HERE IT IS - 1st Norfolk Incident

[spurrit]

imported post

LEO 229 wrote:

para_org wrote:OT
Mods....? Was this necessary?

Definitely.

 

[sailer]

imported post

spurrit wrote:

LEO 229 wrote:

You have a 1 in 8000+ chance you could possibly be shot and killed by a LEO pointing his gun at you.

What if you're black?

Considering the number of news stories here that begin, "Norfolk (or Virginia Beach, or Chesapeake ...) police officers shot and killed ..." I'm guessing those odds would be a little worse in the Tidewater area.

 

[lax]

imported post

This is just crazy thuggery. Let's extend this police behavior to car drivers. Cars can be just as deadly as a gun. How do the cops know that people in their car are not about to jump the curb and run people over? Do they need to be pointingguns at every driver so they feel safe, thenstop them, drag them out and put them against the wall?

I hope you have a great payday in your future danbus. You deserve it for putting your life at risk and the department deserves the punishment.

 

[MetalChris]

imported post

LEO 229 wrote:

Ghettokracker71 wrote:

I can understand if they showed up and POLITELY asked him why he was there,and asked him to leave or to put his weapon in the car while waiting for a friend, THEN if he didnt cooperate to take further action.

You lose the tactical advantage. He draws and shoots you and his partners run out of the bank.

Sorry.. Your deceased now. thanks for playing touchy feely cop. :lol:

You would not make it in my job... You would be killed your first day. Not everyone out there is law abiding.

The above posts where made months ago, but I'm just now catching up w/ this thread and had to give my $.02...

First of all, I'm gonna jump on the bandwagon and get on Dan's side with this one. LEOs went WAY beyond the scope of their "authoritah" in this case.

Anyhoo, to get to my point...How often do getaway drivers/lookouts involved in armed bank robbery sit outside on the bank steps with their weapon holstered? Seriously, how could that in any way be construed as a threat?

The level of ignorance I see from someLEOs scares the living sh!t out of me.

The only thing missing is the goose-step...

 

[LEO 229]

imported post

USAF_MetalChris wrote:

LEO 229 wrote:

Ghettokracker71 wrote:

I can understand if they showed up and POLITELY asked him why he was there,and asked him to leave or to put his weapon in the car while waiting for a friend, THEN if he didnt cooperate to take further action.

You lose the tactical advantage. He draws and shoots you and his partners run out of the bank.

Sorry.. Your deceased now. thanks for playing touchy feely cop. :lol:

You would not make it in my job... You would be killed your first day. Not everyone out there is law abiding.

The above posts where made months ago, but I'm just now catching up w/ this thread and had to give my $.02...

First of all, I'm gonna jump on the bandwagon and get on Dan's side with this one. LEOs went WAY beyond the scope of their "authoritah" in this case.

Anyhoo, to get to my point...How often do getaway drivers/lookouts involved in armed bank robbery sit outside on the bank steps with their weapon holstered? Seriously, how could that in any way be construed as a threat?

The level of ignorance I see from someLEOs scares the living sh!t out of me.

The only thing missing is the goose-step...

Ignorance? I think not.

Would you rather have LEOs willing to go forward and challenge a man with a gun or run away? They are there trying to keep the public safe.

They did what they felt at the time was proper. I am not going to fault them for that.

Your point is valid.... how many bad guys wear holsters to a crime. I have seen video where they DO wear holsters at times. So this argument is not 100% accurate.

It is easy for YOU to sit back and read everything and then critique. The cops being dispatched having little information and having to make snap decisions is much harder.

I only with YOU could attend some real practicals where you must decide quickly what to do. You would not be killed so there is a little less to worry about. But I am confident that many here would make errors in judgement too.

And we can do without the comments of "Goose Stepping" since they are NOT exterminating a race of people. Nobody was shot so in the end everything worked out.

 

[AbNo]

imported post

LEO 229 wrote:

Would you rather have LEOs willing to go forward and challenge a man with a gun or run away? They are there trying to keep the public safe.

I'd rather they not bother someone that is just sitting there. How do they know he wasn't just sitting there because his car had broken down, and he was waiting for a tow truck?

These NPD guys came rolling up, said "Oh hey, that guy has a gun, he must be a necrohiliac child molesting bank robber.", and proceeded to more or less treat him as such, until someone else finally stopeed and said "Uh.... what are you guys doing?"

Should they start trying to run over jay walkers to keep the public safe? (And no, that's not a rhetorical question)

LEO 229 wrote:

They did what they felt at the time was proper. I am not going to fault them for that.

And...... when do you draw the line at giving them carte blanche, because "it felt right at the time"?

You know what other kind of people think it's all right to do things becuase it feels good, or because of their intentions, and not their actions?

Liberals and children, though that was probably redundant.

But seriously, where would you draw the line at letting them get away with something, based soley on their intent?

LEO 229 wrote:

And we can do without the comments of "Goose Stepping" since they are NOT exterminating a race of people. Nobody was shot so in the end everything worked out.

Agreed, but would we be having the same convesation if Dan was on of those 1 in 8000 that you mentioned?

 

[LEO 229]

imported post

AbNo wrote:

LEO 229 wrote:

Would you rather have LEOs willing to go forward and challenge a man with a gun or run away? They are there trying to keep the public safe.

I'd rather they not bother someone that is just sitting there. How do they know he wasn't just sitting there because his car had broken down, and he was waiting for a tow truck?

These NPD guys came rolling up, said "Oh hey, that guy has a gun, he must be a necrohiliac child molesting bank robber.", and proceeded to more or less treat him as such, until someone else finally stopeed and said "Uh.... what are you guys doing?"

Should they start trying to run over jay walkers to keep the public safe? (And no, that's not a rhetorical question)

LEO 229 wrote:

They did what they felt at the time was proper. I am not going to fault them for that.

And...... when do you draw the line at giving them carte blanche, because "it felt right at the time"?

You know what other kind of people think it's all right to do things becuase it feels good, or because of their intentions, and not their actions?

Liberals and children, though that was probably redundant.

But seriously, where would you draw the line at letting them get away with something, based soley on their intent?

LEO 229 wrote:

And we can do without the comments of "Goose Stepping" since they are NOT exterminating a race of people. Nobody was shot so in the end everything worked out.

Agreed, but would we be having the same convesation if Dan was on of those 1 in 8000 that you mentioned?

I completely understand how those not in the profession can see things as extreme or unnecessary. But the police need a little room to operate and get the job done safely.

Times are far more dangerous now and unlike back in the day of Mayberry... police are shot at now at an alarming rate. So approaching someone you suspect may be a criminal... who is armed... may not get a polite "What 'cha doing?" greeting.

Granted... we knowwhy he was there and nothing criminal happening... the police and the other citizens do not. Remember what I posted elsewhere... the police suspect subjectsarecriminals unless proven otherwise. We cannot help that since we see so many bad people everyday.

It is safer to handle things in that mannerrather than dropping our guard and getting shot. We are not paranoid...We know the job is dangerous and accept the risk of DEATH but that does not mean we have to be all "huge and kisses" with the people.

What if Danbus had been shot?The LEO would have to explain why he felt it was necessary to do so. Keep in mind that the LEO did not look for Danbus so he cold just pull his gun on him. This was a citizen call for concern and the police were sent.If the shooting was not justified then that would be a matter for the courts.

If you are going to walk around with a gun openly displayed for self protection... you MUST be aware that in some places you may cause people to get a little scared. It makes no difference if it is allowed or not... the people watch the news and see gun violence every day. Their minds have been poisoned by the media.

What is always comes down to is... were the LEOs "right" in their response?

The most of the board says NO.

I say... appropriatefor the information provided and the situation as presented.

We can continue to disagree on the matter and give "what if" situations but we were not there and we did not have to decide how to handle the event. It is easy to sit back and judge.

I say... chalk one up for experience and learn from others. When you see the police headed your way with lights and sirens... and they jump out with guns drawn... Get your hands up and cooperate!! This will lessen the chance you will be harmed.

Resistance will only escalate the level of force used against you. You cannot win on the street!

 

[spurrit]

imported post

I can honestly see a reason for LEO to contact folks in some situations, upon seeing them OCing.

In the instance of Danbus walking up on otherwise busy cops and interfering with them, I would certainly support them asking him to clear out, and call dispatch with his contact info if he wanted to ask questions. If he refused, he needed to be cuffed and stuffed in the back of the car.

I've seen LEO's and EMT'strying to do business in urban areas, and was kinda surprised that they didn't go nuts. Typically, a crowd would gather, all of them claiming to be the "cousin" of the person the LEO's/EMT's were trying to deal with, and interfering to an extent that would tempt anyone to whip out a gun and make a few "examples".

 

[HankT]

imported post

LEO 229 wrote:

If you are going to walk around with a gun openly displayed for self protection... you MUST be aware that in some places you may cause people to get a little scared. It makes no difference if it is allowed or not... the people watch the news and see gun violence every day. Their minds have been poisoned by the media.

This is why a National OC Day would be a good idea-- to spread awareness of legal OC. So many civilians don't realize that it may be perfectly legal in their state.



If there ever is an National OC Day:

Let's have a national OC day!!!

http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum4/6016.html

and normal citizens happen to see news coverage about it, then the first time they see some OCer walking down the street or in a mall, they'll think....

"Guy's got a GUN! Hey, I saw a news story on that....that must be one of those OCers. I heard it waslegal!"

This would be much better than the normal citizen seeing an OCer for the first time and saying:

"Hey, guy's got a GUN!He doesn't look like a cop--I wonder if he's gonna rob somebody. I better call the cops!"

 

[spurrit]

imported post

Not a good idea, IMHO. Some 'tard would do something stupid in nearly every town.

 

[longwatch]

imported post

I think this thread has run its course.