[Toddsterpatriot]

At the time of the Erik Scott incident, the Metro police get the benefit of the doubt - they get to assume the gun is loaded.

They should assume it's not? Please.

[kiryandil]

So, the police should get to use the mere fact that he had a gun to assert that he could have shot through his holster, and taken innocent people hostage, even with an unloaded gun.

I refuse to concede the point, Metro defender.

[Mr Rogers]

The value of the unloaded chamber is that it shows proof of Scott’s frame of mind. In day 1 of the inquest, the DA suggested Scott was trying to commit suicide by cop...yet the physical evidence shows Scott was not prepared or interested in taking anyone hostage, or threatening anyone. You just can’t do that with a holstered gun with no round in the chamber.

It confirms the witness testimony that Scott was NOT acting like a threat while exiting...so why confront him in a crowd, and why start shooting 2 seconds after the first command. It means there was no way Scott could have threatened anyone without taking time to load his gun, so you are left with a man leaving Costco with a concealed gun, not acting strange, not waving a gun around, not threatening anyone - yet within 6 seconds he went from someone the cops didn’t know was the suspect to a fatally wounded man. SIX SECONDS!

I think that shows, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the cops were trigger happy. And I wouldn’t want to be the defense in a civil trial, trying to explain why my client felt he had to shoot Scott less than 6 seconds after seeing him, and without giving him time to obey any commands.