• 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.

Campus Police Shoot Gunman at North Carolina University

steele

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 20, 2010
Messages
135
Location
Ventura, California
What is going on? If this guy wanted to hurt somebody, they would have been dead long before campus police showed up. Sounds like an OCer, who got a taste of mass paranoia/mind control, to me...

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2011/11/0...ina-university/#ixzz1cv8YsKLV?test=latestnews

"Published November 06, 2011| NewsCore

ELIZABETH CITY, N.C – A former student at a North Carolina university who was seen carrying an AK-47 style rifle on campus was shot by police Saturday before being taken into custody and charged.

Rashaad Gardner was charged with assault by pointing a gun, possession of a weapon on state educational property and going armed to the terror of the people, WAVY reported.

Campus police on patrol at Elizabeth City State University in Elizabeth City, N.C., about 50 miles south of Norfolk, Va., saw students running from part of the campus and saying they had seen a man with a rifle, Police Chief Samuel Beamon said.

An alert posted on the college's website said gunshots were fired on campus shortly after 2:30 a.m. local time Saturday.

The campus was put on lockdown during the incident. Officers saw Gardner wielding an AK-47 style rifle, and he was shot in the leg by an officer during a confrontation.

Gardner fled into a wooded area near the campus while still armed, Beamon said. University police contacted the Elizabeth City Police Department, which dispatched officers and a K-9 unit to locate him.

Gardner was apprehended at 3:28 a.m. local time and taken by ambulance to a local hospital for treatment.

He was being held Sunday in the Albermarle District Jail on $50,000 bond.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2011/11/0...n-at-north-carolina-university/#ixzz1cwZEB7y5
 

MilProGuy

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 7, 2011
Messages
1,210
Location
Mississippi
"...carrying an AK-47 on a college campus..."

Not a wise choice.

Every choice we make in life has a consequence.
 
Last edited:

Redbaron007

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 10, 2011
Messages
1,613
Location
SW MO
There is more to this story that hasn't been given. Would like to know more. Unfortunately, we prolly won't know the rest of the story.

AK47 style rifle! Liberal media! :lol:
 

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
Hey, at least it was written up as an AK-47 style rifle, instead of assault rifle, high-powered rifle, or terrorist rifle, or just plain AK-47. They're getting more accurate in their reporting. Still room for improvement, but its a step in the right direction.
 

Daylen

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 29, 2010
Messages
2,223
Location
America
"...carrying an AK-47 on a college campus..."

Not a wise choice.

Every choice we make in life has a consequence.

Why not who was harmed by its simple presence? I think the lack of wisdom and civility was the persons choice to discharge the firearm, likely in an illegal and possibly harmful manner.
 

skidmark

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 15, 2007
Messages
10,444
Location
Valhalla
It seems the guy who got shot violated several NC laws:

assault by pointing a gun, possession of a weapon on state educational property and going armed to the terror of the people

Now, we know that last one is BS and just there so they can enhance whatever sentence is handed down. We probably will never know if the first charge is accurate or not, so we are left with the one in the middle.

Presuming that does violate NC law on a college campus (I'm too lazy to look it up) then the guy committed a major error in critical thinking.

I want to know if the cop who "[...] shot [him] in the leg ... during a confrontation" is going to claim he did that on purpose. 'Cause if he does, he's probably going to get in trouble over violating department policy and SOPs. And if he admits he's a lousy shot he will need years to even begin to live it down.

stay safe.
 

Polynikes

Regular Member
Joined
May 18, 2011
Messages
182
Location
Colorado Springs
I think everyone failed to notice that this story is likely just a media fabrication. After all, the "Gun Free Zone" signage on campus would have stopped an actual gunman in his tracks. There's no way a bad guy could actually bring a gun past that point.
 

Jack House

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 12, 2010
Messages
2,611
Location
I80, USA
He broke the law, but was it inadvertently? Not that it is an excuse, but I don't see how they justify shooting him. If he was there to cause harm, he would have done so.

Posted using my HTC Evo
 

Redbaron007

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 10, 2011
Messages
1,613
Location
SW MO
He broke the law, but was it inadvertently? Not that it is an excuse, but I don't see how they justify shooting him. If he was there to cause harm, he would have done so.

Posted using my HTC Evo

My thoughts exactly.

There is undoubtedly more to this that hasn't been released. Did he resist arrest? Did he use the gun in a threating manner? Did he violate the GFSZ? I know some of the tin foil hats folks will crucify me, but I have a hard time believing the Campus Police would shoot just because the guy was caring a 'AK47 style rifle'.

Now the question begs, where the Campus Police trained correctly? Did they just see the rifle and fire? If, and I mean a big IF, he was legitimately carrying the rifle and they shot him (mainly to a lack of training)......Now the University is going to have some splaining to do. This guy will see a little $$$, if this is the case.
 

DocWalker

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 6, 2008
Messages
1,922
Location
Mountain Home, Idaho, USA
My thoughts exactly.

There is undoubtedly more to this that hasn't been released. Did he resist arrest? Did he use the gun in a threating manner? Did he violate the GFSZ? I know some of the tin foil hats folks will crucify me, but I have a hard time believing the Campus Police would shoot just because the guy was caring a 'AK47 style rifle'.

Now the question begs, where the Campus Police trained correctly? Did they just see the rifle and fire? If, and I mean a big IF, he was legitimately carrying the rifle and they shot him (mainly to a lack of training)......Now the University is going to have some splaining to do. This guy will see a little $$$, if this is the case.

AK-47 sytle rifle was probably a air-soft version. using the key word STYLE or TYPE weapon.
 

skidmark

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 15, 2007
Messages
10,444
Location
Valhalla
All the speculation about whether it was a real gun or an airsoft, or if he violated a GFZ law or some other law seems to be forgetting the basic point - that a cop used lethal force in a situation where it was not clear that he was authorized/justified/excused to do so in the defense of his life or the life of an innocent third party.

All we have been told is that the gun-carrier is accused of "assault by pointing a gun". We do not know who he pointed it at and when that happened in relation to when he was shot at by the cop.

There is reason to speculate that he did not point the gun at the cop, because that is usually charged as attempted murder/attempted capital murder of a police officer. But it's just speculation.

For all we know the gun-carrying guy could have been on his way to slaughter either an entire kindergarten class or the colle varsity cheerleading squad or some teacher that gave him a failing grade on his last quiz. OR he could have had no evil intent and just did a very stupid thing. Until we hear more about the charge or read about the trial we may never know.

Which brings up a question - is someone going to get copies of the police records and post them?

stay safe.
 

DocWalker

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 6, 2008
Messages
1,922
Location
Mountain Home, Idaho, USA
All the speculation about whether it was a real gun or an airsoft, or if he violated a GFZ law or some other law seems to be forgetting the basic point - that a cop used lethal force in a situation where it was not clear that he was authorized/justified/excused to do so in the defense of his life or the life of an innocent third party.

All we have been told is that the gun-carrier is accused of "assault by pointing a gun". We do not know who he pointed it at and when that happened in relation to when he was shot at by the cop.

There is reason to speculate that he did not point the gun at the cop, because that is usually charged as attempted murder/attempted capital murder of a police officer. But it's just speculation.

For all we know the gun-carrying guy could have been on his way to slaughter either an entire kindergarten class or the colle varsity cheerleading squad or some teacher that gave him a failing grade on his last quiz. OR he could have had no evil intent and just did a very stupid thing. Until we hear more about the charge or read about the trial we may never know.

Which brings up a question - is someone going to get copies of the police records and post them?

stay safe.

aggre not enough information, maybe the college newspaper can teach the local news a thing or two about adding details. If he was there pointing even a realistic toy gun at people he should have been taken down. If he was just stupid and walking through with an airsoft in no threatening manner and shot the college cop should be held accountable.

My gut feeling is he was trying to commit suicide by cop. A quick way to do it as long as you find a cop that can hit you in more than a leg. No evidence to back it up just another scenario to consider.
 

Dreamer

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 23, 2009
Messages
5,360
Location
Grennsboro NC
It seems the guy who got shot violated several NC laws:



Now, we know that last one is BS and just there so they can enhance whatever sentence is handed down. We probably will never know if the first charge is accurate or not, so we are left with the one in the middle.

You are 100% correct on the GAttTotP charge. It is a "pile on charge" that they almost ALWAYS throw at people who do stupid things with firearms in NC. By the letter of the law (actually, there is NO statute that defines GAttTotP--it is a court-precedent based common law violation), a person must meet 4 conditions to be guilty of GAttTotP according to the NC AG's "Firearms Laws" brochure:
By common law in North Carolina, it is unlawful for a person to:
1) arm himself/herself with any unusual and dangerous weapon,
2) for the purpose of terrifying others,
3) and go about on public highways
4) in a manner to cause terror to others.

The N.C. Supreme Court states that any gun is an unusual and dangerous weapon for purposes of this offense. Therefore, persons are
cautioned as to the areas they frequent with firearms.

If he was carrying an AK-47-style rifle, he undeniably meets condition #1.

But to meet condition 2 (which defined this violation as a "crime of intent") he would have had the explicit intent to cause terror or fear in others. Nothing was said about his intentions.

If he was on the grounds of a State University or College, then he most likely was NOT meeting condition #3, unless he was walking in the street of said campus, and that street was a roadway exclusively maintained by the State.

Condition 4 is VERY arbitrary. Any fool can be terrified by the mere presence of a firearm--even one being legally and lawfully carried for appropriate and rational reasons.

So at the very least, he DID meet 1 of the 4 conditions, which means he is NOT guilty of GAttTotP, based on the definition of the requirements of this violation according to the NC AG.

And even if he met 1, 2, and 4, but was not on a public highway, he is not guilty.

Even if he met 1, 3, and 4, but did not have the express intent of terrifying others, he is not guilty.

But if he DID point it at someone, he's pretty much toast on the GAttTotP, as well as the other charges.

I'm reserving judgement on this one until more info comes out...
 

Dreamer

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 23, 2009
Messages
5,360
Location
Grennsboro NC
And now the REST of the story...

Turns out this kid was essentially a wannabee thug:

Witnesses told police the gunman was involved in a fight, left campus, and returned with the gun to retaliate.


Rashaad Gardner, 24-years-old, is charged with assault by pointing a gun after campus police say he brought an AK-47 to campus.


The school says about 1:15 am Saturday officers arrived after a fight at Complex D dorm. Officers say Gardner arrived with the AK-47 and they asked him to drop it, but he refused, pointed the gun at police, and at least one officer shot Gardner in the leg.


http://www.witn.com/crime/headlines/Police_Shoot_Man_With_Assault_Rifle_On_Campus_133298693.html

He SHOULD be charged as previously mentioned, and and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.

However, I'm sure the charges will eventually ALL be dropped, because as everyone knows, there is simply NO WAY that anyone can bring a gun onto a NC college campus, because it is a violation of NC Statute, and there are a whole slew of "gun control" laws that prohibit it. Since "gun control" laws work, this news story is obviously entirely fictional and made-up...
 

Jack House

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 12, 2010
Messages
2,611
Location
I80, USA
I would love to see someone use that as a defense, then take it as high as they can. Imagine legal precedent declaring anti gun laws ineffective.

Posted using my HTC Evo
 

since9

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 14, 2010
Messages
6,964
Location
Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
There is undoubtedly more to this that hasn't been released. Did he resist arrest? Did he use the gun in a threating manner? Did he violate the GFSZ? I know some of the tin foil hats folks will crucify me, but I have a hard time believing the Campus Police would shoot just because the guy was caring a 'AK47 style rifle'.

The article said he was charged with assault by pointing a gun. The question is, how was he pointing it? Up? Down? Or at someone?

Now the question begs, where the Campus Police trained correctly? Did they just see the rifle and fire? If, and I mean a big IF, he was legitimately carrying the rifle and they shot him (mainly to a lack of training)......Now the University is going to have some splaining to do. This guy will see a little $$$, if this is the case.

The article also says he was shot in the leg before fleeing. In the leg? Really? Either a very poor shot, or a very good shot. Given that "shots" plural were fired, I'm inclined to belief it was a bad shot.
 

skidmark

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 15, 2007
Messages
10,444
Location
Valhalla
And now the REST of the story...

...

Agreed - the kid was appropriately charged and got off lucky by only getting hit in the leg (with what sounds like the only one of multiple bullets launched in his direction as opposed to being aimed at him*).

I'm rather amazed that the news reported enough facts in the follow-up story to let us legal nitpickers reach a conclusion.

stay safe.

* Yes, I am aware of how difficult it is to hit a moving target while you are also in movement. But since the cops are The Only Ones who should be allowed to have guns because of all the training they undergo, they should be able to shoot the wings off a fly in a tornado while riding a horse backwards.
 

Redbaron007

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 10, 2011
Messages
1,613
Location
SW MO
The article said he was charged with assault by pointing a gun. The question is, how was he pointing it? Up? Down? Or at someone?


The article also says he was shot in the leg before fleeing. In the leg? Really? Either a very poor shot, or a very good shot. Given that "shots" plural were fired, I'm inclined to belief it was a bad shot.

Yep, you are correct. My point was more about how he did that; I still think there is more to this than what has been released.

As for being shot in the leg, you have some of the same questions I have. I'm not familiar with the campus police there, so I will reserve comments on their ability to shoot. I'm wondering, too, how close were they when they shot; also, since it was 2:30 in the morning, when did they notice the firearm was being pointed at them, they were in a wooded area. Just some questions, not alleging anything.
 
Top