camper4lyfe
.308 Win
Taking the kid to the ground would have escalated the situation.
Off-duty officer in Anaheim fires weapon in altercation with teenager
- Thread starter EMSBronco
- Start date
Taking the kid to the ground would have escalated the situation.
Maybe, maybe not. Take a walk into the gang infested parts of the city and see how much these little shitheads pay attention to commands and orders.
Sorry, you do not get it. They are vermin and need to be treated as much.
Marine Cpl
.577 Tyrannosaur.
Nope. At the beginning of the video, there weren't that many kids around and had he done that and dominated the situation with force and drawn while yelling "Police!" the outcome would have been different as evidence when you saw the kids running away after he drew before he negligently shot.
camper4lyfe
.308 Win
Marine Cpl
.577 Tyrannosaur.
I'm no cop. I was a Sworn Hospital Police Officer in NYC and lived there if that counts for anything but what I do know is that the whole dragging thing and fighting off hands from other kids trying to free the so called perp away is not good tactics or protocol.
In the beginning of the video and towards the middle, he could have taken control of the situation. He lost it.
This guy showed inferior handling and logic skills. Plain and simple.
Last edited:
Dr. Evil
20×102mm Vulcan
This story is increasingly sounding justified from what I've been seeing.
Marine Cpl
.577 Tyrannosaur.
Would you have had the situation under control from the get go? That's my issue.
Marine Cpl
.577 Tyrannosaur.
I'm willing to bet that any cop here on this forum wouldn't have put their self in that situation the way he did.
No, I can not imagine a time that I would get jammed up like this copper allowed himself to be. I am not going to second guess his actions though. He did what he did. Once again, we do NOT know the entire story. We see only what others want us to see and hear.
I will take the account of the incident from a cop over any of those Thug Wannabes, anytime. They are pure garbage.
camper4lyfe
.308 Win
The protests at the cop's house is a scary thing.
Marine Cpl
.577 Tyrannosaur.
You are right. We don't know what happened before the video. Since no weapons were found, I bet it was a running of the mouth but I'll give you that. He may have destroyed something or stole something for argument's sake.
I second guess his actions however. He made too many mistakes there and had I been his boss, he'd be confined to a desk.
The kids being pure garbage is irrelevant. Poor tactics, poor command of the situation, and poor weapons handling is the issue.
Had he been a cop who knew how to control a situation, there would have been no issues.
Just a guess, maybe his arrogance got the better of him. Again, I will not second guess until all information is made available.
Marine Cpl
.577 Tyrannosaur.
Bingo
spat
.950 JDJ
If one of the kids had been armed, would they have been justified in shooting him once he drew ? Pointing a loaded gun at someone is certainly a credible threat to their life.
You shouldn't be drawing unless you intend to fire. The criteria required to point a loaded gun at someone and the criteria to shoot them are the same. Almost any time a gun is drawn but not fired in a self defense situation it means someone was trying to use it to intimidate, that is not what they are for.
Last edited:
...
'You shouldn't be drawing unless you intend to fire."
To this I will only disagree a bit, "You shouldn't be drawing unless you are Prepared to fire."
To this I will only disagree a bit, "You shouldn't be drawing unless you are Prepared to fire."
Probably not, based on how many kids are involved. I live on a dead end private street in an isolated location. I chase pot smokers away pretty frequently. My limit is three. Any more than that and I call my friend who works plainclothes in the precinct I live in.
It looks to me that he drew his gun after the other kid took a swing at him and it seemed that they were suddenly closing in on him.
I think he was well justified in drawing when he did.
I think he was well justified in drawing when he did.
EMSBronco
.40 S&W
I 100% agree that he was justified in drawing at that point.
I just think his actions leading up to that point were bad decisions, regardless of what was said or done before the video started. I get that he is an officer and has the authority to act even when off-duty, but he put himself into a bad tactical position. He let himself get surrounded twice.
I don't think anybody would have faulted him for letting go of the kid and letting them walk away if it meant he wouldn't risk his own life or be forced to draw. They can't outrun the radio, let the uniformed officers deal with it.
Marine Cpl
.577 Tyrannosaur.
I can agree that with that. However had he established his dominance as a police officer if a crime was in fact committed when he first caught the kid and drawn if need be, those kids would not have been there on the attack.
They all ran when he first drew.
spat
.950 JDJ
Pretty subtle distinction. If you aren't planning on pulling the trigger as soon as the target can be lined up in the sights, then you aren't prepared to fire IMHO. If there is something you're going to wait for before pulling the trigger, then you are not prepared to fire.
"Cover your target" is a pretty standard training line for civilians, military, and cops alike. It's not "draw and fire" that I recall being taught. There's reasons to draw and cover, even on armed individuals who don't immediately need to be shot but may be in the near future.
spat
.950 JDJ
Tactically it makes sense, but legally its a bit less concrete. You are far less likely to get jammed up if you don't fire, we can all agree on that, but technically once you have enough justification to cover them, then you are justified in shooting them. You are just far more likely to get away with covering them without proper justification than you are shooting them without it. I realize in the real world there is a huge difference, but on paper there isn't.
Unless there is something specific that addresses this in the law, the only applicable statute would be menacing in NY. As with every other crime, there are justifications which cancel out the crime. So since "covering" a valid threat with a firearm is perfectly justified, there's no reason why anyone, police or otherwise, can't do it.
speedkills27
6.5 Creedmoor
thats the most un-american shit iv ever heard. Did You just advocated shooting children because of the religion they may/or may not practice? or am i missing sarcasm?
freddy
.308 Win
Did you see what those muslim vermin do?!?! They are all filthy animals! Muslims cannot be called human. Nuke the middle east, for a good start. Send the rest of those islamic swine to special camps, you know, to take a final shower and meet allah.
speedkills27
6.5 Creedmoor
freddy
.308 Win
Come on now. Look at the thousands of Americans killed each and every month by muslims! Don't you read the news?
(or at least read what members here post)
(or at least read what members here post)
spat
.950 JDJ
Yes, but what is the actual law about justification ? How does it differ from menacing to murder.