Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 45

Thread: Open Carrier Murdered by **** Cop

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    344

    Open Carrier Murdered by **** Cop

    An August 26th article on infowars.com describes yet another MURDER of an innocent/legal open carrier/veteran by the POLICE - this time in his own house !!!


    "Young Deputy Sheriff Guns Down Air Force Vet in His Own Garage

    22-year-old deputy kills 68-year-old vet who was inspecting damage done to his property.

    Kit Daniels
    Infowars.com
    August 26, 2013

    Funeral arrangements are underway for a 68-year-old Air Force veteran who was gunned down in his own garage by a young Blount County, Tenn. deputy sheriff."


    For full article visit link:

    http://www.infowars.com/young-deputy...is-own-garage/
    Last edited by Grapeshot; 09-08-2013 at 09:48 AM. Reason: Deleted inflammatory verbiage from title

  2. #2
    Regular Member cirrusly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    North Dakota
    Posts
    331

    Open Carrier Murdered by **** Cop

    Wow, just wow.

    That LEO should be given a fair trial with a potential penalty of lethal injection if found guilty.

    Unfortunately that scenario would never happen because it's too far removed from the Disney World reality most dimwitted liberals live in.
    Last edited by Grapeshot; 09-08-2013 at 09:51 AM. Reason: Deleted inflammatory verbiage from title
    I want to keep our founding fathers' visions and rights for this country pure. I implore you to do the same.

  3. #3
    Regular Member Maverick9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Mid-atlantic
    Posts
    1,505
    It appears that the new approach is basically 'the only good citizen is a dead citizen'. I wonder if there's a quota now?

  4. #4
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766
    Quote Originally Posted by Maverick9 View Post
    It appears that the new approach is basically 'the only good citizen is a dead citizen'.
    Alternatively, the state no longer exists to protect citizens and their rights. The state protects itself.
    I'll make you an offer: I will argue and fight for all of your rights, if you will do the same for me. That is the only way freedom can work. We have to respect all rights, all the time--and strive to win the rights of the other guy as much as for ourselves.

    If I am equal to another, how can I legitimately govern him without his express individual consent?

    There is no human being on earth I hate so much I would actually vote to inflict government upon him.

  5. #5
    Regular Member Jamesm760's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Salisbury, NC
    Posts
    430
    Sad to know that we can get killed by the bad guys and the "good guys" on our own property. But at least one of them has to deal with consequences the other gets off with a slap on the wrist.
    SIC VIS PACEM, PARA BELLUM

    μολὼν λαβέ - molṑn labé - ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ - COME AND TAKE!!!!

  6. #6
    Regular Member FreeInAZ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Secret Bunker
    Posts
    2,573

    Re: Open Carrier Murdered by **** Cop

    Sadly, a homeowner is dead. There will be an investgation - let's hope it's done by a independent agency and not the department this officer belongs to. To much conflict of interest potential, yet it is the standard practice.

    Is it me or could this all have been avoided with a simple phone call? Home owner calls police THREE HOURS prior to their arrival. Common sense (or uncommon in the case of some LEA's) would dictate a call back to let the homeowner know officers will be on site shortly and to expect them. Most if not all victims of a break-in(s) are not going to go unarmed into a dwelling that may be revistied at anytime by some thugs.
    Last edited by Grapeshot; 09-08-2013 at 09:53 AM. Reason: Removed inflammatory verbiage from quoted title
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    "You must be the change you wish to see in the world" by Mahatma Gandhi

    “Your beliefs become your thoughts. Your thoughts become your words. Your words become your actions. Your actions become your habits. Your habits become your values. Your values become your destiny.” by Mahatma Gandhi

  7. #7
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    http://www.thedailytimes.com/Local_N...heck-id-039818

    On Tuesday, a deputy took a report from Henry Taylor that several items had been taken from the property, including an HVAC unit. At around 7 p.m. Wednesday, Ragland responded to the rental property and took a report of another burglary of several additional items.
    Ragland informed Cynthia Ridinger he would do property checks at the residence throughout the night, and at around 10 p.m. he returned to conduct the property check and encountered Henry Taylor in the garage.


    Does not sound like he was responding to anything .. conducting "property checks" at the time of the shooting.

    Odd, all articles I read say that the cop GAVE COMMANDS but none say he IDENTIFIED HIMSELF as the po po.

    I'm sure he'll add that to his story later.
    Last edited by davidmcbeth; 09-02-2013 at 02:25 PM.

  8. #8
    Moderator / Administrator Grapeshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    North Chesterfield, Va.
    Posts
    34,608

    Moderator Comment

    In light of several of our rules (LEO bashing, personal attacks, etc.) please refrain from including descriptors for affect in your threads/posts/replies - an indication of your personal negative bias, but IMO not in keeping with OCDO standards.

    We deal in facts. The presentation of overtly negative verbiage, particularly before the facts are fully known, represents a premature conclusion which at best is yellow journalism.

    Insofar as the subject of this thread, the officer involved may well have committed some serious infractions. Even so, we need to restrict our reaction/responses to his actions and severely curtail the personal remarks. We shall have to wait and see what the facts & results in this matter are.

    In general, I have observed a decided tendency to seek out and report LEO transgressions, particularly by a few certain users. While such reports are certainly of interest to many here, the preponderance of them seen recently is beyond the intended scope of OCDO.
    You will not rise to the occasion; you will fall back on your level of training.” Archilochus, 650 BC

    Old and treacherous will beat young and skilled every time. Yata hey.

  9. #9
    Campaign Veteran marshaul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia
    Posts
    11,487
    Quote Originally Posted by cirrusly View Post
    Unfortunately that scenario would never happen because it's too far removed from the Disney World reality most dimwitted liberals live in.
    Right, because "liberals" are solely responsible for the police aristocracy.

    This is one thing the "right" doesn't get to shirk credit for.

    Anyway, this is why you don't call the police to do a "security check", or anything else. Basically, the only time there is a net increase in safety resulting from a 911 call is after you've shot an assailant.
    Last edited by marshaul; 09-08-2013 at 12:01 PM.

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Michigan, USA
    Posts
    902
    A certain WA local LEO, the resident police apologist at any cost will be here to justify this in....3........2.........1......

  11. #11
    Regular Member stealthyeliminator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    3,318
    Quote Originally Posted by Jared View Post
    A certain WA local LEO, the resident police apologist at any cost will be here to justify this in....3........2.........1......
    Hi, my name is Palo. Technically it wasn't murder because the validity of the officer's actions depends on the circumstances as the officer perceives them, not as they actually are.

    Just kidding. He'd probably say that it would depend on what a reasonable person would have believed in the same circumstance. Unfortunately its generally assumed that a police officer thinks reasonable, even in tense and unclear situations, when such an assumption might not be made for non-leo

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Kent
    Posts
    747
    Quote Originally Posted by stealthyeliminator View Post
    Hi, my name is Palo. Technically it wasn't murder because the validity of the officer's actions depends on the circumstances as the officer perceives them, not as they actually are.

    Just kidding. He'd probably say that it would depend on what a reasonable person would have believed in the same circumstance. Unfortunately its generally assumed that a police officer thinks reasonable, even in tense and unclear situations, when such an assumption might not be made for non-leo
    Your trolling is weak sauce. It's not surprising that my analysis of shootings is in-line with how the courts and prosecutors perceive them because I am commenting on the law as it is, not how you want it to be.


    Grow up and drop the trolling. I am pretty sure what you are doing is also a violation of the rules of this site, if not the spirit, misrepresenting another's view and calling them out on stuff. It's certainly the modus operandi of a cowardly troll

    The validity of an officer's shooting are the same as the validity of anybody else's shooting in most cases- did the facts and circumstances reasonably perceived by the person using deadly force , justify a belief that the person was in danger of serious bodily injury or death

    There is also (at least in my state), a justification for officers to shoot a fleeing felon IF the crime committed by the felon involved the use of deadly force or threatened deadly force and the officer has a reason to believe the person represents a deadly risk if not apprehended. When possible, a verbal warning is preferred. That's the RCW. In some respects, it places a tighter standard on officer shootings vs. non-officer shootings as acknowledged at

    http://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=9A.16.040



    Be a man, not a mouse, and cut the weak trolling crap

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Kent
    Posts
    747
    Quote Originally Posted by Jared View Post
    A certain WA local LEO, the resident police apologist at any cost will be here to justify this in....3........2.........1......
    I've seen no apologists on this site when it comes to police misconduct. I've seen plenty of bigots who assume in all cases of police conduct that the police were in the wrong. I see, otoh, the majority of posters are fair and consider fact patterns before jumping to conclusions

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Spokane Washington
    Posts
    285
    Palo, really?

    Citing law where you can shoot a fleeing felon in Washington has nothing to do with an officer murdering a homeowner in his garage in Tennessee, nice try on the diversion tactics, but I can see through that BS

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Spokane Washington
    Posts
    285
    Quote Originally Posted by davidmcbeth View Post
    http://www.thedailytimes.com/Local_N...heck-id-039818

    On Tuesday, a deputy took a report from Henry Taylor that several items had been taken from the property, including an HVAC unit. At around 7 p.m. Wednesday, Ragland responded to the rental property and took a report of another burglary of several additional items.
    Ragland informed Cynthia Ridinger he would do property checks at the residence throughout the night, and at around 10 p.m. he returned to conduct the property check and encountered Henry Taylor in the garage.


    Does not sound like he was responding to anything .. conducting "property checks" at the time of the shooting.

    Odd, all articles I read say that the cop GAVE COMMANDS but none say he IDENTIFIED HIMSELF as the po po.

    I'm sure he'll add that to his story later.
    An unlawful command is still an unlawful command, wether given by an officer with a badge, or some random shmuck on the street.

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Kent
    Posts
    747
    Quote Originally Posted by MattinWA View Post
    Palo, really?

    Citing law where you can shoot a fleeing felon in Washington has nothing to do with an officer murdering a homeowner in his garage in Tennessee, nice try on the diversion tactics, but I can see through that BS
    I see no evidence that an officer "murdered" anyone. That term begs the question. I was merely commenting on when an officer can legally shoot someone, some aspects may be relevant to this shooting and other aspects not. But it was to give an overview of the entirety of lawful conduct in that regard.

    There is no way for a RATIONAL person to determine that this was a MURDER. All we know is that the police shot a 107 yr old man. It may have been justified, it may not, but there is no way an UNbiased person can no whehter it was or not, based on this article

    Many people seem to think that because the shootee was 107, that this is somehow proof or strongly suggestive of "murder" or an unlawful shoooting, which is utter rubbish. Again, firearms are the great equalizer. That's WHY I am such a strong supporter of RKBA, because it gives people like the 107 yr old man, a fighting chance.



    hth

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Spokane Washington
    Posts
    285
    Really, is it legal For an officer to Arrive at a private residence, not responding to a crime in progress, find an American citizen, who is also the owner of the property, illegally try to disarm said homeowner, then fire when the unlawful order is refused...

    Sounds like horrible police work which lead to murder. You can call it what you want,
    Police in this country have no right to come onto your property and start demanding things. That's the spirit this country was built on. If your values are not similar to that, the I fear you may be part of the problem.

  18. #18
    Regular Member stealthyeliminator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    3,318
    Quote Originally Posted by PALO View Post
    Your trolling is weak sauce. It's not surprising that my analysis of shootings is in-line with how the courts and prosecutors perceive them because I am commenting on the law as it is, not how you want it to be.


    Grow up and drop the trolling. I am pretty sure what you are doing is also a violation of the rules of this site, if not the spirit, misrepresenting another's view and calling them out on stuff. It's certainly the modus operandi of a cowardly troll

    The validity of an officer's shooting are the same as the validity of anybody else's shooting in most cases- did the facts and circumstances reasonably perceived by the person using deadly force , justify a belief that the person was in danger of serious bodily injury or death

    There is also (at least in my state), a justification for officers to shoot a fleeing felon IF the crime committed by the felon involved the use of deadly force or threatened deadly force and the officer has a reason to believe the person represents a deadly risk if not apprehended. When possible, a verbal warning is preferred. That's the RCW. In some respects, it places a tighter standard on officer shootings vs. non-officer shootings as acknowledged at

    http://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=9A.16.040



    Be a man, not a mouse, and cut the weak trolling crap
    Oh come on PALO, I made it clear I was just joking. I think that my "representation" of your views is actually pretty spot on, not in the joke part of my post, but in the latter more serious part.

    Quote Originally Posted by stealthyeliminator View Post
    Hi, my name is Palo. Technically it wasn't murder because the validity of the officer's actions depends on the circumstances as the officer perceives them, not as they actually are.

    Just kidding. He'd probably say that it would depend on what a reasonable person would have believed in the same circumstance. Unfortunately its generally assumed that a police officer thinks reasonable, even in tense and unclear situations, when such an assumption might not be made for non-leo
    See bolded. I think that's pretty accurate. You said basically the same thing. ("did the facts and circumstances reasonably perceived by the person using deadly force , justify a belief that the person was in danger of serious bodily injury or death") And that may very well be the law. I understand that fully. I didn't say it was wrong or a bad system.

    You are free to make joke of my posting and belief tendencies in a light-hearted effort to introduce humor into a thread. I won't mind a bit. For what it's worth, I'm not a fan of the thread title either. It is a bit of a leap, I think, to conclude the man was murdered. I believe that people are indeed murdered by police officers, but each shooting case should be treated more or less individually, no? The facts should be the prime focus, and I'd agree we don't have enough to make sound conclusions.

  19. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Spokane Washington
    Posts
    285
    Quote Originally Posted by PALO View Post

    Many people seem to think that because the shootee was 107, that this is somehow proof or strongly suggestive of "murder" or an unlawful shoooting, which is utter rubbish.


    hth
    more disinformation palo, the man was in his sixties, according to the article. You don't even know what particular matter you currently spouting off about. I hope you investigate more in your police work then you do on spreading disinformation. Mistaken identity on a forum makes you look a fool, mistaking the identity of the home owner lead to his murder.
    Last edited by MattinWA; 09-08-2013 at 07:14 PM.

  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Kent
    Posts
    747
    Quote Originally Posted by MattinWA View Post
    more disinformation palo, the man was in his sixties, according to the article. You don't even know what, particular matter you are spouting about. I hope you investigate more in your police work then you do on spreading disinformation. Mistaken identity on a forum makes you look a fool, mistaking the identity of the home owner lead to his murder.
    Yawn...

    That's my bad. I was responding also to the story about the 107 yr old shot by the police and i god forbid made a mistake and posted in the wrong box!

    shiver me timbers!

  21. #21
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Spokane Washington
    Posts
    285
    Yawn sixty plus year old killed in his own home, cop defends cop, cycle of violence continues

    Buisness as usual
    Last edited by MattinWA; 09-08-2013 at 07:20 PM.

  22. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Kent
    Posts
    747
    Quote Originally Posted by MattinWA View Post
    Yawn sixty plus year old killed in his own home, cop defends cop, cycle of violence continues

    Buisness as usual
    I defended nobody. I said there is no way to know from this article if the shooting was justified or not. That is not a defense. It is a statement of agnosticism. Violence is sometimes the only response and often the legal response. Was this such a situation? I have no idea, nor does any other discerning reader who chooses not to kneejerk out of bigotry/prejudice against cops

  23. #23
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Spokane Washington
    Posts
    285
    Quote Originally Posted by PALO View Post
    I defended nobody
    Nor were you, specifically, accused. It will happen, it always does. The story will be fabricated by the last remaining witness, to put the old man in a threatening light. No one will left to refute the testimony of a "trusted" public servant as a police officer. The investigation will be launched by his friends and co-workers, with the intent to prove the original story was the correct one, because heaven forbid we hold police officers to the same standards as "civilians."

    This investigation is then turned over to a DA, who already has a profesional working relationship (possibly personal relationships develope, ie playing golf, drinking beer, ext.) with the shooter, his friends, bosses, and co-workers, who then gets to review their report, then decide wether to press charges.

    In any other legal arena, this would be called a conflict of interest.

    Am I anywhere close to how it works in the "real world?"

    If your definition of prejudice means a a distrust of the set norms because of past abuses, then I guess I'm prejudice ...
    Last edited by MattinWA; 09-08-2013 at 07:43 PM.

  24. #24
    Regular Member HandyHamlet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Terra, Sol
    Posts
    2,779
    Quote Originally Posted by MattinWA View Post
    Am I anywhere close to how it works in the "real world?"
    They don't call it the Thin Blue Line for nothing.

    Quote Originally Posted by stealthyeliminator View Post
    Technically it wasn't murder because the validity of the officer's actions depends on the circumstances as the officer perceives them, not as they actually are.
    The cops call this "the totality of the circumstances". Which means no matter what evidence the cop is innocent and the civilian is guilty.
    Last edited by HandyHamlet; 09-09-2013 at 01:01 AM.
    "Don't interfere with anything in the Constitution. That must be maintained, for it is the only safeguard of our liberties."
    Abraham Lincoln

    "Some time ago, a bunch of lefties defied the law by dancing at the Jefferson Memorial, resulting in their arrests. Last week, a bunch of them pulled the same stunt and - using patented Lefist techniques - provoked the Park Police into having to use force to arrest them."
    Alexcabbie

  25. #25
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by MattinWA View Post
    Palo, really?

    Citing law where you can shoot a fleeing felon in Washington has nothing to do with an officer murdering a homeowner in his garage in Tennessee, nice try on the diversion tactics, but I can see through that BS
    I see that incident as partially the guy's fault too .. he invited the cops onto his land to do "security checks" to look for robbers....

    Of course I think that its 90% the cop's over-reaction.

    We really should make our police departments professional organizations. Right now, they look like Laurel and Hardy.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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