• 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.

RKBA + Rifle = Death Sentence by Florida Law Enforcement

since9

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 14, 2010
Messages
6,964
Location
Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
Article.

This is something I'd expect to occur in Orange County, California. Not Florida.

What was the nature of the "encounter?" Was it "Drop it or we'll" BAM-BAM-BAM-BAM-BAM?

This reminds me of the guy who was murdered by LA cops as he was sitting on the back porch of his friends house. No attempt at contact was made.

This reminds me of the guy in whittler in Washington who was murdered by a trigger-happy patrolman mmediately after crossing a street.
 

RetiredOC

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Dec 21, 2009
Messages
1,561
The article says he pointed a realistic (i'm thinking airsoft) gun at police. If I was the cop I would have defended myself as well. Perhaps the officers could tell he had a disability, that doesn't stop him from pulling the trigger on a gun.


If you saw what appeared to be a mentally handicap person carrying a rifle around would you not be a little concerned?
His neighbors said it was obvious that Ernest Vassell had a disability, and police should have known.

This only makes matters worse, someone who obviously doesn't have the capability to think straight is toting a rifle around? This isn't just open carry. He obviously was holding it in his hands, not slinged, because he was able to point it at police officers.


Now, this was just my opinion. Perhaps you can change my mind :)
 
Last edited:

rodbender

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 23, 2008
Messages
2,519
Location
Navasota, Texas, USA
The article says he pointed a realistic (i'm thinking airsoft) gun at police. If I was the cop I would have defended myself as well. Perhaps the officers could tell he had a disability, that doesn't stop him from pulling the trigger on a gun.


If you saw what appeared to be a mentally handicap person carrying a rifle around would you not be a little concerned?


This only makes matters worse, someone who obviously doesn't have the capability to think straight is toting a rifle around? This isn't just open carry. He obviously was holding it in his hands, not slinged, because he was able to point it at police officers.


Now, this was just my opinion. Perhaps you can change my mind :)

:(I'm with you. If anyone points a reallistic appearing weapon at me, I'm going to do my best to take him down.:(

My question is,"Why would someone allow him to walk around with a reallistic looking toy gun in a public place?" That's where the true supidity lies.
 

eye95

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
13,524
Location
Fairborn, Ohio, USA
Article.

This is something I'd expect to occur in Orange County, California. Not Florida.

What was the nature of the "encounter?" Was it "Drop it or we'll" BAM-BAM-BAM-BAM-BAM?

This reminds me of the guy who was murdered by LA cops as he was sitting on the back porch of his friends house. No attempt at contact was made.

This reminds me of the guy in whittler in Washington who was murdered by a trigger-happy patrolman mmediately after crossing a street.

Hmmm....in reading the story at the link you posted, I see nothing that would even hint at your question that I bolded above.

Based solely on what is in the story (more necessary facts could change this judgment), the officers fired upon a man who pointed what they believed to be a rifle at them. They have the same right to self-defense that civilians do.

The fact that the man was "autistic" (these days, that word has a broad enough definition as to actually have no meaningful definition at all) has no bearing on the officers' actions. They had no way of knowing about any mental defect the man had. The family knew. Are they partly responsible? The officers bear zero responsibility for not considering the man's "autism." They cannot reasonably be expected to know.
 

WalkingWolf

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2011
Messages
11,930
Location
North Carolina
This is nothing more than a tragic set of circumstances. I can understand the family wanting to point fingers, blame is part of grief. What if's are just not constructive in a situation like this. My heart goes out to the family, I hope they can come to grips with this in a timely manner. But if the story is true as reported the officers did nothing wrong.
 

Gunslinger

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2008
Messages
3,853
Location
Free, Colorado, USA
Hmmm....in reading the story at the link you posted, I see nothing that would even hint at your question that I bolded above.

Based solely on what is in the story (more necessary facts could change this judgment), the officers fired upon a man who pointed what they believed to be a rifle at them. They have the same right to self-defense that civilians do.

The fact that the man was "autistic" (these days, that word has a broad enough definition as to actually have no meaningful definition at all) has no bearing on the officers' actions. They had no way of knowing about any mental defect the man had. The family knew. Are they partly responsible? The officers bear zero responsibility for not considering the man's "autism." They cannot reasonably be expected to know.

I agree. It's a real shame, but why didn't someone in his family foresee the possible outcome? I'm not exactly the first to jump to cops' defense, but this time I think it is justified.
 

nonameisgood

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 4, 2008
Messages
1,008
Location
Big D
I think it is a terrible idea to think that a LEO has the same rights of self defense as a non-LEO. We pay these folks to take risk on our behalf. This requires them to tolerate mistreatment and work a bit harder to resolve conflicts involving a risk to personal safety.

Texas used to hold LE to a stricter standard for use of deadly force than that for Non-LE. If LE can shoot someone with a (fake) gun without knowing anything of the circumstance, we have lost control.

I expect an LE to know more than the average citizen about what constitutes a threat to life. Hold them to that standard and judge them for errors in judgement. Without that, there is no reason for them to practice restraint. If it's too tough or too dangerous, go flip burgers.
 

Baked on Grease

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2011
Messages
629
Location
Sterling, Va.
I think it is a terrible idea to think that a LEO has the same rights of self defense as a non-LEO. We pay these folks to take risk on our behalf. This requires them to tolerate mistreatment and work a bit harder to resolve conflicts involving a risk to personal safety.

Texas used to hold LE to a stricter standard for use of deadly force than that for Non-LE. If LE can shoot someone with a (fake) gun without knowing anything of the circumstance, we have lost control.

I expect an LE to know more than the average citizen about what constitutes a threat to life. Hold them to that standard and judge them for errors in judgement. Without that, there is no reason for them to practice restraint. If it's too tough or too dangerous, go flip burgers.

I honestly read halfway through before realizing you weren't going end with a "/sarcasm off". I could understand if they just saw him and shot him, without considering any of the particulars of the circumstance, I would agree. But, the story clearly states that the rifle was pointed at the officers, probably after they told him to freeze and put his hands in the air. Are you telling me you want the rifle to go "BANG" before an officer can defend himself? By then it could be to late. I would think that even Texas would exonerate the officers of wrong doing in this case if the story is true as presented.

How would an officer know it's not real, from 20-30 feet away, before it goes bang?
Edit: and don't say it's got an orange tip on the barrel, the story doesn't say it does or does not, but "could be confused" for a real firearm.

Sent using tapatalk
 
Last edited:

skidmark

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 15, 2007
Messages
10,444
Location
Valhalla
I think it is a terrible idea to think that a LEO has the same rights of self defense as a non-LEO. We pay these folks to take risk on our behalf. In which case I would expect your argument to be that LEOs should have less restriction on them in order to shoot, seeing as how they are under so much more rsk that we mere "citizens" are. This requires them to tolerate mistreatment If you told that to the cops who work where you live you would most likely find yourself without cops on the payroll. They may need to be more restrained to dealing with the mistreatment they receve, but there is nothing I know of that says they must tolerate it. and work a bit harder to resolve conflicts involving a risk to personal safety. It seems that the very limioted amount of information provided by the article shows they did just this - they ordered the man to put the weapon down. Had it been you or me we could have just shot the guy without giving any instructions.

Texas used to hold LE to a stricter standard for use of deadly force than that for Non-LE. Can I get a citation? If LE can shoot someone with a (fake) gun without knowing anything of the circumstance, we have lost control. Your statrement begins with the presumption that the cop(s) knew it was a fake gun when they shot. Can you support that presumption with any information available in the article?

I expect an LE to know more than the average citizen about what constitutes a threat to life. Please provide support for your assertion. There are many anecdotes (I know the plural of anecdote is not data) that suggests that many cops do not in fact know what even the basics of the basic laws relating to self defense are. Hold them to that standard and judge them for errors in judgement. Do you mean strip them of qualified immunity for acting "in good faith" een when what they did was wrong/not legal? Oh, please say that's what you mean. Without that, there is no reason for them to practice restraint. Maybe you are actually saying strip them of qualified immunity? If it's too tough or too dangerous, go flip burgers. Doesn't that apply to everybody, regardless of what job they hold?

Quite frankly I am not sure if you know what point you are trying to make. Note my comments above that seem to suggest what you wrote is actually the opposite of what someone supporting the cops might say.

stay safe.
 

nonameisgood

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 4, 2008
Messages
1,008
Location
Big D
My point is that LE has a duty to put themselves at risk when the job calls for it. An officer should not be on the job if s/he is afraid of guns, knives, minorities, or any other common "threat", however rational or irrational. They should be trained and prepared to act to stop a threat and contain dangerous situations, in a manner which doesn't excessively risk themselves or bystanders AND doesn't create an irrevocable situation, should a mistake have been made.

In the OP, it seems to me that the LE put themselves in the situation where they could get shot. They see the guy on the porch. They approach and make demands. Why not back off a safe distance, observe, evacuate, and check with neighbors? Have dispatch check the address for prior calls, known persons at the address, DL's, etc. Don't rush until it is needed. If the guy is popping off rounds, it's entirely different, since he would have then demonstrated the ability and willingness to shoot things or people. Obviously, this situation involved someone who didn't have the means to shoot people, regardless of what those rushing onto the scene thought they knew.

Keeping in mind that the guy probably hadn't broken any laws, so LE presence is really not warranted anyway.
 

RetiredOC

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Dec 21, 2009
Messages
1,561
This requires them to tolerate mistreatment and work a bit harder to resolve conflicts involving a risk to personal safety.

If LE can shoot someone with a (fake) gun without knowing anything of the circumstance, we have lost control.
1041420_o.gif


These are the circumstances: you have a man who (by description of the family) visibly appears to be mentally unstable pointing a damn rifle at you. How is that not enough to defend your life?
 
Last edited:

nonameisgood

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 4, 2008
Messages
1,008
Location
Big D
Because it wasn't a rifle, the guy wasn't doing anything illegal (even if it had been a real rifle), and the only reason he is dead is because the cops made an avoidable error in judgement. How many of you jump on the bandwagon when police approach and try to ID an OC'er after a MWAG call? What were they doing there absent a crime in progress?

I believe I said "unreasonable risk". Approaching a person who appeared to be armed with a rifle on his porch, before understanding the situation was entirely avoidable. And shooting said person was also avoidable. Kind of like claiming self defense after going to the aid of a stranger.

Edited to add: I'm not condemning these officers specifically for this event. My point is that police, in general and only occasionally, tend to intervene where they have no business, try to control situations which do not need controlling, and may rush to act when they do not really need to rush. It is the macho cop mentality, and may be in part a response to criticism of LE for failing to act in some high-profile cases.
 
Last edited:

j4l

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2011
Messages
1,835
Location
fl
Because it wasn't a rifle, the guy wasn't doing anything illegal (even if it had been a real rifle), and the only reason he is dead is because the cops made an avoidable error in judgement. How many of you jump on the bandwagon when police approach and try to ID an OC'er after a MWAG call? What were they doing there absent a crime in progress?

I believe I said "unreasonable risk". Approaching a person who appeared to be armed with a rifle on his porch, before understanding the situation was entirely avoidable. And shooting said person was also avoidable. Kind of like claiming self defense after going to the aid of a stranger.

Edited to add: I'm not condemning these officers specifically for this event. My point is that police, in general and only occasionally, tend to intervene where they have no business, try to control situations which do not need controlling, and may rush to act when they do not really need to rush. It is the macho cop mentality, and may be in part a response to criticism of LE for failing to act in some high-profile cases.

Well, you must have some mighty gung-ho cops out there. Here, it can be damned frustrating trying to GET THEM TO respond- even to an active shots-fired call (complete with gunfire in background while on the 911 call) when you actually need them to. And even when you can- it ends up being 20 minutes after all is said and done.

Are there some asshat cops out there? Sure, just like in any other profession. It's a bit of a reach to label all or most of them as bloodthirsty folks inclined to go out of their way (and add a ton of paperwork, and potential loss of their careers, among other things) just for a chance to shoot someone. And keep in mind- most of the bs in the media, from which you read about "cops murdering guys on their porch for no reason" crap to begin with, is heavily slanted,and missing a lot of facts.
 

xd shooter

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 31, 2010
Messages
333
Location
usa
If he's holding a rifle in his hands (brandishing), vs having it slung over his back, how is that different than someone holding a handgun in their hand (brandishing), vs having it in a holster.

If someone has a weapon in hand, at the VERY least I'm ducking for cover...If the weapon points at me....all done.

Here's the scary part, when my son was younger, got his first paintball gun, he and the neighbors kids ran around the neighborhood shooting at each other. The same scenario could play out with airsoft guns, one of which a customer of mine brought his by to show me, looking EXACTLY like my M4!

It's scary because the neighborhood kids can be running around with these airsoft guns, and have them mistaken for real guns and get killed! Ok, they hear someone yell "DROP IT!".....Thinking maybe it's one of their buddies, turn to the sound of the yelling...

While I don't certainly want Police officers to take unnecessary risks, it may prevent "accidents" like this if they hold up their trigger fingers until they're sure of the threat. Tough call....
 

RetiredOC

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Dec 21, 2009
Messages
1,561
Because it wasn't a rifle, the guy wasn't doing anything illegal (even if it had been a real rifle), and the only reason he is dead is because the cops made an avoidable error in judgement.

1. At that moment in time it WAS a rifle. I don't care if it was a toy or not, to someone who doesn't know and you're pointing it at them IT IS A RIFLE.

2. He wasn't doing anything illegal even if it had been a real rifle? POINTING A REAL RIFLE AT A HUMAN IS NOT ILLEGAL!?!?!?! TROLOLOLOL

3. The ONLY reason he is dead is because the COPS MADE THE ERROR!??!?! YOU TROLLIN BRAH!??!?! YOU DON'T THINK POINTING A RIFLE AT ANOTHER ARMED INDIVIDUAL PLACES ANY FAULT ON YOURSELF!?!?!?

Bro...you are seriously out of touch with reality.
 
Last edited:

Pace

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 2, 2009
Messages
1,140
Location
Las Vegas, NV
I hate to say this, have you seen a guy on meth with a gun? How can you tell the difference.

Family should be investigated for giving a fake gun to a kid with a disability. I honestly think fake guns are one of the worst ideas in general.

Have you ever had someone point a fake gun at you? Do you know every model and make? If it doesnt have a red tip, do you want to make a choice then if its real or not?

Also, you have any idea who is shooting people right now? 15 year old gang bangers... they pull a gun on me, I'm not going to ask if its loaded or real. f-k that.
 

PrayingForWar

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Sep 9, 2007
Messages
1,701
Location
The Real World.
I hate to say this, have you seen a guy on meth with a gun? How can you tell the difference.

Family should be investigated for giving a fake gun to a kid with a disability. I honestly think fake guns are one of the worst ideas in general.

Have you ever had someone point a fake gun at you? Do you know every model and make? If it doesnt have a red tip, do you want to make a choice then if its real or not?

Also, you have any idea who is shooting people right now? 15 year old gang bangers... they pull a gun on me, I'm not going to ask if its loaded or real. f-k that.

+1

No one should have to wait until rounds have been discharged in their direction. The cops had reasonable cause to shoot.
 
Top