User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 5/11/2024 1:33:21 PM EDT
[#1]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Sixgunner45: Pure murder. And some here are defending it. Deal with your own problems. Never answer the door to the police (or if you aren't expecting someone). You just might get killed by a coward cop. I agree. But I hope the race baiters and cop haters don't make too much of this tragedy. While it is legitimately worse than the George Floyd fiasco, it is still just one jumpy cop, who made a big mistake and killed one man. We don't need to kill and injure dozens more, and lose billions burning down half the country over it. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/11/2024 1:34:51 PM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Missilegeek:  Logic > feelings Words have meaning. He is, by far, a legal adult. A man. A young man if you prefer. Calling him a kid is incorrect and idiotic. It only shows that the person talking values emotions over facts and logic. Just like the leftist media. I appreciate your input. I will call on your expertise if the situation ever arises. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/11/2024 1:44:52 PM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Missilegeek: I agree. But I hope the race baiters and cop haters don't make too much of this tragedy. While it is legitimately worse than the George Floyd fiasco, it is still just one jumpy cop, who made a big mistake and killed one man. We don't need to kill and injure dozens more, and lose billions burning down half the country over it. Don’t make too much of this tragedy? Tell us, hero. What is the appropriate level of anger when government thugs murder innocent civilians? |
|
|
|
AZ, USA
|
Posted: 5/11/2024 1:45:02 PM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By MSGTUSAF: Unlike the Leo's on here care more about a dead man, how you feel if he seen the cop drawing and shot the cop???? You'd be yelling murder. Civilians killing civilians, I bet the military would love to have cops ROE. I guess I’m just adding to the derailment…but you do realize that the ROE in Iraq was different in say 2003, 2004 than say 2010? |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/11/2024 1:48:24 PM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Low_Country: Don’t make too much of this tragedy? Tell us, hero. What is the appropriate level of anger when government thugs murder innocent civilians? State employee murdered a military member... he wasn't a civilian, and fed justice system needs to love that officer tenderly. |
|
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 5/11/2024 1:50:47 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Strike6: Holy shit dude. Talk about semantics. And that is par for GD. Ok, I will do it over again for you so your pussy doesn't hurt. The civilian LEO saw a gun in a CITIZEN's hand and murdered him. Fuck, are you ok now? Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Strike6: Originally Posted By Phil_Billy: Originally Posted By Strike6: Bad shoot all the way around. He saw the gun in the civilian's hands, made a verbal command, and then went lethal without any justification to do so and without giving time for the verbal command to take effect. If you're a LEO and you are defending this, you are absolutely the wrong man for the job. Period. First off the Airman is not a "civilian" and second off the Police are "civilians" you got that completely backward. About par for GD. You did at least get the bad shoot part right. Holy shit dude. Talk about semantics. And that is par for GD. Ok, I will do it over again for you so your pussy doesn't hurt. The civilian LEO saw a gun in a CITIZEN's hand and murdered him. Fuck, are you ok now? Semantics are important. Otherwise we have to choose to live with what people feel like words should mean. It's a shame that you see men talking about how the English language should be accurately used and consider it their pussy being hurt. |
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 5/11/2024 1:54:22 PM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Missilegeek: I agree. But I hope the race baiters and cop haters don't make too much of this tragedy. While it is legitimately worse than the George Floyd fiasco, it is still just one jumpy cop, who made a big mistake and killed one man. We don't need to kill and injure dozens more, and lose billions burning down half the country over it. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Missilegeek: Originally Posted By Sixgunner45: Pure murder. And some here are defending it. Deal with your own problems. Never answer the door to the police (or if you aren't expecting someone). You just might get killed by a coward cop. I agree. But I hope the race baiters and cop haters don't make too much of this tragedy. While it is legitimately worse than the George Floyd fiasco, it is still just one jumpy cop, who made a big mistake and killed one man. We don't need to kill and injure dozens more, and lose billions burning down half the country over it. There is a completely appropriate and great way to make it so that people can't make "too much" out of a man being killed in a manner that isn't justifiable for anyone other than the "reasonable officer". The person who killed someone that wasn't a threat to him needs to be held personally accountable for his actions. When you do that anyone that says "Justice for Roger" can be shut up with facts. Unfortunately what is likely to happen is that the killer will be held to a woefully low standard for killing innocent men and only the taxpayers will be liable. A lot of people have a problem with that. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/11/2024 1:56:28 PM EDT
[#8]
I can't think of any tactical/safety benefit to opening your door with a gun in hand but at your side. If you're concerned, why are you opening the door in the first place? If you're not concerned, why are you answering with a gun in hand on full display?
The only reasons that make any sense are if you plan to shoot the person on the other side of the door or you want to make them think you will/might. Don't really understand the pushback on this. WI is an open carry state but that doesn't mean I can walk around town with a gun in my hand, even if I don't point it at anyone. Likewise, being on my property doesn't mean it's impossible for me to brandish a gun. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/11/2024 1:58:56 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By BCPVP: I can't think of any tactical/safety benefit to opening your door with a gun in hand but at your side. If you're concerned, why are you opening the door in the first place? If you're not concerned, why are you answering with a gun in hand on full display? The only reasons that make any sense are if you plan to shoot the person on the other side of the door or you want to make them think you will/might. Don't really understand the pushback on this. WI is an open carry state but that doesn't mean I can walk around town with a gun in my hand, even if I don't point it at anyone. Likewise, being on my property doesn't mean it's impossible for me to brandish a gun. Because the kid was doing nothing wrong. Opening the door with a pistol in your hand is perfectly legal. He was in his own fucking home, minding his own fucking business. And now he is dead. Due to a situation created entirely by the presence of a police officer, and justified by the uniform he was wearing. You don’t understand the problem with this? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/11/2024 2:00:30 PM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By BCPVP: I can't think of any tactical/safety benefit to opening your door with a gun in hand but at your side. If you're concerned, why are you opening the door in the first place? If you're not concerned, why are you answering with a gun in hand on full display? The only reasons that make any sense are if you plan to shoot the person on the other side of the door or you want to make them think you will/might. Don't really understand the pushback on this. WI is an open carry state but that doesn't mean I can walk around town with a gun in my hand, even if I don't point it at anyone. Likewise, being on my property doesn't mean it's impossible for me to brandish a gun. Define brandish. Please. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/11/2024 2:07:27 PM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Low_Country: Don’t make too much of this tragedy? Tell us, hero. What is the appropriate level of anger when government thugs murder innocent civilians? About the same as when a drone strike took out an innocent family after Kabul or are goat farmers lives worth less? Just curious. Who were the thugs there? The DC shot callers? The .mil leadership or the actual person on the joystick? Where was your rage then? You assured us that was a legit strike. Both were and are tragic human losses that did not have to happen. Where are we going with this "anger?" We can beat this dead horse all day long. In the end, nothing will change except some folks blood pressure. May Airman Fortson rest in peace. I hope for change in the LE training circles to prevent the needless loss of life. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/11/2024 2:09:56 PM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By BigSky171: About the same as when a drone strike took out an innocent family after Kabul or are goat farmers lives worth less? Just curious. Who were the thugs there? The DC shot callers? The .mil leadership or the actual person on the joystick? Where was your rage then? You assured us that was a legit strike. Both were and are tragic human losses that did not have to happen. Where are we going with this "anger?" We can beat this dead horse all day long. In the end, nothing will change except some folks blood pressure. May Airman Fortson rest in peace. I hope for change in the LE training circles to prevent the needless loss of life. The hell are you talking about? Are police officers at war with the American public? |
|
|
|
ND, USA
|
Posted: 5/11/2024 2:10:10 PM EDT
[Last Edit: couchlord]
[#13]
I'm wondering why the cop didn't wait for his back up? He listened for a bit and there was no apparent assault in progress, thus waiting another 5 minutes or whatever is no big deal. I'm no cop but I sure wouldn't want to go solo into a DV.
|
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 5/11/2024 2:12:12 PM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Low_Country: The hell are you talking about? Are police officers at war with the American public? Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Low_Country: Originally Posted By BigSky171: About the same as when a drone strike took out an innocent family after Kabul or are goat farmers lives worth less? Just curious. Who were the thugs there? The DC shot callers? The .mil leadership or the actual person on the joystick? Where was your rage then? You assured us that was a legit strike. Both were and are tragic human losses that did not have to happen. Where are we going with this "anger?" We can beat this dead horse all day long. In the end, nothing will change except some folks blood pressure. May Airman Fortson rest in peace. I hope for change in the LE training circles to prevent the needless loss of life. The hell are you talking about? Are police officers at war with the American public? Not all of them. But enough. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/11/2024 2:12:15 PM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By BCPVP: I can't think of any tactical/safety benefit to opening your door with a gun in hand but at your side. If you're concerned, why are you opening the door in the first place? If you're not concerned, why are you answering with a gun in hand on full display? The only reasons that make any sense are if you plan to shoot the person on the other side of the door or you want to make them think you will/might. Don't really understand the pushback on this. WI is an open carry state but that doesn't mean I can walk around town with a gun in my hand, even if I don't point it at anyone. Likewise, being on my property doesn't mean it's impossible for me to brandish a gun. I heard a YouTuber say “freedom is scary, deal with it”. I like it a lot better than the BCPVP legal doctrine of “the law is the law, unless their is something I personally don’t like about it” |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/11/2024 2:14:45 PM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By XNARC: I guess I’m just adding to the derailment…but you do realize that the ROE in Iraq was different in say 2003, 2004 than say 2010? Was there ever a time, say, after the signing of the Geneva Convention, that what we see here would not have been a war crime? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/11/2024 2:16:30 PM EDT
[#17]
Answering the door with a gun in hand was at worse not bright. Doesn't merit the officer's response (IMO).
I don't expect too much BLM stuff. They riot when the guy who gets shot deserved it. And not to get too conspiratorial but I'm sure the shot callers don't want to give the right more "law and order" ammo right now. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/11/2024 2:17:42 PM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Missilegeek: I agree. But I hope the race baiters and cop haters don't make too much of this tragedy. While it is legitimately worse than the George Floyd fiasco, it is still just one jumpy cop, who made a big mistake and killed one man. We don't need to kill and injure dozens more, and lose billions burning down half the country over it. It's always just "calm down and don't upset the apple cart, it's just one bad cop and one person murdered". I hope they take this tragedy to the streets and put the cop behind bars. |
|
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 5/11/2024 2:19:21 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Martlet: It's always just "calm down and don't upset the apple cart, it's just one bad cop and one person murdered". I hope they take this tragedy to the streets and put the cop behind bars. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Martlet: Originally Posted By Missilegeek: I agree. But I hope the race baiters and cop haters don't make too much of this tragedy. While it is legitimately worse than the George Floyd fiasco, it is still just one jumpy cop, who made a big mistake and killed one man. We don't need to kill and injure dozens more, and lose billions burning down half the country over it. It's always just "calm down and don't upset the apple cart, it's just one bad cop and one person murdered". I hope they take this tragedy to the streets and put the cop behind bars. I've yet to hear what those same posters believe the acceptable ratio for innocent people killed to total calls responded to is. But it's always more forging than the actual numbers. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/11/2024 2:20:15 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Low_Country: Because the kid was doing nothing wrong. Opening the door with a pistol in your hand is perfectly legal. He was in his own fucking home, minding his own fucking business. And now he is dead. Due to a situation created entirely by the presence of a police officer, and justified by the uniform he was wearing. You don't understand the problem with this? Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Low_Country: Originally Posted By BCPVP: I can't think of any tactical/safety benefit to opening your door with a gun in hand but at your side. If you're concerned, why are you opening the door in the first place? If you're not concerned, why are you answering with a gun in hand on full display? The only reasons that make any sense are if you plan to shoot the person on the other side of the door or you want to make them think you will/might. Don't really understand the pushback on this. WI is an open carry state but that doesn't mean I can walk around town with a gun in my hand, even if I don't point it at anyone. Likewise, being on my property doesn't mean it's impossible for me to brandish a gun. Because the kid was doing nothing wrong. Opening the door with a pistol in your hand is perfectly legal. He was in his own fucking home, minding his own fucking business. And now he is dead. Due to a situation created entirely by the presence of a police officer, and justified by the uniform he was wearing. You don't understand the problem with this? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/11/2024 2:23:34 PM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Lug1: I don't give a fuck what you can think of. HE DIDNT BREAK THE LAW. AND HE DIDNT BRANDISH A GUN. That is some fucked up derp. Define brandish. Please. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Lug1: Originally Posted By BCPVP: I can't think of any tactical/safety benefit to opening your door with a gun in hand but at your side. If you're concerned, why are you opening the door in the first place? If you're not concerned, why are you answering with a gun in hand on full display? The only reasons that make any sense are if you plan to shoot the person on the other side of the door or you want to make them think you will/might. Don't really understand the pushback on this. WI is an open carry state but that doesn't mean I can walk around town with a gun in my hand, even if I don't point it at anyone. Likewise, being on my property doesn't mean it's impossible for me to brandish a gun. Define brandish. Please. 790.10 Improper exhibition of dangerous weapons or firearms. If any person having or carrying any dirk, sword, sword cane, firearm, electric weapon or device, or other weapon shall, in the presence of one or more persons, exhibit the same in a rude, careless, angry, or threatening manner, not in necessary self-defense, the person so offending shall be guilty of a misdemeanor of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083. The only logical purpose of answering a door with gun in hand and visible is to threaten the person on the other side. That it turned out to be a cop on the other side of the door who was probably on alert given the nature of the call was bad luck for the airman. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/11/2024 2:23:50 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Low_Country: The hell are you talking about? Are police officers at war with the American public? A lot of them sure like to think so |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/11/2024 2:25:02 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By BCPVP: The 2023 Florida Statutes (including Special Session C) 790.10 Improper exhibition of dangerous weapons or firearms. If any person having or carrying any dirk, sword, sword cane, firearm, electric weapon or device, or other weapon shall, in the presence of one or more persons, exhibit the same in a rude, careless, angry, or threatening manner, not in necessary self-defense, the person so offending shall be guilty of a misdemeanor of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083. The only logical purpose of answering a door with gun in hand and visible is to threaten the person on the other side. That it turned out to be a cop on the other side of the door who was probably on alert given the nature of the call was bad luck for the airman. Remind me to reciprocate your anger the next time the tables are turned. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/11/2024 2:26:24 PM EDT
[Last Edit: burkeva]
[#24]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By MSGTUSAF: And who do you think the PMO called? Point is you can't just roll through the gate and grab anyone. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By MSGTUSAF: Originally Posted By burkeva: I don’t recall ever asking the post commander for permission, nor did i need it. We contacted the PMO as we entered the facility and grabbed the guy as the MPs rolled up to ‘assist’ us. We disagree as to definitions and i couldn’t care less. XNARC’s definition is the correct one. None of this changes this events surrounding this shooting. And who do you think the PMO called? Point is you can't just roll through the gate and grab anyone. lol. We did roll through and we did grab the guy. Sorry sarge, you don’t rate getting notified. PMO office got the call as we were moving to grab the guy. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/11/2024 2:26:50 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By BCPVP: The 2023 Florida Statutes (including Special Session C) 790.10 Improper exhibition of dangerous weapons or firearms. If any person having or carrying any dirk, sword, sword cane, firearm, electric weapon or device, or other weapon shall, in the presence of one or more persons, exhibit the same in a rude, careless, angry, or threatening manner, not in necessary self-defense, the person so offending shall be guilty of a misdemeanor of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083. The only logical purpose of answering a door with gun in hand and visible is to threaten the person on the other side. That it turned out to be a cop on the other side of the door who was probably on alert given the nature of the call was bad luck for the airman. Airman was acting in self defence inside his home. Try again. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/11/2024 2:31:11 PM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By BCPVP: The 2023 Florida Statutes (including Special Session C) 790.10 Improper exhibition of dangerous weapons or firearms. If any person having or carrying any dirk, sword, sword cane, firearm, electric weapon or device, or other weapon shall, in the presence of one or more persons, exhibit the same in a rude, careless, angry, or threatening manner, not in necessary self-defense, the person so offending shall be guilty of a misdemeanor of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083. The only logical purpose of answering a door with gun in hand and visible is to threaten the person on the other side. That it turned out to be a cop on the other side of the door who was probably on alert given the nature of the call was bad luck for the airman. So he was murdered for a misdemeanor violation? Pretty sure that statute probably won't apply to someone in their own home. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/11/2024 2:31:24 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Beltfed308: Airman was acting in self defence inside his home. Try again. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Beltfed308: Originally Posted By BCPVP: The 2023 Florida Statutes (including Special Session C) 790.10 Improper exhibition of dangerous weapons or firearms. If any person having or carrying any dirk, sword, sword cane, firearm, electric weapon or device, or other weapon shall, in the presence of one or more persons, exhibit the same in a rude, careless, angry, or threatening manner, not in necessary self-defense, the person so offending shall be guilty of a misdemeanor of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083. The only logical purpose of answering a door with gun in hand and visible is to threaten the person on the other side. That it turned out to be a cop on the other side of the door who was probably on alert given the nature of the call was bad luck for the airman. Airman was acting in self defence inside his home. Try again. What was he defending himself against? If he really did think he needed to defend himself, why open the door? He wanted to give some potential bad guy a better chance of shooting him first? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/11/2024 2:34:39 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By BamaInArk: So he was murdered for a misdemeanor violation? Pretty sure that statute probably won't apply to someone in their own home. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By BamaInArk: Originally Posted By BCPVP: The 2023 Florida Statutes (including Special Session C) 790.10 Improper exhibition of dangerous weapons or firearms. If any person having or carrying any dirk, sword, sword cane, firearm, electric weapon or device, or other weapon shall, in the presence of one or more persons, exhibit the same in a rude, careless, angry, or threatening manner, not in necessary self-defense, the person so offending shall be guilty of a misdemeanor of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083. The only logical purpose of answering a door with gun in hand and visible is to threaten the person on the other side. That it turned out to be a cop on the other side of the door who was probably on alert given the nature of the call was bad luck for the airman. So he was murdered for a misdemeanor violation? Pretty sure that statute probably won't apply to someone in their own home. The misdemeanor would be the charge if nothing else happened, but it turns out if your actions of brandishing a firearm cause someone else to reasonably fear for their life, they are justified in using deadly force against you. Unluckily for the airman, he brandished a gun against someone who was also armed. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/11/2024 2:37:27 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By BCPVP: lol What was he defending himself against? If he really did think he needed to defend himself, why open the door? He wanted to give some potential bad guy a better chance of shooting him first? He perceived a threat. His actions were defensive in nature. Not like Acorn Cop and company and their perceived threat now either is it? I'm not going to criticize the victims choices but it certainly didn't rise to the the justified threat level. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/11/2024 2:39:05 PM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By BCPVP: Are people being intentionally retarded? The misdemeanor would be the charge if nothing else happened, but it turns out if your actions of brandishing a firearm cause someone else to reasonably fear for their life, they are justified in using deadly force against you. Unluckily for the airman, he brandished a gun against someone who was also armed. Jesus Christ. And you wonder why people don’t care for cops anymore. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/11/2024 2:39:55 PM EDT
[#31]
Hopefully come re-election time, the Sheriff of this county becomes unemployed. Feel passionately? Donate to his opponent and demand that opponent make overwhelming and significant change within the Sheriff's department. This incident and the acorn fiasco would not make me feel safe if I were a resident of Okaloosa County.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/11/2024 2:40:49 PM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By BCPVP: The 2023 Florida Statutes (including Special Session C) 790.10 Improper exhibition of dangerous weapons or firearms. If any person having or carrying any dirk, sword, sword cane, firearm, electric weapon or device, or other weapon shall, in the presence of one or more persons, exhibit the same in a rude, careless, angry, or threatening manner, not in necessary self-defense, the person so offending shall be guilty of a misdemeanor of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083. The only logical purpose of answering a door with gun in hand and visible is to threaten the person on the other side. That it turned out to be a cop on the other side of the door who was probably on alert given the nature of the call was bad luck for the airman. Good thing it’s not up to you what constitutes “brandishing”. Innocent citizens would get killed because of people like you. Oh, wait!  Attached File |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/11/2024 2:41:04 PM EDT
[#33]
This was absolutely a bad shoot.
That officer has zero business being in the position he is in. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/11/2024 2:43:11 PM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Low_Country: Jesus Christ. And you wonder why people don’t care for cops anymore. Yep, anymore they are their own worse enemy. Always sticking up for any and all cop murders. There's so many "bad apples" at this point where it is difficult to see any good ones. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/11/2024 2:45:50 PM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Low_Country: Because the kid was doing nothing wrong. Opening the door with a pistol in your hand is perfectly legal. He was in his own fucking home, minding his own fucking business. And now he is dead. Due to a situation created entirely by the presence of a police officer, and justified by the uniform he was wearing. You don’t understand the problem with this? As painful as it is for me to agree with Low_Country, this post is completely spot on. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/11/2024 2:46:18 PM EDT
[Last Edit: Low_Country]
[#36]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Sixgunner45: Yep, anymore they are their own worse enemy. Always sticking up for any and all cop murders. There's so many "bad apples" at this point where it is difficult to see any good ones. A cop bangs on a dude’s door, and when the dude opens the door, he gets murdered because the cop perceived him as a threat. And the TBL is here defending it. |
|
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 5/11/2024 2:48:22 PM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By BCPVP: lol What was he defending himself against? If he really did think he needed to defend himself, why open the door? He wanted to give some potential bad guy a better chance of shooting him first? Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By BCPVP: Originally Posted By Beltfed308: Originally Posted By BCPVP: The 2023 Florida Statutes (including Special Session C) 790.10 Improper exhibition of dangerous weapons or firearms. If any person having or carrying any dirk, sword, sword cane, firearm, electric weapon or device, or other weapon shall, in the presence of one or more persons, exhibit the same in a rude, careless, angry, or threatening manner, not in necessary self-defense, the person so offending shall be guilty of a misdemeanor of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083. The only logical purpose of answering a door with gun in hand and visible is to threaten the person on the other side. That it turned out to be a cop on the other side of the door who was probably on alert given the nature of the call was bad luck for the airman. Airman was acting in self defence inside his home. Try again. What was he defending himself against? If he really did think he needed to defend himself, why open the door? He wanted to give some potential bad guy a better chance of shooting him first? There’s an amazing irony in asking who a guy that was killed would have needed to defend himself. |
|
|
TX, USA
|
Posted: 5/11/2024 2:50:16 PM EDT
[Last Edit: MSGTUSAF]
[#38]
What i find funny is that Leo's on here can't comprehend its shootings like this and their justification is why we have BLM. They're lucky the media has lied and twisted facts, trying to make this into a racial issue. Cause if they told the truth and showed all the shootings of innocent people and the Leo communities response, they'd have very little support from anyone.
To me they're the ones that should be demanding cops like should be gone. Cause I dang sure wouldn't a trigger happy id10t like this cop backing me up at 0 dark 30. I wouldn't trust anyone that justifies this kind of shooting either. |
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 5/11/2024 2:50:26 PM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By TAG_Match: Good thing it’s not up to you what constitutes “brandishing”. Innocent citizens would get killed because of people like you. Oh, wait! https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/583190/EF77A370-D38E-4C5E-A2E9-2B5D2B4BA52B_jpe-3211715.JPG Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By TAG_Match: Originally Posted By BCPVP: The 2023 Florida Statutes (including Special Session C) 790.10 Improper exhibition of dangerous weapons or firearms. If any person having or carrying any dirk, sword, sword cane, firearm, electric weapon or device, or other weapon shall, in the presence of one or more persons, exhibit the same in a rude, careless, angry, or threatening manner, not in necessary self-defense, the person so offending shall be guilty of a misdemeanor of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083. The only logical purpose of answering a door with gun in hand and visible is to threaten the person on the other side. That it turned out to be a cop on the other side of the door who was probably on alert given the nature of the call was bad luck for the airman. Good thing it’s not up to you what constitutes “brandishing”. Innocent citizens would get killed because of people like you. Oh, wait! https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/583190/EF77A370-D38E-4C5E-A2E9-2B5D2B4BA52B_jpe-3211715.JPG It’s a gun grabber’s definition. The exact same thing could be said if the gun was in a holster. |
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 5/11/2024 2:50:59 PM EDT
[Last Edit: SmilingBandit]
[#40]
double somehow
|
|
|
AS, USA
|
Posted: 5/11/2024 2:53:25 PM EDT
[#41]
Yup murdered by the police
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/11/2024 2:53:26 PM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By SmilingBandit: There is a completely appropriate and great way to make it so that people can't make "too much" out of a man being killed in a manner that isn't justifiable for anyone other than the "reasonable officer". The person who killed someone that wasn't a threat to him needs to be held personally accountable for his actions. When you do that anyone that says "Justice for Roger" can be shut up with facts. Unfortunately what is likely to happen is that the killer will be held to a woefully low standard for killing innocent men and only the taxpayers will be liable. A lot of people have a problem with that. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By SmilingBandit: Originally Posted By Missilegeek: Originally Posted By Sixgunner45: Pure murder. And some here are defending it. Deal with your own problems. Never answer the door to the police (or if you aren't expecting someone). You just might get killed by a coward cop. I agree. But I hope the race baiters and cop haters don't make too much of this tragedy. While it is legitimately worse than the George Floyd fiasco, it is still just one jumpy cop, who made a big mistake and killed one man. We don't need to kill and injure dozens more, and lose billions burning down half the country over it. There is a completely appropriate and great way to make it so that people can't make "too much" out of a man being killed in a manner that isn't justifiable for anyone other than the "reasonable officer". The person who killed someone that wasn't a threat to him needs to be held personally accountable for his actions. When you do that anyone that says "Justice for Roger" can be shut up with facts. Unfortunately what is likely to happen is that the killer will be held to a woefully low standard for killing innocent men and only the taxpayers will be liable. A lot of people have a problem with that. Agree. Swiftly firing, then charging this guy with murder and going to trial seems appropriate. Reasonable people would expect and be satisfied with that. But we've also seen, with the Floyd saga, when the person responsible was tried and held accountable in the media, far beyond that of a legitimate justice system. And it did not matter. Leftist zealots burned down half the country anyway and few were held accountable. So we have seen this example, as well as others that promotes the us vs them mentality that some police have. So while it's obvious the officer is in the wrong, it's also fairly obvious what the leftist agitators will try to do with this, in an election year. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/11/2024 2:57:21 PM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Missilegeek: Why are so many people calling a 23YO man, an active duty airman, a "kid"? Old enough to vote, serve, legally buy a handgun... The only thing he can't do is some companies won't rent him a car. He has been a legal adult for 5 years. Ya'll sound like the left using "teen" If you look at his picture with him holding his pistol straight at his side he looks like a 15 -16 year old to me. But yes I realize he was 23. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/11/2024 2:57:43 PM EDT
[Last Edit: Missilegeek]
[#44]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By BCPVP: The 2023 Florida Statutes (including Special Session C) 790.10 Improper exhibition of dangerous weapons or firearms. If any person having or carrying any dirk, sword, sword cane, firearm, electric weapon or device, or other weapon shall, in the presence of one or more persons, exhibit the same in a rude, careless, angry, or threatening manner, not in necessary self-defense, the person so offending shall be guilty of a misdemeanor of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083. The only logical purpose of answering a door with gun in hand and visible is to threaten the person on the other side. That it turned out to be a cop on the other side of the door who was probably on alert given the nature of the call was bad luck for the airman. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By BCPVP: Originally Posted By Lug1: Originally Posted By BCPVP: I can't think of any tactical/safety benefit to opening your door with a gun in hand but at your side. If you're concerned, why are you opening the door in the first place? If you're not concerned, why are you answering with a gun in hand on full display? The only reasons that make any sense are if you plan to shoot the person on the other side of the door or you want to make them think you will/might. Don't really understand the pushback on this. WI is an open carry state but that doesn't mean I can walk around town with a gun in my hand, even if I don't point it at anyone. Likewise, being on my property doesn't mean it's impossible for me to brandish a gun. Define brandish. Please. 790.10 Improper exhibition of dangerous weapons or firearms. If any person having or carrying any dirk, sword, sword cane, firearm, electric weapon or device, or other weapon shall, in the presence of one or more persons, exhibit the same in a rude, careless, angry, or threatening manner, not in necessary self-defense, the person so offending shall be guilty of a misdemeanor of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083. The only logical purpose of answering a door with gun in hand and visible is to threaten the person on the other side. That it turned out to be a cop on the other side of the door who was probably on alert given the nature of the call was bad luck for the airman. What was the threatening, careless or angry manner? Is being prepared for self defense, in your own home, not a logical purpose? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/11/2024 3:02:13 PM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By SmilingBandit: It’s a gun grabber’s definition. The exact same thing could be said if the gun was in a holster. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By SmilingBandit: Originally Posted By TAG_Match: Originally Posted By BCPVP: The 2023 Florida Statutes (including Special Session C) 790.10 Improper exhibition of dangerous weapons or firearms. If any person having or carrying any dirk, sword, sword cane, firearm, electric weapon or device, or other weapon shall, in the presence of one or more persons, exhibit the same in a rude, careless, angry, or threatening manner, not in necessary self-defense, the person so offending shall be guilty of a misdemeanor of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083. The only logical purpose of answering a door with gun in hand and visible is to threaten the person on the other side. That it turned out to be a cop on the other side of the door who was probably on alert given the nature of the call was bad luck for the airman. Good thing it’s not up to you what constitutes “brandishing”. Innocent citizens would get killed because of people like you. Oh, wait! https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/583190/EF77A370-D38E-4C5E-A2E9-2B5D2B4BA52B_jpe-3211715.JPG It’s a gun grabber’s definition. The exact same thing could be said if the gun was in a holster. You’re absolutely right! “Why did he feel the need to open his door with a holstered handgun?” “A holstered handgun is brandishing (because I’m a cop ball gargler and they said so)”, “Wasn’t to bright coming to the door with a holstered pistol. What was he afraid of? He wouldn’t have been open carrying like that if he wasn’t trying to intimidate someone”. |
|
|
|
VA, USA
|
Posted: 5/11/2024 3:03:14 PM EDT
[#46]
They need to nail a few of them really good to set an example for the rest of the nation.
This is BS and has to stop. Where are the feds when they need them? |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/11/2024 3:04:51 PM EDT
[Last Edit: AK-12]
[#47]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By MSGTUSAF: What i find funny is that Leo's on here can't comprehend its shootings like this and their justification is why we have BLM. They're lucky the media has lied and twisted facts, trying to make this into a racial issue. Cause if they told the truth and showed all the shootings of innocent people and the Leo communities response, they'd have very little support from anyone. To me they're the ones that should be demanding cops like should be gone. Cause I dang sure wouldn't a trigger happy id10t like this cop backing me up at 0 dark 30. I wouldn't trust anyone that justifies this kind of shooting either. Not exactly. We have BLM because subhuman leftists and NGOs pay agitators to riot under the guise of issues that aren't the actual issue-the actual issue being marxist revolution. See also: Free Palestine protests. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/11/2024 3:09:16 PM EDT
[#48]
Bad shoot.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/11/2024 3:12:35 PM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Beltfed308: He perceived a threat. His actions were defensive in nature. Not like Acorn Cop and company and their perceived threat now either is it? I'm not going to criticize the victims choices but it certainly didn't rise to the the justified threat level. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Beltfed308: Originally Posted By BCPVP: lol What was he defending himself against? If he really did think he needed to defend himself, why open the door? He wanted to give some potential bad guy a better chance of shooting him first? He perceived a threat. His actions were defensive in nature. Not like Acorn Cop and company and their perceived threat now either is it? I'm not going to criticize the victims choices but it certainly didn't rise to the the justified threat level. If you perceived there was a threat right outside your door, would you open the door with your gun at your side? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/11/2024 3:15:17 PM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By BCPVP: I can't think of any tactical/safety benefit to opening your door with a gun in hand but at your side. If you're concerned, why are you opening the door in the first place? If you're not concerned, why are you answering with a gun in hand on full display? The only reasons that make any sense are if you plan to shoot the person on the other side of the door or you want to make them think you will/might. Don't really understand the pushback on this. WI is an open carry state but that doesn't mean I can walk around town with a gun in my hand, even if I don't point it at anyone. Likewise, being on my property doesn't mean it's impossible for me to brandish a gun. I wonder how many people would be killed every month, if every officer shot the homeowner coming to the front door with a firearm in 3 seconds. Or or met them in the driveway and homeowner had a fire arm. You know 3 seconds then drop the gun! as they are bleeding out ground. I'll bet a lot. |
|
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
