Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: Police kill homeowner for protecting himself?

  1. #1
    Regular Member bigdaddy1's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Southsider der hey
    Posts
    1,320

    Post imported post

    Found this on one of the other sites I visit.

    Sounds like an unjustifiable shooting to me.

    http://www.fox2now.com/videobeta/wat...&src=front


    What part of "shall not be infringed" don't you understand?

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    129

    Post imported post

    I like how the cop immediately turns this into the homeowners fault for coming out armed and that's why he was shot.

    "If he had waited or stayed inside or called himself there would have been an opportunity for everyone to be identified."Why didn't the police identify themselves when they got there? According to the statement they didn't have opportunity because the homeowner hadn't dialed 911?

    He armed himself and came out of the building. SO WHAT. In doing this he caused the officers to fear for there safety. MAYBE but They reacted as one would expect to defend themselves. FROM WHAT? Did he raise the gun act in a way to threaten them make a gesture or verbal statement indicating intent to harm? I doubt it because as soon as he saw them it would have been clear the were cops. Lights sirens uniforms all those types of indicators that we use and are expected to use BEFORE determining to use deadly force in defense.

    Police say right as they walked up they heard a gunshot and saw muzzle flash. If he was actually shooting at the suspect with the cops being so close wouldn't they see a suspect fleeing. If it was the suspect shooting the homeowner wouldn't the guy be bolting out the door running or fleeing and do you think the suspect is going to stop for the cops?









  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Hodgenville, Kentucky, USA
    Posts
    1,261

    Post imported post

    Scared.....minimal trained cops over reacting. Key word is scared.

  4. #4
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Greensboro, North Carolina, USA
    Posts
    1,052

    Post imported post

    gunrunner1911 wrote:
    I like how the cop immediately turns this into the homeowners fault for coming out armed and that's why he was shot.


    I noticed that right away as well.

    Truely sad.

    It seems as though there was a failure to communicate.

    One dead, law abiding citizen.

    This will probably get used as fuel for the anti-gun people. Of course they'll ignore procedural mistakes and continue to call it "an accidental shooting of a law-abiding fool with a gun."

    And I think something like this happened on the west coast recently, a man was shot several time by police protecting his home and family, but he thankfully survived.

    Edit:

    However, it appears it depends on whose story is true. This link appears to indicate that the homeowner fired at the police through mistaking them as the intruders and they fired back. Lots of stories of mistaken identity getting people shot:

    http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/new...3?OpenDocument


    Oh great, and he was a drug dealer apparently.Perhaps he was shooting atthe police. Maybe he wasn't law-abiding. We'll see.




  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Portsmouth, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    463

    Post imported post

    hmmmm....a crack dealer with a stolen gun...one might wonder exactly who"No No"was shooting at and if it were a matter of the police just returning fire.

  6. #6
    Regular Member bigdaddy1's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Southsider der hey
    Posts
    1,320

    Post imported post

    Some of the comments I read were people say it sounds suspicious that the story is changing or evolving to protect the police. The homeowner is now a crack dealer that came out firing after the police announced themselves?
    What part of "shall not be infringed" don't you understand?

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Portsmouth, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    463

    Post imported post

    bigdaddy1 wrote:
    Some of the comments I read were people say it sounds suspicious that the story is changing or evolving to protect the police. The homeowner is now a crack dealer that came out firing after the police announced themselves?
    Well...unless the police are completely fabricating the story and planting evidence...in the St Louis Post-Dispatch article that tekshogun provided, it states:

    Hogans' gun was recovered at the scene, police said. It had been reported stolen from St. Louis County.

    Detectives believe Hogans had fought with an intruder who had kicked in a door and ransacked his apartment, including drawers and shoeboxes, possibly in search of drugs or drug money, police said. The burglar was gone when police arrived.

    Inside the apartment, police found that at least one shot had been fired before officers arrived. The crime lab will test the bullet to determine its source. Detectives also found packaged crack cocaine inside Hogans' pants pocket.


    That's why it's called an "investigation" ...because things aren't always what they appear to beon the surface...so yes, the story may "evolve."...the only person that I saw that said it sounded suspicious was that "Diva314" person...and I've seenseveral comments callingthe residence a "known crack house." hmmm....I wonder if Diva314's real name is Oralee Williams?

  8. #8
    Regular Member opusd2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Butt is in, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    453

    Post imported post

    Well, if it was a known crack house and he was a known dealer, the two police officers just took care of any more arrests of the guy (if there were ever any) and there will be no more bail for a suspected dealer. Very convenient if you ask me. Oh, and the drugs in his pockets were also a handy touch.

    If it was a case of an innocent resident who ran out after chasing away a burglary suspect that got iced by two excited LEO yearlings, well I think they need to get a job that scares them less. If they fired a total of 6 bullets into him, the lighting should have been adequate enough to acquire the target, and one would think that would make the lighting enough to distinguish whether or not the person they shot was actually pointing his weapon at them.

    All the details that came later on pointing out that the gun was stolen, and the person shot was a bad guy is pretty convenient to know afterwards. If it's true, so be it. If it's not all exactly true then it's another guy who got needlessly wasted. But since I don't know the full story, I can't make a comment I know to be fully accurate.

    All I do know is that whenever the police make a questionable move and become involved in a shooting that requires quite a bit of investigation, I find it unsettling and curious that they get a paid vacation until it gets worked out. Call it administrative leave if you want, but do they not get paid? And this is a punishment, or should at the very least be considered that they did something that someone else performing their duty would also be found to be questionable? I just don't get it.

    Either way, this story seems to have more sides than a schizophrenic in a changing mirror.
    I aim to misbehave

  9. #9
    Founder's Club Member ixtow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Suwannee County, FL
    Posts
    5,069

    Post imported post

    fully_armed_biker wrote:
    That's why it's called an "investigation"
    It is openly taught, at least at the Academy I attended, that "investigation" is really just another word for 'making up or fabricating whatever you have to.'

    Rule Numero Uno for this, is, of course, make sure no one survives to give yourself greater leeway in what you fabricate later. It is hard to kill the whole neighborhood, so one guy, with nobody watching.... Perfect opportunity to kill someone.

    Least round here... Cops see anyone who isn't another cop as a target they just have to wait to get alone time with... They hunt people.

    If this guy was a dealer, well.... Odds are they knew who he was and just wanted to 'solve the problem permanently.' Another victim of prohibition.
    "The fourth man's dark, accusing song had scratched our comfort hard and long..."
    http://edhelper.com/poetry/The_Hangm...rice_Ogden.htm

    https://gunthreadadapters.com

    "Be not intimidated ... nor suffer yourselves to be wheedled out of your Liberties by any pretense of Politeness, Delicacy, or Decency. These, as they are often used, are but three different names for Hypocrisy, Chicanery, and Cowardice." - John Adams

    Tyranny with Manners is still Tyranny.

Posting Permissions

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