User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 9/28/2022 10:30:34 PM EST
[#1]
OK noted never run towards cops.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/28/2022 10:43:50 PM EST
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted: A 15-year-old girl fatally shot by San Bernardino County Sheriff’s Department deputies during a gun battle involving her father Tuesday returned gunfire during the ordeal, the sheriff said. “Based on the information, evidence suggests that Savannah Graziano was a participant in shooting at our deputies,” Sheriff Shannon D. Dicus said in a 39-second video posted on Twitter Wednesday afternoon. “However, based on the totality of events and the requirements of AB 1506, I have consulted with the California Department of Justice about assuming the primary role for this investigation.” https://ktla.com/news/local-news/girl-shot-at-deputies-before-being-killed-in-hesperia-shootout-sheriff-says/ What information? What evidence? |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/28/2022 10:44:59 PM EST
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted: So now we know she fired at deputies. Wearing tac gear while daddy is shooting at the same deputies, she bails from the car and charges deputies. Based on what do you say that she fired at deputies? |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/28/2022 10:46:56 PM EST
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted: “OH MY GOD, she’s coming right for us! And she’s wearing TACTICAL GEAR!” What the actual fuck? Wearing black is a threat now?? If your skin is black, always has been. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/28/2022 10:53:13 PM EST
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Dad kills the mom. Takes the kid. Knows that the cops are gonna be coming and things are gonna get loud. Sticks a vest and helmet on daughter so she doesn’t get killed. Daughter gets killed anyway. Sound about right? Thinking something like this. What a mess. First hammer drops then the bullets start flying. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/28/2022 11:08:15 PM EST
[#6]
Wow, so wearing tactical gear is now a reason to be shot, huh?
That plate carrier might hurt someone, and the helmet could launch any second, thought the cops... If the investigation proves she was unarmed as she ran to the cops, the shooters should face charges and be fired automatically. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/28/2022 11:18:43 PM EST
[#7]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/28/2022 11:25:37 PM EST
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Wow, so wearing tactical gear is now a reason to be shot, huh? That plate carrier might hurt someone, and the helmet could launch any second, thought the cops... If the investigation proves she was unarmed as she ran to the cops, the shooters should face charges and be fired automatically. Yea but they didn't mean it. They were in a 1. rapidly changing environment 2. while underfire with 2. unknown suspects and 3. a suspect approaches them in tactical gear commonly worn by those in tactical situations with weapons which they were previously underfire leading them to believe..... 4. (speculating) did not have hands up or get on the ground No reasonable prosecutor......Officers placed back on duty after x months paid leave and investigation completed |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/28/2022 11:35:44 PM EST
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Point of fact, how does this even fucking matter? When they shot her, she was running away from the threat, and she was unarmed? I would be in prison if I did what they did. LE will try to justify anything anymore, instead of just standing up and saying 'We fucked up'. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Sherrif's office is saying preliminary information indicates the passenger may have been involved in exchanging gunfire with LE during some points of the various shootouts. Of course she was. Because she isn't here to say anything different. LE will try to justify anything anymore, instead of just standing up and saying 'We fucked up'. That’s kinda my point. Perhaps I did not express myself with sufficient clarity. My statement was to mean of course they’ll say that because she’s dead. There’s no one to refute the claims. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/29/2022 5:19:16 AM EST
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted: What’s the old saying, It sucks to be a hostage? She was never a hostage. She was never kidnapped. She was part of her mother's murder. Jay |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/29/2022 5:27:01 AM EST
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted: She was never a hostage. She was never kidnapped. She was part of her mother's murder. Jay It's amazing how things work out. Everyone jumps on the cops for killing a teen, but after investigation of the incident it turns out she was a murderer all along and the cops did the right thing completely on accident. What are the odds? |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/29/2022 5:47:03 AM EST
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted: She was never a hostage. She was never kidnapped. She was part of her mother's murder. Jay Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: What’s the old saying, It sucks to be a hostage? She was never a hostage. She was never kidnapped. She was part of her mother's murder. Jay None of which was known to the cops when they shot an unarmed teenager they believed to be a kidnapping victim. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/29/2022 6:49:38 AM EST
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted: So now we know she fired at deputies. Wearing tac gear while daddy is shooting at the same deputies, she bails from the car and charges deputies. No, we don’t know that. The sheriff is alleging that. There’s a qualitative difference. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/29/2022 7:18:56 AM EST
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted: So now we know she fired at deputies. Wearing tac gear while daddy is shooting at the same deputies, she bails from the car and charges deputies. Reports are coming out that she wasn't kidnapped, per se, but rather was living with her dad while her brothers were with their mother during the separation/divorce process. "Living," in this case, being a pretty loose description with respect to custodial/guardianship expectations - they were living in motels, if that, and she was not in school, but rather, being home schooled. And that, also, probably stretches the definition of home schooling. At best, she was not in a stable environment, and not in a stable environment for months if not years before this. But, how a gunman gets to the point of shooting at cops isn't that much of a concern to cops, or anybody else, when it comes time to stopping an imminently dangerous situation. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/29/2022 7:20:43 AM EST
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted: She was never a hostage. She was never kidnapped. She was part of her mother's murder. Jay Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: What’s the old saying, It sucks to be a hostage? She was never a hostage. She was never kidnapped. She was part of her mother's murder. Jay Are authorities now suspecting she was part of the confrontation/murder of her mother? Last I read, their understanding was that she was back at the motel. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/29/2022 7:23:51 AM EST
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Wild guess: After getting in a police chase with the daughter he still loved despite being a crazy person and having just kidnapped her, Dad had her don armor so she’d hopefully survive the shootout he saw as inevitable. Police saw her wearing said armor while trying to run away and mag dumped her. I’m sure that I don’t know. But you're forgetting, no matter what, at least those cops went home safe that night. That's really all that matters. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/29/2022 8:03:02 AM EST
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Quickest way to end a hostage situation! Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Shoot the hostage Quickest way to end a hostage situation! That's Plan A, put together in the conference room at headquarters. Plan B is: Kill'em all, and let God sort them out. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/29/2022 9:03:20 AM EST
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted: What information? What evidence? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: A 15-year-old girl fatally shot by San Bernardino County Sheriff’s Department deputies during a gun battle involving her father Tuesday returned gunfire during the ordeal, the sheriff said. “Based on the information, evidence suggests that Savannah Graziano was a participant in shooting at our deputies,” Sheriff Shannon D. Dicus said in a 39-second video posted on Twitter Wednesday afternoon. “However, based on the totality of events and the requirements of AB 1506, I have consulted with the California Department of Justice about assuming the primary role for this investigation.” https://ktla.com/news/local-news/girl-shot-at-deputies-before-being-killed-in-hesperia-shootout-sheriff-says/ What information? What evidence? And if she had shot at the cops, was she doing so or looking like she was about to when she was shot? Having shot at cops in the past is not (or was not) justification for lethal force later. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/29/2022 9:07:13 AM EST
[#19]
The SB Sheriff released a statement solely addressing whether the girl is suspected of participating in the shooting. The Sheriff stated that evidence indicated she was, and that they have brought in outside agencies to now look at this, and if the circumstances of events meet XYZ statute, any future updates will be provided by the outside agency.
No other aspects of the case were discussed. The Sheriff wasn't stating anything off the cuff, or getting subject/suspect mixed up in the discussion, or anything else like that. More information will be released to the public in time, but for now, it seems they have enough evidence to make a strong statement of her involvement. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/29/2022 9:14:44 AM EST
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted: None of which was known to the cops when they shot an unarmed teenager they believed to be a kidnapping victim. Bingo. This was all about an Amber Alert rescue operation of the girl they apparently lit the fuck up. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/29/2022 10:05:14 AM EST
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Bingo. This was all about an Amber Alert rescue operation of the girl they apparently lit the fuck up. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: None of which was known to the cops when they shot an unarmed teenager they believed to be a kidnapping victim. Bingo. This was all about an Amber Alert rescue operation of the girl they apparently lit the fuck up. We are kind of leaving out the daylight spray and pray murder of a woman at a street corner in front of an elementary school, the immediate rifle fire towards police when they first encountered the suspect up by Barstow, the fifty something mile chase involving a rolling shootout, and a suspect who's Exhibit A for violently carjacking another motorist. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/29/2022 10:10:20 AM EST
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted: We are kind of leaving out the daylight spray and pray murder of a woman at a street corner in front of an elementary school, the immediate rifle fire towards police when they first encountered the suspect up by Barstow, the fifty something mile chase involving a rolling shootout, and a suspect who's Exhibit A for violently carjacking another motorist. Because all of those have fuck-all with shooting an unarmed minor in the process of rescuing that unarmed minor. But you knew that already. Especially the murder of the kidnapping victim's mother by the kidnapper in the process of kidnapping the girl the cops eventually murdered. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/29/2022 10:11:23 AM EST
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted: We are kind of leaving out the daylight spray and pray murder of a woman at a street corner in front of an elementary school, the immediate rifle fire towards police when they first encountered the suspect up by Barstow, the fifty something mile chase involving a rolling shootout, and a suspect who's Exhibit A for violently carjacking another motorist. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: None of which was known to the cops when they shot an unarmed teenager they believed to be a kidnapping victim. Bingo. This was all about an Amber Alert rescue operation of the girl they apparently lit the fuck up. We are kind of leaving out the daylight spray and pray murder of a woman at a street corner in front of an elementary school, the immediate rifle fire towards police when they first encountered the suspect up by Barstow, the fifty something mile chase involving a rolling shootout, and a suspect who's Exhibit A for violently carjacking another motorist. You left out the part about the suspect having neck tats. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/29/2022 10:13:11 AM EST
[#24]
I await the release of the video. Statements from police don't mean much at this point.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/29/2022 10:14:44 AM EST
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted: She was never a hostage. She was never kidnapped. She was part of her mother's murder. Jay I'm going with this as the most likely scenario. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/29/2022 10:16:06 AM EST
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I don't think we know that she fired at anyone. Indications, recollections, inferences, firm belief ... who knows? Reports are coming out that she wasn't kidnapped, per se, but rather was living with her dad while her brothers were with their mother during the separation/divorce process. "Living," in this case, being a pretty loose description with respect to custodial/guardianship expectations - they were living in motels, if that, and she was not in school, but rather, being home schooled. And that, also, probably stretches the definition of home schooling. At best, she was not in a stable environment, and not in a stable environment for months if not years before this. But, how a gunman gets to the point of shooting at cops isn't that much of a concern to cops, or anybody else, when it comes time to stopping an imminently dangerous situation. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: So now we know she fired at deputies. Wearing tac gear while daddy is shooting at the same deputies, she bails from the car and charges deputies. Reports are coming out that she wasn't kidnapped, per se, but rather was living with her dad while her brothers were with their mother during the separation/divorce process. "Living," in this case, being a pretty loose description with respect to custodial/guardianship expectations - they were living in motels, if that, and she was not in school, but rather, being home schooled. And that, also, probably stretches the definition of home schooling. At best, she was not in a stable environment, and not in a stable environment for months if not years before this. But, how a gunman gets to the point of shooting at cops isn't that much of a concern to cops, or anybody else, when it comes time to stopping an imminently dangerous situation. Regardless of the girl's possible involvement in the shootout, which was unknown to the cops, I think they are going to have a hard time articulating how an unarmed victim/suspect running towards them is an "imminently dangerous situation". It looks like the cops were in an adrenaline-fueled rush from the shoot-out and their brains did not disengage from "shoot" mode. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/29/2022 10:21:12 AM EST
[#27]
How many of these guys have been shot with a self firing P320? Asking for a friend.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/29/2022 10:44:51 AM EST
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Regardless of the girl's possible involvement in the shootout, which was unknown to the cops, I think they are going to have a hard time articulating how an unarmed victim/suspect running towards them is an "imminently dangerous situation". It looks like the cops were in an adrenaline-fueled rush from the shoot-out and their brains did not disengage from "shoot" mode. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/29/2022 10:54:07 AM EST
[#29]
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11260991/Teen-girl-15-shot-police-fugitive-dad-started-gunfight-officers.html
Says she was an active shooter, guess she fucked around and found out |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/29/2022 10:57:55 AM EST
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I'm going with this as the most likely scenario. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: She was never a hostage. She was never kidnapped. She was part of her mother's murder. Jay I'm going with this as the most likely scenario. A 15 year old girl probably did not go leroy jenkins in that situation |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/29/2022 11:05:52 AM EST
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Based on what do you say that she fired at deputies? Easier question is......Did she have an obvious weapon on her when they shot her? I know forn some cops that is entirely irrelevant but its always a good question. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/29/2022 11:09:01 AM EST
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted: None of which was known to the cops when they shot an unarmed teenager they believed to be a kidnapping victim. Most cops dont care |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/29/2022 11:11:15 AM EST
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The SB Sheriff released a statement solely addressing whether the girl is suspected of participating in the shooting. The Sheriff stated that evidence indicated she was, and that they have brought in outside agencies to now look at this, and if the circumstances of events meet XYZ statute, any future updates will be provided by the outside agency. No other aspects of the case were discussed. The Sheriff wasn't stating anything off the cuff, or getting subject/suspect mixed up in the discussion, or anything else like that. More information will be released to the public in time, but for now, it seems they have enough evidence to make a strong statement of her involvement. Seems they only possibly known of this AFTER they shot her. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/29/2022 11:13:08 AM EST
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Because all of those have fuck-all with shooting an unarmed minor in the process of rescuing that unarmed minor. But you knew that already. Especially the murder of the kidnapping victim's mother by the kidnapper in the process of kidnapping the girl the cops eventually murdered. They dont care if they didnt know at the time or that she was disarmed. They will justify anything. Its like watching the White House press secretary. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/29/2022 1:02:29 PM EST
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I await the release of the video. Statements from police don't mean much at this point. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/29/2022 1:05:00 PM EST
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Regardless of the girl's possible involvement in the shootout, which was unknown to the cops, I think they are going to have a hard time articulating how an unarmed victim/suspect running towards them is an "imminently dangerous situation". It looks like the cops were in an adrenaline-fueled rush from the shoot-out and their brains did not disengage from "shoot" mode. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/29/2022 1:05:36 PM EST
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted: How many of these guys have been shot with a self firing P320? Asking for a friend. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/29/2022 1:20:12 PM EST
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted: And if she had shot at the cops, was she doing so or looking like she was about to when she was shot? Having shot at cops in the past is not (or was not) justification for lethal force later. @marquar If I take a shot at you, disappear behind concealment, then come out running at you, you don't believe you're justified to shoot me? This question is being posed separate from the incident as I know almost nothing about it and am not picking a side. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/29/2022 1:33:33 PM EST
[#39]
Oops.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/29/2022 1:51:26 PM EST
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted: @marquar If I take a shot at you, disappear behind concealment, then come out running at you, you don't believe you're justified to shoot me? This question is being posed separate from the incident as I know almost nothing about it and am not picking a side. FYI, mentions are case sensitive. It depends on whether you have reason to run at me other than to continue the threat. If I'm a cop and you are someone that might be a hostage, then simply running at me unarmed wouldn't be justification. Also, I have a hard time believing that cops could have positively identified her as an active shooter while she was still inside the cab of the truck. So your question might be more like: If shots come out from inside a house/vehicle, then you come running out at me am I justified in shooting you? |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/29/2022 6:49:35 PM EST
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted: FYI, mentions are case sensitive. It depends on whether you have reason to run at me other than to continue the threat. If I'm a cop and you are someone that might be a hostage, then simply running at me unarmed wouldn't be justification. Also, I have a hard time believing that cops could have positively identified her as an active shooter while she was still inside the cab of the truck. So your question might be more like: If shots come out from inside a house/vehicle, then you come running out at me am I justified in shooting you? Good to know, thank you. However, I disagree that it depends. I'm not a mind reader. If you take a shot at me, then charge me, I'm assuming your intentions are to harm me. Since you've already demonstrated your intent to kill me, you no longer get the benefit of the doubt. This happens in moments, without time to analyze. As far as the second part, I'm not going to pass judgement. I've been running around today and haven't researched the case at all. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/29/2022 6:54:16 PM EST
[#42]
Poor girl.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/30/2022 5:48:27 AM EST
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted: FYI, mentions are case sensitive. It depends on whether you have reason to run at me other than to continue the threat. If I'm a cop and you are someone that might be a hostage, then simply running at me unarmed wouldn't be justification. Also, I have a hard time believing that cops could have positively identified her as an active shooter while she was still inside the cab of the truck. So your question might be more like: If shots come out from inside a house/vehicle, then you come running out at me am I justified in shooting you? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: @marquar If I take a shot at you, disappear behind concealment, then come out running at you, you don't believe you're justified to shoot me? This question is being posed separate from the incident as I know almost nothing about it and am not picking a side. FYI, mentions are case sensitive. It depends on whether you have reason to run at me other than to continue the threat. If I'm a cop and you are someone that might be a hostage, then simply running at me unarmed wouldn't be justification. Also, I have a hard time believing that cops could have positively identified her as an active shooter while she was still inside the cab of the truck. So your question might be more like: If shots come out from inside a house/vehicle, then you come running out at me am I justified in shooting you? I think the command "stop, hands up!" would be the proper procedure and maybe they did that. As a non-LE (almost said "civilian", LOL), I'm not going to risk my future freedom on shooting an unarmed hostage/suspect. I think the question would be "Is this person a serious threat AT THIS MOMENT?". That would probably be a "no weapon, no shoot" situation unless there was an articulable fear of injury or death. LE may be able (as seen in the comments ITT) to spin up justification for the shoot. One would think the applicable laws, which create an "ROE", would be the same for LE and Non, but it seems that LE has "a bit" more latitude in some situations. And a lot of support here for that "latitude", ref the "oh well, collateral damage" posts in the Denver PD thread. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/30/2022 6:02:31 AM EST
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted: One would think the applicable laws, which create an "ROE", would be the same for LE and Non, but it seems that LE has "a bit" more latitude in some situations. And a lot of support here for that "latitude", ref the "oh well, collateral damage" posts in the Denver PD thread. Considering LE is tasked with responding to ongoing violent incidents with the purpose of stopping the threat and/or taking the perpetrator into custody, while non-LE simply has a duty to retreat, I'd say the "latitude" is warranted. Refer to USSC decision Graham v Connor. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/30/2022 6:21:47 AM EST
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Considering LE is tasked with responding to ongoing violent incidents with the purpose of stopping the threat and/or taking the perpetrator into custody, while non-LE simply has a duty to retreat, I'd say the "latitude" is warranted. Refer to USSC decision Graham v Connor. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: One would think the applicable laws, which create an "ROE", would be the same for LE and Non, but it seems that LE has "a bit" more latitude in some situations. And a lot of support here for that "latitude", ref the "oh well, collateral damage" posts in the Denver PD thread. Considering LE is tasked with responding to ongoing violent incidents with the purpose of stopping the threat and/or taking the perpetrator into custody, while non-LE simply has a duty to retreat, I'd say the "latitude" is warranted. Refer to USSC decision Graham v Connor. No "duty to retreat" in many states. As I said, it comes down to evaluation of the "threat", if there actually was one in this case. Or was it only a perceived threat because the girl was supposedly wearing some type of "tactical gear"? Probably several armed, guns drawn, LE vs an unarmed 15 y.o. girl just doesn't look right at this point. ETA: I don't think it was still an "ongoing violent incident" at the time of the shooting. But as I said in another post, cops may not have disengaged from that mindset. Possible OODA loop failure. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/30/2022 6:41:28 AM EST
[#46]
Quoted: Good to know, thank you. However, I disagree that it depends. I'm not a mind reader. If you take a shot at me, then charge me, I'm assuming your intentions are to harm me. Since you've already demonstrated your intent to kill me, you no longer get the benefit of the doubt. This happens in moments, without time to analyze. As far as the second part, I'm not going to pass judgement. I've been running around today and haven't researched the case at all. If someone is "charging" me, then yes, deadly force is on the table. But we don't know if she was charging or running towards them. Hard to explain in text, but there's clear body language in each type of running. And my two paragraphs were two comments on one hypothetical. IE, someone runs out of an area from which shots were fired, not someone who was clearly shooting at me earlier runs at me. IOE, in this case: I saw someone shooting at me and that same person who is now running at me, I would use potential deadly force. In this case: Shots had been fired at me from a vehicle/structure and now someone is running towards me from that structure, I'd assess their body language and see if they were carrying a weapon before using potential deadly force. Especially if I'm an officer and the person is potentially a hostage. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/30/2022 6:45:40 AM EST
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted: ... One would think the applicable laws, which create an "ROE", would be the same for LE and Non, but it seems that LE has "a bit" more latitude in some situations. And a lot of support here for that "latitude", ref the "oh well, collateral damage" posts in the Denver PD thread. I think that extra latitude is warranted if we expect the police to be active in protecting civilians against threats. In most cases, the general public does not expect non LEO to charge into a dicey, potentially deadly situation. IE, if you as a non-LEO see a man waving a gun around you grab your loved ones and get the hell out, then call 911. As a LEO, you are expected to confront that person. Since we expect officers to insert themselves into situations that aren't as absolutely cut-and-dried regarding use of potential deadly force, we should give them a bit more latitude in how such situations are resolved. Note that "a bit more" is not carte blanche. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/30/2022 6:48:32 AM EST
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted: She was probably seen driving a blue Toyota Tacoma... |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/30/2022 7:02:50 AM EST
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted: If someone is "charging" me, then yes, deadly force is on the table. But we don't know if she was charging or running towards them. Hard to explain in text, but there's clear body language in each type of running. And my two paragraphs were two comments on one hypothetical. IE, someone runs out of an area from which shots were fired, not someone who was clearly shooting at me earlier runs at me. IOE, in this case: I saw someone shooting at me and that same person who is now running at me, I would use potential deadly force. In this case: Shots had been fired at me from a vehicle/structure and now someone is running towards me from that structure, I'd assess their body language and see if they were carrying a weapon before using potential deadly force. Especially if I'm an officer and the person is potentially a hostage. I understand what you mean by the different body language. Fleeing vs running with an aggressive purpose. As to the second part regarding the hypothetical, I was responding to your post: "And if she had shot at the cops, was she doing so or looking like she was about to when she was shot? Having shot at cops in the past is not (or was not) justification for lethal force later." |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/30/2022 7:19:07 AM EST
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted: So shooting at cops with daddy? Thats a helluva position for a 15 yr old 8th grader. I wonder how much and how long daddys influence was to have her get into the fight. "The cops are after us, and we won't go down! Your're with me now, you're daddys little girl" Wonder what her social media looked like, maybe "Cops have been after my daddy since I was born"  Attached File |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
Attached File