"Officer Safety"-- the justification for nearly anything

[rockhopper46038]

Screw that. Shoot whenever your judgement tells you that you need to. LEO or not. Just be responsible for your actions. LEO or not.

 

[JMoses]

Though I see were you coming from you have to be carful with wording of laws. What about the 250lb man attacking and attempting to rape a 100lb woman with nothing but his hands. She fires on him but he did not fire on her first so... What about the guy that out weighs you by 100lbs and is 20 years younger and faster coming at you with a knife. You have your side arm but hey he did not fire on you so its a no go to use it.

You don't think I understand what you're saying, I do. But, the people that post this crap just because they hate the police can't have their cake and eat it too.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

Thats funny, Bisard got more time in prison than most non-cops that commit DUI causing death.

Dave Butler got charged with robbery instead of theft, which is what would have been filed in most any non-LEO circumstance. He also got 3 years served and 4 probation afterward, which for Marion Co is a very standard plea for a robber with no priors and no injury.

That doesn't fit the narrative, though.

 

[DOWNRANGE]

So many pass strong judgments with absolutely no personal experience.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

Anyway, to the original post, if I shot everyone I could legally and ethically justify shooting, I'd have gotten a lot more time off over the years. I've dealt with many armed suspects and armed not-suspects. I've wrestled a woman who had just shot someone over the use of a dryer in a laundry mat while her boyfriend tried to intervene and pull me off. 2:1 and one is armed, you don't think I could have justified that shoot? But I didn't shoot, because I know that killing someone sucks, no matter how justified, and its a last resort.

So you can hypothesize and state your "witness" as fact all you want. I know better. I know me, I know the guys and gals I work with, and I know the truth better than you with your skewed perspective of paranoia and media fueled controversy from nothing.

I also know how many civilians are involved in questionable or borderline shoots that were tactically and ethically questionable, but I don't run here and spout off about the dangerous mindset of LTCH civilians and how their lack of training and forethought is a danger to their community and the rights of other gun owners.

 

[JMoses]

So many pass strong judgments with absolutely no personal experience.

Oh, now wait.....they know it all, just ask them.

 

[KG1]

Anyway, to the original post, if I shot everyone I could legally and ethically justify shooting, I'd have gotten a lot more time off over the years. I've dealt with many armed suspects and armed not-suspects. I've wrestled a woman who had just shot someone over the use of a dryer in a laundry mat while her boyfriend tried to intervene and pull me off. 2:1 and one is armed, you don't think I could have justified that shoot? But I didn't shoot, because I know that killing someone sucks, no matter how justified, and its a last resort.

So you can hypothesize and state your "witness" as fact all you want. I know better. I know me, I know the guys and gals I work with, and I know the truth better than you with your skewed perspective of paranoia and media fueled controversy from nothing.

I also know how many civilians are involved in questionable or borderline shoots that were tactically and ethically questionable, but I don't run here and spout off about the dangerous mindset of LTCH civilians and how their lack of training and forethought is a danger to their community and the rights of other gun owners.

I think you just did.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

I think you just did.

No, just showing that I could easily present facts with real cases behind them to paint the picture that way. LTCH is a great thing, I wish more folks employed it, as it would likely reduce my case load.

 

[9x18]

it's us vs. them or me and my lawyers vs them lol. ignore them that is the best way, don't care for the cops, today I fear crims. less.

 

[rockhopper46038]

I didn't get all of that.

 

[JMoses]

I didn't get all of that.

LOL, you're not the only one. He needs to try it again in English!

 

[Frank_N_Stein]

it's us vs. them or me and my lawyers vs them lol. ignore them that is the best way, don't care for the cops, today I fear crims. less.

Is there not an FLGO?

 

[88GT]

Do not police officers have a right to life? Are they not afforded the same rights as the rest of us?

Yes, and yes. But the authority and powers change things a bit.

Would you wait for someone to fire the first round?

Hard to say. But I wouldn't have the luxury of using a badge to justify a decision that may or may not have been kosher under the statutory limitations for the use of deadly force. Or more correctly, my claims that it was justified.

Nah...that would take away the fun of whipping out their Johnson and pissing on us now wouldn't it?

I think you know I don't have one of those. And it has nothing to do with pissing on LE.

I don't really want LE to be hindered such. I don't know how else to protect the citizen from the state though. Self-policing doesn't seem to be getting it done. And the threshold of threatening behavior seems to be getting lower and lower. I am not foolish enough to believe that we can create a line demarcating "okay" and "not okay" and all scenarios will fall cleanly into one category or the other. But I do think that the fuzzy line that does exist is moving, and it's favoring the actions of LE, not the citizen.

I believe that the state should be held to a higher standard when it comes to taking life because of the inherent disparity of authority and power in the relationship between the state and the citizen. If that doesn't sit well with some of you, I'm fine with that.

 

[Hohn]

88gt-- nailed it.

 

[Denny347]

it's us vs. them or me and my lawyers vs them lol. ignore them that is the best way, don't care for the cops, today I fear crims. less.

Go away. Find a nice Fl gun owners board to troll.

 

[phylodog]

I believe that the state should be held to a higher standard when it comes to taking life because of the inherent disparity of authority and power in the relationship between the state and the citizen. If that doesn't sit well with some of you, I'm fine with that.

Any idea what standard is used to judge when a LEO takes a life? I'll give you a hint, it was the result of a pretty big court case in 1989 and the standard has remained unchanged since that time.

In Marion County, all fatal police shootings are reviewed by the Grand Jury. This is required, unlike other parts of the state. The Grand Jury (a group of non cops) decide if the actions of the officer constitute criminal activity. We've never had a LEO indicted by the Grand Jury for a police shooting. The reality is that the standard used to judge an officer who shoots and kills someone changed pretty dramatically in 1989 and it wasn't in favor of the police. At least in Indianapolis it isn't the police department, Sheriff's department, State Police or the Prosecutor's office who decide if a LEO should be charged with a crime when they shoot and kill someone. A group of citizens, granted some pretty powerful authority to subpoena, question and force testimony get to decide.

 

[Mark 1911]

Any idea what standard is used to judge when a LEO takes a life? I'll give you a hint, it was the result of a pretty big court case in 1989 and the standard has remained unchanged since that time.

In Marion County, all fatal police shootings are reviewed by the Grand Jury. This is required, unlike other parts of the state. The Grand Jury (a group of non cops) decide if the actions of the officer constitute criminal activity. We've never had a LEO indicted by the Grand Jury for a police shooting. The reality is that the standard used to judge an officer who shoots and kills someone changed pretty dramatically in 1989 and it wasn't in favor of the police. At least in Indianapolis it isn't the police department, Sheriff's department, State Police or the Prosecutor's office who decide if a LEO should be charged with a crime when they shoot and kill someone. A group of citizens, granted some pretty powerful authority to subpoena, question and force testimony get to decide.

Do you think this kind of policy has a positive impact on the officers, negative impact, none?

I never realized there was that much disparity between how such cases are handled from one locality to another.

 

[phylodog]

None. The taking of a human life is not taken lightly by anyone but a sociopath. Police officers are well aware that the actions they take and decisions they make in seconds will be dissected and picked apart for weeks or months by people who weren't there and very well may have no clue what it is like to be in that situation. It's part of the job.

 

[Mark 1911]

None. The taking of a human life is not taken lightly by anyone but a sociopath. Police officers are well aware that the actions they take and decisions they make in seconds will be dissected and picked apart for weeks or months by people who weren't there and very well may have no clue what it is like to be in that situation. It's part of the job.

Your's is not an easy job. High courage with not much in financial compensation. But I admire the guys who do it well, they really have something to be proud of.

 

[Bunnykid68]

OMG, I am tired of all you damn officers whining