I sat back and watched 2 officers try to get a guy to put a shotgun down........ even though he occassionally swung it around and wasn't watching muzzle control at all, he didn't do it in a threatening manner . He had pulled the gun out and called 911 because someone was trying to break into his house. He was no threat to the police, if you knew him. But, he can't hear squat without his hearing aids and it was late and he didn't have them in....... it would have been stupid and a real shame if they would have used bad judgement and shot him.
When they finally got the point across to him ...... he said "oh hell, forgot I had this in my arms" .... and quickly put it on the ground, apologizing 100 times for it to the police officers. It took them about 40 minutes to get to that point, and didn't want to get too close to him during that period, but close enough. 4
Any "good" police officer doesn't respond only in black and white .... you do this then I shoot you. They are good at analyzing and assessing ... and are aware they may meet people that are senile, have dementia, can't hear, or may have other issues..... none of which are life threatening. But , there are those who don't engage their brain, don't analyze, don't assess and make bad judgments as a result. And sometimes, it's hard to tell ..... and they will take the side of their safety, which it is hard to blame them for doing.
A pretty fool-proof way to get shot, IMO. Point a gun at someone with apparent manifest intent to fire, and you get what you get.Quote:
He [resident] comes to the door of his house holding a gun. He does not respond to repeated commands [by police] to drop the gun. Instead, he raises the muzzle toward the police. They fire.
I must know why the police came to his door in order to answer. I read the article. I believe this shooting was within the law.
It was HIS house. The cops should have put THEIR guns down. That is all I will say as my honest thoughts won't go over well on this forum.
The "problem" is that the Seattle police have been having use of force / abuse issues in the news lately, so the public is upset. And we are all trained to believe that cops are super heroes and can not make mistakes with thier guns, that is why they are the only people who should have them. So people then assume that it was a choice/decision made by these particular officers that is to blame.
This is part of the brainwashing that the media didn't see coming. Call the cops when you have problems. That's always the answer. They just forgot that even when you call the cops, things don't always turn out good.
Any rational person will not blame the officers for protecting themselves, and I doubt anyone other than the homeowner regrets what happened more than the officers will for the rest of their lives. Now we just need to get the media to leave them alone.
He raised a gun at cops after he was told the police would be responding. There Was no choice WRT the police action taken IMO. The police can't make a medical assessment of his mental capiciaty other than he can raise a gun at them.
Use a taser? No. Blame the cops for not knowing he suffered from alzheimer's, no. Be mad at the family for not removing ALL the firearms and placing him in an assisted-living OR having someone there with him as this nasty condition advanced and slowly took from this man his life? Yes. I've witnessed firsthand how alzheimer's can destroy a once strong person.
The cops did what they could/had to do. I am certinally sympathic to the family, and the police for having to shoot as well, but this should have NOT happened..... and by no fault of the responding officers.
Both officers were vetern officers with plenty of experience in assessing and making decisions under pressure. When a gun comes into play things change. Training and that mental 'autopilot' kicks in along with adrenialin and very healthly dose of fear.
Sounds like the police were presented with a tough and extremely dangerous situation. They will have to live with the actions that they had to take to ensure their safety.
Some in the victim's family sound like their are going through the 'they should've/could've' gyrations...I'd seriously like to ask the family, "Dad (the victim's son) took away 'most' of his father's guns when he was diagnosed/started becoming sick, but why not all of them??"