Police shoot armed man who trying to defend hisself

FireStar M40 · Aug 29, 2012

No Matter How Hard We Try..

We have to realize that no matter how hard we try to have "EMNofSeattle" see the situation for what it was, we'll never be able to change his thinking that (in this case), the "Cops Did NO Wrong!"

Unfortunate as it is, beliefs like this only lead to more and more of our freedoms taken away. It is so sad.

FireStar M40

EMNofSeattle · Aug 29, 2012

FireStar M40 said:
We have to realize that no matter how hard we try to have "EMNofSeattle" see the situation for what it was, we'll never be able to change his thinking that (in this case), the "Cops Did NO Wrong!" Unfortunate as it is, beliefs like this only lead to more and more of our freedoms taken away. It is so sad.

FireStar M40

No, you make the situation out to be something it is not without evidence. your freedoms have been taken away as a result of a defensive shooting in some county no one's heard of in Florida? yeah interesting case you're making there.

If you have evidence that this was anything other then a defensive shooting by police, then please go ahead and share it. you have nothing other then your blind belief that the cops must be wrong.

sharkey · Aug 29, 2012

I present to you the emotional case of the little 7 year old killed and a rational discussion by RT propaganda ... I mean news. Over 50 thousand time a year in the U.S. !!! That does not seem to be rare or unusual.

It's been said in other threads and other places, if you have proper intel arrest the individuals outside, there is no need for these no knock raids.

ETA I just watched the whole video and while I almost cried I feel compelled to add the following disclaimer;

The views and opinions expressed in this video are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of any poster on opencarry.org including myself.

[video=youtube;3hjcHjN7Fe8]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3hjcHjN7Fe8[/video]

http://youtu.be/b-RTBlZ_z1I

Search youtube for all the officer cam videos of innocent dogs dying if you don't care about the people who die.

ugggh, I cringe at the word licensed. My guns aren't licensed.

sharkey · Aug 29, 2012

davidmcbeth said:
OK, this guy is deceased so there is nothing we can do for him. But what about others in the same situation in the future....

Here is what I have done in such situations (only a few times ... relatives traveling to "surprise me" with a visit):
1) do not open the door
2) have a rifle with a night vision scope prepared already
3) go out back door (after checking and making sure its clear)
4) go around to the front at a distance most favorable to you (you have night vision and a rifle & they may or may not--so still take cover)
5) yell over to the persons to leave your property
6) take it from there

Others have a roof option ... which is good too but you have limited escape options.

2 3 and 4 will get you killed.

I could quote and respond to waaaay to many reply's here. So I'll just put this out there without quoting anyone else. This is madness.

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=home+invasion+fake+police

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=police+kill+at+wrong+address

sharkey · Aug 29, 2012

I've used the ignore feature for the first time ever on opencarry.org. I didn't even do that to HankT but he's an intentional troll. EMNofSeattle actually believes what he is saying and that's scary.

EMNofSeattle · Aug 29, 2012

great, so you bring a case in which a police officer obviously acted in the wrong and killed a little girl and lied about, and inject it into a discussion that has nothing to do with that case. two deputies shooting a grown man (who happened to be involved in drug activity) who *allegedly* stuck a gun in their face has noting to do with crooked cops in detroit shooting a little girl.

EMNofSeattle · Aug 29, 2012

MKEgal said:
That's similar to the anti's argument about an innocent person being forced to break into a house to use the phone to call 911, & the evil gun owner waking up & shooting the intruder...
If I were in the position of needing to use someone's phone, I'd be banging on the door & shouting long before breaking in, & if I thought I had to break in I'd be shouting as I entered, & until I found the phone.
"I have an emergency, please call 911 for an ambulance, I need to call 911, please call 911..."
I sure as heck wouldn't be quiet about it, sneaking around, or leaving the lights off.

I've never heard an anti make an argument that dumb, are anti's seriously that bad in Wisconsin?

OC for ME · Aug 29, 2012

EMNofSeattle said:
The family lawyer can say what he wants, I've been spending the last hour searching United States Code and can't find anything about it, so it's unlikely that federal law says that.

He was not executed, he was shot after pointing a gun at people, that's justifiable homicide. The officers in question did not execute a no-knock warrant at the residence, they did not force entry, they didn't even have a warrant. no intention to search anything, they simply knocked at the door. tell me if the guy had pointed a gun at girl scouts selling cookies would you be taking his side? it doesn't matter what time of day it is, pointing a gun people you're not legally justified to shoot is a bad idea, and is a crime. would a reasonable person fear for their life if while they're being peaceful a gun points at their head? most certainly.

So your idea is to believe the one girlfriend then over the words of the cops, and criminally charge them and destroy their careers with no corroborating evidence? that sounds like you don't support due process for police, so you believe police could be held to a different standard then a civilian?

Of course she didn't see him with the gun, if she did she wouldn't be able to sue the department and push for a settlement. While not explicit stated in the article, those cops would already be in firing proceedings if a gun or something that looked like a gun was not recovered at the scene.

Suspects gun retrieved at scene? If no then the officers lied or are incompetent, charge with manslaughter, if yes (which is most likely) then the girl is lying and should be charged with making a false statement to investigators.

and take a look at this

"If the name of the law enforcement agency was announced, do you think this could've been prevented?" asked WFTV reporter Ryan Hughes.

"Well, based upon what we found inside his home -- drugs, scales, pipes, baggies -- I can't answer that. I don't know what he thought," Herrell said. "

http://www.wftv.com/news/news/local/deputy-involved-shooting-lake-county/nPtDq/

What's that sound like to you? a drug dealer maybe? Well maybe he knew it was the cops all along and decided he didn't want to go to prison. I have a hard time believing a 20 year old girlfriend of a man who's minor flaw was carrying all the required drug dealing equipment over the word of three sheriff's deputies who didn't even open his door.

Until a trial, the witness is just as credible as the three officers.

The drugs stuff is irreverent and immaterial to the facts of the shooting. The deputies did not know about the drugs before hand and now that we do this information it will be used to discredit a "strung-out girl friend" of a dope dealer as a credible witness. It has already worked, on you.

You choose to give the deputies the benefit of the doubt for the simple fact that they are cops.

PistolPackingMomma · Aug 29, 2012

EMNofSeattle said:
No, you make the situation out to be something it is not without evidence.

Isn't that precisely what you've been doing, with all of your assumptions? You are taking the word of the cops, because they are cops, and the dead man can't contradict them. Sorry, but a badge just doesn't automatically make them more trust worthy or honest than anyone else with their butt on the line and something to lose.

cabledawg · Aug 29, 2012

OC for ME said:
You choose to give the deputies the benefit of the doubt for the simple fact that they are cops.

And you all have chosen to discredit the deputies for the simple fact that they are cops. Prejudice at it's finest.

OC for ME · Aug 29, 2012

cabledawg said:
And you all have chosen to discredit the deputies for the simple fact that they are cops. Prejudice at it's finest.

The deputies stated that they did not ID themselves. The GF states that the vic did not point his gun at whoever it was from her perspective. The cops went to the wrong house, essentially they just assumed that a warm motorcycle in front of a apartment meant that the perp they were searching for was in that apartment. All the vic did was answer his door at 1:30 in the morning and sees three dudes on a darkened door step. The deputies may have seen a gun, then again they could have thought that the mere presence of a gun is the same as pointing a gun.

We don't even know for certain if any words were exchange based on news reports.

So, the preponderance of the available "evidence" leans me to discount the deputies account until they can prove that they were in fact following the law and department policy. The vic gets the benefit of the doubt until the deputies are found innocent of any wrong doing. I highly doubt that a jury of their peers will ever see this "case" in a criminal proceeding.

Civil action is almost certain, yet the deputies may remain unharmed due to how civil judgements are typically paid out to victims. Though, it is possible the county would not approve of a payout and the deputy(s) could be forced to pay the award if any out of their own pocket.

Is there a law in FL that states that you are not permitted to point a firearm, while on your own property, when you reasonably believe that you are in imminent danger of great bodily harm or death? Obviously we will never be able to know what the vic thought he believed was going on that night or who he thought those three strangers were at 1:30 in the morning on his darkened front step.

As I stated previously, three breathing cops against one dead drug dealer and is strung-out GF.

KYGlockster · Aug 29, 2012

px4guy said:
I'm a little conflicted here. Obviously it sucks that he was killed, but had the guy answered the door in the manner you describe, maybe he would still be alive. What I got out of the video was that he opened the door while pointing the gun at the deputies. The deputies most likely could have seen that this was indeed the wrong man, but in their defense and for all they knew, he could have been someone with a warrant from another jurisdiction that freaked out at the thought of being taken in and was dead set on taking one of them out. In any event, it's just sad all the way around. It sucks that he had to die, and it also sucks that the officers have to live with the fact that they killed a seemingly innocent man.

So just because this guy answered HIS door to HIS house armed it would allow the cops to "believe" he was someone with a warrant? Anytime law enforcement knocks on a door they should identify themselves, but they normally don't. This is like the cops that shot the vet in AZ. The majority of Leo comments supported the officers' actions and believed it was the vet's fault for firing on police (even though he didn't know it was the police executing a search warrant at the WRONG address). Some comments even claimed the vet got what he deserved and so forth. Blame should be on the officers for not identifying like they should knocking on a stranger's door. Sure, hr could have hid hi weapon or looked out a window, by perhaps there was no window. And, it was his house at early hours; who else would be prowling around knocking on doors at a late hour? If he answered with his weapon lowered a felon could have shot him point blank before he had time to react. The officers were no serving a no knock warrant, therefore they should have identified.

KYGlockster · Aug 29, 2012

OC for ME said:
Until a trial, the witness is just as credible as the three officers.

The drugs stuff is irreverent and immaterial to the facts of the shooting. The deputies did not know about the drugs before hand and now that we do this information it will be used to discredit a "strung-out girl friend" of a dope dealer as a credible witness. It has already worked, on you.

You choose to give the deputies the benefit of the doubt for the simple fact that they are cops.

I find it odd that everytime a wrongful death shooting happens on the behalf of leo's that drugs are magically found. They were in the house because THEY shot someone without cause and if drugs were found they should not be used as evidence in the shooting.

KYGlockster · Aug 29, 2012

EMNofSeattle said:
great, so you bring a case in which a police officer obviously acted in the wrong and killed a little girl and lied about, and inject it into a discussion that has nothing to do with that case. two deputies shooting a grown man (who happened to be involved in drug activity) who *allegedly* stuck a gun in their face has noting to do with crooked cops in detroit shooting a little girl.

Drugs found AFTER the fact (odd) has nothing to do with this man getting shot by police who failed to identify themselves. The man was in his house; if he wanted to use drugs that was his business. What makes you think the government has the right to regulate their use anyways? The phony war on drugs is nothing more than an overreach of the state, and a way for the Feds and the states to make money.

davidmcbeth · Aug 29, 2012

KYGlockster said:
Drugs found AFTER the fact (odd) has nothing to do with this man getting shot by police who failed to identify themselves. The man was in his house; if he wanted to use drugs that was his business. What makes you think the government has the right to regulate their use anyways? The phony war on drugs is nothing more than an overreach of the state, and a way for the Feds and the states to make money.

Not to make money but to justify more fed agents and cops.

sudden valley gunner · Sep 2, 2012

Third, cops are trained to shoot on sight of a weapon if confronted by a suspect or an unknown. If indeed this man answered the door barrel first, I'd have shot him too. You're given an address of a suspect, possibly armed/dangerous, and someone answers the door pointing a gun in your face. Who wouldnt shoot in that situation?

MSG Laigaie said:
I was in a meeting last week with the local Dep Chief of Police. We were discussing the settlement for my Open Carry incident last December. During the conversation she commented on how her LEOs are trained to see Gun= bad guy. The city atty cringed when she said it.
Shoot first, shoot often, is that the way it goes?? I find this attitude not only sickening, but contradictory to the general peace. This "shoot them all and let the gods sort it out" crap MUST stop. Collateral damage?? I, and the people standing near me are not "collateral" and I do not expect to be "accidentally" or "incidentally" shot because I am armed or because you cannot do your job. If your job is too difficult, find another line of work or suck it up. "Oh, sorry, wrong house." just does not cut it at the funeral.

[end rant]

John I have that recorded, (Deputy Chief, Flo Simmon of Bellingham PD ) not only did she say that she said it emphatically and several times, gun =bad guy, gun = bad guy, gun, bad guy.

But John according to the logic of Emn we should have shot the officers that pointed weapons at us without justification. I wonder if Flo Simmon would have not second guessed our use of force if that happened after ?

The mere fact that EMN mentioned that if innocent people don't immediately obey cop orders its justified for them to shoot them.....sickening.

I am for gun control.....taking guns away from government and their street warriors.

since9 · Sep 4, 2012

sudden valley gunner said:
John I have that recorded, (Deputy Chief, Flo Simmon of Bellingham PD ) not only did she say that she said it emphatically and several times, gun =bad guy, gun = bad guy, gun, bad guy.

Agreed.

The mere fact that EMN mentioned that if innocent people don't immediately obey cop orders its justified for them to shoot them.....sickening.

Also agreed. I'd say, "quick-trigger finger cop = bad cop."

Here's the reason why: It's a well know fact that unless you're specifically trained to react differently in a crisis situation, one of two things happens when your life is threatened:

1) You freeze up.

2) You panic and run around like a chicken with your head cut off.

So, if you're a lawfully-armed citizen who is surprised by law enforcement pointing their guns at you, and the cops are properly trained, you should be ok whether you do #1, #2, or #3 (immediately putting down your weapon).

But, if you're a lawfully-armed citizen who is surprised by law enforcement pointing their guns at you, and the cops are not properly trained, you should be ok if you do #3, but if you #1 or #2, you stand a good chance of being shot.

The crux of this matter is whether the local cops are properly trained, i.e. they're in possession of enough knowledge and self-control so that if you react as per #1 or #2, they're not going to shoot you dead because they're acting like #2.

OC for ME · Sep 4, 2012

The one and only true irony to this and the countless other incidents before this one......the survivors must run to the feds to gain redress....the feds.....disgusting in a ironic sort of way.

I'll be the first to run to the feds to spank a local LEA.....hypocrite you may say......you bet, but only on this occasion until a local thug cop can get spanked by his boss and the local prosecutor.....until then we only have the feds to "rely" upon.....sadly.

Police shoot armed man who trying to defend hisself

FireStar M40

Regular Member

EMNofSeattle

Regular Member

sharkey

Regular Member

sharkey

Regular Member

sharkey

Regular Member

EMNofSeattle

Regular Member

EMNofSeattle

Regular Member

OC for ME

Regular Member

PistolPackingMomma

Regular Member

cabledawg

Regular Member

OC for ME

Regular Member

KYGlockster

Activist Member

KYGlockster

Activist Member

KYGlockster

Activist Member

davidmcbeth

Banned

sudden valley gunner

Regular Member

since9

Campaign Veteran

OC for ME

Regular Member