• 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.

Snowballs? I'll blast your face off !

stealthyeliminator

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 29, 2008
Messages
3,100
Location
Texas
Regardless of how the call came in - is the officer not required to observe facts on scene justifying use of force before using force? What facts were observed on scene that justified use of force? Unless I'm mistaken, the video doesn't show us the moments before the officer drew. It seems quite unlikely, however, that any real justification for threat of lethal force was given. We may never know. I agree this smells strongly of SWATing.
 
Last edited:

skidmark

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 15, 2007
Messages
10,444
Location
Valhalla
Regardless of how the call came in - is the officer not required to observe facts on scene justifying use of force before using force? What facts were observed on scene that justified use of force? Unless I'm mistaken, the video doesn't show us the moments before the officer drew. It seems quite unlikely, however, that any real justification for threat of lethal force was given. We may never know. I agree this smells strongly of SWATing.

The deadly "furtive movement towards his waistband."

Again, that is the factual answer to your inquiry about what facts were observed (and in fact articulated). It shpould not be taken as either support or opposition to the actual behavior of either side.

stay safe.
 

WalkingWolf

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2011
Messages
11,930
Location
North Carolina
Reaching in the waistband is one of those catch phrases used, like "stop resisting" "stop grabbing my gun" too many cases that are coming to light of those phrases used when it did not happen.
 

marshaul

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Aug 13, 2007
Messages
11,188
Location
Fairfax County, Virginia
Again, that is the factual answer to your inquiry about what facts were observed (and in fact articulated). It shpould not be taken as either support or opposition to the actual behavior of either side.

The thing is skid, sometimes when threads like this come up you act as though we aren't all intimately aware of what sort of justifications are legally acceptable, and which ones the police prefer.

I suppose I should remind you that this is a self-defense site, and we're not children. It's supremely difficult to take you harping on points which the rest of us implicitly assume as given and move past, as anything but defense of the cops -- regardless of how carefully you couch it in objectivity nor how many disclaimers of neutrality you attach.

In other words, do you actually have anything to add to the conversation? Or do you just enjoy telling us things we already know, because patronizing us appeals to you?
 
Last edited:

SovereigntyOrDeath

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 15, 2014
Messages
411
Location
Coeur D Alene, Idaho
Virginia case law considers anything you can heave as a "missle" - not restricted to to air-to-air or intercontinental tubes. Kids (mostly) have been busted and sent to juvie for throwing snowballs at cars, hitting a long one past the back yard left field and busting a window, and IIRC they tried to convict a 6-year old trying his first pass beyond 10 yards for hitting a on oncoming car - on the bounce! (The judge insisted that the spectators stop laughing when the Commonwealth Attorney described the henious crime he alleged had taken place.

Huzzah, Huzzah, Huzahhhhhhhhhhhhh!!!!!!!

What a heinous usurpation of liberty for those kids!

And I assume the egregious law is still on the books.
 

The Truth

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 18, 2014
Messages
1,972
Location
Henrico
The thing is skid, sometimes when threads like this come up you act as though we aren't all intimately aware of what sort of justifications are legally acceptable, and which ones the police prefer.

I suppose I should remind you that this is a self-defense site, and we're not children. It's supremely difficult to take you harping on points which the rest of us implicitly assume as given and move past, as anything but defense of the cops -- regardless of how carefully you couch it in objectivity nor how many disclaimers of neutrality you attach.

In other words, do you actually have anything to add to the conversation? Or do you just enjoy telling us things we already know, because patronizing us appeals to you?

:uhoh:
 
Last edited:

davidmcbeth

Banned
Joined
Jan 14, 2012
Messages
16,167
Location
earth's crust
I'm waiting for a swatter to be prosecuted. Or at least sued for everything they got.

It was me who called .... all I said was

"I see these black guys and" me, getting cut off by 911 operator
"will blast those guys to pieces" 911 operator
"now how many terrorists do you see?" 911 operator
"huh" me
"that many? sending 45 MRAPs" 911 operator
"you don't understand" me being cut off again
"thank you for calling, I would get out of the area, 45 block radius just to be sure" 911 operator
 
Top