Posted on 11/17/2018 4:28:58 PM PST by NRx
You can take issue with me all you wish. But that is not what he has told me on a couple occasions since his retirement and he considered drawing his weapon an escalation of the situation rather than a helpful action.
I also recall him saying that if he drew his gun he might have to shoot somebody.
Big city police work is likely different than his experience as a state patrolman as well, but doing a felony stop out on a lonely road at night had it's own level of excitement.
I quite agree that if the shooting took place as initially reported that it is a tragedy on many levels.
We send teenagers all over the world into places where, frankly, everyone has a gun, and they do a fantastic job of not shooting everyone they see. Yet, here back in the US, the mere site of a gun has (some) police officers firing away at will. Strange times.
All true... And I agree, Unfortunately the justice system has become dysfunctional. My Dad and Uncle worked in it when it was still functional and anymore all they can do is shake their heads with no comment at what is happening now.
And you might argue against this... But the only cure I can see that might bring it back in order would be to eliminate both Qualified and Justified immunity.
I fear that until personal financial liability and accountability for actions is put in place it is never going to change. It’s just going to continue to get worse.
Since my only experience has been in a city environment, I cannot speak about the policies or procedures of your brother’s agency. And yes, having a weapon drawn during a traffic stop can be detrimental. But I would bet his holster was unsnapped and he had one hand on his weapon until he determined the intent of the person he had stopped.
As evidenced by the recent traffic stop of the illegal alien who came out firing at the officer, you really don’t know what you have until sometimes it’s too late.
Looking back, there were a few situations where I probably could have fired my weapon and been perfectly justified. At the end of the day, the college kid who was outside in our downtown business district running around with his paintball gun at 3am is probably glad I didn’t.
Every department is different, just like every situation. Responding to a “man with a gun call, shots fired” usually elicits a different response than a domestic violence. But the chances of getting injured on the domestic violence call are far greater than the gun call.
I commend your brother’s service and am very happy he’s reached retirement safely. I hope he is happy, healthy, and as glad as I am that he no longer has to deal with the demands of law enforcement
OK, I don’t know if that would be a help either.
I can only give you my perspective from my own experiences.
Our department used to have a policy that no patrol officer could take a promotional exam until they had at least five years on the job. Because of political pressure, that was then changed to three years. Then, because the desired result wasn’t achieved, the rules were changed once again to exam at two years, promote after three.
What we saw was those guys who really didn’t want to be cops would try and get slow one-man car districts where they spent the bulk of their time parked in a shopping mall studying while the rest of us were busting ass answering calls in hot districts.
Those were what we called the “inside” guys. The guys who didn’t want to be cops, but wanted to be promoted to a better gig. And believe me, the peter principal is alive and well in the police service.
Those guys are now senior command and they are making policy. They are the ones in charge of recruitment, training, operations, investigations, and of course, are your chiefs and deputies.
It’s kind of like having someone jump from a rowboat to a yacht. Experience, in this business, does matter.
I once had a chief that was more concerned about us wearing our hats than doing the work. I got written up because I responded to a robbery in progress and exited my vehicle without my hat. I did catch the perp, but priorities.
There is no easy fix for this.
As long as there is no respect by the public for the job, the downward slide will continue. As long as there are officers who create reasons for the public not to trust LEO’s the circle continues.
I don’t believe immunity from civil liability ever enters the mind of those involved. What we need are politicians who do not use the safety services as positions to reward their cronies and more accountability by and for police executives over the people they manage.
I understand what you share here. But there is something important in your words.
“I don’t believe immunity from civil liability ever enters the mind of those involved.”
I agree, But I think this is because it is a reality and they have no reason to ever think about it or worry about it. Not having immunity would be something for them to indeed think about every time they make an interaction.
It might just be that little effortless consideration to “make sure they are in the right” factor that could eliminate a LOT of the problems we are having. Far too many “just in case” interactions now happening.
And unfortunately the above event is an example of one of those events. Just that second of delay the liability factor might have created might just have been enough to hear that he was security.
They were too quick on the trigger to do it “just in case” without worrying about the consequences if they might be wrong. They know not much will happen even if they are wrong. They know they are already protected with common opinion, legal representation, and financial liability immunity.
But these unnecessary “just in case” events are happening far too often now. A slight bit of hesitance and confidence in situation assessment is now truly in order. I too have been in the tunnel vision mode five times now as a civilian protecting my business and my family. Liability is what dictated the exercise of very sure judgement in all of these and no one got hurt.
“What we need are politicians who do not use the safety services as positions to reward their cronies and more accountability by and for police executives over the people they manage.”
Absolutely, this too.
“Thoughts and prayers” come in a far distant second place to a .45 in your hand at the moment of need.
YOU Are the First Responder in any event involving lethal consequences to your life and safety.
Thankfully, a good guy with a gun was present to stop the psycho.
Ideally, MANY good guys with guns would be present, but that’s not the time nor place we find ourselves in.
All each of us can do is be responsible for our own personal sphere of influence and be armed, always.
Did the black guy lower his gun or give any indication he was not the shooter?
Another misunderstood dark side of gun control.
I understand your position but if I read your comments correctly, it sounds like you believe police officers are not liable for their actions.
While it may appear to some in some very high-profile cases that that is the case, nothing could be further from the truth.
There have been several cases where police officers were involved in “bad” shootings or misconduct and they were fired, prosecuted, and sued. There is a “good faith” exemption for some actions but just because someone wears a badge doesn’t mean they aren’t “liable”.
I know I’m going to take some heat on that statement so to be proactive, I’m just going to say unless we know all the facts, anecdotal evidence is sometimes not reliable.
As for my statement about liability, when a cop is trying to process all the information presented to him/her in a very short period of time, make the correct decision and then act, sometimes mistakes are made. But I don’t believe liability enters the equation because the law overrides everything.
In the case of an officer-involved shooting, it is the case of “does this event require the use of deadly force?” If it does, then there “should” be no problem. If it doesn’t, then there is no need to shoot. This is not condoning the shooting of the security guard. I don’t know all the facts. At face value, it doesn’t look good for the officer involved. But I will wait for all the facts to be presented before I render my opinion.
Again, I am not excusing anything here, but there are times when the media gets it wrong and the community is led to believe one set of facts when the reality is something totally different. Remember the adage: “If it bleeds, it leads”
It has been my experience that most LEO’s are trying to do the best job they possibly can. Are there some bad apples? Sure, we discussed it before. Unfortunately, those “bad apples” garner more press and make the job for the good guys that much more difficult.
OMG!
“He stopped a bad guy with a gun, fulfilling the promise of the Second Amendment, and then died at the hands of government employees who would exercise a near-monopoly on firearms ownership if the most extreme anti-gun activists had their way.”
The author uses this argument to suggest this incidents means “gun-rights groups” (code word for Americans who appreciate the 2A) have a moral dilemma. Except we don’t. The dilemma lays with LEOs (a handful) with no aptitude for that line of work, acting as surrogates of eager government gun-grabbers. If anything, this incident shows precisely WHY we need a right to take up arms: It is in case we need to “water the tree of liberty.”
You are not going to get any heat from me, I very much appreciate this very important civil dialog and your honest opinion. Let me catch up a bit and I will be back with a proper reply.
“Best to put your gun away when the cops arrive.”
I disagree.
If the cops are going to pose a mortal threat to law abiding folks then we really need to rethink why we have cops.
Of course it would be ideal if they knew who the good guys and bad guys are but they probably won't.
Then maybe it would be safer for the police to disband and go find a safer line of work.
After all, most of what they do anymore is they protect criminals from the citizens who’d like to kill off the criminals.
Oh, and they collect revenue for the criminals who rule us.
Obviously if there is still an active threat I'll take that into consideration.
You are welcome to do what you feel is best.
Does not matter what Race, Sex, or Orientation the good guys is.
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.