User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 2/14/2024 7:20:48 PM EDT
[#1]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Well those 'noises' also included her partner also screaming that he'd just been shot by the suspect that was in the back seat of car, which she had no reason to doubt. I absolutely do agree with their determination that she made the correct decision given the information she had at the time. Did she know he was still a threat? Had he surrendered? Or was she just providing suppressing fire? |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/14/2024 8:14:55 PM EDT
[#2]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/14/2024 9:05:49 PM EDT
[#3]
Apparently police cars shouldn't have tinted windows.That way idiot cops won't shoot blindly into the police cars because an acorn fell on it.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/14/2024 9:19:35 PM EDT
[#4]
So THIS is why we need to ban ghost guns.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/14/2024 9:25:41 PM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I have found plenty of weapons on people that were searched. Field searched isn't always a 100% weapon free. There was the video that went around a few years ago withe guy the offed himself in the interrogation room with the 1911 from his pants. Iirc at the time it was said he had been searched 3 times before that |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/14/2024 9:27:32 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted: So THIS is why we need to ban ghost |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/14/2024 9:29:26 PM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Well those 'noises' also included her partner also screaming that he'd just been shot by the suspect that was in the back seat of car, which she had no reason to doubt. I absolutely do agree with their determination that she made the correct decision given the information she had at the time. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: There was indeed a reasonable basis for her belief and actions, but not for his. Report https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/214740/IMG_7885-3129158.jpg https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/214740/IMG_7886-3129159.jpg Listen, even that comes back to exactly what I posted: shooting at noises. The difference is that the department's brass seems to think that shooting, mag-dumping really, is a reasonable response to a noise, and apparently you agree. Did you take note that these LE professionals evidently can't proofread well enough to catch "interrupted" where they presumably meant to use "interpreted"? Color me skeptical about their conclusions in general. She didn't know her target. She shouldn't have shot. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/14/2024 9:31:28 PM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Sure she responded, but in arguably the worst way possible. There was no target, so she just tried to kill someone, anyone (who? we don't even know) with no regard for the suspect in her custody or anyone else in the neighborhood. I'd love to hear from her own mouth exactly who she was shooting at, and why she chose that person as her target (assuming she can even articulate that basic point). Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Male cop should have never been one. @smilingbandit Female cop responded to her officer claiming shots fired and officer down, I doubt others in her position would or should have acted different. He was, obviously, negligent beyond reason, but given what she understood, acted appropriately. There was no target, so she just tried to kill someone, anyone (who? we don't even know) with no regard for the suspect in her custody or anyone else in the neighborhood. I'd love to hear from her own mouth exactly who she was shooting at, and why she chose that person as her target (assuming she can even articulate that basic point). Would it even matter? She could have just started firing at the first person she saw and it would be deemed "reasonable" that was the "shooter". |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/14/2024 9:32:21 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted: There was the video that went around a few years ago withe guy the offed himself in the interrogation room with the 1911 from his pants. Iirc at the time it was said he had been searched 3 times before that Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: I have found plenty of weapons on people that were searched. Field searched isn't always a 100% weapon free. There was the video that went around a few years ago withe guy the offed himself in the interrogation room with the 1911 from his pants. Iirc at the time it was said he had been searched 3 times before that Click To View Spoiler |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/14/2024 9:36:54 PM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Neither of us are police officers doing a policing job and dealing with armed suspects, so no, us shooting into a police car at a suspect we've detained naturally isn't going to be treated the same way. Had I been doing the same job and been in her shoes that morning, I probably would have come to the same conclusion as she did and done pretty much what she did. She heard a weird bang sound, then turned to see her partner fall while screaming in panic that he's been shot and begin firing into the back of the patrol car at a suspect that had been known to possess a suppressed firearm a few hours earlier. Given the context of the event, I agree with the assessment she had a reasonable belief that a weapon had been missed during the patdown, and that there was a suspect in the back of the car that had just shot and disabled her partner and was actively trying to kill him. She had a couple seconds to come to a decision, and that's unfortunately a far more common and reasonable take than "my partner just randomly lost his marbles and is in a complete delusional breakdown right now". Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: For the sake of argument let's assume they missed a suppressed pistol during the pat down. Somehow. Not really reasonable but whatever. Things happened fast for her. But then they slowed down. She can say whatever she wants after the fact, but if you're going to try to take someone's life I'd argue you that morally speaking you need to know something beyond, "My partner just yelled." She saw nothing, had no target, there was no threat to be seen or heard, etc etc. Obviously she beat the rap but no way you or me could walk away scot-free from mag dumping into an occupied patrol car based on an acorn falling and a buddy yelling that he's under fire. She heard a weird bang sound, then turned to see her partner fall while screaming in panic that he's been shot and begin firing into the back of the patrol car at a suspect that had been known to possess a suppressed firearm a few hours earlier. Given the context of the event, I agree with the assessment she had a reasonable belief that a weapon had been missed during the patdown, and that there was a suspect in the back of the car that had just shot and disabled her partner and was actively trying to kill him. She had a couple seconds to come to a decision, and that's unfortunately a far more common and reasonable take than "my partner just randomly lost his marbles and is in a complete delusional breakdown right now". With those kind of mental gymnastics, at least she will never have to actually work out. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/14/2024 9:49:23 PM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted: There was indeed a reasonable basis for her belief and actions, but not for his. Report https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/214740/IMG_7885-3129158.jpg https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/214740/IMG_7886-3129159.jpg Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: When your partner goes to pull a subject from the back of his car and give him a more thorough search for the suppressed firearm he was known to possess shortly before being arrested, then your partner falls down and starts screaming he was shot after you heard a weird sound, the reasonable assumption under the circumstances is the suspect you have in custody just shot him with a firearm someone missed during the previous patdown. The fact it didn't objectively happen is separate from what she could have been reasonably expected to think given the information she was presented, in the short amount of time she had to process it and make a decision. The report from the SO is a good read, and I agree with its conclusion that she acted reasonably given what she had to go on under the circumstances. But this is the point. There's no reasonable basis for such a belief. After the fact varnishing to the contrary, what both of these idiots did, when you boil it down the the most basic factors, is that they started shooting at noises. Report https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/214740/IMG_7885-3129158.jpg https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/214740/IMG_7886-3129159.jpg I'm going with she is good. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/14/2024 9:51:59 PM EDT
[#12]
This guy's putting himself on the line against murderous squirrels and you guys mock him.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/14/2024 10:09:03 PM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Did she know he was still a threat? Had he surrendered? Or was she just providing suppressing fire? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Well those 'noises' also included her partner also screaming that he'd just been shot by the suspect that was in the back seat of car, which she had no reason to doubt. I absolutely do agree with their determination that she made the correct decision given the information she had at the time. Did she know he was still a threat? Had he surrendered? Or was she just providing suppressing fire? |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/14/2024 10:11:05 PM EDT
[#14]
thats messed up
I turned volume on PC as high as I could and didn't hear anything from him walking to shouting "shots fired" |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/14/2024 10:15:09 PM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted: She didn't know her target. She shouldn't have shot. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: There was indeed a reasonable basis for her belief and actions, but not for his. Report https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/214740/IMG_7885-3129158.jpg https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/214740/IMG_7886-3129159.jpg Listen, even that comes back to exactly what I posted: shooting at noises. The difference is that the department's brass seems to think that shooting, mag-dumping really, is a reasonable response to a noise, and apparently you agree. Did you take note that these LE professionals evidently can't proofread well enough to catch "interrupted" where they presumably meant to use "interpreted"? Color me skeptical about their conclusions in general. She didn't know her target. She shouldn't have shot. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/14/2024 10:23:31 PM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Every indication she had at the moment she fired was that she was in an active shootout with an armed suspect that was direct threat to her partner. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Well those 'noises' also included her partner also screaming that he'd just been shot by the suspect that was in the back seat of car, which she had no reason to doubt. I absolutely do agree with their determination that she made the correct decision given the information she had at the time. Did she know he was still a threat? Had he surrendered? Or was she just providing suppressing fire? These dopes are somehow held to a lower standard than a 10 yo with a 22lr at my place  Wonder if this woman would have been swiftly cleared if she lit up the police chief's kid in the exact same manner lol |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/14/2024 10:25:48 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted: At my own private range the rules are know your target and what's beyond it. For the cops it's, "My buddy screwed up and I murdered someone I never even saw but it's ok because I believed my fuck-up buddy who heard an acorn fall or something." These dopes are somehow held to a lower standard than a 10 yo with a 22lr at my place Wonder if this woman would have been swiftly cleared if she lit up the police chief's kid in the exact same manner lol I know if I was told there was an active shooter threat I would abide all of my private shooting range rules. Hopefully I have a Range Safety Officer present to tell me if the range is hot or cold. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/14/2024 10:27:56 PM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I know if I was told there was an active shooter threat I would abide all of my private shooting range rules. Hopefully I have a Range Safety Officer present to tell me if the range is hot or cold. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: At my own private range the rules are know your target and what's beyond it. For the cops it's, "My buddy screwed up and I murdered someone I never even saw but it's ok because I believed my fuck-up buddy who heard an acorn fall or something." These dopes are somehow held to a lower standard than a 10 yo with a 22lr at my place Wonder if this woman would have been swiftly cleared if she lit up the police chief's kid in the exact same manner lol I know if I was told there was an active shooter threat I would abide all of my private shooting range rules. Hopefully I have a Range Safety Officer present to tell me if the range is hot or cold. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/14/2024 10:37:26 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Commissioned SF officers don't go out on patrol? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: No wonder he blew it up so fast When asked about prior military experience, Deputy Hernandez said he attended West Point, and was an infantry officer and an officer in special forces for the army for a total of ten years. Deputy Hernandez said he had two combat rotations to Afghanistan, but noted as an officer, he was not in direct combat Commissioned SF officers don't go out on patrol? |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/14/2024 10:37:31 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted: At my own private range the rules are know your target and what's beyond it. For the cops it's, "My buddy screwed up and I murdered someone I never even saw but it's ok because I believed my fuck-up buddy who heard an acorn fall or something." These dopes are somehow held to a lower standard than a 10 yo with a 22lr at my place Wonder if this woman would have been swiftly cleared if she lit up the police chief's kid in the exact same manner lol    |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/14/2024 10:39:43 PM EDT
[#21]
They need to revisit the psych eval they are using.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/14/2024 10:48:43 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted: So THIS is why we need to ban ghost guns. Acorn guns 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/14/2024 10:57:34 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted: She knew her target, which was an apparent armed suspect concealed behind tinted glass in the rear of the patrol car that her partner told her had just shot him and was still an active threat. That it turned out not to be the facts of the case is separate from what she reasonably knew at the time, given the circumstances. He fucked up tremendously, but she reacted appropriately to the information she had at hand. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: There was indeed a reasonable basis for her belief and actions, but not for his. Report https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/214740/IMG_7885-3129158.jpg https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/214740/IMG_7886-3129159.jpg Listen, even that comes back to exactly what I posted: shooting at noises. The difference is that the department's brass seems to think that shooting, mag-dumping really, is a reasonable response to a noise, and apparently you agree. Did you take note that these LE professionals evidently can't proofread well enough to catch "interrupted" where they presumably meant to use "interpreted"? Color me skeptical about their conclusions in general. She didn't know her target. She shouldn't have shot. So someone could have fell down, yelled they had been shot, pointed to Acorn, and she would have done the same? |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/14/2024 11:01:02 PM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: At my own private range the rules are know your target and what's beyond it. For the cops it's, "My buddy screwed up and I murdered someone I never even saw but it's ok because I believed my fuck-up buddy who heard an acorn fall or something." These dopes are somehow held to a lower standard than a 10 yo with a 22lr at my place Wonder if this woman would have been swiftly cleared if she lit up the police chief's kid in the exact same manner lol https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/214740/IMG_7892-3129572.jpg https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/214740/IMG_7890-3129574.jpg https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/214740/IMG_7891-3129576.jpg Did they ask Sgt. Roberts why she didn't subdue Jesse after figuring out just how crazy his actions were? |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/14/2024 11:02:09 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: At my own private range the rules are know your target and what's beyond it. For the cops it's, "My buddy screwed up and I murdered someone I never even saw but it's ok because I believed my fuck-up buddy who heard an acorn fall or something." These dopes are somehow held to a lower standard than a 10 yo with a 22lr at my place Wonder if this woman would have been swiftly cleared if she lit up the police chief's kid in the exact same manner lol https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/214740/IMG_7892-3129572.jpg https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/214740/IMG_7890-3129574.jpg https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/214740/IMG_7891-3129576.jpg "Oops, my bad. Next time maybe I'll double-check before I try to kill someone, just to make sure they actually did something wrong." Obviously I'm looking at this from the standpoint that she gambled the facts would justify her reckless actions...and whoops, that's not what happened so there should be consequences. You're in the "reasonable belief" camp and that's fine too. Either way her buddies cleared her of any wrongdoing  |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/14/2024 11:02:20 PM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted: At my own private range the rules are know your target and what's beyond it. For the cops it's, "My buddy screwed up and I murdered someone I never even saw but it's ok because I believed my fuck-up buddy who heard an acorn fall or something." These dopes are somehow held to a lower standard than a 10 yo with a 22lr at my place Wonder if this woman would have been swiftly cleared if she lit up the police chief's kid in the exact same manner lol If your wife was rolling around on the ground yelling that she’s shot and shooting at a car in front of your house are you gonna wait and see if she makes it? |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/14/2024 11:03:45 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I'd have to assume if a cop is great at his job you'll never hear about him, isn't that the point? Shitty cops end up in the news and good cops get shot at by assholes because the shitty cops hurt people because they should be working at HomeDepot. Not even true. Been clean from civil suits and internal investigations, but been in the news with some wild accusations. A great cop will get into enough stuff to end up on the news. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/14/2024 11:05:10 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I read it all and I understand and agree with her thought process almost all the way...right up until we remember the facts: the poor sucker she's trying to kill is seated in her vehicle with his hands cuffed behind him. She wouldn't know cuz she never even saw him though. "Oops, my bad. Next time maybe I'll double-check before I try to kill someone, just to make sure they actually did something wrong." Obviously I'm looking at this from the standpoint that she gambled the facts would justify her reckless actions...and whoops, that's not what happened so there should be consequences. You're in the "reasonable belief" camp and that's fine too. Either way her buddies cleared her of any wrongdoing The fact that she’s only responsible for acting reasonably with the information available to her is why you don’t have to die in prison if you smoke your neighbor for crawling into your house instead of his. Or why you could be justified in shooting an officer who slipped into your house through an open door unannounced. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/14/2024 11:05:19 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The only thing missing from her Cyril Figgis impression was yelling "Suppressing fire!" Police training includes suppressing fire, doesn't it? Ditching plastic guns with Hi-Cap magazines and a return to revolvers would eliminate these panicked mag dumps from high strung LEOs  (or at least slow them down a little ) |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/14/2024 11:05:42 PM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted: If your wife was rolling around on the ground yelling that she’s shot and shooting at a car in front of your house are you gonna wait and see if she makes it? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: At my own private range the rules are know your target and what's beyond it. For the cops it's, "My buddy screwed up and I murdered someone I never even saw but it's ok because I believed my fuck-up buddy who heard an acorn fall or something." These dopes are somehow held to a lower standard than a 10 yo with a 22lr at my place Wonder if this woman would have been swiftly cleared if she lit up the police chief's kid in the exact same manner lol If your wife was rolling around on the ground yelling that she’s shot and shooting at a car in front of your house are you gonna wait and see if she makes it? Are you going to go free after doing so and it turns out you killed someone that did not in fact shoot your wife, and was in no way capable of shooting your wife? |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/14/2024 11:07:07 PM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted: If your wife was rolling around on the ground yelling that she's shot and shooting at a car in front of your house are you gonna wait and see if she makes it? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: At my own private range the rules are know your target and what's beyond it. For the cops it's, "My buddy screwed up and I murdered someone I never even saw but it's ok because I believed my fuck-up buddy who heard an acorn fall or something." These dopes are somehow held to a lower standard than a 10 yo with a 22lr at my place Wonder if this woman would have been swiftly cleared if she lit up the police chief's kid in the exact same manner lol If your wife was rolling around on the ground yelling that she's shot and shooting at a car in front of your house are you gonna wait and see if she makes it? Unlike the cops. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/14/2024 11:09:29 PM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Nope probably not, and if I fuck up and waste some innocent person I'd have to face the consequences. That's my entire basis here: normal people have to pay up when they gamble and lose. Unlike the cops. Different laws for the people and the .gov. You know that though. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/14/2024 11:13:01 PM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Nope probably not, and if I fuck up and waste some innocent person I'd have to face the consequences. That's my entire basis here: normal people have to pay up when they gamble and lose. Unlike the cops. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: At my own private range the rules are know your target and what's beyond it. For the cops it's, "My buddy screwed up and I murdered someone I never even saw but it's ok because I believed my fuck-up buddy who heard an acorn fall or something." These dopes are somehow held to a lower standard than a 10 yo with a 22lr at my place Wonder if this woman would have been swiftly cleared if she lit up the police chief's kid in the exact same manner lol If your wife was rolling around on the ground yelling that she's shot and shooting at a car in front of your house are you gonna wait and see if she makes it? Unlike the cops. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/14/2024 11:15:01 PM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The fact that she's only responsible for acting reasonably with the information available to her is why you don't have to die in prison if you smoke your neighbor for crawling into your house instead of his. Or why you could be justified in shooting an officer who slipped into your house through an open door unannounced. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: I read it all and I understand and agree with her thought process almost all the way...right up until we remember the facts: the poor sucker she's trying to kill is seated in her vehicle with his hands cuffed behind him. She wouldn't know cuz she never even saw him though. "Oops, my bad. Next time maybe I'll double-check before I try to kill someone, just to make sure they actually did something wrong." Obviously I'm looking at this from the standpoint that she gambled the facts would justify her reckless actions...and whoops, that's not what happened so there should be consequences. You're in the "reasonable belief" camp and that's fine too. Either way her buddies cleared her of any wrongdoing The fact that she's only responsible for acting reasonably with the information available to her is why you don't have to die in prison if you smoke your neighbor for crawling into your house instead of his. Or why you could be justified in shooting an officer who slipped into your house through an open door unannounced. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/14/2024 11:19:33 PM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I read it all and I understand and agree with her thought process almost all the way...right up until we remember the facts: the poor sucker she's trying to kill is seated in her vehicle with his hands cuffed behind him. She wouldn't know cuz she never even saw him though. "Oops, my bad. Next time maybe I'll double-check before I try to kill someone, just to make sure they actually did something wrong." Obviously I'm looking at this from the standpoint that she gambled the facts would justify her reckless actions...and whoops, that's not what happened so there should be consequences. You're in the "reasonable belief" camp and that's fine too. Either way her buddies cleared her of any wrongdoing Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: At my own private range the rules are know your target and what's beyond it. For the cops it's, "My buddy screwed up and I murdered someone I never even saw but it's ok because I believed my fuck-up buddy who heard an acorn fall or something." These dopes are somehow held to a lower standard than a 10 yo with a 22lr at my place Wonder if this woman would have been swiftly cleared if she lit up the police chief's kid in the exact same manner lol https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/214740/IMG_7892-3129572.jpg https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/214740/IMG_7890-3129574.jpg https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/214740/IMG_7891-3129576.jpg "Oops, my bad. Next time maybe I'll double-check before I try to kill someone, just to make sure they actually did something wrong." Obviously I'm looking at this from the standpoint that she gambled the facts would justify her reckless actions...and whoops, that's not what happened so there should be consequences. You're in the "reasonable belief" camp and that's fine too. Either way her buddies cleared her of any wrongdoing |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/14/2024 11:20:27 PM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Not-subtle difference... In both those scenarios I'd be shooting someone I actually saw in the act of committing a crime. With my own eyes. Not really a difference. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/14/2024 11:25:24 PM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Not-subtle difference... In both those scenarios I'd be shooting someone I actually saw in the act of committing a crime. With my own eyes. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: I read it all and I understand and agree with her thought process almost all the way...right up until we remember the facts: the poor sucker she's trying to kill is seated in her vehicle with his hands cuffed behind him. She wouldn't know cuz she never even saw him though. "Oops, my bad. Next time maybe I'll double-check before I try to kill someone, just to make sure they actually did something wrong." Obviously I'm looking at this from the standpoint that she gambled the facts would justify her reckless actions...and whoops, that's not what happened so there should be consequences. You're in the "reasonable belief" camp and that's fine too. Either way her buddies cleared her of any wrongdoing The fact that she's only responsible for acting reasonably with the information available to her is why you don't have to die in prison if you smoke your neighbor for crawling into your house instead of his. Or why you could be justified in shooting an officer who slipped into your house through an open door unannounced. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/14/2024 11:28:08 PM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted: That's just it: she didn't act recklessly, given the facts as she knew them at that moment. What is she supposed to do, ask him to take a picture of his bullet wound and text it to her before she responded? She had absolutely no reason to doubt anything she saw at that moment wasn't exactly what it appeared to be. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: At my own private range the rules are know your target and what's beyond it. For the cops it's, "My buddy screwed up and I murdered someone I never even saw but it's ok because I believed my fuck-up buddy who heard an acorn fall or something." These dopes are somehow held to a lower standard than a 10 yo with a 22lr at my place Wonder if this woman would have been swiftly cleared if she lit up the police chief's kid in the exact same manner lol https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/214740/IMG_7892-3129572.jpg https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/214740/IMG_7890-3129574.jpg https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/214740/IMG_7891-3129576.jpg "Oops, my bad. Next time maybe I'll double-check before I try to kill someone, just to make sure they actually did something wrong." Obviously I'm looking at this from the standpoint that she gambled the facts would justify her reckless actions...and whoops, that's not what happened so there should be consequences. You're in the "reasonable belief" camp and that's fine too. Either way her buddies cleared her of any wrongdoing Yeah she had no reason to doubt, because she never even saw the guy she was trying to kill lol |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/14/2024 11:31:12 PM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Committing a crime isn't the relevant standard for shooting someone, a threat to your or someone else's life or health is. If you shoot your neighbor for drunkenly walking into the wrong house you'd be shooting an innocent person that objectively wasn't a threat, but you'd likely be cleared because you made a reasonable interpretation given what you knew at that moment. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: I read it all and I understand and agree with her thought process almost all the way...right up until we remember the facts: the poor sucker she's trying to kill is seated in her vehicle with his hands cuffed behind him. She wouldn't know cuz she never even saw him though. "Oops, my bad. Next time maybe I'll double-check before I try to kill someone, just to make sure they actually did something wrong." Obviously I'm looking at this from the standpoint that she gambled the facts would justify her reckless actions...and whoops, that's not what happened so there should be consequences. You're in the "reasonable belief" camp and that's fine too. Either way her buddies cleared her of any wrongdoing The fact that she's only responsible for acting reasonably with the information available to her is why you don't have to die in prison if you smoke your neighbor for crawling into your house instead of his. Or why you could be justified in shooting an officer who slipped into your house through an open door unannounced. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/14/2024 11:32:10 PM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted: If your wife was rolling around on the ground yelling that she’s shot and shooting at a car in front of your house are you gonna wait and see if she makes it? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: At my own private range the rules are know your target and what's beyond it. For the cops it's, "My buddy screwed up and I murdered someone I never even saw but it's ok because I believed my fuck-up buddy who heard an acorn fall or something." These dopes are somehow held to a lower standard than a 10 yo with a 22lr at my place Wonder if this woman would have been swiftly cleared if she lit up the police chief's kid in the exact same manner lol If your wife was rolling around on the ground yelling that she’s shot and shooting at a car in front of your house are you gonna wait and see if she makes it? I wouldn’t expect that I’d get to walk away when the detectives find out it was actually an acorn. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/14/2024 11:33:55 PM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted: If not "reckless", what word would you use to describe trying to kill an innocent man who has his hands cuffed behind him? In your police car. Where you put him. After searching him for weapons. And who has said and done nothing threatening whatsoever. Yeah she had no reason to doubt, because she never even saw the guy she was trying to kill lol It’s critical that you understand this: facts don’t matter if they would be unknown to a reasonable person. Only things that an objectively reasonable person in that situation would know or perceive matter. If someone comes running up to you with a knife in his bloody hands are you shooting him? My buddy did that once, cut an artery accidentally at work and bled everywhere. Fortunately no one shot him and they got the bleeding stopped. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/14/2024 11:34:41 PM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Not really a difference. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Not-subtle difference... In both those scenarios I'd be shooting someone I actually saw in the act of committing a crime. With my own eyes. Not really a difference. Huge difference. Primary vs. secondary information. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/14/2024 11:38:40 PM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Huge difference. Primary vs. secondary information. It’s reasonable under some circumstances to act with secondary information. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2024 12:01:10 AM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted: It's reasonable under some circumstances to act with secondary information. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Huge difference. Primary vs. secondary information. It's reasonable under some circumstances to act with secondary information. Like I said above, when you gamble without the benefit of even basic first-hand information (such as maybe verifying who you're trying to kill before you start blasting away at a handcuffed and innocent man) then in my perfect world you should face some kind of consequences when the facts don't justify the insert-adjective-here actions you took. That's all. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2024 12:01:22 AM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted: That's just it: she didn't act recklessly, given the facts as she knew them at that moment. What is she supposed to do, ask him to take a picture of his bullet wound and text it to her before she responded? She had absolutely no reason to doubt anything she saw at that moment wasn't exactly what it appeared to be. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: At my own private range the rules are know your target and what's beyond it. For the cops it's, "My buddy screwed up and I murdered someone I never even saw but it's ok because I believed my fuck-up buddy who heard an acorn fall or something." These dopes are somehow held to a lower standard than a 10 yo with a 22lr at my place Wonder if this woman would have been swiftly cleared if she lit up the police chief's kid in the exact same manner lol https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/214740/IMG_7892-3129572.jpg https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/214740/IMG_7890-3129574.jpg https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/214740/IMG_7891-3129576.jpg "Oops, my bad. Next time maybe I'll double-check before I try to kill someone, just to make sure they actually did something wrong." Obviously I'm looking at this from the standpoint that she gambled the facts would justify her reckless actions...and whoops, that's not what happened so there should be consequences. You're in the "reasonable belief" camp and that's fine too. Either way her buddies cleared her of any wrongdoing The lack of a pop comes to mind. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2024 12:07:21 AM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I'm not arguing legalities, or what a cop can technically get away with after investigating themselves and finding no evidence of wrongdoing. Like I said above, when you gamble without the benefit of even basic first-hand information (such as maybe verifying who you're trying to kill before you start blasting away at a handcuffed and innocent man) then in my perfect world you should face some kind of consequences when the facts don't justify the insert-adjective-here actions you took. That's all. That’s considered under the present standard. Whether someone reasonable would believe the force was necessary. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2024 12:08:05 AM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted: She knew her target, which was an apparent armed suspect concealed behind tinted glass in the rear of the patrol car that her partner told her had just shot him and was still an active threat. That it turned out not to be the facts of the case is separate from what she reasonably knew at the time, given the circumstances. He fucked up tremendously, but she reacted appropriately to the information she had at hand. lol. wow. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2024 12:08:13 AM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The lack of a pop comes to mind. Doesn’t matter. I’ve been near or even fired shots without hearing a gunshot. Many people have and it’s reasonable. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2024 12:09:13 AM EDT
[#49]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/15/2024 12:17:22 AM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Doesn’t matter. I’ve been near or even fired shots without hearing a gunshot. Many people have and it’s reasonable. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: The lack of a pop comes to mind. Doesn’t matter. I’ve been near or even fired shots without hearing a gunshot. Many people have and it’s reasonable. Really? You can't hear 100+ decibels near you? How did she hear him yelling then? |
|
|
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.
.jpg)
Attached File
Attached File