Posted on 02/27/2014 9:10:59 AM PST by DariusBane
“The situation is very unfortunate,” Faris said, reading from a statement at a news conference. “It does appear, at this time, that Deputy Knox’s actions were an appropriate response to what he reasonably believed to be an imminent threat to his life.”
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
Can you see the Police making this same statement if had been a civilian that shot the guy?
Or if the old man had beat the shiite out of the cop because the old man “feared for his life”.
The police are poorly trained and out-of-control. Thugs. At least the vet didn’t have a dog with him. It would have been shot also.
Fear not it’s just Obama’s army in test mode.
The video link in post 15 "The shooting of Kyle Dinkheller" is frequently used in police training nationwide. It's a perfect example of why terrified officers shoot first and ascertain facts to support claims of "reasonable fear" later.
Training is the problem, it is fast approaching the "zero tolerance" policies found in schools. Only voters can put a stop to it, either by defunding law enforcement or by insisting true independent civilian oversight and review of of shootings. Civilians should also have control over training curriculum so that it is properly balanced in favor of civilian safety over officer safety.
Poor old guy, At least now the cops will learn to respect the new 4-barrelled semi-automatic walker he’ll have to use to get around now.
Because he’s a cop and everyone he meets wants him dead.
As they get worse and worse, your statement becomes truer and truer.
Look, it’s pretty much a cardinal rule that when you are around a cop, you DO NOT make any sudden movements, and you keep your hands in plain sight, if at all possible, and empty of *anything* that could conceivably look like a weapon.
The very best, most assuring way to behave is to follow “Military instructional rules.” This is pretty easy to do, if you think about it ahead of time. Simply put, you give the cop a lot of feedback about what you are doing.
For example, you get pulled over in a traffic stop. You roll down your window just a few inches and put both hands on the top of your steering wheel.
Cop: “May I see you license, registration, and proof of insurance, sir?”
You: “My license is in my wallet. My registration, and proof of insurance are in my glove box. I am now reaching for my wallet.”
It sounds methodical, and it is. If you have a weapon in your glove box, you tell them that it is there *first* and that you are licensed, as needs be, to have it.
I have done this at a traffic stop, and it works, to a great extent because it makes you sound like a military type who is not going to do something rash or stupid.
Excellent advice.
This is how you deal with police in a banana republic.
Next you will advise us to wrap your license in a $20 bill.
When people begun to understand that the officer knocking at the door may well shoot whoever answers the door, warfare between police and citizens will begin in earnest.
So the next time someone sees a cop and fears for his life, he would be justified in shooting the officer? There would be quite a few vacancies in the nations police departments.
I doubt it would be found justified or they would be put on a paid vacation like the cops do.
And it will make for dangerous living for everyone-I would feel like I’m a teen watching my back in the 60’s again if I still lived in a city...
Install cameras at your door, with both frontal and side views. Make sure the video is recorded, and that the storage device is well hidden or mirrored to the cloud elsewhere. Check a video monitor anytime someone knocks at the door. Use a speakerphone device to communicate. Determine intentions long before deciding to open that front door. Most communications can be completed without resorting to opening the door. Works for us. Until they come knocking asking about grabbing guns, then I don't know what will happen after that. That day is coming for all of us.
Yeah... Good advice after the fact.
However, this sounds more like blaming the shooting on the old man. Not going to work. No excuse for this one.
Warning shots.
No, I figure this should be the situation were I in the officer’s shoes.
Importantly, I am a proponent of “Old West” rules for LEOs, rules that were foolishly superseded by SWAT rules in the mid-1970s; as well as for states to de-paramilitarize their LEOs.
However, LEOs do face off, far too often, against real bad men, so have to have the attitude, especially with road stops, that somebody may come out of their vehicle guns blazing, or with the intent to kill.
As an aside, in real “banana republics”, their police are often toting machine guns. And while the officer you see in Germany, for example, may not have a gun at all, the one you do not see has a machine gun as well. With the safety off.
North America is different in that our cops usually are on their own, and just have a pistol. So somewhat different tactical rules.
The victim in this case made two very bad errors. The first was in exiting his vehicle without being told to, and the second was reaching in his bed for his cane. And that’s enough to get you shot.
That should be unacceptable, AGAIN, in this country.
That’s almost a gun control argument in its logic. That if people weren’t allowed to have guns, then nobody would get shot. But the reality is otherwise, so people need guns to defend themselves against violent criminals. And the police are part of this.
Did Rodney King deserve his beating? He did everything in his power to unnerve, frighten, and unbalance police while engaged in reckless endangerment of innocent people. By the time he was finally stopped, to me at least, it is no surprise that the police beat him.
Was it “unprofessional” of the police to do this? Yes and no. Legally, they shouldn’t have, but they had been pushed to their limits. And this happens far too often to too many officers to be ignored.
If you do something to a cop that looks threatening to him, even if it seems perfectly innocent to you, there is a good likelihood that he will react, because if he doesn’t react just once, when he needed to, he could very well be killed.
And what would have happened if the cop hadn’t reacted, and the old guy pulled a shotgun on him? Would there be real tears for the dead cop?
That’s almost a gun control argument in its logic.
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.