I see a link to a forum that looks to be a lot of hearsay, with no supporting documentation.
Police & Deadly Force
- Thread starter jks9199
- Start date
FierySquidFace
Green Belt
please try to find the documentation. i have tried, with no luck. i know you won't believe me, but you may believe another source.
here's a more recent one:
F.B.I. arrest TWO Texas sheriff Deputies in METH-ring 'round-up'
http://www.topix.com/city/trinity-t...-texas-sheriff-deputies-in-meth-ring-round-up
here's a more recent one:
F.B.I. arrest TWO Texas sheriff Deputies in METH-ring 'round-up'
http://www.topix.com/city/trinity-t...-texas-sheriff-deputies-in-meth-ring-round-up
KenpoTex
Senior Master
What exactly is your goal in posting all the comments you've posted?
-That there are cops who made a bad call at some point?
-That there are some cops who shouldn't be doing the job because they don't have the correct mindset and/or have a track-record of using poor judgement or?
-That there are some cops who are nothing more than scum who intentionally violate the rights of the very people they exist to protect (and as a result, are traitors who deserve to be hung)?
-That cops should be held to a "higher standard" because of the powers entrusted to them?
I happen to believe that all of the above are true and I don't think anybody else is really going to argue the validity of those statements either.
The problem with your posts is that you are just throwing out the typical, stupid "cops are bad 'cause they kill people for jaywalking" crap.
-That there are cops who made a bad call at some point?
-That there are some cops who shouldn't be doing the job because they don't have the correct mindset and/or have a track-record of using poor judgement or?
-That there are some cops who are nothing more than scum who intentionally violate the rights of the very people they exist to protect (and as a result, are traitors who deserve to be hung)?
-That cops should be held to a "higher standard" because of the powers entrusted to them?
I happen to believe that all of the above are true and I don't think anybody else is really going to argue the validity of those statements either.
The problem with your posts is that you are just throwing out the typical, stupid "cops are bad 'cause they kill people for jaywalking" crap.
FierySquidFace
Green Belt
the point is to give you an idea of the mentality and actions of the police in levelland. i grew up there, and know first hand alot of what went down there, but you guys did not/ do not. i was hoping that if you had more information, you might not be so quick to lynch me for cop bashing. you're all telling me that i think/say/believe this and that, anti-cop, pro badguy, cop basher, etc, putting words in my mouth and then say i'm twisting your words. I'm sorry no one here understands. and i'm sorry for being immature. last post. really.
Last edited:
KenpoTex
Senior Master
Well first of all, I spent about 4 years in that part of Texas and know people from all over that region, but that's neither here nor there.
From the beginning of the discussion, no one denied that there are plenty of examples of cops abusing their authority. That does not mean that you can paint all of them with that brush.
If you have "first hand" information, perhaps you should have posted it and actually answered some of the questions asked of you. Instead, you just posting select bits of information that only told the part of the story that you wanted to tell.
I'll once again advise you to think a little, and do some more reading around here, before making inflamatory remarks that really don't amount to much more than trolling.
From the beginning of the discussion, no one denied that there are plenty of examples of cops abusing their authority. That does not mean that you can paint all of them with that brush.
If you have "first hand" information, perhaps you should have posted it and actually answered some of the questions asked of you. Instead, you just posting select bits of information that only told the part of the story that you wanted to tell.
I'll once again advise you to think a little, and do some more reading around here, before making inflamatory remarks that really don't amount to much more than trolling.
Umm...for someone who said he was done with this thread, notice howhe comes back to troll the thread. If you have nothing useful to say, dont say anything at all. After all, trolling is against forum rules. You know what the rules are right....those things YOU agreed upong when YOU joined. I'll be sure to report this post.
And I as well as a few others, have repeatedly said to you that we do understand and fully know, that there are bad cops. But this is all that YOU are harping on. Back to the articles....many of us acknowledge that shooting the tires probably wasn't the best thing, but again, until we know the SOPs for that dept...did you find them BTW?....then you really have no ground to stand on, as far as saying they were wrong.
Also, you still fail to see what the badguys do, to make the cops respond with force.
xJOHNx
Purple Belt
Don't know about that last one.
When I was travelling in America (been there 3 weeks in california, arizona, nevada and georgia), I've seen people getting arrested on 5 different occasions.
In one case: 10 officers with guns drawn approached someone who had his hands up. This seemed dangerous to me, as both the "bad guy" as well as bystanders could get shot from a accidental gun shot.
I know that some criminals carry guns, but approaching someone who was almost 70 with guns blazin'.. A bit overkill no?
Another case (happened in Vegas), they were arresting a woman. Now the woman was already on the ground with 5 or so police officers around here all with their guns drawn and pointed at her head/back. One guy puts his gun away and puts his knee on her head. Up until that point she wasn't resisting. She started resisting when the musclehead who was triple her size started putting his knee on her temple. Another arrest also had 2 officers putting their knees on a suspects throat/neck.
I was shocked, because here stuff doesn't go off like that.
When I was travelling in America (been there 3 weeks in california, arizona, nevada and georgia), I've seen people getting arrested on 5 different occasions.
In one case: 10 officers with guns drawn approached someone who had his hands up. This seemed dangerous to me, as both the "bad guy" as well as bystanders could get shot from a accidental gun shot.
I know that some criminals carry guns, but approaching someone who was almost 70 with guns blazin'.. A bit overkill no?
Another case (happened in Vegas), they were arresting a woman. Now the woman was already on the ground with 5 or so police officers around here all with their guns drawn and pointed at her head/back. One guy puts his gun away and puts his knee on her head. Up until that point she wasn't resisting. She started resisting when the musclehead who was triple her size started putting his knee on her temple. Another arrest also had 2 officers putting their knees on a suspects throat/neck.
I was shocked, because here stuff doesn't go off like that.
KenpoTex
Senior Master
oh geez...
Do you know the full story as to what may have caused 10 officers to have guns pointed at the guy? If there were that many officers on scene and all of them were pointing their weapons at the subject, I'd imagine it could have been for a reason.
Also, "approaching someone...with guns blazin" would mean they were actually shooting. Comments like that don't do anything to lend credibility to your post.
Once again, do you know the full story...do you know what she may have done right before she ended up on the deck with a bunch of guys holding her at gunpoint?
Without knowing the full story, you are in no position to judge what may or may not have been excessive or overkill.
Do you know the full story as to what may have caused 10 officers to have guns pointed at the guy? If there were that many officers on scene and all of them were pointing their weapons at the subject, I'd imagine it could have been for a reason.
Also, "approaching someone...with guns blazin" would mean they were actually shooting. Comments like that don't do anything to lend credibility to your post.
Once again, do you know the full story...do you know what she may have done right before she ended up on the deck with a bunch of guys holding her at gunpoint?
Without knowing the full story, you are in no position to judge what may or may not have been excessive or overkill.
Any idea as to what led up to the end results that you posted here? Reason I ask, is while it may seem like 'overkill' is many times people see the end result...which is what you described...cops with guns drawn, multiple officers holding someone down. Who knows what this guy did prior to that. If he did have a weapon, tried ramming a police car, etc., thus the reason for the drawn guns. The woman on the ground...its very possible that she was resisting, was told to do something, refused, and was taken to the ground, fighting while that was happening.
People seem to forget one thing....if the cops are telling you to do something...DO IT. If you feel its wrong, complain about it later. If the cop tells you to get on the ground, and you tell him to **** off and start walking towards him, fists clenched, swearing, yelling, I can assure you, he will be put down.
Again, 99.9% of the people that interact with the police, could avoid headaches, if they just acted normal, and not like a jerk.
I recall one day while working in Corrections, I was doing my routine pat downs of some inamtes in my block. I felt something in the pocket of one guy, went to look and he pulled away from me, and started yelling at me. I told him to get back against the wall so I could finish. He refused, so I called for assistance. Needless to say, when 5 other COs arrived, he suddenly had a change of heart. One way or another I was going to see what was in his pocket, which turned out to be a plastic comb, but had he not been an *******, I could have looked, seen it was a comb and sent him on his way. So, because he failed to comply with my search, not only did he cause a seen, but he was written up, which caused him to lose some privledges, ie: phones for a week, visits, etc. Of course, I would have been well within my rights, to slam him to the ground as well, due to his resisting, but opted to try a different route. Funny how the big man, suddenly looses his steam when he's outnumbered.
I understand that this is a topic where feelings are going to be strong, regarding the issue, but that doesn't give anyone a license to start flaming.
ATTENTION ALL USERS:
Please keep the discussion at a mature, respectful level.
Please review our sniping policy http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=71377. Feel free to use the Ignore feature to ignore members whose posts you do not wish to read (it is at the bottom of each member's profile).
Thank you.
-Ronald Shin
-MT Supermoderator
ATTENTION ALL USERS:
Please keep the discussion at a mature, respectful level.
Please review our sniping policy http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=71377. Feel free to use the Ignore feature to ignore members whose posts you do not wish to read (it is at the bottom of each member's profile).
Thank you.
-Ronald Shin
-MT Supermoderator
And these posts have exactly what to do with the topic of "Police & Deadly Force"?
They'd be perfectly appropriate were the thread about police corruption -- and I even encourage you to start such a thread -- but they're off topic here. Even so, for the record, I'll state that there are indeed corrupt LEOs and even corrupt LE agencies. MPDC and New Orleans PD both had cases where cops were providing protection (and worse) to drug dealers, for example. I know of a sheriff's department in Virginia which was recently all but closed down because of selling drugs from the property room... Yep, there are corrupt agencies and even cops who aren't corrupt, but just have stupid judgement.
One thing that does touch on the topic of deadly force is suicide by cop... And that's something I definitely want to discuss. One of the most difficult and trying things a cop can respond to is a person who has decided to die -- and decided to make a cop the instrument of their death. Most of the time, we're not talking about bad guys here. We're talking about someone who has found themselves in such a deep hole that they can't find a way out, and they've decided the only help they want is someone to close that hole over them. It's the last thing the cop wants to do -- but the person is often leaving them no alternative. I can't think of another profession that faces that particular challenge or anything comparable.
I recently completed training to be a police firearms instructor. One thing that I was reminded of, and it was stressed to remind recruits in training, is that just because the gun is out doesn't mean you HAVE to shoot someone. I can't count how many times I've had my gun out in the course of my duties; the times I've shot it outside of a firing range is exactly zero. (Haven't even had to put down a critter...) I have been within a fraction of an inch of shooting some, as in I had about 6 1/2 pounds of pressure on the 7 pound trigger pull... He complied, he didn't get shot.
I can't address what you saw because I wasn't there. I've participated in arrests where 10 to 15 of us drew down on the suspect because of the potential resistance. Action is faster than reaction, and if my gun is already out, I'm ahead of the reaction curve. It's a scary situation because there are lots of potentials for bad things to happen to every one, including the suspect. (See the Salvatore Culosi case I described early in the thread.)
Ideally, most arrests follow a simple script: The cop tells the person "You're under arrest, put your hands behind your back" and they comply. Reality is that a few people do this, most will mostly comply but maybe need some "assistance" in being handcuffed (steering the arms behind their back, etc.), and some will resist at various levels. A prone arrest is a clue that there's a problem; generally we try to do it standing 'cause it's much easier. You don't have to lift 'em off the ground (try standing up from lying on your belly without using your hands...), you don't have to get on the ground yourself... It's just simpler. In the case described -- I'm going to make some assumptions and "possibles" since I don't know any of the circumstances. There was already some sort of higher risk situation, since she was proned out. As the cop who's going to cuff her approaches, he may have seen a gun, knife or other concern in her waistband... and ratchets his control up. You can't see it from the outside -- but it's still there.
Also, one general note on cuffing anyone -- the most dangerous moment is as the first cuff is being applied; that's the instant that the fact of the arrest really sinks in, and it's the moment a person who was complying (however reluctantly) will sometimes flip out and start to buck and fight.
Finally, one note on your travels... I've traveled over most of the East Coast, professionally and on my own. Off duty, I've seen maybe 3 or 4 arrests in my life, and I'm more clued in to pick up on it than most... and that's including some of the worst parts of DC during the years it was called the "Murder Capitol." You just might be going to some places of questionable wisdom on your travels...
For finding corroborating information, use Google or Bing.
Reputable links will include news sources such as CNN, Fox, WP, the major networks, the papers. Some of these will be dismissed due to particular biases (Hint Page 3 in the Sun is not a reliable source)
A link to a discussion forum isn't seen as a trustworthy main source. Especially if it is populated by anonymous and non verifiables.
Contrast your link to this one:
Also
http://www.statesman.com/blogs/content/shared-gen/blogs/austin/cityhall/entries/2008/10/13/
Reputable links will include news sources such as CNN, Fox, WP, the major networks, the papers. Some of these will be dismissed due to particular biases (Hint Page 3 in the Sun is not a reliable source)
A link to a discussion forum isn't seen as a trustworthy main source. Especially if it is populated by anonymous and non verifiables.
Contrast your link to this one:
http://www.austinchronicle.com/gyrobase/Issue/story?oid=oid:531755
Also
http://www.statesman.com/blogs/content/shared-gen/blogs/austin/cityhall/entries/2008/10/13/
punisher73
Senior Master
I work in Michigan, we have over 62,000 car/deer accidents a year. About 1800 in my county alone. It's par for the course to have to put an injured deer down at least 6-10 times a year for our deputies. Only reason I point that out is people always second guess that decision as well without understanding the facts. Either the officer/deputy has to use more than one shot and citizens think we should all be trained assassins that can do it one shot every time with an injured animal moving around. Or second, that we can somehow put the injured deer in our patrol car and take them to the vets office (you know it's just like an ER for animals) to get it taken care of.
I agree, most people don't understand what a PD's "Use of Force" policy is and what LEO's can do and at what time. ANY time you have to put your hands on someone other than a compliant handcuffing it is going to "look bad". I am NOT saying that there is NEVER any excessive force by officers, but sticking to legitimate uses of force the amount that citizens will say it was excessive is a high percentage.
xJOHNx
Purple Belt
Yeah, first case was some old chap who ran into another car with his. I stood by waiting (you have to witness overhere) to tell them what I saw. 6 cars and 4 motors pull up at the old guy who was standing there. Like woody allen. After I testified, I asked why such show of force was needed. Police officer just muttered: "drugs and stuff". Old man took nitrates because he had a heart condition, which I told the officer. Because I was present when he administered them.
Don't know about the women, but someone triple my size putting his knee on my temple and then starts leaning in...
Don't know about my travels, because I'm not an US citizen. Saw 2 arrests while on the motorway, the 2 others I described and 1 in SF. The old guy one was in LA.
Maybe I'm too soft.
It's just been pure luck that I haven't had to put a deer down... We get plenty of car/deer accidents, not to mention deer in basements & stores. I have put several squirrels down... but not with a firearm.
Putting animals down is, like you said, another area of controversy. You covered it pretty well; people have a lot of misconceptions about putting animals down.
Theres a few threads here where we've looked at excessive force issues, including kneeling on the neck. If not here, check the Study.
Someone I know was shot by LEO last week. He worked with me for over a year. I knew him and his family. They have been over to my house. It's sad that he died in a tragic way, it's sad for his family. It's sad he made life choices that put him in the position he was in. Of course he will be missed.
Having said that, here are the basic details and my thoughts;
His girlfriend had called the cops several times about abusive behavior. Cops had been out to the house several times on domestic abuse calls.
She filed for an order of protection. Officers arrived at the home to serve the order. He became angry, and pulled out a knife.
Officers shot him.
Friends and family are saying the following;
Could have talked him down.
Could have tased him.
Could have shot him in the leg or arm.
Knife was planted.
I am sure they tried to talk him down, but in a 10x10 room and an assailant with a knife, your lucky to even get a shot off. It is not SOP to tase unless another officer can give lethal coverage, and that makes sense to me. Any of us who shoot know the likelihood of successfully hitting an arm or a leg of a moving attacker. To try would have been a tactical error, and put the officer and others at greater risk. I highly doubt the knife was planted.
I have been pulled over by dick cops. I have been mistreated and disrespected by ignorant cops on a power trip. I think they are in the minority, and I give them extra margin for error in the attitude department because I can guess as to how they are treated by many, day in and day out. I can guess as to the stress they face daily regarding their safety. I support LEO's (so long as they are not deployed in a way that infringes on my basic freedoms and constitutional rights). I believe they have a tough, often thankless job, but it is a job that needs doing.
My opinion, I think this was a good shoot. I have taken some fire for saying so by others who know the individual, but I can not honestly expect and LEO to risk not going home to his family, simply because I wish someone was still alive.
Now, some of the local blogs are buzzing over this. Some family and friends are hurt, angry and want to blame someone. People who are pointing fingers and claiming "trigger happy" cops are citing a case from a few years ago where the local PD paid a large settlement to a family after the shooting. They feel the settlement indicates "wrong doing" on the part of the police.
I became curious, and read some articles, as well as the attorney's web page who represented the family. His webpage reads as though this was a major victory for the citizens showing that attorney's are good and cops are bad. His website reported that the father called the PD because his son had a knife and was going to kill himself. The PD arrived, tased his son until he was on the ground and then shot him, fatally.
This is the publics general perception of the incident. I found it hard to believe. Via the freedom of information act, some more digging and google fu, LEO forums etc, I found information on the evidence that was never presented, because the case never went to trial. Here are the bullet points;
- County medical examiner, state Department of Public Safety and the FBI found that forensic evidence proved the man was shot while still standing and moving forward (despite family's testimony to the contrary.
- The independent forensic scientist hired by the family reached the same conclusion
-original 911 call has the father asking, what do I do if I have to shoot my son to defend myself, and, can I shoot my son.
- Officer who deployed his taser had a slash mark on his shirt and belt from the carving knife held by the attacker.
Interesting, how these "news stories" like some of those posted earlier, don't really tell how the shooting went down.
The settlement was paid because accounting determined a drawn out trial would cost more taxpayer money than the settlement. It was a business decision.
Great accounting decision, poor PR decision.
Regardless, I am slow to believe a lot of the conspiracy theory stories out there, and quick to assert that LEO's in harms way must be able to confidently use lethal force in their own defense. They have a right to ensure they go home to their families.
Having said that, here are the basic details and my thoughts;
His girlfriend had called the cops several times about abusive behavior. Cops had been out to the house several times on domestic abuse calls.
She filed for an order of protection. Officers arrived at the home to serve the order. He became angry, and pulled out a knife.
Officers shot him.
Friends and family are saying the following;
Could have talked him down.
Could have tased him.
Could have shot him in the leg or arm.
Knife was planted.
I am sure they tried to talk him down, but in a 10x10 room and an assailant with a knife, your lucky to even get a shot off. It is not SOP to tase unless another officer can give lethal coverage, and that makes sense to me. Any of us who shoot know the likelihood of successfully hitting an arm or a leg of a moving attacker. To try would have been a tactical error, and put the officer and others at greater risk. I highly doubt the knife was planted.
I have been pulled over by dick cops. I have been mistreated and disrespected by ignorant cops on a power trip. I think they are in the minority, and I give them extra margin for error in the attitude department because I can guess as to how they are treated by many, day in and day out. I can guess as to the stress they face daily regarding their safety. I support LEO's (so long as they are not deployed in a way that infringes on my basic freedoms and constitutional rights). I believe they have a tough, often thankless job, but it is a job that needs doing.
My opinion, I think this was a good shoot. I have taken some fire for saying so by others who know the individual, but I can not honestly expect and LEO to risk not going home to his family, simply because I wish someone was still alive.
Now, some of the local blogs are buzzing over this. Some family and friends are hurt, angry and want to blame someone. People who are pointing fingers and claiming "trigger happy" cops are citing a case from a few years ago where the local PD paid a large settlement to a family after the shooting. They feel the settlement indicates "wrong doing" on the part of the police.
I became curious, and read some articles, as well as the attorney's web page who represented the family. His webpage reads as though this was a major victory for the citizens showing that attorney's are good and cops are bad. His website reported that the father called the PD because his son had a knife and was going to kill himself. The PD arrived, tased his son until he was on the ground and then shot him, fatally.
This is the publics general perception of the incident. I found it hard to believe. Via the freedom of information act, some more digging and google fu, LEO forums etc, I found information on the evidence that was never presented, because the case never went to trial. Here are the bullet points;
- County medical examiner, state Department of Public Safety and the FBI found that forensic evidence proved the man was shot while still standing and moving forward (despite family's testimony to the contrary.
- The independent forensic scientist hired by the family reached the same conclusion
-original 911 call has the father asking, what do I do if I have to shoot my son to defend myself, and, can I shoot my son.
- Officer who deployed his taser had a slash mark on his shirt and belt from the carving knife held by the attacker.
Interesting, how these "news stories" like some of those posted earlier, don't really tell how the shooting went down.
The settlement was paid because accounting determined a drawn out trial would cost more taxpayer money than the settlement. It was a business decision.
Great accounting decision, poor PR decision.
Regardless, I am slow to believe a lot of the conspiracy theory stories out there, and quick to assert that LEO's in harms way must be able to confidently use lethal force in their own defense. They have a right to ensure they go home to their families.
Settlements in civil trials are a whole 'nother thing. Too often, it's done because it's the right financial decision (even a successful defense in a use-of-force trial can run in to the tune of several tens of thousands of dollars...) but it creates a false impression that the cops are settling because they cannot win. Unfortunately, a lot of agencies risk management people just lack the intestinal fortitude to fight when they can save a buck or three...
Similar threads
