Iraq Veteran Killed By Deputies

[Carnivore]

imported post

Any given one of us would have had to of been there to truely assess the situation and feel the air for what was about to happen next, I feel this soldier will be wearing wings of RED/WHITE and BLUE, it's sad that he fell the way he did,But Swat/LEO are trained and function under certain guidelines, if any wrong doing transpired, the investigation will hopefully be unbiased. I only hope their was a high ranking militaryofficer/commander called in to try to make this soldier stand down before the Swat made their decision..

Rest in peace Hero!!

 

[smoking357]

imported post

LEO 229 wrote:

You do not user less lethal measures on a guy with a gun.

You absolutely do. That's why you have them. The whole idea is for police to put themselves at risk to subdue the citizen with no citizen loss of life. Just as firefighters put themselves at risk for the citizen, even if the citizen got himself trapped in a fire he may have started, so the police risk themselves for the citizen.

There is no preexisting right to go home at night when you take the public's dollar.

 

[AWDstylez]

imported post

I'm as disgusted with the police state as the next guy, and I avoid siding with the cops like the plague, but how else was this supposed to go?

Ifa robber was standing in front of you waving an automatic weapon in the air, are you not going to shoot him on the basis of: "well if he wanted to kill me he would have already"?? Are you kidding me?

Is it possible the guy had psychological problems? Most definitely. Was that the time and place to call the psychologist? Absolutely not. Society's failure to take care of him occured long before the incident that ended his life.

 

[smoking357]

imported post

suntzu wrote:

the people should absolutely demand the total and complete disbanding of ALL swat teams nationwide. They are soldier wannabes, they get a kick out of it.

The "swat" person who killed that soldier should be put on trial for murder.

I see young bleeding hearts like you still have hope in the system. So naive. So innocent. Those with a bit of experience have seen far too much of this and know that due process does not properly attend when the military executes civilians. He should be immediately brought to a secret overseas prison and given a summary trial for war crimes. When cops start being executed for crimes against humanity, they might drop the sick fetish of sport killing civilians.

We are subjugated to a terrorist, unaccountable, army.

 

[AWDstylez]

imported post

smoking357 wrote:

LEO 229 wrote:

You do not user less lethal measures on a guy with a gun.

You absolutely do. That's why you have them. The whole idea is for police to put themselves at risk to subdue the citizen with no citizen loss of life. Just as firefighters put themselves at risk for the citizen, even if the citizen got himself trapped in a fire he may have started, so the police risk themselves for the citizen.

There is no preexisting right to go home at night when you take the public's dollar.

I suppose you've got a point here. I'm still hard pressed to break from my original opinion though.

 

[LEO 229]

imported post

smoking357 wrote:

LEO 229 wrote:

You do not user less lethal measures on a guy with a gun.

You absolutely do. That's why you have them. The whole idea is for police to put themselves at risk to subdue the citizen with no citizen loss of life. Just as firefighters put themselves at risk for the citizen, even if the citizen got himself trapped in a fire he may have started, so the police risk themselves for the citizen.

There is no preexisting right to go home at night when you take the public's dollar.

Ialready know that you are certified as irrational and a nut job.

You want to disbanded the police and go back to handling things yourself. :lol:

It is people like you that the gun grabbers love to see speak. You give them something to prove the people need to be disarmed. :uhoh:

 

[LEO 229]

imported post

While I understand the question of why less lethal means were not used.. I cannot answer because I know nothing about the scene. There are many factors that will render less lethal options ineffective.

What options are even available?

How would you deploy them?

• Baton
• Mace
• Pepper Fogger
• Pepperball Gun
• Taser
• Bean Bag

We are talking about a soldier armed with a rifle. None of the means above will stop him from shooting at someone.

The baton and mace require to you get very close and this is deadly for the guy who pulls the short straw

A pepper fogger may blind the guy and make him choke. The pepperball gun do the same and cause physical pain. But neither will stop him from cranking off a few rounds if he gets mad.

For the taser.. you have to get "at least"21 feet or closer and there is no guarantee both darts will hit him. He may also be wearing clothing preventing a shot from being delivered. He might still be able to move his hands and arms and shoot the rifle.

You have a bean bad but you still have to be very close to deploy it. 20-25 feet to be accurate. The bean bag strike to the head throat, check, spine, and groin can be deadly. This will also not stop him from shooting anyone. It might just piss him off causing him to fire.

So what less lethal option do you want to use?

Is the guy in a room or out in the open? Are there other people in the area that are at risk? There is no perfect answer.

You can negotiate for as long as the guy will let you. But when he starts pointing a gun... you have to believe he has intent to shoot and kill others. You cannot let that happen.

You can shoot one guy who is a threat to everyone.... or let him start shooting everyone and try to play nice and take his gun away.

You decide.....

 

[smoking357]

imported post

LEO 229 wrote:

It is people like you that the gun grabbers love to see speak. You give them something to prove the people need to be disarmed. :uhoh:

It's only a slice of gun owners who like the cops. Everyone else thinks they're bullies and killers, and when the outside world looks in on gun owners and sees cop worshiping occurring, it reinforces their belief that gun owners are pro-death hateful nutjobs.

If you want to help the gun owners' cause, lay off the pro-cop stuff. The places that comprise today's Electoral College majority don't think much of the cops.

 

[Carnivore]

imported post

smoking357 wrote:

LEO 229 wrote:

It is people like you that the gun grabbers love to see speak. You give them something to prove the people need to be disarmed. :uhoh:

It's only a slice of gun owners who like the cops. Everyone else thinks they're bullies and killers, and when the outside world looks in on gun owners and sees cop worshiping occurring, it reinforces their belief that gun owners are pro-death hateful nutjobs.

If you want to help the gun owners' cause, lay off the pro-cop stuff. The places that comprise today's Electoral College majority don't think much of the cops.

Throw me in with the slice that appreciates the cops!! (Likes) is a feeling reserved for chocolate/icecream/hunting/and fishing oh yea and of course the wife.. I am very relaxed around 99% of any Leo that I come in contact with,this is a far higher number that I am comfortable with the general civilian population..

 

[rj3663]

imported post

My best man when I got married 16 years ago is and was a cop. We did some heinous stuff together. I have a degree from Ferris State and my classmates all agreed, even toasted to the fact that it was "Us against them" You are a cop or you are not a cop. AsI learned more and opened my eyes to what I was in danger of becoming I changed my profession. AllLEO's aren't bad but they are all cops. Today I'm a biker. A biker may beat the heck outta someone but a cop will take everything you have, including your freedom and ruin your life forever.

 

[Aaron1124]

imported post

suntzu wrote:

Aaron1124 wrote:

suntzu wrote:

the people should absolutely demand the total and complete disbanding of ALL swat teams nationwide. They are soldier wannabes, they get a kick out of it.

The "swat" person who killed that soldier should be put on trial for murder.

Are you kidding? 80% of SWAT officers come from the military. They are not "soldier wannabes" because what SWAT does and what the military does is as different as night and day. Different objectives and different missions. You can't compare them at all, aside the fact that they both carry weapons. On top of that, what were the officers suppose to do? Wait for the guy to shoot them before they opened fire?

If a school trained sniper had wanted to take on a "swat team"--do you actually think he would have done so in the open, or would he conceal himself, draw swat out and then pick them off?

If this sniper had wanted to kill the police--he would have done so.

Yes, they are soldier wannabes. Either they could not hack it in the military or could not get in...so they became police and go out and like to dress up and play army. They have Army hair cuts, they try to dress and act like the military, they try to carry military weapons, they ride around in armored cars....they are soldier wannabes.

yes, you are actually correct--the job of the military and the police are as different as night is from day...So why is it exactly that the police like to play Army so much?

Yes all--and I do mean ALL "swat teams" should be disbanded, and the police absolutely forbidden to ever play army again.

The "officer(s)" who killed that man should be in jail.

Your post is ignorant and idiotic on so many levels. First you say that he could have killed them all if he wanted? You really think he'd be able to get off more than one burst off before the officers gunned him down?

So please explain how they are "soldier wannabes". They could not "hack" it in the military? You realize the military is MUCH easier to get into than the police force? The military requires an enlistment, and there isn't a limit on how many can enlist. Once you enlist and pass basic training, you're in. The police force, on the other hand, is a competitive field, and for every department opening, there are potentially hundreds of applicants. Your entire statement reveals stupidity. There are just too many issues to touch with you.

 

[Bustelo5%]

imported post

Any information on how this deputy is being delt with? Is he still on duty?Damn shame seeing this soldier was doing something for the community and providing a service.

 

[Doug Huffman]

imported post

THIS is how bad it's getting!

SWAT is the paramilitarization of police. What do you imagine is the foundation of the Posse Comitatus Act?

The police are the toothless-tiger OBONGO's false teeth. Only some are evil, but many are stupid. A few are good citizens.

Either we are equal or we are not. Good people ought to be armed where they will, with wits and guns and the truth.

 

[LEO 229]

imported post

Bustelo5% wrote:

Any information on how this deputy is being delt with? Is he still on duty?Damn shame seeing this soldier was doing something for the community and providing a service.

When you say "dealt with" are you implying how he is being punished?

I am sure he was placed on administrative leave pending an investigation. This happens to any officer that shoots at someone or takes a life.

His weapon and gear are secured and statements are taken from him and everyone on the scene. He is compelled to provide a statement and explain his actions.

If it is found that he was justified in taking the shot... he is eventually returned to duty. If not... he is "dealt with" in some fashion.

I have yet to see any details on this story to inform us what the soldier was doing just before being shot.

What I love is how so many people can get all worked up not knowing all the details. Like Obama didon TV where he openly admitted he did not know buy made a statement anyway.

While it is a tragedy a soldier who served our country at a time of war returned home to be killed.... being a soldier does not mean you cannot be a criminal and kill innocent people.

Many soldiers returning home do kill innocent people.

Do some research and you will find stories of soldiers committing crimes and murders.


Here are a few.. there are many more...

url=http://media.http://media.http://www.thebatt.com/media/storage/paper657/news/2004/07/26/News/HusbandWife.Soldiers.Killed.In.MurderSuicide-695779.shtml]http://www.thebatt.com/media/storage/paper657/news/2004/07/26/News/HusbandWife.Soldiers.Killed.In.MurderSuicide-695779.shtml]http://media.http://www.thebatt.com/media/storage/paper657/news/2004/07/26/News/HusbandWife.Soldiers.Killed.In.MurderSuicide-695779.shtml[/url]

http://stliraqwarvets.wordpress.com/2007/01/12/iraq-war-vet-murders-wife-commits-suicide-pfc-michael-gwinn-jr/

http://siratyst.blogspot.com/2006/05/ft-lewis-soldier-murders-wife-iraq-war.html

 

[AWDstylez]

imported post

LEO 229 wrote:

smoking357 wrote:

LEO 229 wrote:

You do not user less lethal measures on a guy with a gun.

You absolutely do. That's why you have them. The whole idea is for police to put themselves at risk to subdue the citizen with no citizen loss of life. Just as firefighters put themselves at risk for the citizen, even if the citizen got himself trapped in a fire he may have started, so the police risk themselves for the citizen.

There is no preexisting right to go home at night when you take the public's dollar.

Ialready know that you are certified as irrational and a nut job.

You want to disbanded the police and go back to handling things yourself. :lol:

It is people like you that the gun grabbers love to see speak. You give them something to prove the people need to be disarmed. :uhoh:

He can be a little out there sometimes. But, by way of exercise... tell me what I need the cops for? I'm plenty capable of defending myself. What use does that leave for the cops? I would say they're there to keep terrible drivers out of my way, but they have never and will never do that (too busy ticketing me for rolling stop signs at 2am with no one around, never there when people are doing 100+mph and weaving in and out of traffic on the highway, never there when your grandpa is drifting over the double yellow at me, etc), so it's a moot point.

 

[rj3663]

imported post

I suppose I should apologize for starting this thread. We will never know the truth as long as the police are in charge of the facts.

 

[LEO 229]

imported post

rj3663 wrote:

I suppose I should apologize for starting this thread. We will never know the truth as long as the police are in charge of the facts.

How about posting the story or news articles that have more details on what they may have witnessed first hand

 

[rj3663]

imported post

I did. Twice. hometownonline.com Yesterdays edition of the Livingston County Press carried that "story"

 

[LEO 229]

imported post

AWDstylez wrote:

He can be a little out there sometimes. But, by way of exercise... tell me what I need the cops for? I'm plenty capable of defending myself. What use does that leave for the cops? I would say they're there to keep terrible drivers out of my way, but they have never and will never do that (too busy ticketing me for rolling stop signs at 2am with no one around, never there when people are doing 100+mph and weaving in and out of traffic on the highway, never there when your grandpa is drifting over the double yellow at me, etc), so it's a moot point.

You have to look at history and see why the law enforcement was created.

Without law enforcement.. the people... such as yourself... will do what they decide is right. They may decide to not follow anylaws or rules and do what is in their best interests.If they do not follow the rules, who will hold them accountable anyway? The answer.. other people. So now you have a battle of people.

If you want to say that the "people" could just arrest bad guys and take them to court... many people will not like being in court all dayand not be paid. So they will just deal out justice on the spot and skip court.

But law enforcement has far more to it than traffic tickets. I cannot even begin to list all that it does for the community.I am talking about things that are not crime related.

But let's say thereare no police departments.... who do the people call when their child is missing? The community? Oh Please! In our society today.. you are not going to get very many people to come help you find your child. What member of the community will volunteer to take up his chopper and pay for the gas out of his own pocket to help you look for your child?

Writing tickets is a task that is done when there are no calls from the public needing assistance. And even if YOU can handle things on your own... what says that the rest of the community can do this too? I have been to many calls were adults had no clue what to do and they could have handled things on their own.

So while YOU may not need the police.... other people do.

So think outside the box for a bit and stop being so ignorant. :lol:

 

[Dispatcher]

imported post

smoking357 wrote:

LEO 229 wrote:

You do not user less lethal measures on a guy with a gun.

You absolutely do. That's why you have them. The whole idea is for police to put themselves at risk to subdue the citizen with no citizen loss of life. Just as firefighters put themselves at risk for the citizen, even if the citizen got himself trapped in a fire he may have started, so the police risk themselves for the citizen.

There is no preexisting right to go home at night when you take the public's dollar.

What sort of fantasy world are you living in? Seriously?

You are paid with public money, therefore you lose the right of self defense? Did I interpret that comment correctly? You are payed public money so you have no right to go home to your wife and kids at night?

Essentially it breaks down to a simple argument. You are all for citizens arming themselves for self defense and acting in self defense with a firearm. However, you believe that just because someone is working on a public dollar for the greater good of all that they lose the right of self defense? In essence you argue, some have the right to defend themselves, but not others.

The whole idea is not for police to subdue a citizen with no loss of life. This is not a utopia. Bad things happen, people die.

The whole idea is that police subdue a suspect while keeping the loss of life at a minimum and only use lethal force when there is no other choice.

Defense for some, but not for all? That whole argument is lunacy.

I see little of this making sense to you though. You shut out common reasoning and practical sense for some sort of flawed reasoning based on flimsy and unsubstantiated evidence as shown by this little gem of a comment "They (the police) look for every excuse to kill a citizen." That's an absolute fallacy that can't be backed up with anything substantial unless one looks for the most distorted and exaggerated evidence to support grandiose accusations that are altogether baseless.