 6'4" 350+ pound unarmed felon, that was attacking a Police Officer and trying to take his weapon was wrong?
    There are plenty of instances where shooting an unarmed civilian is justified.
    You don't think this officer should have been able to defend herself by use of deadly force?
    https://youtu.be/PnUYKFU0OqM

    Again, I am not defending the actions of the deputy in regards to the OP.
    I am postulating that there is more here than meets the eye.
    Did the guy deserve to get shot?, an emphatic NO!
    Luckily the injuries are not serious, regrettably, the taxpayers will be funding the reporters lifestyle of choice until he dies.
     

    Slash0311

    FUBAR
    Full Member
    Minuteman
  • Feb 11, 2017
    2,050
    3,774
    Southwest Indiana
    Something above reminded me of a call I took. I think it sums up the mentality a lot of people are getting. It's the "let the police handle it" mentality. The "I can't or don't want to handle it" attitude. This is an example.

    I get a radio dispatched run of a car blocking the call's mailbox. Seems reasonable. I arrive and find the offending car has heavy front end damage. Air bags popped and totally inoperable. I go to the car owner's house and speakers to the Mrs. She had been in a head-on accident it the car was dropped there by the tow company. Her husband was due back in town that afternoon to decide what to do with the car.

    Why couldn't the caller gone over and asked about the accident and plans for the car? Beats me. Maybe Mr. Car owner is a dumbass and can't get along with the caller. Maybe the caller is just "that asshole neighbor" that like to complain. Either way, i, as a police officer, was requested to come and handle (aka solve) their problem.

    People just can't handle problems any more and have to rely on police to solve it for them... But then bitch about the solution.

    And seeing comments from a quote above, I'm am glad the "ignore" feature works! There absolutely are times that deadly force is justified on someone who is "unarmed"
     
    Last edited:

    2ndamendfan

    Sergeant
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Nov 10, 2010
    5,853
    8,335
    UT
    Something above reminded me of a call I took. I think it sums up the mentality a lot of people are getting. It's the "let the police handle it" mentality. The "I can't or don't want to handle it" attitude. This is an example.

    I get a radio dispatched run of a car blocking the call's mailbox. Seems reasonable. I arrive and find the offending car has heavy front end damage. Air bags popped and totally inoperable. I go to the car owner's house and speakers to the Mrs. She had been in a head-on accident it the car was dropped there by the tow company. Her husband was due back in town that afternoon to decide what to do with the car.

    Why couldn't the caller gone over and asked about the accident and plans for the car? Beats me. Maybe Mr. Car owner is a dumbass and can't get along with the caller. Maybe the caller is just "that asshole neighbor" that like to complain. Either way, i, as a police officer, was requested to come and handle (aka solve) their problem.

    People just can't handle problems any more and have to rely on police to solve it for them... But then bitch about the solution.

    And seeing comments from a quote above, I'm am glad the "ignore" feature works! There absolutely are times that deadly force is justified on someone who is "unarmed"

    I agree with all that. including the last sentence.

    People just don't want to talk to each other anymore. scared they will start a "confrontation".
     

    Slash0311

    FUBAR
    Full Member
    Minuteman
  • Feb 11, 2017
    2,050
    3,774
    Southwest Indiana
    ^^^ +1
    deadly force is any action that can reasonably cause serious bodily injury or death.

    An example I use:. A female officer, 110# gets called to a gym. Known MMA badass says she's not taking him to jail and grabs her in a choke hold. She absolutely can shoot him. If she goes unconscious, she has no control over her weapon.

    And I only use that "female" as an example since I know several that would fit that description.
     

    j-huskey

    Jafo / Instigator !
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Jul 27, 2001
    3,508
    7,920
    AL
    None
    ^^^ +1
    deadly force is any action that can reasonably cause serious bodily injury or death.

    An example I use:. A female officer, 110# gets called to a gym. Known MMA badass says she's not taking him to jail and grabs her in a choke hold. She absolutely can shoot him. If she goes unconscious, she has no control over her weapon.

    And I only use that "female" as an example since I know several that would fit that description.

    Supreme Court has ruled on that too..... in the police's favor, more than once.
     

    ArmyJerry

    fukallyall
    Banned !
    Nov 22, 2012
    13,378
    21,730
    Kicking Ass Somewhere
    We are talking g about a guy with a camera and a tripod across the street. Why you guys are bringing up Mike Brown at this point shows how far afield you will go to plant doubt and defend the indefensible.

    I am not going down the Mike Brown rabbit hole. Without doubt a lawful shoot. Not what we are discussing here though.
     

    j-huskey

    Jafo / Instigator !
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Jul 27, 2001
    3,508
    7,920
    AL
    None
    We are talking g about a guy with a camera and a tripod across the street. Why you guys are bringing up Mike Brown at this point shows how far afield you will go to plant doubt and defend the indefensible.

    I am not going down the Mike Brown rabbit hole. Without doubt a lawful shoot. Not what we are discussing here though.

    No Jerry,
    This is solely in response to your statement "Shooting an unarmed civilian is always wrong, period."
    And further,
    Nothing more than spirited discourse in the bear pit to stimulate open discussion on a topic that needs a fix with no offense intended to you in this.
     

    ArmyJerry

    fukallyall
    Banned !
    Nov 22, 2012
    13,378
    21,730
    Kicking Ass Somewhere
    I am not really offendable. And no-one should hesitate to speak their mind with me sorry if I come that way. Just at the end of my paitience and feel to call b's cards earlier in the convo on this subject too many civilians getting killed needlessly.
     

    WaltHer

    Sergeant
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Aug 26, 2009
    735
    596
    51
    hillbilluns, montucky
    Supreme Court has ruled on that too..... in the police's favor, more than once.

    Agreed. Meant to quote Slash and you...

    In most jurisdictions (at least in fly-over states without their heads up their collective asses)the presence of a disparity of force between the victim and the attacker would allow for lethal force to be reasonable for civilians and LEO alike- all things being equal.
    The camera tripod may take a little es'splainin'.
     

    7.62willdo

    Private
    Full Member
    Minuteman
  • My Uncle in law is a detective over in Vidor where that incident took place. Said residents were calling in to complain about that guy because he was playing loud music, drinking, and creating large wakes through the neighborhoods he was driving through.

    RE: http://truthfight.com/watch-cop-tell...escuers-leave/

    OH A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER SAID THAT? Why that completely justifies their actions then......... wait a minute....
     

    Slash0311

    FUBAR
    Full Member
    Minuteman
  • Feb 11, 2017
    2,050
    3,774
    Southwest Indiana
    OH A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER SAID THAT? Why that completely justifies their actions then......... wait a minute....

    But this is a good example of what I've been talking about. If you look at things with an open mind, wouldn't you agree that complaints like what's mentioned would change things?

    Again, I'm not saying anyone is right or wrong, but there are ALWAYS two sides to every argument.

    ​​​​​
     
    Last edited:

    ArmyJerry

    fukallyall
    Banned !
    Nov 22, 2012
    13,378
    21,730
    Kicking Ass Somewhere
    At some point and I think that point is visible in the near future, people will beginning assuming a self defense posture when they have to deal with scared, easily terrified police, then what. Courts ruled its okay to defend yourself from police that are unlawfully attacking you the its a two way lead street. So your Supreme Court bullshit does not give you a right to shoot civilians just because you got a fright..Just to remind you the Supremes gave their blessing to slavery at one point and it led to a civil war.
     

    308pirate

    Gunny Sergeant
    Full Member
    Minuteman
  • Apr 25, 2017
    17,019
    23,979
    Anybody here understand what's coming if the local police fail , the criminals run wild and there is no law OR vigilante justice starts and gets out of hand ?
    It will be time to go hunting and settle motherfucking scores. That's what.
     

    WaltHer

    Sergeant
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Aug 26, 2009
    735
    596
    51
    hillbilluns, montucky
    "So your Supreme Court bullshit does not give you a right to shoot civilians just because you got a fright"


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IOP2TuanjMA

    I'm not sure what if any conclusions should be drawn from the Horn video, but it appears as if this incident is portrayed in a positive manner, especially since Horn was aquitted by a grand jury.

    That being said, Horn's lawyer argues that he was so scared for his life that even after the 911 operator told him to stay inside his own home multiple times, he overcame his fear and assassinated two presumably unarmed burglars within seconds of confronting them after articulating his intent to kill them to the dispatcher. All of this over stolen property- not belonging to him.

    Even in some fly-over states without their heads up their collective rears, taking a life in defense of property is not defensible-especially if the attacker went out of their way to engage the subjects-the opposite of retreat, which they have no duty to do.

    Now, I'M FINE WITH ALL OF THIS (caps for the reading And thinking impaired). These two illegals were allegedly involved in an ongoing criminal enterprise, and everybody knows that you don't mess with Texas. However how does this jive with,"
    Shooting an unarmed civilian is always wrong, period. "? Furthermore, what if the same exact scenario went down but it was LEO with the 12 gauge? Would you all have the same positive reaction -assuming that's how you view it- or would there be more complaing about heavy-handed police tactics and civil rights violations? I might be ok with this too, but you can't have it both ways.

    There have been several posts in the last couple of days about holding LEO to the same standards as civilians. Ok. If you view this case in a positive light then shouldn't the opposite be true also?
    Here is another take on the potential limitations of Castle Doctrine laws.
    http://www.nydailynews.com/news/nat...d-killer-sentenced-70-years-article-1.2113108
     

    ArmyJerry

    fukallyall
    Banned !
    Nov 22, 2012
    13,378
    21,730
    Kicking Ass Somewhere
    A armed agent of the state is much more dangerous to our civil society than a neighbor protecting neighbors and local businesses when no law is around. Armed agents of teh state have killed more people than anything else other than medical or natural death.You mentioned a key point above, a jury has to be of min d to bring charges, the more unjust killing by police the more you willl see jurys become hostile, already happening in the inner cities.
     

    j-huskey

    Jafo / Instigator !
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Jul 27, 2001
    3,508
    7,920
    AL
    None
    Armed agents of teh state have killed more people than anything else other than medical or natural death.

    So absolutely NOT true. It's not even in the top 10.
    Depending on the sources quoted, homicides and war are either 15 or 17th.

    And since armed agent of the state deaths are listed in homicides, if you removed them into a separate category, they wouldn't even be in the top 40.

    jfwiw.... let's not have facts color our opinions.

    Now, mind you, none of the above facts should be even considered in the discussion of stupid needless criminal shootings by armed agents of the state. Those shootings remain unacceptable to all, especially to the law abiding professional agents of the state who continue to STAY LAW ABIDING CORRECT PROFESSIONAL agents of the state...
     
    Last edited:

    ArmyJerry

    fukallyall
    Banned !
    Nov 22, 2012
    13,378
    21,730
    Kicking Ass Somewhere
    War is armed agents of the state, more incidious is armed police forces historically speaking, it was not the German army offing all those civilians, nor was it the soviet East German Chinese army offing all their populations, it was their internal police.Armed agents of the state.
     

    j-huskey

    Jafo / Instigator !
    Full Member
    Minuteman
    Jul 27, 2001
    3,508
    7,920
    AL
    None
    War is armed agents of the state, more incidious is armed police forces historically speaking, it was not the German army offing all those civilians, nor was it the soviet East German Chinese army offing all their populations, it was their internal police.Armed agents of the state.

    The police in the U.S. are not Germany of ww2, Russia of communism, China of Mao, Cambodia of pol pot, Bosnia of Serbian acts, Iraq, Afghanistan, or Syria, of today.......

    Those countries actions are not relevant to the theme if this topic.