Justified shoot ? - Page 3

Justified shoot ?

This is a discussion on Justified shoot ? within the Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; Originally Posted by Chad Rogers My life's experience is the truth usually lies somewhere in between, but not necessarily in the middle. Add it all ...

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 31 to 40 of 40
Like Tree12Likes

Thread: Justified shoot ?

  1. #31
    Member Array jackson85746's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    AZ
    Posts
    254
    Quote Originally Posted by Chad Rogers View Post
    My life's experience is the truth usually lies somewhere in between, but not necessarily in the middle.
    Add it all up.........then divide by two. You'll get pretty close to the truth.
    Don't tread on me or mine.
    I am comfortable laying on a rock in the sun; bothering no one. If you choose to ignore the above statement, you will wish all you had to do, is deal with a snake.


  2. #32
    VIP Member Array 9MMare's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Outside Seattle, WA
    Posts
    3,309
    Quote Originally Posted by Doubledown View Post
    I do not believe that it is the responsibility of the officer to retreat. He has his gun drawn and pointed at the BG who continues to advance and will not obey commands. How far should the police retreat? Now even those that are here to protect us must give ground to the criminal? I am not going to wait to see what he has in his hand as a non LEO.
    One situation could be that the cop ends up shooting a pissed off, unarmed drunk guy reaching for his wallet.

    Does the guy deserve to die?

    I cant answer that for someone else standing in front of him.
    Fortune favors the bold.

    Freedom doesn't mean safe, it means free.

    The thing about "defense" is that it has practically nothing to do with guns. (As passed on by CCW9MM)

  3. #33
    Member Array maat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Oklahoma
    Posts
    123
    Quote Originally Posted by HotGuns View Post

    I guess you need to understand that failing to heed the warnings of a police officer and refusing to do what he tells you can get you shot. I though most of us here understood that, but perhaps not.
    IMO, OP is not questioning the LEO's shooting, he is questioning whether we have the same right to self-defense as the LEO.

    What about you giving warning to an possible serious threat? Would you have the same right to use deadly force as the LEO?

    I don't know and it would be nice to know just in case.

  4. #34
    Senior Moderator
    Array HotGuns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    15,133
    What about you giving warning to an possible serious threat? Would you have the same right to use deadly force as the LEO?
    I don't know and it would be nice to know just in case.
    Often times, a threat is not fully understood until the incident is over. What you call a possible serious threat, may not be perceived as such at the time. It can be very difficult to assess a situation because you never have all of the facts, any one of which could change the outcome.

    You have to understand that an LEO has the force of law behind him. If he commands you to stop and show your hands, he has the legal authority to do so.

    As a citizen, you do not. Also, in most states, (not all) it is the duty of a citizen to retreat if he can do so. Of course, this doesn't apply in ones home,but a Police Officer has no duty to retreat, again, the law gives him this authority.

    Now, lets say that some weird dude walks up to you on the street and he does it rather quickly. Can you legally shoot him? No, because he has not immediately threatened you, nor is you're life in danger.

    Now lets say that a cop is called to the scene to check it out. Someone has called in a "suspicious person" and all he wants to do is to see whats up. He gets out of his car, and see this guy that looks weird and acts it, and he tells the dude to come over. Now the weird guy has his hands in his pocket and the cop politely tells him to show his hands, which he can legally do because the he has the force of the law behind him and its an officer safety issue, which the courts have repeatedly upheld. Weird guy ignores the request and keeps moving towards him.

    Now that cop knows that anyone in their right mind would simply pull their hands out of their pockets to show the cop that they mean him no harm, but this guy does not, in fact he ignores the warning. Thats the first red flag right there. The cop tells him again, and still the guy ignores the warning and he is still moving towards the cop. The cop is now wondering whats up with the guy and the second red flag has popped up because obviously this guy ain't right. Now, the cop takes a step back, and screams at the guy while placing his hand on his gun and using his off hand to motion STOP. Still no response. Now the cop is thinking"here we go", and he is realizing that no good is going to come from this because the guy has ignored his warning, which carrys the force of law. The guy has demonstrated that he has no intent of following the cops verbal instructions.

    Now the guy is just several feet away and the cop knows that he must do something. Using a language that is accepted and understood around the world and needs no interpretation, the cop pulls his handgun, levels it at the weird dude and tells him one final time to stop. Know the cop knows that the guy ain't right, because anyone in their right mind would immediately cease movement when a gun was leveled at them. But this guy doesn't, he moves with purpose toward the cop. He has clearly demonstrated unlawful intent. The cop shoots. Weird guy grabs his chest, falls to the ground, and ceases to breath within a minute. The cop sees that his hands are empty.

    Now...had you been in that cops shoes, what would you have done? Would you have continued to speak until the guy grabbed you, attempted to take your gun from its holster?
    What if the guy had a knife in his pocket and now he sticks you in the gut or underneath your arm? We can what if this forever because we will never know the weird guys true intent.

    Now,same scenario, but you are a gun toting citizen. Weird guys moves toward you and you tell him to stay away. He keeps coming. You retreat. He goes on about his way.
    Or what if he doesn't? Can you articulate in a court of law that you felt threatened? Can you make 12 jurors believe that you felt threatened? Why? How? Hes hasn't done anything to prove his intent. Now, if he grabs you and you get in a scuffle, he has upped the odds in your favor considerably. If he pulls out a knife, you are in immediate danger and you shoot. But if he doesn't, if he shows no ill will, then he's just some guy that happens to be on the same sidewalk as you at the same time.

    This forum has a lot of discussions about what cops can and cant do and there is a lot of misinformation out there. Are cops held to a different standard? You bet. Are they what some people call double standards? Certainly not, because the standards are different
    .
    We get a lot of cop bashing because some people refuse to understand that and they think that they are governed by the same standards and they are not, because they do not have the force of the law behind them.

    Consider this. When you hear gunfire close-by, what is your first reaction? You instinctively duck or assume a guarded position without even realizing it. You do this for the purpose of self preservation. If you are smart, you'll grab your loved ones and get the heck out of Dodge.

    If a cop hears gunfire, he'll move to it because that it what they do. He has the force of the law behind him, its his job to do whatever he can to stop the threat.

    I hope that this has shed a bit of light on the situation and lets not forget that it was ruled as a justifiable shooting by the people that had more facts than we do.
    SIXTO, Doubledown, baren and 1 others like this.
    I would rather stand against the cannons of the wicked than against the prayers of the righteous.


    AR. CHL Instr. 07/02 FFL
    Like custom guns and stuff? Check this out...
    http://bobbailey1959.wordpress.com/

  5. #35
    VIP Member Array Secret Spuk's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    South Florida
    Posts
    3,209
    Another post that makes me go Hmmmmm!

    There is no double standard when it comes to the police. There are different standards... If anything the police have a higher degree of responsibility. The Police are considered trained professionals, and are held to a higher standard. According to the O/P it seems the shooting happened, and it was deemed justified on the same day. That hasnt been my experience with police involved shootings. There would be a police investigation, a states atty. investigation, possibly a coronors investigation, and possibly a grand jury presentation. That usually takes a few days at the minimum. However I have seen the police department release a statament aying the shooting APPEARS to be justified, and within department guidlines for the use of deadly physical force.

    Anytime that anyone... Police or public shoot and kill an unarmed person there should be a full, and thorough investigation.

  6. #36
    VIP Member
    Array ksholder's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    4,015
    Quote Originally Posted by 9MMare View Post
    Well it hasnt been thru police review yet. And then the community might demand a separate one.

    Happened here in Seattle, Aug. 2010. Young cop shot a transient woodcarver he was familiar with (peaceful) that he had to challenge for an infraction. Woodcarver disregarded and witnesses said he turned towards the cop with his knife. Cop said knife open but it was found closed on the ground.

    Anyway, he was initially let off by police review but public outrage made them conduct an outside review. He was not charged with a crime but was fired.The public wanted him up on criminal charges.

    Personally, I think he used very poor judgement as he knew this non-violent woodcarver who always had a knife and who didnt move or act aggressively. OTOH, I'm sure he was taught the Tueller drill and so that may have factored into his decision to shoot. I think he read the situation poorly, as I said, but if that's what he had been taught, then I dont think the police dept should have hung him out to dry. Never once did I hear the theory behind the Tueller drill mentioned (or read) in the media. And the woodcarver was within 22 feet.

    Just my take on all that I heard and read about it, and I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt.

    So I think 'the jury's' still out on the OP's incident that just occurred.
    IIRC, you left out a rather key bit of info. The woodcarver had significant hearing loss and could not have made out the commands of the cop, only that someone was making noise behind him - that is why he turned. That police action and the immediate follow-up by the department was FUBAR.
    It's the Land of Opportunity, not the Land of Entitlements - Vote America!!!

    "When governments fear the people there is liberty. When the people fear the government there is tyranny." Thomas Jefferson

    You are only paranoid until you are right - then you are a visionary.

  7. #37
    Member Array maat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Oklahoma
    Posts
    123
    Quote Originally Posted by HotGuns View Post
    Often times, a threat is not fully understood until the incident is over. What you call a possible serious threat, may not be perceived as such at the time. It can be very difficult to assess a situation because you never have all of the facts, any one of which could change the outcome.

    You have to understand that an LEO has the force of law behind him. If he commands you to stop and show your hands, he has the legal authority to do so.

    As a citizen, you do not. Also, in most states, (not all) it is the duty of a citizen to retreat if he can do so. Of course, this doesn't apply in ones home,but a Police Officer has no duty to retreat, again, the law gives him this authority.

    Now, lets say that some weird dude walks up to you on the street and he does it rather quickly. Can you legally shoot him? No, because he has not immediately threatened you, nor is you're life in danger.

    Now lets say that a cop is called to the scene to check it out. Someone has called in a "suspicious person" and all he wants to do is to see whats up. He gets out of his car, and see this guy that looks weird and acts it, and he tells the dude to come over. Now the weird guy has his hands in his pocket and the cop politely tells him to show his hands, which he can legally do because the he has the force of the law behind him and its an officer safety issue, which the courts have repeatedly upheld. Weird guy ignores the request and keeps moving towards him.

    Now that cop knows that anyone in their right mind would simply pull their hands out of their pockets to show the cop that they mean him no harm, but this guy does not, in fact he ignores the warning. Thats the first red flag right there. The cop tells him again, and still the guy ignores the warning and he is still moving towards the cop. The cop is now wondering whats up with the guy and the second red flag has popped up because obviously this guy ain't right. Now, the cop takes a step back, and screams at the guy while placing his hand on his gun and using his off hand to motion STOP. Still no response. Now the cop is thinking"here we go", and he is realizing that no good is going to come from this because the guy has ignored his warning, which carrys the force of law. The guy has demonstrated that he has no intent of following the cops verbal instructions.

    Now the guy is just several feet away and the cop knows that he must do something. Using a language that is accepted and understood around the world and needs no interpretation, the cop pulls his handgun, levels it at the weird dude and tells him one final time to stop. Know the cop knows that the guy ain't right, because anyone in their right mind would immediately cease movement when a gun was leveled at them. But this guy doesn't, he moves with purpose toward the cop. He has clearly demonstrated unlawful intent. The cop shoots. Weird guy grabs his chest, falls to the ground, and ceases to breath within a minute. The cop sees that his hands are empty.

    Now...had you been in that cops shoes, what would you have done? Would you have continued to speak until the guy grabbed you, attempted to take your gun from its holster?
    What if the guy had a knife in his pocket and now he sticks you in the gut or underneath your arm? We can what if this forever because we will never know the weird guys true intent.

    Now,same scenario, but you are a gun toting citizen. Weird guys moves toward you and you tell him to stay away. He keeps coming. You retreat. He goes on about his way.
    Or what if he doesn't? Can you articulate in a court of law that you felt threatened? Can you make 12 jurors believe that you felt threatened? Why? How? Hes hasn't done anything to prove his intent. Now, if he grabs you and you get in a scuffle, he has upped the odds in your favor considerably. If he pulls out a knife, you are in immediate danger and you shoot. But if he doesn't, if he shows no ill will, then he's just some guy that happens to be on the same sidewalk as you at the same time.

    This forum has a lot of discussions about what cops can and cant do and there is a lot of misinformation out there. Are cops held to a different standard? You bet. Are they what some people call double standards? Certainly not, because the standards are different
    .
    We get a lot of cop bashing because some people refuse to understand that and they think that they are governed by the same standards and they are not, because they do not have the force of the law behind them.

    Consider this. When you hear gunfire close-by, what is your first reaction? You instinctively duck or assume a guarded position without even realizing it. You do this for the purpose of self preservation. If you are smart, you'll grab your loved ones and get the heck out of Dodge.

    If a cop hears gunfire, he'll move to it because that it what they do. He has the force of the law behind him, its his job to do whatever he can to stop the threat.

    I hope that this has shed a bit of light on the situation and lets not forget that it was ruled as a justifiable shooting by the people that had more facts than we do.
    I agree, the LEO has a superior position when it comes to compliance with orders. What I do question is how far can the citizen go in protecting himself from an unknown possible threat.

    I would likely move away from the possible aggressor in an attempt to see if he has intent towards me. If he were to follow me, I would likely consider him a threat at this point. I would think that I have the same right to self-defense as a LEO at this point.

    I agree with you that I will need to be able to justify my action more so than the LEO. Someone coming at someone with the appearence of a possible weapon and to do harm, but not saying anything would be a difficult call for anyone.

  8. #38
    VIP Member Array 9MMare's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Outside Seattle, WA
    Posts
    3,309
    Quote Originally Posted by ksholder View Post
    IIRC, you left out a rather key bit of info. The woodcarver had significant hearing loss and could not have made out the commands of the cop, only that someone was making noise behind him - that is why he turned. That police action and the immediate follow-up by the department was FUBAR.
    Interesting...I have heard and read many news reports on this and the report outcomes. I have heard his family speak on the incident. I never once heard that he was hard of hearing. OTOH, the officer was very familiar with this woodcarver. He would have known that.

    I think the most damning thing against the officer was that when the knife was found on the ground...it was closed. But again....he most certainly knew the woodcarver was armed.
    Fortune favors the bold.

    Freedom doesn't mean safe, it means free.

    The thing about "defense" is that it has practically nothing to do with guns. (As passed on by CCW9MM)

  9. #39
    Senior Member Array mastercapt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    503
    If you felt that your life was threatened at the time you shot, you are justified. Wether or not you are a LEO.

  10. #40
    Senior Member Array Gaius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    677
    Quote Originally Posted by mastercapt View Post
    If you felt that your life was threatened at the time you shot, you are justified. Wether or not you are a LEO.
    First, HotGuns has presented probably the best explanation i have seen regarding the different roles of the poise and citizen in a shooting.

    That being said, I respectfully disagree with mastercapt. You are using a subjective standard to determine whether a shooting was justifiable. That is, if the shooter in his mind felt threatened, the shoot is justifiable. I believe the legal standard is quite different. The law uses an objective standard. That is, it is not what the individual subjectively believed, but rather what the mythical "ordinary, reasonable and prudent person" would have believed under the same or similar circumstances. And this is probably how it should be. For example, we could arguably have someone who subjectively see deadly threats behind every corner, whether real or imagined. The problem with a subjective standard is that that even an imagined threat could be used to justify a shooting. The law will not accept this. Were your actions reasonably under the circumstances is the key. And reasonable is judged objectively, not subjectively.
    Best way to win a gun fight? "That's easy, don't show up."
    --Wyatt Earp

    "Fast is fine, but accuracy is everything."
    -- Wyatt Earp

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Sponsored Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Search tags for this page

arkansas act 83

,

concealed carry when is it not justified to shoot

,

gun holster on justified

,

if a cop shoots a person who he thinks may have a wepon is that justified

,

justifiable shooting buffalo

,

justifiable shooting storys

,

justified defense positions for concealed carry of weapon

,

justified shooting with concealed carry

,

seattle cop shoots woodcarver defensivecarry

,

what is a justifiable shooting

,

what is ajustified shoot

,

what is considered justified in chl laws

Click on a term to search for related topics.