Open Carrier Murdered by **** Cop

Augustin · Aug 31, 2013

An August 26th article on infowars.com describes yet another MURDER of an innocent/legal open carrier/veteran by the POLICE - this time in his own house !!!

"Young Deputy Sheriff Guns Down Air Force Vet in His Own Garage

22-year-old deputy kills 68-year-old vet who was inspecting damage done to his property.

Kit Daniels
Infowars.com
August 26, 2013

Funeral arrangements are underway for a 68-year-old Air Force veteran who was gunned down in his own garage by a young Blount County, Tenn. deputy sheriff."

For full article visit link:

http://www.infowars.com/young-deputy-sheriff-guns-down-air-force-vet-in-his-own-garage/

cirrusly · Sep 1, 2013

Wow, just wow.

That LEO should be given a fair trial with a potential penalty of lethal injection if found guilty.

Unfortunately that scenario would never happen because it's too far removed from the Disney World reality most dimwitted liberals live in.

Maverick9 · Sep 1, 2013

It appears that the new approach is basically 'the only good citizen is a dead citizen'. I wonder if there's a quota now?

Citizen · Sep 1, 2013

Maverick9 said:
It appears that the new approach is basically 'the only good citizen is a dead citizen'.

Alternatively, the state no longer exists to protect citizens and their rights. The state protects itself.

Jamesm760 · Sep 2, 2013

Sad to know that we can get killed by the bad guys and the "good guys" on our own property. But at least one of them has to deal with consequences the other gets off with a slap on the wrist.

FreeInAZ · Sep 2, 2013

Sadly, a homeowner is dead. There will be an investgation - let's hope it's done by a independent agency and not the department this officer belongs to. To much conflict of interest potential, yet it is the standard practice.

Is it me or could this all have been avoided with a simple phone call? Home owner calls police THREE HOURS prior to their arrival. Common sense (or uncommon in the case of some LEA's) would dictate a call back to let the homeowner know officers will be on site shortly and to expect them. Most if not all victims of a break-in(s) are not going to go unarmed into a dwelling that may be revistied at anytime by some thugs.

davidmcbeth · Sep 2, 2013

http://www.thedailytimes.com/Local_...roperty-owner-during-security-check-id-039818

On Tuesday, a deputy took a report from Henry Taylor that several items had been taken from the property, including an HVAC unit. At around 7 p.m. Wednesday, Ragland responded to the rental property and took a report of another burglary of several additional items.
Ragland informed Cynthia Ridinger he would do property checks at the residence throughout the night, and at around 10 p.m. he returned to conduct the property check and encountered Henry Taylor in the garage.

Does not sound like he was responding to anything .. conducting "property checks" at the time of the shooting.

Odd, all articles I read say that the cop GAVE COMMANDS but none say he IDENTIFIED HIMSELF as the po po.

I'm sure he'll add that to his story later.

Grapeshot · Sep 8, 2013

Moderator Comment

In light of several of our rules (LEO bashing, personal attacks, etc.) please refrain from including descriptors for affect in your threads/posts/replies - an indication of your personal negative bias, but IMO not in keeping with OCDO standards.

We deal in facts. The presentation of overtly negative verbiage, particularly before the facts are fully known, represents a premature conclusion which at best is yellow journalism.

Insofar as the subject of this thread, the officer involved may well have committed some serious infractions. Even so, we need to restrict our reaction/responses to his actions and severely curtail the personal remarks. We shall have to wait and see what the facts & results in this matter are.

In general, I have observed a decided tendency to seek out and report LEO transgressions, particularly by a few certain users. While such reports are certainly of interest to many here, the preponderance of them seen recently is beyond the intended scope of OCDO.

marshaul · Sep 8, 2013

cirrusly said:
Unfortunately that scenario would never happen because it's too far removed from the Disney World reality most dimwitted liberals live in.

Right, because "liberals" are solely responsible for the police aristocracy.

This is one thing the "right" doesn't get to shirk credit for.

Anyway, this is why you don't call the police to do a "security check", or anything else. Basically, the only time there is a net increase in safety resulting from a 911 call is after you've shot an assailant.

Jared · Sep 8, 2013

A certain WA local LEO, the resident police apologist at any cost will be here to justify this in....3........2.........1......

stealthyeliminator · Sep 8, 2013

Jared said:
A certain WA local LEO, the resident police apologist at any cost will be here to justify this in....3........2.........1......

Hi, my name is Palo. Technically it wasn't murder because the validity of the officer's actions depends on the circumstances as the officer perceives them, not as they actually are.

Just kidding. He'd probably say that it would depend on what a reasonable person would have believed in the same circumstance. Unfortunately its generally assumed that a police officer thinks reasonable, even in tense and unclear situations, when such an assumption might not be made for non-leo

PALO · Sep 8, 2013

stealthyeliminator said:
Hi, my name is Palo. Technically it wasn't murder because the validity of the officer's actions depends on the circumstances as the officer perceives them, not as they actually are.

Just kidding. He'd probably say that it would depend on what a reasonable person would have believed in the same circumstance. Unfortunately its generally assumed that a police officer thinks reasonable, even in tense and unclear situations, when such an assumption might not be made for non-leo

Your trolling is weak sauce. It's not surprising that my analysis of shootings is in-line with how the courts and prosecutors perceive them because I am commenting on the law as it is, not how you want it to be.

Grow up and drop the trolling. I am pretty sure what you are doing is also a violation of the rules of this site, if not the spirit, misrepresenting another's view and calling them out on stuff. It's certainly the modus operandi of a cowardly troll

The validity of an officer's shooting are the same as the validity of anybody else's shooting in most cases- did the facts and circumstances reasonably perceived by the person using deadly force , justify a belief that the person was in danger of serious bodily injury or death

There is also (at least in my state), a justification for officers to shoot a fleeing felon IF the crime committed by the felon involved the use of deadly force or threatened deadly force and the officer has a reason to believe the person represents a deadly risk if not apprehended. When possible, a verbal warning is preferred. That's the RCW. In some respects, it places a tighter standard on officer shootings vs. non-officer shootings as acknowledged at

http://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=9A.16.040

Be a man, not a mouse, and cut the weak trolling crap

PALO · Sep 8, 2013

Jared said:
A certain WA local LEO, the resident police apologist at any cost will be here to justify this in....3........2.........1......

I've seen no apologists on this site when it comes to police misconduct. I've seen plenty of bigots who assume in all cases of police conduct that the police were in the wrong. I see, otoh, the majority of posters are fair and consider fact patterns before jumping to conclusions

MattinWA · Sep 8, 2013

Palo, really?

Citing law where you can shoot a fleeing felon in Washington has nothing to do with an officer murdering a homeowner in his garage in Tennessee, nice try on the diversion tactics, but I can see through that BS

MattinWA · Sep 8, 2013

davidmcbeth said:
http://www.thedailytimes.com/Local_...roperty-owner-during-security-check-id-039818

On Tuesday, a deputy took a report from Henry Taylor that several items had been taken from the property, including an HVAC unit. At around 7 p.m. Wednesday, Ragland responded to the rental property and took a report of another burglary of several additional items.
Ragland informed Cynthia Ridinger he would do property checks at the residence throughout the night, and at around 10 p.m. he returned to conduct the property check and encountered Henry Taylor in the garage.

Does not sound like he was responding to anything .. conducting "property checks" at the time of the shooting.

Odd, all articles I read say that the cop GAVE COMMANDS but none say he IDENTIFIED HIMSELF as the po po.

I'm sure he'll add that to his story later.

An unlawful command is still an unlawful command, wether given by an officer with a badge, or some random shmuck on the street.

PALO · Sep 8, 2013

MattinWA said:
Palo, really?

Citing law where you can shoot a fleeing felon in Washington has nothing to do with an officer murdering a homeowner in his garage in Tennessee, nice try on the diversion tactics, but I can see through that BS

I see no evidence that an officer "murdered" anyone. That term begs the question. I was merely commenting on when an officer can legally shoot someone, some aspects may be relevant to this shooting and other aspects not. But it was to give an overview of the entirety of lawful conduct in that regard.

There is no way for a RATIONAL person to determine that this was a MURDER. All we know is that the police shot a 107 yr old man. It may have been justified, it may not, but there is no way an UNbiased person can no whehter it was or not, based on this article

Many people seem to think that because the shootee was 107, that this is somehow proof or strongly suggestive of "murder" or an unlawful shoooting, which is utter rubbish. Again, firearms are the great equalizer. That's WHY I am such a strong supporter of RKBA, because it gives people like the 107 yr old man, a fighting chance.

hth

MattinWA · Sep 8, 2013

Really, is it legal For an officer to Arrive at a private residence, not responding to a crime in progress, find an American citizen, who is also the owner of the property, illegally try to disarm said homeowner, then fire when the unlawful order is refused...

Sounds like horrible police work which lead to murder. You can call it what you want,
Police in this country have no right to come onto your property and start demanding things. That's the spirit this country was built on. If your values are not similar to that, the I fear you may be part of the problem.

stealthyeliminator · Sep 8, 2013

PALO said:
Your trolling is weak sauce. It's not surprising that my analysis of shootings is in-line with how the courts and prosecutors perceive them because I am commenting on the law as it is, not how you want it to be.

Grow up and drop the trolling. I am pretty sure what you are doing is also a violation of the rules of this site, if not the spirit, misrepresenting another's view and calling them out on stuff. It's certainly the modus operandi of a cowardly troll

The validity of an officer's shooting are the same as the validity of anybody else's shooting in most cases- did the facts and circumstances reasonably perceived by the person using deadly force , justify a belief that the person was in danger of serious bodily injury or death

There is also (at least in my state), a justification for officers to shoot a fleeing felon IF the crime committed by the felon involved the use of deadly force or threatened deadly force and the officer has a reason to believe the person represents a deadly risk if not apprehended. When possible, a verbal warning is preferred. That's the RCW. In some respects, it places a tighter standard on officer shootings vs. non-officer shootings as acknowledged at

http://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=9A.16.040

Be a man, not a mouse, and cut the weak trolling crap

Oh come on PALO, I made it clear I was just joking. I think that my "representation" of your views is actually pretty spot on, not in the joke part of my post, but in the latter more serious part.

stealthyeliminator said:
Hi, my name is Palo. Technically it wasn't murder because the validity of the officer's actions depends on the circumstances as the officer perceives them, not as they actually are.

Just kidding. He'd probably say that it would depend on what a reasonable person would have believed in the same circumstance. Unfortunately its generally assumed that a police officer thinks reasonable, even in tense and unclear situations, when such an assumption might not be made for non-leo

See bolded. I think that's pretty accurate. You said basically the same thing. ("did the facts and circumstances reasonably perceived by the person using deadly force , justify a belief that the person was in danger of serious bodily injury or death") And that may very well be the law. I understand that fully. I didn't say it was wrong or a bad system.

You are free to make joke of my posting and belief tendencies in a light-hearted effort to introduce humor into a thread. I won't mind a bit. For what it's worth, I'm not a fan of the thread title either. It is a bit of a leap, I think, to conclude the man was murdered. I believe that people are indeed murdered by police officers, but each shooting case should be treated more or less individually, no? The facts should be the prime focus, and I'd agree we don't have enough to make sound conclusions.

MattinWA · Sep 8, 2013

PALO said:
Many people seem to think that because the shootee was 107, that this is somehow proof or strongly suggestive of "murder" or an unlawful shoooting, which is utter rubbish.

hth

more disinformation palo, the man was in his sixties, according to the article. You don't even know what particular matter you currently spouting off about. I hope you investigate more in your police work then you do on spreading disinformation. Mistaken identity on a forum makes you look a fool, mistaking the identity of the home owner lead to his murder.

PALO · Sep 8, 2013

MattinWA said:
more disinformation palo, the man was in his sixties, according to the article. You don't even know what, particular matter you are spouting about. I hope you investigate more in your police work then you do on spreading disinformation. Mistaken identity on a forum makes you look a fool, mistaking the identity of the home owner lead to his murder.

Yawn...

That's my bad. I was responding also to the story about the 107 yr old shot by the police and i god forbid made a mistake and posted in the wrong box!

shiver me timbers!

Open Carrier Murdered by **** Cop

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Founder's Club Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Banned

Legendary Warrior

Campaign Veteran

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member