Results 1 to 22 of 22

Thread: Self-Defense Gone Wrong

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,422

    Post imported post

    http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/08180/893428-100.stm
    Saturday, June 28, 2008

    An off-duty Pittsburgh police officer was in custody today and under suspension, accused of hitting a man on the back of his head with his gun and wounding the individual in the hand as the gun discharged.

    At a midday news conference, Police Chief Nate Harper identified the officer as Paul Abel, an 8-year veteran assigned to the South Side station. He faces charges of aggravated assault and drunken driving from the incident reported at 2:11 a.m. at Sidney and South 20th streets on the South Side.

    Chief Harper said the officer and his wife were patrons at the Town Tavern earlier and had driven away in their car when it was approached at an intersection by two unknown males. The officer apparently rolled down his window and one of them punched him, the chief said. The officer then drove around the block, retrieving his weapon from inside the car, Chief Harper said. The officer then parked the car and approached a 20-year-old pedestrian who was not one of the two who had approached the officer's car, striking that individual with his gun, Chief Harper said.

    The victim's description did not match that of the earlier assailants, and police were investigating why the man was singled out, the chief said. "The gentleman who was in the physical altercation (with the officer) is an innocent victim as far as we can tell. He was just walking," Chief Harper said. The man was taken to Mercy Hospital and was in stable condition. Police would not identify him.

    The whereabouts of the two other individuals were not known, nor were other details about that altercation.

    Officer Abel was charged with driving under the influence after a breath test indicated he had a blood-alcohol level of .111, Chief Harper said. The legal limit is .08.

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Lake Charles Area, Louisiana, USA
    Posts
    1,723

    Post imported post

    Now that will give LEO's a bad Name right there. :shock:





  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    , Alabama, USA
    Posts
    36

    Post imported post

    BAC of .111?! :what:



    Why did he have a weapon anywhere near him?

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Springfield, Oregon, USA
    Posts
    737

    Post imported post

    Just another case to show that Law-Abiding Citizens are more responsible with their guns than LEOs (even off-duty LEOs)

    We hit our intended targets a higher percent of the time, we shoot a fewer percentage of innocent people, and there are many MORE of us carrying our gun in public, too!

    ...Orygunner...

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Salt Lake City, Utah, USA
    Posts
    800

    Post imported post

    This guy is an idiot on so many levels.

    1. Don't drink and drive.
    2. Don't drink and carry a gun.
    3. Don't roll down your window.
    4. Never go back for more!
    5. Always be sure of your target...

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    , Alabama, USA
    Posts
    36

    Post imported post

    What if the guy the officer attacked had beena LAC? I think if some drunk hit me on the head with a gun/came at me with a gun, my response would be something along the lines of draw/aim/fire. Simply amazing.

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Walton County, Georgia, ,
    Posts
    475

    Post imported post

    And then they'd probably arrest you and label you a cop killer. They'd probably release you later though, assuming that the officer's buddies didn't try to cover up that he was drunk and assaulted you.

    (Not saying it is right, just what I see happening.)

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,422

    Post imported post

    The man wasn't acting in official capacity. He happened to be an officer, but could have been anyone that had training and a permit.

    An interesting question, if you're going to involve his occupation, is out of the total number of wrongful gun usages by persons authorized to carry a firearm by the government, what percentage are localofficers of the law, what percentage are federal law enforcement officers, what percentage are other government employees, and what percentage are citizens that carry for personal security?

  9. #9
    Campaign Veteran deepdiver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Southeast, Missouri, USA
    Posts
    5,974

    Post imported post

    Pointman wrote:
    The man wasn't acting in official capacity. He happened to be an officer, but could have been anyone that had training and a permit.

    An interesting question, if you're going to involve his occupation, is out of the total number of wrongful gun usages by persons authorized to carry a firearm by the government, what percentage are localofficers of the law, what percentage are federal law enforcement officers, what percentage are other government employees, and what percentage are citizens that carry for personal security?
    +1 His occupation has nothing to do with the story.

    Edit: And another +1 for not making it an issue in the thread title, Pointman!
    Bob Owens @ Bearing Arms (paraphrased): "These people aren't against violence; they're very much in favor of violence. They're against armed resistance."

  10. #10
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766

    Post imported post

    The thread's mis-titled.

    This was not a self-defense gone-wrong. It was arevenge gone wrong.
    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.

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Catasauqua, Pennsylvania, USA
    Posts
    3,047

    Post imported post

    ToJas wrote:
    BAC of .111?! :what:



    Why did he have a weapon anywhere near him?
    Not so long ago, the "legal limit" for driving a car was .10, so .11 isn't all that unreasonable, generally. Whether or not it was an actual issue has yet to be seen.

    Anyhow, perhaps the anti-OCers can use this as a case where the "element of surprise" was useful in self-defense. Oh, wait...

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    275

    Post imported post

    imperialism2024 wrote:
    ToJas wrote:
    BAC of .111?! :what:



    Why did he have a weapon anywhere near him?
    Not so long ago, the "legal limit" for driving a car was .10, so .11 isn't all that unreasonable, generally. Whether or not it was an actual issue has yet to be seen.

    Anyhow, perhaps the anti-OCers can use this as a case where the "element of surprise" was useful in self-defense. Oh, wait...
    Obviously he was impaired, because he hit, and shot the wrong guy. He was not thinking straight. I'll bet he's glad niether of them had a weapon.

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    , Alabama, USA
    Posts
    36

    Post imported post

    WhiteRabbit22 wrote:
    imperialism2024 wrote:
    ToJas wrote:
    BAC of .111?! :what:



    Why did he have a weapon anywhere near him?
    Not so long ago, the "legal limit" for driving a car was .10, so .11 isn't all that unreasonable, generally. Whether or not it was an actual issue has yet to be seen.

    Anyhow, perhaps the anti-OCers can use this as a case where the "element of surprise" was useful in self-defense. Oh, wait...
    Obviously he was impaired, because he hit, and shot the wrong guy. He was not thinking straight. I'll bet he's glad niether of them had a weapon.

    I think most of us don't drink when we carry just to maintain the "above reproach" appearance. I've been at .09, and I wouldn't be anywhere my weapon. That may just be me, but as white rabbit pointed out, he hit the wrong guy.

    And that line about "element of surprise" was pretty funny... I'm glad I wasn't drinking anything when I read it.
    .

  14. #14
    Regular Member BUBB4H's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Centreville, VA, ,
    Posts
    165

    Post imported post

    Excellent self-moderation gentlemen.

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,422

    Post imported post

    Is Training Important?

    The following story has limited information,but really makes the case for why education is important. The officer may have had complete justification in shooting, but a witness lays out the case for an excessive force lawsuit. If an everyday citizen had been the shooter, things would be much worse.

    Sourced from: http://www.canada.com/edmontonjournal/news/story.html?id=7e5677c7-c3ab-45b1-8575-ed17e3275fce
    Saturday, August 09, 2008, Edmonton, Canada

    Police were called to Abbottsfield Mall at 9:20 A.M. after a convenience store clerk saw a man on a bicycle with a butcher knife in his hand, said Mark Neufeld, an investigator with the Alberta Serious Incident Response Team. A single police officer arrived at the scene.

    When confronted by the officer, the suspect dismounted his bike and slowly walked backward holding the knife over his head as the officer drew his weapon and ordered him to drop the knife several times. The young man did not, and the officer deployed pepper spray with little effect. According to Neufeld, the officer did not have a Taser.

    After walking backward for about a block, Marlene Flohr, 42 years old and about 100 feet away watched the suspect either lunge or simply stumble on a curb, which caused the officer who was about 30 feet from the suspect to discharge two rounds into the suspect's chest. Paramedics took the man to the Royal Alexandra Hospital, where he was listed in critical but stable condition. Police still have not identified the man, who they estimate is 16 to 20 years old.

    "He was just a kid. You could still see the baby in him," Flohr said, shaking and repeating herself as she stood near the scene minutes afterward. "I know our generation is losing it out there, but I think that was a little aggressive. It looked like he wanted to calm himself, too, but the cop just kept yelling." Flohr said the young man looked to be about 17.

    Hans Jensen, 38, was standing near the entrance to his townhouse complex when he saw the shooting. He said the man was yelling, " 'Leave me alone.' " "I just couldn't believe it. The officer did the right thing, because if someone would have walked behind the guy, he could have grabbed them. It would have been a lot worse."

    The shooting happened between the mall and the Terrace Heights townhouse complex, just down the street from a soccer field and meters away from a McDonald's.

    The officer who fired the shots has not been interviewed yet, Neufeld said. The officer spent the rest of Friday with his family.

    The Alberta Serious Incident Response Team was formed in January to investigate cases of serious injury or death in police custody, as well as serious allegations of police corruption. After the investigation, the case will go to the Calgary Crown prosecutor to determine if the officer will be charged.


  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Walton County, Georgia, ,
    Posts
    475

    Post imported post

    The female witness must be one of those criminal apologists. The man had a butcher knife, how many babies have you seen with those?

    I think the officer did the right thing, although a video would definitely help provide definitive proof.



  17. #17
    Regular Member thnycav's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Windsor VA, ,
    Posts
    305

    Post imported post

    I think they should have the Monday morning quarterbacks go though some shoot no shoot simulator or some good force on force training just to see how hard it is to make the decision when you have seconds and not the luxury of looking back.

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Panama City, Florida, USA
    Posts
    107

    Post imported post

    thnycav wrote:
    I think they should have the Monday morning quarterbacks go though some shoot no shoot simulator or some good force on force training just to see how hard it is to make the decision when you have seconds and not the luxury of looking back.


    agreed. In addition, the cops job is hard enough. now in order to keep the law in the city state or county before he does what he is SUPOSSED to do, he has to worry will his actions in upholding the law cost him a lawsuit?

    america is becoming weak and it is sad! i miss the america where your next door neighbor knew what kind of desert you liked on christmas.

  19. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Greensboro, ,
    Posts
    235

    Post imported post

    deepdiver wrote:
    Pointman wrote:
    The man wasn't acting in official capacity. He happened to be an officer, but could have been anyone that had training and a permit.

    An interesting question, if you're going to involve his occupation, is out of the total number of wrongful gun usages by persons authorized to carry a firearm by the government, what percentage are localofficers of the law, what percentage are federal law enforcement officers, what percentage are other government employees, and what percentage are citizens that carry for personal security?
    +1 His occupation has nothing to do with the story.

    Edit: And another +1 for not making it an issue in the thread title, Pointman!
    I respectfully disagree. A police officer is assumed to have a certain level of training, and carry themselves in a professional. they are assumed to obey the laws they arrest others for breaking.

    The fact that the person drove around drunk, then attempted to take revenge on someone is a police officer is very much relevant to the story and the events.

    Especially since one would assume that a police officer "should know better."



  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Shenandoah Valley, Virginia
    Posts
    3,806

    Post imported post

    Pointman wrote:
    Relating this to an ordinary person, say the shooter is defending himself from an armed robbery on the street. .....
    What if the sky turned purple?

    What if zombies attack?

    What if a judge goes crazy and starts whacking people with his hammer?


    No offense, Point, but we can what-if all day.

    What if the robbery victim in question lowers his weapon, only to get attacked from behind by a third party?
    Why open carry? Because 1911 > 911.

  21. #21
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Eastlake, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    62

    Post imported post

    This just goes to show you that police are just ordinary people. Ordinary people are just as deserving of trust as your average LEO. Give that some thought. It's kinda scary.

  22. #22
    Campaign Veteran marshaul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia
    Posts
    11,487

    Post imported post

    Orygunner wrote:
    Just another case to show that Law-Abiding Citizens are more responsible with their guns than LEOs (even off-duty LEOs)

    We hit our intended targets a higher percent of the time, we shoot a fewer percentage of innocent people, and there are many MORE of us carrying our gun in public, too!

    ...Orygunner...
    Well said.

Posting Permissions

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