Scott made two main mistakes. Carried his weapon in to the store supposedly against Costco policy and while under the influence of pain medication. It sounds like he had built up a tolerance and this wouldn’t be any different then someone drinking a 12 pack then thinking that they are okay to drive.
He acted strangely but according to what I read he did nothing “strange” against the law. If the employees had not seen his weapon nothing would have come of his strange behavior. The employees and security were over zealous and called 911 after knowing he had a weapon under the assumption he “might do something” although he never took the weapon out at any time. I think Scott and security had conversed that he was legally carrying but security did not tell the cops that fact. The cop in question seriously prejudged the situation again based on “he might do something”.
Scott never knew he was the target before or after he left the store. In his mind he did nothing wrong. The Costco employees and cops ambushed him period. Now if he had brandished his weapon at any time I could see the cops predetermined actions. The cop got close enough to touch him and see his “glossy eyes” but could not see the weapon being pulled out while in it’s holster? If the cop came up from behind to touch him then they could have just as easily taken him down. If the cop thought he was so dangerous (not brandishing a weapon) they should have stayed away from him and let him - Scott clear the area and then confronted him from a distance.
I agree I would not want to be stopped by this cop.
Yeah, it's Scott's fault. The three sorry sacks of sh*t that came in looking to gun someone down, who shouted contradictory orders they don't even remember shouting, were the true victims. Maybe they need to sue Scott's estate for pain and suffering.
2 problems with those 2 'mistakes'...
first being, all reports indicate there were NO signs alerting people to a no gun policy...
2ndly, the idea that someone who is too impaired to use an adequate amount of 'reasoning ability' when using a tool, should 'legally' be expected to use that same lack of reasong ability, to make a responsible decision to not use it, is insane and dishonest...
*if* the whole cast of characters believed him to be so torn up that he couldnt function, [maybe he was] he was an easy take down w/o a [controlled] chaos of an evac of a large store and armed confrontation...
the fact that a cop was close enough to touch him, tells me if he wasnt going for a takedown, he violated protocol in getting that close in the first place...
I believe that scott was completely unaware of his fate till about 3 seconds before he was shot...
in a *FRee* country, that is totally unacceptable...