Posted on 06/18/2011 5:58:55 AM PDT by ConservativeStatement
An off-duty Chicago police officer dressed up as a clown for a South Side fundraiser shot and killed a teen who held him at gunpoint tonight after the event, authorities said, citing preliminary information.
The officer, who is assigned to the Near North police district, was in his clown outfit for a fundraiser for a day-care business, attended by about 50 children near West 87th Street and South Damen Avenue.
(Excerpt) Read more at chicagotribune.com ...
The officer wasn’t carrying. He disarmed the perp who drew on him.
In a way, I feel happy about this shooting. One of the bad guys got what was coming to him. A gang banger thought the clown was an easy target, and got more than he bargained for. And that’s the last time that gang banger will ever terrorize decent people.
And FourPeas said: "The officer wasn’t carrying. He disarmed the perp who drew on him."
From the linked article: "During a struggle with the teen, the officer grabbed hold of the gun, opened fire and killed him."
I think there is a great deal of ambiguity in this article, perhaps intended.
The article does not say that the perp was killed with his own gun. The article does not say that the Chicago Clown was unarmed. The article doesn't even say that the perp was disarmed; just that the Clown "grabbed hold of the gun".
The article doesn't say that the Clown "opened fire with the perp's gun"; it just says the Clown "opened fire".
If a so-called "journalist" working for the Main Stream Media wanted to avoid the question of whether the Clown was armed, this would be a way to make it appear that the Clown was unarmed, despite the Clown being one of Chicago's elite.
If you were an off-duty Chicago cop, and were allowed to carry, would you be unarmed? Neither would I.
From the context "the gun" would refer to the previously mentioned firearm.
The suspect approached the off-duty Chicago Police officer about 10:10 p.m. in the 1900 block of West 87th Street, produced a gun and tried to rob the officer, according to a statement from police News Affairs.
The officer and the robber struggled, and the gun discharged and struck the robber, the statement said. The weapon was recovered at the scene.
So, you're correct the officer did not disarm the perp, but again it appears the gun with which the perp was shot was his own.
At 10:10 p.m. after the event ended, the officer went to his car and a teen approached him, asking him for money, authorities said. When the officer said he had no money, the teen pulled a gun on him, authorities said.
During a struggle with the teen, the officer grabbed hold of the gun, opened fire and killed him.
Not sure I would be unarmd in Chicago whether I was a cop or not.
If I were a cop, I would be carrying, off-duty or on.
At least this article makes clear that the perp was shot with his own gun.
But still, the article is silent as to whether the cop was armed or unarmed. Tactically, it may be necessary to disarm an attacker rather than attempt to draw a weapon.
The question remains: Does an off-duty Chicago cop dressed as a clown carry a weapon or not? Chicago may be require that their off-duty law enforcement officers disarm. Maybe they do.
I would consider it newsworthy to know whether or not the officer was armed. It would be instructive to recognize that sometimes an attacker must be disarmed rather than drawing a weapon.
On the other hand, it would be instructive to know that even Chicago cops, when off-duty, are at the mercy of armed attackers, and only those physically capable of using the attackers own weapon will overcome the attack.
Both articles are noteworthy for what they don't say.
Nor would I. Illinois was one of several states that my wife and I avoided on a recent cross-country trip.
Those black and white checkered hats are silly, but no reason to call him a clown.
Homey don’t play that.>>>>>
Homey shot homey dead
Yep!
Now *that* is a nice homemade graphic. ;’)
If you were an off-duty Chicago cop, and were allowed to carry, would you be unarmed? Neither would I.
While wearing a clown suite around a bunch of kids? Would you wear that gun in the shower or to bed? Good grief man, if you can't be wearing a clown suite hanging out with kids without being in mortal fear of needing to gun someone down and not having a tool at hand, that is paranoid.
Yet in a perverse way, that paranoia was justified - ("Honey, is that a gun or are you happy to see me?" "Its a gun.")
But still, the article is silent as to whether the cop was armed or unarmed. Tactically, it may be necessary to disarm an attacker rather than attempt to draw a weapon.
In all of the gun disarmament drills I went though, it was always "redirect", "control", "disable the attacker", "disarm". So if a crim shoves a gun towards you, the first effort is to redirect the muzzle, the next move is to control the perp's hand in such a way that he won't get a shot off into you. The third is to beat-the-crap out of the guy either with knees, fists, elbows, whatever until the subject is softened up, then break the weapon out of the crim's hand. Extra points if you can also pistol whip or break off fingers in the process. Given the situation, and since this was a Chicago LEO so every shoot is always a deemed a "clean shoot", empty the magazine into the perp.
Extra points for good grouping and clever shot placement so that your fellow officers won't give you grief after IA clears the shoot.
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.