Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: Moonman62; machogirl

The testimony clip in the article is contradictory - that the doctor was giving prescriptions without monitoring, and that the doctor had nothing to do with Scott. It would be interesting to know how Scott met his girlfriend...did he meet her & use her, or did he meet her at the doctor’s office?

All of which is irrelevant to the questions, “Did the police act responsibly in shooting Scott 7 times? Did they feel threatened based on the facts or what they expected (I obviously believe #2)? Did they shoot him on the ground? And were there better ways to handle the situation?”


77 posted on 09/28/2010 9:50:43 AM PDT by Mr Rogers (When the ass brays, don't reply...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies ]


To: Mr Rogers
If you have three shooters, seven rounds from three simultaneous shooters is not excessive, yet the number of rounds is touted as evidence of 'overkill'. Mosher fired twice, according to the evidence. I still haven't found a single piece of data from the court supporting the accusation that he was shot after hitting the pavement.

There is little doubt that the police reacted to what they had been led to believe they would be facing with 'an armed crazy'. But to crucify the police for this is over the top agenda mongering.

BTW, I used to have a 1991 and it had a short cocked hammer position which kept the hammer off of the firing pin but would not everytime fire if the trigger was pulled and the hammer dropped from the short cocked position. A newer hammer spring would have made it fire reliably from the short cocked position and the trigger wouldn't need heavy finger pressure.

78 posted on 09/28/2010 10:40:18 AM PDT by MHGinTN (Dems, believing they cannot be deceived, it's nye impossible to convince them when they're deceived.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies ]

To: Mr Rogers
The testimony clip in the article is contradictory - that the doctor was giving prescriptions without monitoring, and that the doctor had nothing to do with Scott.

The doctor was illegally writing prescriptions on demand to Scott without actually seeing him as a patient as a law abiding doctor would, therefore the article isn't being contradictory.

All of which is irrelevant to the questions, “Did the police act responsibly in shooting Scott 7 times? Did they feel threatened based on the facts or what they expected (I obviously believe #2)? Did they shoot him on the ground? And were there better ways to handle the situation?”

Relevancy should be determined by the laws of Nevada, not your lawyerly questions. Scott's illegal drug use should be considered along with the testimony about Scott's behavior. Scott was carrying his weapon illegally under the influence of drugs. He held up his hand to a Costco employee's head as if it was a gun. He told another employee he was a Green Beret when he never was. Another employee was told by Scott that he was "messed up". Scott immediately went for his gun when he was first contacted by the police. He didn't follow any commands. Two witnesses yesterday said when Mosher was giving commands, Scott was looking back and forth as if he was looking for a way out. From the information Mosher received from his dispatcher, he believed Scott was armed, under the influence of drugs, and threatening. Scott disobeyed any training he ever received as a soldier or as a CCW holder on how to disarm.

The only way the cops could have handled the situation better was with hindsight. The best outcome would have been if Scott was in a detox center or a hospital where he belonged.

80 posted on 09/28/2010 10:43:21 AM PDT by Moonman62 (Half of all Americans are above average.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson