Homeless man shot to death by police while “illegally camping” in NM foothills

[BigBoxaJunk]

I will differ judgement as we only have a small portion of all information but my gut is this guy needed killing.

Not sure about the "needed" part, but perhaps he did find himself in the same position that some guys who drive too fast or too recklessly when they end up wrapped around a tree.

It didn't seem like he presented an immediate threat to anyone at the time he was shot, and maybe what he really did was to push those Officers past their point of patience.

 

[steveh_131]

Once again, Boyd has no right to self-defense as he is a trespasser. I'll say it again since you have the Black Flag music up too loud, Boyd has no right to defend himself.

Boyd's brandishing the deadly weapons is Aggravated Assault in New Mexico. This triggers the permissible use of deadly force.

In order to claim the defense of self-defense one must be in place where one has a right to be.[/QUOTE]

He probably let the cactus get too high in his campsite. That's grounds for immediate execution in kirk-land.

Thank you for the regular reminders telling us which side of liberty you reside.

I'll also add that we should remember the neighboring property-owners in this discussion. Their entitled whining about this homeless man who dared attempt to survive within their field of vision is what prompted this mess.

Next time they should man up and go talk to him themselves. Let him know that his existence is obstructing their view of the horizon from their infinity pools.

 

[steveh_131]

Well, I watched the video and I'm sickened.

I've been sitting here thinking back on my LEO career and I came up with maybe a half-dozen situations where I could have used deadly force and gotten away with it.

But I didn't do it. It wasn't my job to GET AWAY with killing people. My job was to kill people only if it was absolutely necessary.

Our downtown area was lousy with unmedicated paranoid schizophrenics that our courts in their wisdom turned out of mental hospitals. Confrontations with them were frequent. Most of us were pretty good at handling them. We UNDERSTOOD that we were dealing with people whose connection with reality was tenuous. Sometimes it required force. I had to pound a guy one day who was chasing a city bus up a downtown street biting its tires because he thought he was a werewolf.

There were many times when I could have manipulated mentally challenged individuals into doing things that would have given me the justification to kill them. I didn't do that. None of us did. Our job was to DE-ESCALATE situations like this, not provoke the people we were trying to talk down.

Why on EARTH any law enforcement professional would throw a f***king flashbang at a known mental AFTER he had been talked down I can't imagine. That tactic GUARANTEED a defensive response from the suspect, which ANY experienced and properly trained LEO KNOWS!!!!!

So the guy pulled a knife. OF COURSE HE PULLED A F***KING KNIFE!! That's what paranoid schizophrenics DO!!!! The goal is to talk to them so that they DON'T do something like that, not guarantee that the poor sick bastard WILL do it!!!

So now they'll get away with a claim of self-defense. The reality is that the poor SOB was set up murdered by a gang of god-damned cowardly bullies hiding behind badges. If there had been any REAL cops on the scene it would have ended very differently.

God-damn it to hell, this makes me SICK!!!!

Well. Liberty Sanders nailed it. Not much more to be said.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

Did you watch the video? He had picked up his stuff and was walking towards the officers peacefully when the flashbang was thrown and the dog attacked. Then he drew the knives and was shot.

Did you watch the video? He brandished knives at the officers after talking about killing them.

Thank you for the regular reminders telling us which side of liberty you reside.

I am on the side of property rights and Liberty. You are not. I understand your position and your hatred of Liberty.

Why on EARTH any law enforcement professional would throw a f***king flashbang at a known mental AFTER he had been talked down I can't imagine.

To stun him so you can handcuff him, right?

so now they'll get away with a claim of self-defense. The reality is that the poor SOB was set up murdered by a gang of god-damned cowardly bullies hiding behind badges. If there had been any REAL cops on the scene it would have ended very differently.

So, if body armor isn't much help against knives, and Boyd won't drop his weapons, how does one close the gap in order to arrest him?

Send in both dogs?

 

[Kirk Freeman]

I'll also add that we should remember the neighboring property-owners in this discussion. Their entitled whining about this homeless man who dared attempt to survive within their field of vision is what prompted this mess.

How many homeless from New Mexico can I put you down for? Let me know and I'll have a busload to you.

Boyd was dangerous as well as being a nuisance.

 

[Liberty Sanders]

People who have surrendered don't have to be stunned to be handcuffed. And if not for one of those damned idiots throwing a flashbang he wouldn't have been HOLDING any weapons.

 

[TMU317]

Well, I watched the video and I'm sickened.

I've been sitting here thinking back on my LEO career and I came up with maybe a half-dozen situations where I could have used deadly force and gotten away with it.

But I didn't do it. It wasn't my job to GET AWAY with killing people. My job was to kill people only if it was absolutely necessary.

Our downtown area was lousy with unmedicated paranoid schizophrenics that our courts in their wisdom turned out of mental hospitals. Confrontations with them were frequent. Most of us were pretty good at handling them. We UNDERSTOOD that we were dealing with people whose connection with reality was tenuous. Sometimes it required force. I had to pound a guy one day who was chasing a city bus up a downtown street biting its tires because he thought he was a werewolf.

There were many times when I could have manipulated mentally challenged individuals into doing things that would have given me the justification to kill them. I didn't do that. None of us did. Our job was to DE-ESCALATE situations like this, not provoke the people we were trying to talk down.

Why on EARTH any law enforcement professional would throw a f***king flashbang at a known mental AFTER he had been talked down I can't imagine. That tactic GUARANTEED a defensive response from the suspect, which ANY experienced and properly trained LEO KNOWS!!!!!

So the guy pulled a knife. OF COURSE HE PULLED A F***KING KNIFE!! That's what paranoid schizophrenics DO!!!! The goal is to talk to them so that they DON'T do something like that, not guarantee that the poor sick bastard WILL do it!!!

So now they'll get away with a claim of self-defense. The reality is that the poor SOB was set up murdered by a gang of god-damned cowardly bullies hiding behind badges. If there had been any REAL cops on the scene it would have ended very differently.

God-damn it to hell, this makes me SICK!!!!

Well then. I would hope that as a former law enforcement officer you would understand that watching a video that captures only a few minutes of a several hour ordeal and then casting judgement on those involved is less than ideal. No one here was involved that I am aware of and no one here knows all of the facts surrounding the incident. I am sure that now, after the fact, everyone can sit around and think of 100 different ways to handle the situation. The problem with dealing with people in general is no twp people act the same way in a given situation. People are unpredictable, and there is no good way to compare one incident to another. No two situations are the same. Of course, as a former law enforcement officer yourself, I am sure you understand this very well. I am not saying the officers were right or wrong, mostly because I know nothing about the incident other than the short video I have seen and what the media has reported. I find it difficult to form an opinion when I know very little about the incident.

 

[Destro]

Our job was to DE-ESCALATE situations like this, not provoke the people we were trying to talk down.

so hero? what exactly were they doing for the previous 3 1/2 hours prior, having a staring contest? painting Easter eggs?

 

[DoggyDaddy]

Once again, Boyd has no right to self-defense as he is a trespasser. I'll say it again since you have the Black Flag music up too loud, Boyd has no right to defend himself.

Boyd's brandishing the deadly weapons is Aggravated Assault in New Mexico. This triggers the permissible use of deadly force.




In order to claim the defense of self-defense one must be in place where one has a right to be.

You keep saying this, but if true, then how are people that are trespassing able to sue (successfully) the property owner if they are injured while on said property? If the act of trespassing makes all rights null and void, it should be okay for me to shoot someone if they are trespassing, right? No requirement that they threaten me? Because, well, they're trespassing and they have no right to defend themselves, ergo, I should have every right (as the property owner) to take advantage of that. (Only a pale shade of purple implied.)

 

[Destro]

Well then. I would hope that as a former law enforcement officer you would understand that watching a video that captures only a few minutes of a several hour ordeal and then casting judgement on those involved is less than ideal. No one here was involved that I am aware of and no one here knows all of the facts surrounding the incident. I am sure that now, after the fact, everyone can sit around and think of 100 different ways to handle the situation. The problem with dealing with people in general is no twp people act the same way in a given situation. People are unpredictable, and there is no good way to compare one incident to another. No two situations are the same. Of course, as a former law enforcement officer yourself, I am sure you understand this very well. I am not saying the officers were right or wrong, mostly because I know nothing about the incident other than the short video I have seen and what the media has reported. I find it difficult to form an opinion when I know very little about the incident.

after awhile, I think some people tend to forget where they came from

 

[Destro]

If the act of trespassing makes all rights null and void, it should be okay for me to shoot someone if they are trespassing, right?

he never said that

 

[Liberty Sanders]

so hero? what exactly were they doing for the previous 3 1/2 hours prior, having a staring contest? painting Easter eggs?

I don't know, nor does it matter. The man capitulated, picked up his stuff and started to walk down to meet the officers. There was NO JUSTIFICATION WHATSOEVER to throw that flashbang.

When a mental isn't actively trying to kill you talk for as long as it takes. Talk is cheap.

 

[Destro]

I don't know, nor does it matter. The man capitulated, picked up his stuff and started to walk down to meet the officers. There was NO JUSTIFICATION WHATSOEVER to throw that flashbang.

When a mental isn't actively trying to kill you talk for as long as it takes. Talk is cheap.

it's reported that they attempted for almost 4 hours to talk him down. We also don't know how many times prior to this he "picked up is stuff and started to walk down to meet the officers" only to run back up the hill again.

it's hard to believe 2 videos of less than 10 minutes total accurately portray the totality of a 4 hour law enforcement encounter accurately

 

[DoggyDaddy]

he never said that

Then why must I be "in fear for my life" to defend myself with lethal force on MY property? If trespassing is enough to remove one's right to self defense, then conversely, being the property owner should confer upon me unlimited rights to self defense. Of course it doesn't. And I submit that trespassing, in and of itself does not take away one's right to defend themselves.

As others have said, I wasn't there, so I only have the video to go on, but the content of that video certainly appears to be pretty damning for the officers involved. I don't believe it needed to end the way it did.

 

[nakinate]

More Americans have been killed by cops in the last 10 years than the number of soldiers that were killed in Iraq. You are 8x more likely to be killed by a cop than by a terrorist. Just remember that, at the end of the day, your only job is to get home to your family.

You can't make a statement like that and expect me to fall for it. There are over 300 million citizens in the USA. How many troops were in Iraq? You have to look at percentages. Furthermore, to be accurate you would have to look at each case where an officer killed a citizen to figure out if it was "justified". Good luck with that. And stop trying to play with people's emotions by stating misleading statistics and half truths.

 

[Destro]

Then why must I be "in fear for my life" to defend myself with lethal force on MY property?

Because that's what the law says silly. In the situation we are discussing, the suspect had no right to self defense.

 

[BigBoxaJunk]

Probably what happened was that those cops all had their brackets filled out and they looked at their tactical watches and realized that the games were starting.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

You keep saying this, but if true, then how are people that are trespassing able to sue (successfully) the property owner if they are injured while on said property? If the act of trespassing makes all rights null and void, it should be okay for me to shoot someone if they are trespassing, right? No requirement that they threaten me? Because, well, they're trespassing and they have no right to defend themselves, ergo, I should have every right (as the property owner) to take advantage of that. (Only a pale shade of purple implied.)

1. The act of trespassing does not make all rights null and void.

2. You cannot use deadly force against someone who is merely trespassing as you have no reasonable fear of death or seriously bodily injury.

3. The instruction that the judge would read to the jury before a self-defense case is decided is that the defendant must be in a place where they have the right to be. Boyd was not in a place where he had a right to be thus his right to self-defense is null and void.

Because that's what the law says silly. In the situation we are discussing, the suspect had no right to self defense

Bingo.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

We also don't know how many times prior to this he "picked up is stuff and started to walk down to meet the officers" only to run back up the hill again.

A violent EDP do that? The devil you say!

 

[Kirk Freeman]

BTW, before I forget again, the "ROP"/rope jackets that the officers are wearing designate the "Repeat Offenders Program".

These guys knew Boyd and his violent character. He wanted to fight, I am happy he was bad at it.