• 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.

Off-duty cop, OCing, shoots, kills firefighter.

Jeff Hayes

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2009
Messages
2,569
Location
Long gone
Good for you, but a majority of the people do not go into the military, nor have medical training nor attend the acadamy (sic). Heck, a good amount of people don't grow up with a father....

Nor are people compelled to intervene in a situation that can become and in fact did become deadly. Especially a film crew. (Full disclosure: my oldest daughter is a film major at Montana State University and is proficient with her handgun) Most film majors are probably not along the same internal makeup as you or I or anyone on this forum.

Just a perspective that we need to understand exists...

+1
 

sudden valley gunner

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2008
Messages
16,674
Location
Whatcom County
And most of it from those that have never done the job or could not qualify for the job.

Because most are over qualified to be cops.

My two cents worth, Officer Hubbard was off duty that is clear. What is not clear is who was the initial aggressor between Cop and firefighter? If the off duty Cop was the initial aggressor then he lost his right to self defense.

From the article

"Hubbard, who was working security for the Marriott while wearing his Police Department uniform, saw the group arguing and saw Anthony Bruno leaving the area. He headed east after him."

Read more here: http://www.kansascity.com/2014/02/25/4848650/case-file-reveals-moments-before.html#storylink=cpy

If an argument is all Hubbard saw and Bruno was leaving the area I have to question why Hubbard reacted as harshly as he did. What Probable cause did he have for accosting Bruno? At this point I have to ask if the stop was lawful, if the stop was not lawful was Bruno simply defending himself, admittedly not he best idea with a uniformed officer.

"Bruno told Hubbard he shouldn’t have hit him, Hubbard said."

Read more here: http://www.kansascity.com/2014/02/25/4848650/case-file-reveals-moments-before.html#storylink=cpy

I have to agree if all Hubbard saw was an argument he would not be justified in detaining
Bruno much less assaulting him.

I am sick to death of giving Cops the benefit of the doubt.

+1 I have dealt with way too many cops they will never get the benefit of the doubt from me.

Please cite the qualifications required for the job.

Jingoism, nationalism, ignoring the constitution, prejudiced, blind devotion to their brothers in blue, enforcing malum prohibitum laws, and not thinking for yourself.
 
Top