[Ronald_Magnus]

Hmmmm. Seems to me only a few weeks ago, some people here wanted to bestow sainthood on Scott and lynch the cops. After reading these eyewitness reports, what do you say now? It sure appears now Scott was “carrying while hammered”. A dumbass plan and a recipe for disaster.

[Electric Graffiti]

What’s the penalty for legally carrying and being hammered?

How many cops could pass that test on or off duty on any given day?

I guess execution is the only way to resolve these situations /s.

[Mr Rogers]

What hasn't been denied by the police is that the gun was in its holster - a fact the shooting cop admits he didn't realize until after the shooting. You'd be surprised at how few people pull an IWB holster out as part of their shooting drill...

Scott may have reacted wrong, but the fact that the gun was in a holster is pretty good evidence that he was NOT planning on shooting the cop.

Also, while I don't spend a lot of time practicing a draw (and I use this type of holster), I have yet to have it come out with the gun by accident. I either remove both, or just the gun, but never yet have I pulled on the gun and brought out the holster as well.

Also, when I remove this holster, I can't do it with a draw motion. I have to deliberate wiggle it out in a movement that is very different from the motion I use in removing the gun by itself.

[monkeyshine]

The police need to review this policy of asking suspects to reach for their weapons. They cannot simultaneously order a suspect to reach for his weapon, and then fire on him for doing it. That is tantamount to an execution. Drunk or not. Stoned or not. On morphine or not.

Now, if I were Scott, and I were sober, I would defy the order to reach for my weapon. This, knowing what I now know. Reaching for your weapon with 3 cops pointing guns at you is a VERY BAD IDEA. Even if they order you to. It reminds me of the old west, quick draw style. Just keep your hands in the air. You do not want to be reaching for a gun when cops are pointing guns at you. Period.

I admit I don’t know all the facts, but, I lean towards the theory that the 3 cops were not working in harmony. One says “remove your weapon” and the other, seeing him reach for his weapon to comply with the order, lights him up.

No matter what being druged up, being stoned, acting silly, slurring your words etc etc are no reason to be shot to death. It seems to be an undisputed fact that he was ordered to reach for his weapon, and that he was shot when he did. His weapon was still in its holster, which makes it appear to me that he was lucid enough to know not to draw on the cops, but to remove his weapon while holstered to avoid the appearance of trying to draw on cops.

We all now know that this appearance is an impossible task. Better to keep your hands in the air.

[old school]

I agree. Just as driving under the influence is stupid, so is carrying a firearm under the influence; and obviously, potentially fatal!

[JSteff]

It sure appears now Scott was “carrying while hammered”. A dumbass plan and a recipe for disaster.

So is the "It sure appears now Scott was “carrying while hammered” a legal definition or your knee jerk reaction to the story. From what they said a toxicology report was NOT produced at any time in the hearing. Personally I have MS and I am not always coordinated when walking at all. NO drugs or drinking ever but would a cop then have the right to shot me if I obeyed the wrong order of 3 to 5 that were yelled at me?

So don't blame fellow freepers for coming to a possible conclusion based on shoddy, confusing orders shouted at a man over a period of a few seconds when they faced him with their guns pointed at him.

Sir this hearing did nothing to make me consider it was other than a bunch of adrenalin pumped cops feeling like SF troops (who they are NOT) when confronting a man based on the reports of Costco employees! The cops were going on nothing other than the poor reports of those employees and decided to execute on those grounds.

Might a taser or pepper spray have left a man alive under those circumstances? Probably but a man died because of some skitzy Dime store employees and some cops up for a little action to wear off some adrenalin.

Back to my story, if I tripped around in a store would I deserve to die too??????

[JLS]

I would say the LV cops shot a guy for no reason and should be fired and criminally charged. What do you say about criminals like those in the LVPD?