Cop shot in Indy

[Frank_N_Stein]

The Sargent made a point to indicate that that is the case when a LEO is involved...he did not say it happens with every call...just when one of their own is in need.

Did the newsperson interviewing him ask about response to incidents involving Joe Citizen? Probably not. The Sgt. was answering a specific question about that specific incident. Any thing else you want to get your panties in a wad about?

 

[ATF Consumer]

no wad here...just made an observation and a few individuals come jumping in to defend LEOS, when the answer is with Sargent Paul Thompson and how he thinks.

 

[Frank_N_Stein]

no wad here...just made an observation and a few individuals come jumping in to defend LEOS, when the answer is with Sargent Paul Thompson and how he thinks.

Your observation could be taken to its own thread instead of ****ting on the one talking about an officer being shot by some mope.

 

[Griffeycom]

or the guy that I grabbed before he could jump off of a bridge onto I-70.

Why isn't this typical when anyone else calls 911?

I was actually riding with Frank when this happened. I can tell you that we were there within ~1-2 minutes that the call came out and before frank could make it from where he parked his car on the bridge and where the first responding officer was standing there were 2 officers behind us and 2-3 officers on the opposite lane of that bridge. There was no one that responded to that scene who took their time responding. They got there as fast and safely as they could. As soon as Frank went to grab that guy the rest of those officers grabbed the guy (and Frank!) before anyone went over the bridge.

 

[ATF Consumer]

Your observation could be taken to its own thread instead of ****ting on the one talking about an officer being shot by some mope.

I absolutely mean no disrespect to this LEO that was shot.

Had he more serious injuries, I probably would have, but seeing as how he is going to make a full recovery, I thought I'd just post it here since it is related to the article.
Not trying to "make LEO's look bad"...just comments like the one from the Sargent reinforces what many already believe.

What would happen to me if I were in the need of LEO presence and I wasn't getting as quick of a response as desired...if I were to tell 911 that there was an officer down, what would be the ramifications of that, other than getting LEO there quicker?

 

[rockhopper46038]

How high on your drug of choice do you have to be to think shooting a police officer in uniform is a viable solution to your situation?

 

[phylodog]

Not trying to "make LEO's look bad"...just comments like the one from the Sargent reinforces what many already believe.

What would happen to me if I were in the need of LEO presence and I wasn't getting as quick of a response as desired

There is nothing you can do. We all believe deep down in our hearts that the only people on the planet who matter and who deserve any protection are other cops. We've always believed that, since the day we were born which is why we wanted to be cops. Unless it's a cop that's been shot or is in danger we are always going to stop along to way to eat a donut, shoot a few dogs and harass a couple open carrying citizens on the way to get to you. Best to just stop worrying about it now, that's just the way it is and the way it will always be, unless you become a cop then we'll treat you "special".

 

[Frank_N_Stein]

What would happen to me if I were in the need of LEO presence and I wasn't getting as quick of a response as desired...if I were to tell 911 that there was an officer down, what would be the ramifications of that, other than getting LEO there quicker?

At the very minimum you could be charged with false reporting. I would imagine that the officers that cover your area would take their sweet time responding to subsequent calls to your address.

 

[redneckmedic]

I absolutely mean no disrespect to this LEO that was shot.

Had he more serious injuries, I probably would have, but seeing as how he is going to make a full recovery, I thought I'd just post it here since it is related to the article.
Not trying to "make LEO's look bad"...just comments like the one from the Sargent reinforces what many already believe.

What would happen to me if I were in the need of LEO presence and I wasn't getting as quick of a response as desired...if I were to tell 911 that there was an officer down, what would be the ramifications of that, other than getting LEO there quicker?

WOW, I guess Hollywood brainwashes more people than I thought they did. Please explain to me how any Gunshot would to any part of the body isn't serious. Tell me how 3rd degree burns from the bullet ripping through just skin which would need graphing isn't serious. Or "just" an extremity would which would need months of rehab and PT and OT just to get back basic neuro-muscular familiarization back. Not to mention that the media stated that this was a shoulder injury. Since he was approaching the crowd it could be assumed that he was shot anterior and there-fore his injury would be described as a chest injury, which is easy considered life-threatening, since many rounds from a handgun generally bounce off most solid structures in the body and cause more damage that way.

Of course I suppose since he is going to "make a full recovery" (lets hope psychologically also) it is OK to trash him.

 

[ATF Consumer]

At the very minimum you could be charged with false reporting. I would imagine that the officers that cover your area would take their sweet time responding to subsequent calls to your address.

That's what I figured...

Last time a LEO was at my house, they dented in my door with their flashlight and then would not admit it.

 

[phylodog]

Last time a LEO was at my house, they dented in my door with their flashlight and then would not admit it.

They teach us that at the academy, The flashlights we have are actually cryogenically treated and then case hardened to be 25% harder than commonly available flashlights so that we leave no door undented.

 

[ATF Consumer]

WOW, I guess Hollywood brainwashes more people than I thought they did. Please explain to me how any Gunshot would to any part of the body isn't serious. Tell me how 3rd degree burns from the bullet ripping through just skin which would need graphing isn't serious. Or "just" an extremity would which would need months of rehab and PT and OT just to get back basic neuro-muscular familiarization back. Not to mention that the media stated that this was a shoulder injury. Since he was approaching the crowd it could be assumed that he was shot anterior and there-fore his injury would be described as a chest injury, which is easy considered life-threatening, since many rounds from a handgun generally bounce off most solid structures in the body and cause more damage that way.

Of course I suppose since he is going to "make a full recovery" (lets hope psychologically also) it is OK to trash him.

First off, I did no trashing to the office that was shot!
I was "trashing" the Sargent for his comments.

And I was just going from what the article said about his condition..."Officer Morse was shot in the shoulder following a fight outside a downtown nightclub Sunday morning. He is expected to make a full recovery."
If it were more serious, maybe they might have mentioned that.

 

[ATF Consumer]

They teach us that at the academy, The flashlights we have are actually cryogenically treated and then case hardened to be 25% harder than commonly available flashlights so that we leave no door undented.

That's funny, the officer on duty at the station indicated they don't use their "expensive" flashlights for such tasks.

 

[phylodog]

That's funny, the officer on duty at the station indicated they don't use their "expensive" flashlights for such tasks.

That's what they teach us to say at the academy.

 

[Fenway]

Thanks a lot for trashing this thread about an officer being shot ATF

That's what I figured...

Last time a LEO was at my house, they dented in my door with their flashlight and then would not admit it.

 

[88GT]

Did the newsperson interviewing him ask about response to incidents involving Joe Citizen? Probably not. The Sgt. was answering a specific question about that specific incident. Any thing else you want to get your panties in a wad about?

I have never in my relatively average life-span ever read or heard of a response to questions about a shooting involving Joe Citizen that reeked of the favoritism implied in Sgt. Thompson's response.

There was an enormous amount of officers responding which is very typical when any one of our own is in need.

Let's dissect this, rationally.

If this were about nothing more than "typical" police response to a shooting, regardless of the victim, the answer would go along the lines of this: "There are always greater numbers of responding officers to shooting calls because we don't know what we'll be facing. With more officers we can cover a larger area if the shooter is on the move, increasing the likelihood he'll be caught. If it escalates to something beyond the shooting, we already have a substantial LE presence to deal with the changing circumstance and adjust more rapidly and more efficiently. "

Or something like that. The point is that there's a mile-wide difference in the implications of the statement Sgt. Thompson gave and my hypothetical one. And the glaring difference is the emphasis on the motivating factor for the larger response: Sgt. Thompson implies that it was the victim that garnered the response, not the crime. And any reasonable person is left to question whether a change in the identity of the victim would have translated to a change in the response.

The whole thing hinges on his use of the word typical. Sure, it was typical. But not because it was a LE, right? Right? Well, then, why in the world did he have to go and draw the distinction? He didn't say it was typical for a shooting. He said it was typical for a LE victim.

Surely you can understand the implications for identifying a response based on the victim and not on the crime.

 

[ATF Consumer]

Thanks a lot for trashing this thread about an officer being shot ATF

I really don't think I "trashed" this thread. I called an officer out on his comment in an article and now that is trashing a thread?

Thanks for indicating I did trash it though....

 

[ATF Consumer]

I have never in my relatively average life-span ever read or heard of a response to questions about a shooting involving Joe Citizen that reeked of the favoritism implied in Sgt. Thompson's response.


Let's dissect this, rationally.

If this were about nothing more than "typical" police response to a shooting, regardless of the victim, the answer would go along the lines of this: "There are always greater numbers of responding officers to shooting calls because we don't know what we'll be facing. With more officers we can cover a larger area if the shooter is on the move, increasing the likelihood he'll be caught. If it escalates to something beyond the shooting, we already have a substantial LE presence to deal with the changing circumstance and adjust more rapidly and more efficiently. "

Or something like that. The point is that there's a mile-wide difference in the implications of the statement Sgt. Thompson gave and my hypothetical one. And the glaring difference is the emphasis on the motivating factor for the larger response: Sgt. Thompson implies that it was the victim that garnered the response, not the crime. And any reasonable person is left to question whether a change in the identity of the victim would have translated to a change in the response.

The whole thing hinges on his use of the word typical. Sure, it was typical. But not because it was a LE, right? Right? Well, then, why in the world did he have to go and draw the distinction? He didn't say it was typical for a shooting. He said it was typical for a LE victim.

Surely you can understand the implications for identifying a response based on the victim and not on the crime.

Now see...88GT said what I was getting at...except he said it better than I did.

 

[Denny347]

 

[Denny347]

I've avoided any LEO threads for several weeks but I cannot hold my tongue any longer. Kerry is our brother. As LEO's we are family. No matter if we know each other personally or not. I did work with Kerry when I was on middles. We take all person shot runs seriously. We respond accordingly and with enough cars to get the job done. When a brother/sister get shot WHILE IN THE PERFORMANCE OF THEIR DUTIES, we respond as though a blood member of our family has been shot. If your brother was shot, and you and the rest of your family were LEOs working...you would ALL respond in force. You will see officers respond that are off-duty, different departments, from ALL OVER the city. We help each other. We are not all there for the crime scene. Mostly were are there to show support to him/her and their family. We are there to help them in any possible way. We don't "value" our lives more than non-LEO's...but were take care of our family. If we do not support each other, who will? No one else is gonna gather their family together and take them to the hospital...no one else is going to go and pick their kids up, no one else is going to watch their house while they are gone, no on else is going to make sure their bills are paid while they are down. No, we bleed together so we help each other knowing that if it was one of us, our families will be taken care of. Maybe it is hard to imagine. I dono. Paul was right, we show up in force to a brother/sister down. It is the worst case scenario. We did the same for Fish. We came out 5-6hrs early to cover the shift so his shift could go to the hospital with him...on our own dime. I don't see the controversy and I WILL NOT apologize for it. Same reason we show up in force to a brother/sister funeral. I dono...we cannot do anything right. "There were too many officers responding to an officer down call."