Wait inside your apartment

imported post

Vandal wrote:

NightOwl, you remember incorrectly.

The high school student was in possession of a WWII Japanese 8mm rilfe with bayonet attached. He charged the single BPD officer from the bushes by his home and stuck the cop through his jacket. According to the Tueller Rule (which has been held up in court) a person within 21 feet with an edged weapon is an immediate and lethal threat. That teen was well within 21 feet and had already attempted to stab the cop after going apesh!t inside of his home. If you would have pulled the trigger it would have been justified and so was that one. Oddly enough the same rule applies to the guy with the bread knife.

Before you go ragging on our cops do some research about the cases you so poorly cite. You should also look into the use of force continuum that LEOs use.

I would much rather have Idaho cops than CA or Spokane cops here. They may be found not-guilty in their shootings but that is because they tend to play by the rules around here and are not a corrupt agency like LAPD, Spokane PD or any host of others. If you don't like 'em leave my state.

Call me a LEO apologist, or whatever you want but before you go calling out people and situations you have very little knowledge of do some research into the cases. You appear to have virtually zero knowledge of police procedure, if you had any you would know the cops did what needed to be done. Of course you seem to have a hard on for stirring up trouble around here. Personally I don't trust you with a firearm with your attitude, but living in Nampa it kinda come with the territory.

Click to expand...

I did recall correctly, you didn't say anything different than what I said, and I did not go "ape@#$%". The cops involved absolutely deserve me "ragging on" them, and they should be charged with murder, at least in the case of the guy with the bread knife. Did the cop know the kid with the bayonette was there in the yard before he showed up? Absolutely,the officerwas informed the teen was in that yard with the rifle and put themselves in proximity to be in danger. Did he have to approach so closely to be in a position to get charged like that? No. Where was the shotgun with non-lethal rounds? Where was the tazer? Few bean bags would have done the trick perhaps, but now we'll never know. The officer went into the situation knowing full well the teen was there and what was going on, and made the choice to put himself in that location. The officer wasn't within 21 feet when he got the call, and he made the choice to put himself close enough to get charged at. Could have have parked his car and stood behind it, firing non-lethal ammo from behind it? Perhaps he could have talked the kid down from behind it, keeping the vehicle in position to prevent himself from getting charged at.

Do your own research and you'll find that the ombudman and the father both agree that the officer fired without warning. The father and officer disagree as to whether or not the teen was close enough to poke the officer. The father told the dispatcher it was an unloaded rifle, the dispatcher told the officer that it was an "assault rifle" (confirmed by the ombudsman).

Take a look for yourself: http://boiseguardian.com/2006/07/13/report-raises-ombudsman-stock/ Alternatively, you can check here, where they state the ombudsman finds that they officer did not follow proper procedure: http://www.fox12boise.com/Global/story.asp?s=5143880 Perhaps you'd prefer to see where the officer says the cuts in his shirt and vest were from the bayonet, but there were no cuts in his fleece jacket that he was wearing over the shirt and vest: http://www.ktvb.com/news/localnews/stories/ktvbn-nov1705-inquest_day_4.610a320.html That's kind of odd how the "stab" missed the outer layer of clothing, don't you think? Oh, wait, I'm wrong...using a magnifying glass and a flashlight they found a tiny, tiny hole in the outer jacket that cut a year after the event (and I quote the coroner here) "one or two threads". From a bayonet stab? Seriously? Yet it made visible holes in the underclothing and didn't injure the officer?

As for the guy with the bread knife, they again put themselves into the position where he was within 21 feet, he didn't put himself in that position. If you walk up to a person with a knife and shoot them for being too close to you with a knife, that's hardly the fault of the person with the knife. It could have been handled MUCH better, since he wasn't a threat to them until they made him one. He was sequestered in a back bedroom of an empty house...until they went in with guns drawn and shot him down. Ahem, more links: http://www.ktvb.com/news/localnews/stories/ktvbn-may1407-shooting.6aa9f739.htmlwhere it clearly states that everyone was safely out of the house till the officers went into the house with their "plan". Obviously, their plan was insufficient to handle the known situation of a man with a mental disorder who had a knife in an area where he wasn't actively threatening anyone. Could they have worked out a better plan? Perhaps tried talking to him through the closed door, or from the backyard? Why on earth would they enter the room when they didn't need to do so immediately, when they could have taken the time to deal with him in safety?

Would I be justified in walking up to someone with a knife who I know to be mentally unstable and shooting them down? No, that would be called murder. How about if I talked them into putting down the knife and surrendering while I'm in a safe location, since nobody is currently being threatened? Much better outcome.

As for my "attitude" I'm not sure where you get the idea that I'm "stirring up trouble" around here. Perhaps a little research into that might be helpful to you as well. I can only assume that you're referring to my disagreement with CaCop, and I will always have a problem with someone saying that their paycheck is more important than my rights, every single time. Other than that, and people stirring up trouble involving me directly, I'm a pretty easygoing guy. So, why are you coming here with incorrect assumptions about the incident (which it seems that I remembered correctly) and claiming that I'm wrong? Before you jump on my case telling me I'm going "ape@#$%" check your own facts and get them straight. Feel free to use the links I provided to help out with that.

Oh, and if you could show me a link to any police policy indicating that they should shoot people who aren't a threat to anybody, I'd love to read it.

imported post

BTW - we DO have the undesirable California cops here. Boise Police Department has been posting recruiting notices in L.A. to attract cops to move here. The BPD brass figures they save money by not having to send the L.A. copsto POST because they've already had training down there. Wouldn't be surprised if Caldwell and Nampa PD do the same thing.

This practice should outrage everyone in the Treasure Valley; we don't need non-residents with no sense of Idaho perspective or attachments to the community they serve enforcing our laws. It certainly explains the militarization in appearance and mindset of LEO's here,and may well have something to do with the spate of officer-involved shootings over the last decade.

imported post

Nightowl, I've certainly had good and bad experiences with police. I once had a gun to my head while at a friends house that was getting raided. Ended up being the wrong apartment, but I think I remember pissing my pants quite literally. Men dressed in black with black hoods and no badges, lots of barking orders, no knock; I thought we were dead for sure. Surely incompetence due to someone reading the address wrong. They wanted the apartment above us.

I've had officers assist while my car is broken down, play "counselor" during family disputes (instead of making an arrest when they lawfully could have), search for my lost dog, and some have been great when it comes to showing me their guns, and their secondary pieces, and just talking guns in general.

I think I've learned by now that everyone is an individual. Most of those individuals have been great people. Some of them not just like anyone else. I tend to defend the individual first and assume that they are innocent. As far as them putting themselves in danger, yes, they did. We hire them to go into danger every day, to go after the really bad people. When they are called to a house, they need to respond. When that person doesn't comply, then it is no one else's fault when they get shot for not dropping a weapon. Its terrible, its sad, but the responsibility lies on the person waving a knife around and making threats. In the case of a mentally ill person, the responsibility lies with their guardians to have prevented this in the first place. Until I see firm evidence of malice, intentional murder, I think I'll assume he did exactly what I would have and acted within the law. Don't you want the same assumption when you fire your weapon in self defense some day?

Your not stirring up any trouble with me. Just sharing my analysis of things.

imported post

I've had good experiences and bad as well. I've had officers be helpful, courteous, polite, and go out of their way...and others who have done things which resulted in me getting a misdemenor conviction for something I didn't do about 15 years ago(well, that and not being as familiar with my rights as I am now, there's no way the same thing would get anywhere, knowing what I know now). I'm not disputing that 99% of officers are decent folks, trying to do the best they can with a crappy job. The problem is the 1% who are feeding on the power trip, or perhaps a bit sadistic in a line of work where they can get into fights legally (in many situations, use of force is required, etc, not trying to say that cops beating on citizens is a legal fight), as well as unjust laws they're required to enforce from time to time, etc.

I sincerely hope that any police reading this don't feel that I'm bashing on them, as I'm not (well, unless you're in the 1%). I have a lot of respect for the good officers and the dirty job they have to do. I just don't want to be responsible for calling out the 1% who abuse their authority in any way, and it saddens me that I even feel concerned at all when I need to call the police, as a result I deal with most stuff directly myself, when I can.

Glad to hear you don't feel like I'm stirring up trouble, I certainly didn't intend to and apologize to anyone who feels I came off that way, just voicing my opinion. Anyhow, I still would have liked to have seen the bread knife incident go to trial more than anything, so a jury could have drawn their conclusions rather than just a couple of people making the decision. It clearly won't, but it still bothers me when I consider it. At best, it was a horrible judgement call that resulted in loss of life, and those officers got off very, very easy for that.

This thread is getting pretty derailed, so getting back on topic. I decided that, though I didn't like the officer telling me that he'd have to post someone to watch me talk to my neighbor if I didn't go inside, it wasn't sufficient to warrant a complaint. He's a decent enough guy, I've talked with him before, and I don't want to put a complaint (valid or not) in his file. I do, however, hope that I have the opportunity to talk to him again and discuss the incident. I think it was a bad call on his part to not tell the firemen to just cope with their own nervousness. The officer and I both knew that I wasn't in the way of the incident at all, and that I was being perfectly helpful otherwise. Perhaps I can convince him to tell the firemen that their nervousness is not my problem in the future.

imported post

And if the officer doesn't tell the fireman...I'd say at least the officer knows how you feel now and will be prepared for you NOT going back into the house if asked again. At least that way its discussed AFTER the situation is over, and he can expect non-compliance on your part with simple "requests" unless he gives you an "order" the next time you have an encounter.

I'm fortunate enough to know most of the officers I see by name. I've had 911 called on me twice here in Eagle, and both times the officers drive up to me (I was on foot both time) saw my gun on my hip and asked "Hey, we just got a call bout a man with a gun...were you just down the street that way?" I tell them yes and they said "Ok man, just checking, see ya later!" I'm positive that knowing them on a personal basis removes some of the thinking that I'm a potential threat and it makes my life easier. I wonder how these same officers would react not knowing me. I'd hope they'd be as friendly as they are now, but who knows?

Actually Nightowl...I would say its more than 1% bad apples. I wouldn't know how to begin to quantify things, but if I did a percentage just based on my own bad/good experiences, I'd say it's closer to 10%. The percentage doesn't matter so much though; whats important is that we stand together for our rights, as peacefully as we can and fight within the system until that is no longer an option. The more we change peoples attitudes about guns and other rights in general, the better our police force will mirror the public attitude. Unfortunately, while we might decrease the number of bad cops out there, we'll never be able to get rid of all of them. A job like that is going to attract certain undesireable types, much like a forum like this will too.