Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Dreadwinter wrote:
He saw the hate in my eyes! (I don't hate cops!)

You know, we have had the argument used that since african americans are not disproportionately killed by the police, we should not do anything to stop it. Should that also apply to cops? I believe the figures showing that being a policeman isn't actually that dangerous of a job have been thrown around, why are they given special regard when they execute people?

Police deaths, not that high. Why are they allowed special privilege?

I hadn't really looked at the numbers before. From memory more cops die in car crashes than are shot, and as a ratio of the total population a cop is around half as likely to be killed by being shot than a construction worker is to be killed on the job.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Dreadwinter wrote:
Police deaths, not that high. Why are they allowed special privilege?

Yeah, we should all be allowed to gun people down for reaching for their waist!

Well, I meant more along the lines of special privilege in trials and special treatment by juries. It is kind of absurd.

Well, that's not quite as entertaining.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 Dreadwinter wrote:
Police deaths, not that high. Why are they allowed special privilege?

Yeah, we should all be allowed to gun people down for reaching for their waist!

I for one am ready for our new Wild West quickdraw gunbattles.

 Disciple of Fate wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 Dreadwinter wrote:
Police deaths, not that high. Why are they allowed special privilege?

Yeah, we should all be allowed to gun people down for reaching for their waist!

I for one am ready for our new Wild Wild West quickdraw gunbattles.

Fixed that for you, because it needed more Will Smith!

I have always been curious, what right, if any, do civilians have to defend themselves against someone claiming to be the police?

Like if someone comes in to your house (or hotel in this case) and you aren't running a drug lab out of it so have no reason to believe the cops would be after you and you gun one of them down while they're pointing guns at you, can you claim any sort of self defence?

I ask because if you have no rights once the popo says "I'm the police" that would be an awesome way to rob/rape/kidnap/murder/terrorist attack someone, dress up as a cop and yell at people to do what you say until you can gain enough advantage to do the aforementioned robbery/rape/kidnapping/murder/terrorist attack.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
I have always been curious, what right, if any, do civilians have to defend themselves against someone claiming to be the police?

Like if someone comes in to your house (or hotel in this case) and you aren't running a drug lab out of it so have no reason to believe the cops would be after you and you gun one of them down while they're pointing guns at you, can you claim any sort of self defence?

I ask because if you have no rights once the popo says "I'm the police" that would be an awesome way to rob/rape/kidnap/murder/terrorist attack someone, dress up as a cop and yell at people to do what you say until you can gain enough advantage to do the aforementioned robbery/rape/kidnapping/murder/terrorist attack.

This article has some of those questions considered:
"Murder or Self-Defense if Officer Is Killed in Raid?"
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/03/18/us/texas-no-knock-warrant-drugs.html


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Dreadwinter wrote:

 Disciple of Fate wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

 Dreadwinter wrote:
Police deaths, not that high. Why are they allowed special privilege?

Yeah, we should all be allowed to gun people down for reaching for their waist!

I for one am ready for our new Wild Wild West quickdraw gunbattles.

Fixed that for you, because it needed more Will Smith!

Are his reflexes still up to par

 Ouze wrote:


That cop just wanted to go home to his family.

So do serial killers, narcos, terrorists etc... the fact they have a family doesn't justify a murder.

Also: https://law.stackexchange.com/questions/16695/can-you-legally-defend-yourself-against-an-attacking-police-officer

Basically, if there is no way for you to know that the person in question is a police officer (no knock warrant in middle of the night), or you have reasonable suspicion that the person is impersonating a police officer (always ask for name and badge number when in doubt, they should be able to rattle it off by memory), then you are in the clear. My friend punched a plainclothes cop who failed to identify himself before grabbing my friend, and was able to walk free from it after being detained and questioned by some of the higher ups (cameras helped a good bit too).

tneva82 wrote:

 Spinner wrote:
Honestly, I don't think that's enough. We need to consider raising hands to be threatening as well. What if the man on the floor begging for his life has some sort of weapon up his sleeve, like the guy from Django, or the other guy from the Punisher? You never know, and the only way for some cops to be able to do their job of enforcing the law and protecting citizens safely and efficiently is to gun down anyone not instantly complying with their orders.

Until the police are safe from wrist-deployable weapons, this country has a long way to go. You never know if a random traffic stop is going to involve a Mandalorian bounty hunter.

However you need to add clarification to that statement: Only in US. Or at least only outside Europe. In Europe police can do their job just fine without gunning down people down all the time just like that.

I'm sooooo glad I wasn't born in US nor have any need to go there. Much more pleasant to live in safe country.

Agreed. Your wussy self would not survive here.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Inquisitor Lord Bane wrote:
Also: https://law.stackexchange.com/questions/16695/can-you-legally-defend-yourself-against-an-attacking-police-officer

Basically, if there is no way for you to know that the person in question is a police officer (no knock warrant in middle of the night), or you have reasonable suspicion that the person is impersonating a police officer (always ask for name and badge number when in doubt, they should be able to rattle it off by memory), then you are in the clear. My friend punched a plainclothes cop who failed to identify himself before grabbing my friend, and was able to walk free from it after being detained and questioned by some of the higher ups (cameras helped a good bit too).

Caselaw actually supports that you will not be in the clear. It is highly likely you will be dead.

 Frazzled wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

 Spinner wrote:
Honestly, I don't think that's enough. We need to consider raising hands to be threatening as well. What if the man on the floor begging for his life has some sort of weapon up his sleeve, like the guy from Django, or the other guy from the Punisher? You never know, and the only way for some cops to be able to do their job of enforcing the law and protecting citizens safely and efficiently is to gun down anyone not instantly complying with their orders.

Until the police are safe from wrist-deployable weapons, this country has a long way to go. You never know if a random traffic stop is going to involve a Mandalorian bounty hunter.

However you need to add clarification to that statement: Only in US. Or at least only outside Europe. In Europe police can do their job just fine without gunning down people down all the time just like that.

I'm sooooo glad I wasn't born in US nor have any need to go there. Much more pleasant to live in safe country.

Agreed. Your wussy self would not survive here.

Hey, don't mess with the Finns or they'll go all Simo Häyhä on y'all. Texas ain't got nothin' on that!

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
I have always been curious, what right, if any, do civilians have to defend themselves against someone claiming to be the police?

Like if someone comes in to your house (or hotel in this case) and you aren't running a drug lab out of it so have no reason to believe the cops would be after you and you gun one of them down while they're pointing guns at you, can you claim any sort of self defence?

I ask because if you have no rights once the popo says "I'm the police" that would be an awesome way to rob/rape/kidnap/murder/terrorist attack someone, dress up as a cop and yell at people to do what you say until you can gain enough advantage to do the aforementioned robbery/rape/kidnapping/murder/terrorist attack.

An interesting question since I believe there was a case years back of someone who had cop lights he would put on his car, pull women over, and rape them.

Here we go:

http://katv.com/archive/blue-light-rapist-victim-urging-lawmakers-to-make-a-change

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

 Spinner wrote:
Honestly, I don't think that's enough. We need to consider raising hands to be threatening as well. What if the man on the floor begging for his life has some sort of weapon up his sleeve, like the guy from Django, or the other guy from the Punisher? You never know, and the only way for some cops to be able to do their job of enforcing the law and protecting citizens safely and efficiently is to gun down anyone not instantly complying with their orders.

Until the police are safe from wrist-deployable weapons, this country has a long way to go. You never know if a random traffic stop is going to involve a Mandalorian bounty hunter.

However you need to add clarification to that statement: Only in US. Or at least only outside Europe. In Europe police can do their job just fine without gunning down people down all the time just like that.

I'm sooooo glad I wasn't born in US nor have any need to go there. Much more pleasant to live in safe country.

Agreed. Your wussy self would not survive here.

Hey, don't mess with the Finns or they'll go all Simo Häyhä on y'all. Texas ain't got nothin' on that!

Finn snipers are no match for chupacabra and angry Mexican mother in law's!

 Blackie wrote:

 Ouze wrote:


That cop just wanted to go home to his family.

So do serial killers, narcos, terrorists etc... the fact they have a family doesn't justify a murder.

Yeah, that's the joke. Every time a cop has a bad shoot, they always trot out that line as an excuse, along with "he didn't wake up and plan to shoot someone that day" or something in that vein. I think most people who commit criminally negligent manslaughter by definition could so claim.

 Frazzled wrote:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

 Spinner wrote:
Honestly, I don't think that's enough. We need to consider raising hands to be threatening as well. What if the man on the floor begging for his life has some sort of weapon up his sleeve, like the guy from Django, or the other guy from the Punisher? You never know, and the only way for some cops to be able to do their job of enforcing the law and protecting citizens safely and efficiently is to gun down anyone not instantly complying with their orders.

Until the police are safe from wrist-deployable weapons, this country has a long way to go. You never know if a random traffic stop is going to involve a Mandalorian bounty hunter.

However you need to add clarification to that statement: Only in US. Or at least only outside Europe. In Europe police can do their job just fine without gunning down people down all the time just like that.

I'm sooooo glad I wasn't born in US nor have any need to go there. Much more pleasant to live in safe country.

Agreed. Your wussy self would not survive here.

Hey, don't mess with the Finns or they'll go all Simo Häyhä on y'all. Texas ain't got nothin' on that!

Finn snipers are no match for chupacabra and angry Mexican mother in law's!

You'll find yourself minding your business one day, then you'll notice a patch of snow, you'll think nothing of it, then by the time you remember it doesn't snow in Texas, it'll be too late.

 Dreadwinter wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
The two big differences are firstly the home intruder is the one threatening you vs the cop being the one doing the threatening and the second is that it's the cop's job to deal with those situations.

I have a lot less sympathy for cops who wrongly kill someone in self defence than a home owner wrongly killing an intruder in self defence.

The cop should rightly be held to a higher standard.

Disagree. If someone is reaching for their waistband, that is considered a threatening move in the presence of police. Since you could potentially be reaching for a gun or a knife. This is pretty much true in every country in the world, its not unique to the US.

So if I am walking down the street and pass a cop, then reach to pull my pants up, it is reasonable for a cop to shoot me dead?

No, because there are other factors. If the police have had reason to try to detain you, then you need to comply and not do stupid things like reach for your waist. In this case, the police were responding to a gun complaint, so they had every reason to think he was armed.

If anybody should have blame, it was the person who called the police just because they saw a gun through a window.

Every reason to think he was armed? This is the US, its safe to assume a good chunk of the population is armed due to the 2nd. Its not a good reason to assume everyone with a gun is out to get you as police officers wouldn't even be able to go outside anymore. Its a severe overreaction.

Also, the assumption that a policeman trying to detain you means they have a reason to do so.

Lets just remember back to the nurse who was detained for not allowing the police to carry out an illegal act of assault.

 Disciple of Fate wrote:
Every reason to think he was armed? This is the US, its safe to assume a good chunk of the population is armed due to the 2nd. Its not a good reason to assume everyone with a gun is out to get you as police officers wouldn't even be able to go outside anymore. Its a severe overreaction.

Not out to get you. But someone who is being detained who makes a move which is the same move that would be used to draw a gun is threatening the officer, willing or unwilling.

If you are arresting someone and they reach for the waistband, they could be drawing a weapon. They're even more likely if the call you are responding to was firearm related.

My issue is this - no armed citizen would have gotten away with that shoot looking at the video. Had it been someone without a badge behind that trigger, I cannot see this having resulted in an acquittal. If it's not a good shoot for you or I, it should not be a good shoot for a police officer.

Police training, at least in my opinion, heavily emphasizes a "shoot first, ask questions later" mentality, or a "officer safety is so paramount any even remotely potential threat, no matter how unlikely is actionable", almost looking for an excuse to fire in some cases (one instructor at my range recently made a comment during a training that basically amounted to this). Any movement can be construed as going for a weapon and a "go" to fire, which in many cases would not be considered appropriate for your average person even in the exact same situation, and often for military personnel in actual combat zones. I won't comment too much on the specifics here, but this shoot certainly doesn't inspire me to confidence. That said, it went to trial, a jury heard the evidence, and made their decision, as far as the justice system is concerned, thats all that can be asked I guess with regards to this specific case.

The big issue I think, more than anything specific to this shoot, is training and culture among police, and things have to change for the public to have confidence in the police, and to keep such institutions from overstepping their boundaries it's good to have this constant pushback and public scrutiny.

Having recently served as a jury foreman on a criminal case and hearing several days of testimony from multiple officers from two different departments, I will say my impression of police standards and conduct in general has...certainly not been enhanced.

The problem with possibly grabbing a gun movements is that this is an area many people keep their ID and such. As in the Castillo case. Its not helped when you have all of 5 seconds to respond to an event the police officers who mentally prepared themselves for expect you to understand immediatly. How many innocent people have died like this? Well they don't keep records so we will never know. But officers are very quick to treat any movement as 'threatening'. Its a serious lack of training and the "warrior-cop" mentality.

On the specific case itself, the trial was done properly, but leaving out key pieces of evidence certainly makes t look like the victim wasn't given a fair chance at justice

 Grey Templar wrote:

 Dreadwinter wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
The two big differences are firstly the home intruder is the one threatening you vs the cop being the one doing the threatening and the second is that it's the cop's job to deal with those situations.

I have a lot less sympathy for cops who wrongly kill someone in self defence than a home owner wrongly killing an intruder in self defence.

The cop should rightly be held to a higher standard.

Disagree. If someone is reaching for their waistband, that is considered a threatening move in the presence of police. Since you could potentially be reaching for a gun or a knife. This is pretty much true in every country in the world, its not unique to the US.

So if I am walking down the street and pass a cop, then reach to pull my pants up, it is reasonable for a cop to shoot me dead?

No, because there are other factors. If the police have had reason to try to detain you, then you need to comply and not do stupid things like reach for your waist. In this case, the police were responding to a gun complaint, so they had every reason to think he was armed.

If anybody should have blame, it was the person who called the police just because they saw a gun through a window.

Horsegak. You dot no shoot until you see a weapon. Period. Because there is no threat until a weapon is confirmed. This isn't the wild west, he isn't going to quick draw a weapon why laying prone and kill an entire group of officers. You don't shoot somebody because they might have a weapon, but you're not sure, somebody on the phone told you they did.

That is weak.

 Grey Templar wrote:

 Dreadwinter wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
The two big differences are firstly the home intruder is the one threatening you vs the cop being the one doing the threatening and the second is that it's the cop's job to deal with those situations.

I have a lot less sympathy for cops who wrongly kill someone in self defence than a home owner wrongly killing an intruder in self defence.

The cop should rightly be held to a higher standard.

Disagree. If someone is reaching for their waistband, that is considered a threatening move in the presence of police. Since you could potentially be reaching for a gun or a knife. This is pretty much true in every country in the world, its not unique to the US.

So if I am walking down the street and pass a cop, then reach to pull my pants up, it is reasonable for a cop to shoot me dead?

No, because there are other factors. If the police have had reason to try to detain you, then you need to comply and not do stupid things like reach for your waist. In this case, the police were responding to a gun complaint, so they had every reason to think he was armed.

If anybody should have blame, it was the person who called the police just because they saw a gun through a window.

You keep saying "Don't do stupid things", when the natural human response to feeling threated and being scared are literally all the "stupid things" that can get you shoot by a police officer. Is the job of the police officer to be better than your normal Joe, and have the mental capacity to evaluate situations that other people can't.

I know it must be different for you because in USA you are more used to firearms, etc... but if a police officer was pointing at me with that firearm of the video? Thats something out of Call of Duty. If a police is pointing at me with that at the same time is companion is yelling at me? I doubt I'll even be able to eard the instructions they are yelling. I'll be scared as Probably I'll just faint into the ground.
I'm no Rambo, no police or soldier. I'm a normal civilian that his biggest contact with fire weapons has been with medieval replications from Toledo. And I believe, most people out there, is the same as me.

This used to be satire (mostly) but it's become more of a sad reality over the passing years. Can't even adjust your pants let alone reach for a safety orange wallet.

You'll find yourself minding your business one day, then you'll notice a patch of snow, you'll think nothing of it, then by the time you remember it doesn't snow in Texas, it'll be too late.

It actually snowed here the other for the first time in years. It snowed maybe an eighth of an inch. Tens of thousands were hospitalized and we were forced to eat the neighbors!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Disciple of Fate wrote:
Every reason to think he was armed? This is the US, its safe to assume a good chunk of the population is armed due to the 2nd. Its not a good reason to assume everyone with a gun is out to get you as police officers wouldn't even be able to go outside anymore. Its a severe overreaction.

They were responding to a report of someone with a gun. Not defending them, but thats why they were there.

 Frazzled wrote:

You'll find yourself minding your business one day, then you'll notice a patch of snow, you'll think nothing of it, then by the time you remember it doesn't snow in Texas, it'll be too late.

It actually snowed here the other for the first time in years. It snowed maybe an eighth of an inch. Tens of thousands were hospitalized and we were forced to eat the neighbors!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Disciple of Fate wrote:
Every reason to think he was armed? This is the US, its safe to assume a good chunk of the population is armed due to the 2nd. Its not a good reason to assume everyone with a gun is out to get you as police officers wouldn't even be able to go outside anymore. Its a severe overreaction.

They were responding to a report of someone with a gun. Not defending them, but thats why they were there.

Is it illegal to have a gun in a hotel or something?

 Dreadwinter wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

You'll find yourself minding your business one day, then you'll notice a patch of snow, you'll think nothing of it, then by the time you remember it doesn't snow in Texas, it'll be too late.

It actually snowed here the other for the first time in years. It snowed maybe an eighth of an inch. Tens of thousands were hospitalized and we were forced to eat the neighbors!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Disciple of Fate wrote:
Every reason to think he was armed? This is the US, its safe to assume a good chunk of the population is armed due to the 2nd. Its not a good reason to assume everyone with a gun is out to get you as police officers wouldn't even be able to go outside anymore. Its a severe overreaction.

They were responding to a report of someone with a gun. Not defending them, but thats why they were there.

Is it illegal to have a gun in a hotel or something?

Probably not but it is probably illegal to be brandishing a weapon through an window???

Just because someone calls in and says someone is armed doesn't make it true.

And the report of a gun doesn't carry a death sentence. Which is what this guy received.

 Frazzled wrote:


They were responding to a report of someone with a gun. Not defending them, but thats why they were there.

So some one using their 2nd Amendment rights is reason for police to forcibly enter the room where they are staying and detain them?

 Marmatag wrote:
Just because someone calls in and says someone is armed doesn't make it true.

And the report of a gun doesn't carry a death sentence. Which is what this guy received.

Just because some one calls it in doesnt make it false ether. hindsight is 20/20 its not the polices job to make assumptions its their job to secure the location and make sure there is no threat or the neutralize it. the two cops that was yelling out those nutzo orders should be convicted of manslaughter at the minimum for causing the situation in the first place. the cop doing the shooting was doing his role of keeping watch.