Horrors..another man with a rifle shot in Southern CA

http://www.sacbee.com/2010/12/25/3281129/la-police-shoot-kill-rifle-toting.html



Los Angeles police have shot and killed a bicyclist they said rode toward them with a rifle early Christmas morning.

Doesn't seem to be enough (or any) information on which to base an opinion in this posted piece!

wow

What happened to non lethal force ?

1 2 many said:

What happened to non lethal force ?

Click to expand...

Hmmm...



Are you serious?

As much as LAPD is going to have growing pains when a RTC is established, this situation is different. They were investigating shots fired in the area. If you're the only person carrying in the area your likely to be detained for the felony investigation.

The story lacks any real details and at 0400 I doubt there were many wits if any. I'll gladly bag on my brothers when they do wrong but here we just can't know yet what happened (if we ever know).

I doubt a CALGUNNER was carrying his OLL while riding his BMX bike through a Watt's public housing project on his way to the down town LA range at 4am. But I could be wrong.

cato said:

snip...
As much as LAPD is going to have growing pains when a RTC is established, this situation is different. They were investigating shots fired in the area. If you're the only person carrying in the area your likely to be detained for the felony investigation.

Click to expand...

Plus this person had a rifle in hand and continued to approach.

I will give the benefit of the doubt to LAPD here. It was either one of two incidents ,some guy really high on drugs or drunk that was unaware of what he was doing, or a "suicide by cop" . If you approach a police officer with a rifle in the "hood" at night, and the LEO is close enough to shoot you, with a handgun or shotgun, you were too close to him not to hear the instructions to drop it/freeze. High powered rifles go threw standard bullet proof vest like butter, and all the LEO's want to come home for Christmas to their families. LAPD is known to shoot first and ask questions later, but hard to blame them on this one given the time ,place and nature of the call.

Just remember anytime you are visibility armed, you take on a huge risk of a negative encounter with a LEO or BG. You better have a plan of action for each type of scenario. If you encounter multiple LEO's in one location,they may each be yelling different conflicting instructions from different angles(or hiding positions). This has happened before, and one LEO started shooting when the person did not comply to his order and advanced towards him versus the other LEOs orders to walk towards a certain direction to prone him out in a open area.

oc4ever said:

Just remember anytime you are visibility armed, you take on a huge risk of a negative encounter with a LEO or BG.

Click to expand...

I will have to interject here just a little bit...
And the info in THIS story doesn't have this info YET and may not ever.

But,

There is a HUGE difference between advancing on the LEO with the long gun mounted and in firing position vs having the same long gun slung on your back.

I do agree that 4am on a bicycle in project housing in WATTS with a long gun SHORTLY AFTER A REPORT OF GUNSHOTS will be guaranteed to have SOME level of interaction with the police.

Of course, is there EVER a time of day in WATTS where one would not hear the gunshots? And it would probably warrant some sort of investigation if no shots were heard over a period of an hour or so... but some of this is speculation as I haven't lived across the river from COMPTON since 1973!

From the article:

Police said he was holding a rifle and was shot when he ignored their commands.

Click to expand...

One guess as to the timeline:

4:00:00.0000: FREEZE!!!
4:00:00.0001: BLAM-BLAM-BLAM-BLAM-BLAM....

I'm sorry, but between this and the garden hose massacre, the officers of the LAPD are appearing like paranoid chicken****s. What's departmental policy these days? "If you see anyone who even remotely appears to be armed with a deadly weapon, issue one verbal warning then open fire."

I like S.W.A.T.'s description: "They are trained to perform high-risk operations that fall outside of the abilities of regular officers." - Source

Apparently, a simple take-down is beyond the abilities of regular officers, so I think it's time S.W.A.T. take over the LAPD. I like the following quotes from the Wikipedia article:

"SWAT applicants undergo rigorous selection and training. Applicants must pass stringent physical agility, written, oral, and psychological testing to ensure they are not only fit enough but also psychologically suited for tactical operations."

Perhaps the LAPD should require at least the same psychological testing as required for members of S.W.A.T. I can imagine one question that would be an immediate disqualifier:

137. You come across an individual sitting on a back porch who is holding what appears to be a small caliber handgun. You:

a. Open fire.

b. Let him have it!

c. Determine whether or not what he's holding is a firearm or a garden hose sprayer.

d. Answer c has too many words, and big ones, so screw it - open fire!

e. I'm scared of this question BLAM-BLAM-BLAM! Stupid test...

Is it just me, or have the actions of the several officers in California over the last year earned them all a sordid reputation?

Considering the person with the rifle has control of the engagement from a greater distance than the person armed with a handgun or a shotgun, the person with the rifle was in the kill zone of the lesser weapon.

I would like to know more about the timing of the incident.

JoeSparky said:

Doesn't seem to be enough (or any) information on which to base an opinion in this posted piece!

Click to expand...

Quit being so danged reasonable!

Jumping to any conclusion after reading this piece, whether that conclusion decries or praises the police action, would be gratuitously presumptuous and would betray a bias that warrants some serious introspection.

What happened here can range from an unmistakable threat to the officers to a ridiculous and criminal overreaction by those officers. I'll hold off judgment until more facts are in.

eye95 said:

Quit being so danged reasonable!

Jumping to any conclusion after reading this piece, whether that conclusion decries or praises the police action, would be gratuitously presumptuous and would betray a bias that warrants some serious introspection.

What happened here can range from an unmistakable threat to the officers to a ridiculous and criminal overreaction by those officers. I'll hold off judgment until more facts are in.

Click to expand...

Wow, Eye95, said that I was reasonable..... I think I need to archive this one... LOL

Anyway, I agree with your assessment!

There is more to the story than what has been released - either against the officers or for the officers. So far I've ran across nothing new, except the person's name.

cato said:

I doubt a CALGUNNER was carrying his OLL while riding his BMX bike through a Watt's public housing project on his way to the down town LA range at 4am. But I could be wrong.

Click to expand...

+1. Had to chuckle at that.