• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

The latest insult to Erik Scott's Memory

Vegassteve

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 15, 2008
Messages
1,763
Location
Las Vegas NV, ,
A couple of points. As to the one gun not listed on his card. It means nothing. It could have been on a card he left at home. If you will remember they never took our old cards back, I have a stack of them. I keep one in every car just in case I forget one day. They never said that he didnt have it listed just that it wasnt on the card on him.

Also I am sure everyone in this town that is a legal gun owner has every single pistol they own registered at metro. Nod nod wink wink.

And I m also sure not one person in here has ever taken more than the recommended dose of any pain pill.

I also know as a fact that only one side of this story was ever heard. In my heart and mind metro are killers. And Erik may or may not have reached for his holstered gun. The same gun that was on the ground away from him in his holster still.
 

DON`T TREAD ON ME

Regular Member
Joined
May 17, 2009
Messages
1,231
Location
Las Vegas, Nevada, USA
Assume that These Govt. agents had authority given to them by we the people (however that happens) And that Erick Scott and the Mercenary's who killed him are subject to local and federal laws.

  • What was the Imminent Crime that was being/ or had been committed, that authorized any of the "Lawful orders" that were shouted at Scott?
Since no officer witnessed what allegedly occurred in the store, according to Nevada Law they would need The store Manager to swear a Citizen complaint, alleging any unlawful behavior, as they do in shoplifting situations.
According to the "Laws" the Mercenary's are purportedly upholding, they had no authorization to compel Scott to do anything. Much less set up a mobile incident command in an adjacent shopping center. Assume Federal law is a factor lets insert the incident into the SCOTUS decision, "orders shouted at Scott were derived from the facts and circumstances KNOWN to the cops yelling the orders. Circumstances they are certain would persuade a prudent man to believe that A crime had been committed, and Scott had committed the crime.

CITE: Probable cause exists where "the facts and circumstances within [the arresting officers'] knowledge and of which they had reasonably trustworthy information [are] sufficient in themselves to warrant a man of reasonable caution in the belief that" an offense has been or is being committed. Carroll v. United States, 267 U. S. 132, 162

The Mercenary's who killed Scott, admitted that the store employee pointed out Scott to them, (admitting they would not have known who Scott was, not to mention they had no personal knowledge of any crime!)

The fact that the laws formed by the government, did not apply to the government agents is no accident. It is not a one time "hiccup" it is intentional.
 

DVC

Regular Member
Joined
May 12, 2010
Messages
1,185
Location
City? Who wants to live in a CITY?, Nevada, USA
The Mercenary's who killed Scott, admitted that the store employee pointed out Scott to them, (admitting they would not have known who Scott was, not to mention they had no personal knowledge of any crime!).

Not only that, but Scott was obviously acting in a rational manner (or they would have known it), spiking the original claim by the store that he was irrational and violent.
 

punisherprice

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 2, 2011
Messages
92
Location
Las Vegas, NV
Not only that, but Scott was obviously acting in a rational manner (or they would have known it), spiking the original claim by the store that he was irrational and violent.

The reason he was able to handle the amount of painkillers was because because he was an addict. He was used to taking heavy amounts of narcotics. He was supposedly using them for injuries or depression. ( http://federaleagent86.blogspot.com/2010/10/erik-scott-committed-suicide-by-cop.html?m=1)
I have not read any reports that went into more details on how he was being belligerent or uncooperative, but he was doing so, that the security guard decided it was out of his pay grade and called the cops. So i guess we can wash out the stealing beer, since i cant find any cites or sources. But it wasnt the first time i heard it either. I also had a different view on the "holstered weapon" because they said he drew but never unholstered his gun. So i was wondering if he had a clip on holster or IWB holster, and in his delusion....ripped off the holster on or in his belt, but failed to separate the gun from holster.

http://m.lvsun.com/news/2010/sep/28/jury-shooting-justified/
 

MAC702

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jul 31, 2011
Messages
6,331
Location
Nevada
The fact that Scott was on painkillers probably saved those cops because it was unknown at the time they had no justification to unload on him. Cops seem to always learn the hard way. In this case, their biggest lesson was to have a plan and have someone actually be in charge so only one person is giving commands to a suspect. Unfortunately, it is usually a regular Joe who dies while the cops learn their lessons.
 

wrightme

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2008
Messages
5,574
Location
Fallon, Nevada, USA
The reason he was able to handle the amount of painkillers was because because he was an addict. He was used to taking heavy amounts of narcotics. He was supposedly using them for injuries or depression.

Not accurate.

'The reason he was able to handle the amount of painkillers was because he had built up a tolerance to them. He was used to taking heavy amounts of narcotics. He was supposedly using them for injuries or depression.'


As for the rest, not proven, simply conjecture, and appears to be created to make CostCo look more justified.
 

usmcmustang

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 17, 2011
Messages
393
Location
Las Vegas, NV & Southern Utah
The reason he was able to handle the amount of painkillers was because because he was an addict. He was used to taking heavy amounts of narcotics. He was supposedly using them for injuries or depression. ( http://federaleagent86.blogspot.com/2010/10/erik-scott-committed-suicide-by-cop.html?m=1)
I have not read any reports that went into more details on how he was being belligerent or uncooperative, but he was doing so, that the security guard decided it was out of his pay grade and called the cops. So i guess we can wash out the stealing beer, since i cant find any cites or sources. But it wasnt the first time i heard it either. I also had a different view on the "holstered weapon" because they said he drew but never unholstered his gun. So i was wondering if he had a clip on holster or IWB holster, and in his delusion....ripped off the holster on or in his belt, but failed to separate the gun from holster.

http://m.lvsun.com/news/2010/sep/28/jury-shooting-justified/

You f***ing crack me up. You are either a cop, a relative of a cop, or a good friend of a cop. Let’s see, someone who is an “addict” (your words) deserves to be gunned down by police because he IS an armed “addict” (your words). Now, never mind that the “addict” (your words) part of the scenario never materialized until the result of the autopsy showed that he was an “addict” (your words). Now we know that he was an “addict” (your words), so of course the cops had justification for gunning him down because the only good armed “addict” (your words) is a dead armed “addict” (your words). It is as simple as that.
 

vegaspassat

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 2, 2011
Messages
626
Location
united states
So i guess we can wash out the stealing beer, since i cant find any cites or sources. But it wasnt the first time i heard it either.

I've heard that the moon was made of cheese and the world was flat NUMEROUS times, so surely there must be some shred of truth in it, right?
 
Last edited:

punisherprice

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 2, 2011
Messages
92
Location
Las Vegas, NV
You f***ing crack me up. You are either a cop, a relative of a cop, or a good friend of a cop. Let’s see, someone who is an “addict” (your words) deserves to be gunned down by police because he IS an armed “addict” (your words). Now, never mind that the “addict” (your words) part of the scenario never materialized until the result of the autopsy showed that he was an “addict” (your words). Now we know that he was an “addict” (your words), so of course the cops had justification for gunning him down because the only good armed “addict” (your words) is a dead armed “addict” (your words). It is as simple as that.

I dont have any relations to LEO's. I also don't know who or what made you Sheriff of the Forum, but everything you write is either deprecating or sarcastic. Remember what your mother said about not saying anything if it isnt good at all? You wait, and wait, and then pounce to throw in your $0.02 that noone wants to hear. Now you're putting words in my mouth. I'm trying to look at both sides of the equation here, children. I was trying to make you guys think, instead of a knee-jerk reaction just because the guy had a firearm and CCW. I found it interesting also that the family was taking donations through a website for the case, but then dropped the lawsuit. Why? If they had a winning chance, and enough funds still comin in...why? I think they knew their son had a problem, but never thought it would get this bad.
 

punisherprice

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 2, 2011
Messages
92
Location
Las Vegas, NV
I've heard that the moon was made of cheese and the world was flat NUMEROUS times, so surely there must be some shred of truth in it, right?

fun fact of the day: there's still a group of people that believe the world is flat. Even in the 21st century. I about fell out of my chair when my science teacher told me that back in HS. But like i said, since there's no magical URL that says he was stealing alcohol, it didn't happen I guess. :confused:
 

usmcmustang

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 17, 2011
Messages
393
Location
Las Vegas, NV & Southern Utah
I dont have any relations to LEO's. I also don't know who or what made you Sheriff of the Forum, but everything you write is either deprecating or sarcastic. Remember what your mother said about not saying anything if it isnt good at all? You wait, and wait, and then pounce to throw in your $0.02 that noone wants to hear. Now you're putting words in my mouth. I'm trying to look at both sides of the equation here, children. I was trying to make you guys think, instead of a knee-jerk reaction just because the guy had a firearm and CCW. I found it interesting also that the family was taking donations through a website for the case, but then dropped the lawsuit. Why? If they had a winning chance, and enough funds still comin in...why? I think they knew their son had a problem, but never thought it would get this bad.

"the family was taking donations through a website for the case, but then dropped the lawsuit. Why? If they had a winning chance, and enough funds still comin in...why?"

I'll leave all your other "drivel" alone and just address what I have quoted above. You don't know why the family dropped the lawsuit? Try to do just a bit of research on a little thing called "qualified immunity." See what the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals track record is on hearing cases where the defendant has put forth that defense. I could spell it all out for you but the effort wouldn't be worth it obviously.
 

Harley

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 14, 2013
Messages
33
Location
Las Vegas
So much for not opening a can of worms as said in the beginning. That idea was shot to hell with this thread.
 

tomrkba

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 4, 2011
Messages
125
Location
Virginia
The fact of the matter is that the police have become the enemy of the law abiding citizen due to the unethical behavior of some prosecutors and courts and most legislatures. The legislatures have put the police at odds with law abiding citizens. Continued exposure of police violence, "brutality" or legitimate, further inflames this issue.

Gun owners now need to be especially careful when dealing with police or the possibility of police involvement. I believe it is time for people who carry a gun to start carrying some means of video and audio recording. Apps, such as Cop Recorder, are available for smart phones.
 
Last edited:

FreeInAZ

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 15, 2012
Messages
2,508
Location
Secret Bunker
One thing is certain. Never EVER comply with a command to handle your firearm. It know of one OCer who was told to hand a officer his pistol inside of a gas station. He did so and lived to talk about it, thankfully. I have family members who are retired and active duty officers and they all say the same thing. "A LE who orders a citizen to hand them/touch/or even make motions towards a holstered firearm is (a) RETARDED or (b) attempting to lure the citizen into making a move that will justify his/hers/their use of deadly force in response to such a stupid command. " :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:

MAC702

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jul 31, 2011
Messages
6,331
Location
Nevada
One thing is certain. Never EVER comply with a command to handle your firearm. It know of one OCer who was told to hand a officer his pistol inside of a gas station. He did so and lived to talk about it, thankfully. I have family members who are retired and active duty officers and they all say the same thing. "A LE who orders a citizen to hand them/touch/or even make motions towards a holstered firearm is (a) RETARDED or (b) attempting to lure the citizen into making a move that will justify his/hers/their use of deadly force in response to such a stupid command. " :rolleyes:

I agree strongly. I'd like to think (a) is the more likely reason.
 

DVC

Regular Member
Joined
May 12, 2010
Messages
1,185
Location
City? Who wants to live in a CITY?, Nevada, USA
BTW, to make my own position clear:

1) I don't know enough about what happened to know if Scott was the innocent victim that most here believe him to be; at the same time, I have not seen anything to prove that he is NOT.

2) My worry is about the way this has been handled from the beginning by Costco and by the PD and Clark County officials.

3) The inquest was of absolutely no value in determining the truth.

4) I am willing to believe that the cops were acting in good faith and made a terrible mistake.

5) I am willing to believe that the cops were acting on incorrect and/or incomplete data.

6) I am willing to believe that Scott was not thinking clearly and did in fact react poorly to the commands which he was given.

7) THIS WILL HAPPEN AGAIN, unless LEOs are able to see the mistakes that were made and correct their procedures:

a) One officer is given SOLE responsibility for issuing commands to suspects

b) In such a situation, with multiple officers on scene, the officer giving commands will use a Taser as primary weapon, and other officers will not fire unless it is either ineffective, or a clear, present and immediate threat presents itself

c) Officers will be equipped with recorders (preferably video) which will be operating from the moment of arrival on scene

8) I am NOT willing to believe that Costco's surveillance systems had failed at this one store, during this one important event, and will not shop at Costco.
 

wrightme

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2008
Messages
5,574
Location
Fallon, Nevada, USA
BTW, to make my own position clear:

1) I don't know enough about what happened to know if Scott was the innocent victim that most here believe him to be; at the same time, I have not seen anything to prove that he is NOT.

2) My worry is about the way this has been handled from the beginning by Costco and by the PD and Clark County officials.

3) The inquest was of absolutely no value in determining the truth.

4) I am willing to believe that the cops were acting in good faith and made a terrible mistake.

5) I am willing to believe that the cops were acting on incorrect and/or incomplete data.

6) I am willing to believe that Scott was not thinking clearly and did in fact react poorly to the commands which he was given.

7) THIS WILL HAPPEN AGAIN, unless LEOs are able to see the mistakes that were made and correct their procedures:

a) One officer is given SOLE responsibility for issuing commands to suspects

b) In such a situation, with multiple officers on scene, the officer giving commands will use a Taser as primary weapon, and other officers will not fire unless it is either ineffective, or a clear, present and immediate threat presents itself

c) Officers will be equipped with recorders (preferably video) which will be operating from the moment of arrival on scene

8) I am NOT willing to believe that Costco's surveillance systems had failed at this one store, during this one important event, and will not shop at Costco.
Very clearly stated. This makes sense.
 

vegaspassat

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 2, 2011
Messages
626
Location
united states
A man is innocent until proven guilty. As far as Im concerned they gunned down an innocent man.

Sent from my SPH-D710 using Tapatalk 2
 
Top