Posted on 12/13/2017 2:13:42 AM PST by Oshkalaboomboom
Daniel Shaver did not deserve to die. He made an otherwise innocuous mistake, as people often do, especially in high pressure situations and after having consumed alcohol. But he did not deserve to die for it. Shaver could have been any one of our twenty-something children or siblings.
The events of the night in which 25-year old Shaver died nearly two years ago, are not in dispute. Shaver was drinking with two companions in a Mesa, Arizona La Quinta Inn. At one point that evening, likely showing off, Shaver pointed a pellet rifle he used for his job in pest control out of the fifth-floor window, prompting a report to the police from someone who observed this foolhardy act. When police arrived, things escalated . . . quickly.
The ensuing encounter between Shaver and at least two police officers armed with assault rifles was captured on police body cameras, but it essentially shows a sobbing and scared Shaver doing his best to cooperate with police barking confusing orders at him, all while threatening that he may be killed for not obeying perfectly. “If you make a mistake, another mistake, there is a very severe possibility that you’re both going to get shot,” police shouted at Shaver, who apologized through his tears for the slips, and begging the police not to shoot him.
Then it happened; as Shaver was attempting to obey one officer’s orders to crawl toward a fellow officer (who already had cuffed Shaver’s female companion), he reached back in what looks like an instinctive attempt to keep his gym shorts from falling off him. That movement prompted Officer Philip Brailsford, who had his AR-15 trained on Shaver, to instantly fire five shots, killing Shaver.
Last week, Brailsford was acquitted of charges in Shaver’s 2016 death, claiming the motion Shaver made to reach for his waistband looked as if he was reaching for a weapon; an argument with which the jury apparently agreed. As I have written previously, police are – rightfully – given broad latitude in their use of deadly force, which courts are reluctant to second guess. Brailsford’s judgement in taking lethal action that night, as incomprehensible, regrettable, and excessive as it may have been in light of what we see from the body cam, nevertheless arguably falls within this intentionally constructed safe harbor. But, whether Brailsford was legally culpable for the shooting of Shaver is not so much the point -- the situation should never have escalated to where Brailsford felt the need to pull the trigger.
The problem goes well beyond any individual officer or incident.
It is unlikely that when Brailsford arrived at the La Quinta Inn that night, his objective was to kill someone. However, a perfect storm of trends in policing today make it more likely that confrontations end in such a manner. The phenomenon of increasing “militarization” of community police, fear of terrorism, and over-criminalization have run head-on into cultural problems, such as blatant disrespect of police and a rise in mass-casualty crimes, that understandably put police more on edge. Add to this dangerous brew officers who are either poorly trained, or not trained at all in de-escalation tactics, especially when in contact with individuals who possess (legally, or otherwise) firearms, and it is less a matter of if, than of when, deadly confrontations occur.
Conservatives are reasonably reluctant to call-out this critical issue for fear of appearing to pile-on to the disgusting rudeness shown to police from the Left, but this is an issue that cannot be ignored. Shaver was not some menacing thug with a rap sheet and an illegal gun; he was a young, working-class father with a pellet gun in an open carry state. And, let us not forget Corey Jones, a concealed carry permit holder who was killed by police after his car broke down in a bad neighborhood; Andrew Scott, who answered a knock at his door late at night armed with a pistol, and was killed in his own home by the officer who failed to identify himself; and Corey Crawford, who was killed by police in a Walmart while holding a BB-gun he picked up off the shelf.
And, these are just the more obvious cases.
Police deserve our support and respect, but this should not preclude us from demanding reforms to a problem in which exercising Second Amendment rights – either intentionally, passively, or in the case of Shaver and Crawford, not at all – exposes gun owners to greater risks of deadly confrontations with police. Whether it is better training for police, demanding politicians reverse the trend of over-criminalization, or a broad cultural movement to treat officers with respect in everyday encounters; we can, and must, find a way to do better as a society that values both liberty and justice . . . and the very lives of our fellow citizens.
Until the 90% condemn the horrible 10% they will not have earned it.”
You do not solve a problem by introducing a larger and more complex problem.
Can’t argue with that.
I think the shooter’s police career is over, but it is sad that it cost someone else his life.
Don't apologize. Thank you for doing so.
I am not sure about that quote. It has been reported Shaver was pointing his pellet rifle out of the window, pointing toward the highway, but I think the actually testimony of the people in the hotel hot tub who called the police was that they saw a silhouette of someone who appeared to be holding a gun.
They ordered him to move. When he did, they shot him.
I have many family who are cops.
From a young age, I was told that cops only see two groups of people. Cops and threats. That is it.
If you are in the immediate family of a cop, you MAY get a pass. Maybe.
They are not all violent, not all bad, but they are not your friends.
I’ve discussed this with quite a few cops over the years. The most telling was a guy I worked with that was an ex-cop. He told me some interesting stories but the thing that was most important was this: His father was still a sheriff and he didn’t have a lot of good things to say about his father (at least as a cop) or the department he worked for.
On a side note, can you imagine the outcry if this victim was black?
The solution is to remove LEO immunity to civil suit.and require, as a condition of employment, that LEOs must purchase malpractice insurance. If they cost the insurer more than the actuaries deem reasonable, they will be unemployable in law enforcement.
Though this case is similar, it’s in a different category. The guy on the floor was not holding a weapon and being asked to drop a weapon. Both are similar in that there was ample information for a reasonable man to not shoot.
In my opinion, neither shooting was justified.
My point exactly, I am not moving, shoot me in the head and my family will never have to work again.
Nobody forced Brailsford to have an obscene threat engraved on his rifle. That was purely voluntary on his part, and gives evidence regarding his frame of mind. He wanted to use lethal force.
EXCELLENT advice. Cops who can't deeply internalize that concept need to be booted out before they kill some confused citizen.
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.