Posted: 4/5/2004 7:31:33 AM EDT
|
I was just going over threads I had posted in yesterday, and jrzy made one comment that I feel needs a public response versus an IM, which is how I was originally going to handle it. Specifically: [qb]Yes that's true , BUT YOU DO HAVE TO MAKE SURE THERE IS REALLY A FUCKING THREAT. THE MURDERING SCUMBAGS SHOULD BE JAILED WHEN THEY SHOOT UNARMED PEOPLE![/qb] Where do you think that thats the legal standard? If thats what you believe, you are wrong, and its no wonder you get so upset at LEO shootings. The legal standard is what the shooter believes at the moment the trigger is pulled: did the shooter reasonably perceive that they were in imminent risk of death or serious physical injury. This is the same standard that is applied to both LEO and non-LEO shootings. LEOs DO get some "flexibility" in shootings due to the nature of the increased risk associated with performing our jobs,and in NYS we are authorized to employ force at times when non-LEos are not authorized to do so, but the same legal standard applies overall. |
|
didnt read the closed thread.. nor even know what your talking about.. so let me jump in feet first into the deepend here... seems the discusion is If I can shoot an unarmed man in my home. I believe I can.. if you belive that man most first rape your wife an daughter before you take him out.. then I feel sorry for you.. can a cop fire on you during a riad beciase you refuse to drop a flashlight... remote controll and any object .. espesally if they see its not a gun .. then no.. they cant.. you as a home onwer can shoot and they as a cop can not..< unless they are in danger.... but funny how there was always an "object" in the deadmans hand... yeah right.. and the code of silence doesnt esist.. > now with all the pretty flashlights the cops have at the end of thier toys.. you really gonna tell me they dont know what I have in my hands...? |
|
Quoted: I was just going over threads I had posted in yesterday, and jrzy made one comment that I feel needs a public response versus an IM, which is how I was originally going to handle it. Specifically: [qb]Yes that's true , BUT YOU DO HAVE TO MAKE SURE THERE IS REALLY A FUCKING THREAT. THE MURDERING SCUMBAGS SHOULD BE JAILED WHEN THEY SHOOT UNARMED PEOPLE![/qb] Where do you think that thats the legal standard? If thats what you believe, you are wrong, and its no wonder you get so upset at LEO shootings. The legal standard is what the shooter believes at the moment the trigger is pulled: did the shooter reasonably perceive that they were in imminent risk of death or serious physical injury. This is the same standard that is applied to both LEO and non-LEO shootings. LEOs DO get some "flexibility" in shootings due to the nature of the increased risk associated with performing our jobs,and [red]in NYS we are authorized to employ force at times when non-LEos are not authorized to do so,[/red] but the same legal standard applies overall. I see....... The standard in Oregon, is the "reasonable belief", standard, at least for CCW. "Would a reasonable person, under the same circumstances, blah, blah....." Now, I suppose, if I just did a home invasion, under color of authority, I would EXPECT resistence........... Ergo, it's "reasonable", for me to shoot those who appear to be a risk, even though, it was MY actions that precipitated the "Threat".... I really get a kick out of you guys, who believe it's just fine, to do anything a legislator, and a judge says you can, in the name of "freedom, liberty, and justice".... You yourself, have said you will enforce NY gun laws........ Peace officer, or JBT??? I guess, it's in the eye of the beholder....... |
|
Quoted: Now, I suppose, if I just did a home invasion, under color of authority, I would EXPECT resistence........... A warrant execution is NOT a home INVASION.Don't even try to compare the two. I really get a kick out of you guys, who believe it's just fine, to do anything a legislator, and a judge says you can, in the name of "freedom, liberty, and justice".... That IS the standard of what is legal, which dictates how we do our job. Do you have any other alternative? No? OK then. You yourself, have said you will enforce NY gun laws........ Peace officer, or JBT??? I guess, it's in the eye of the beholder....... As is my job. If NY'ers want to change the laws, then they should work to do so. They should not expect officers to pick and choose which laws they will enforce on some personal whim. |
|
I wish I had come by earlier before the original thread was closed, but since I was late to the party, I'll jump in here. I know Steve Ecker. He is a good guy. He used to be the top defensive tactics instructor at the police academy. He taught everything from unarmed combat to dynamic entry. He has been a cop a very long time, and he is a big element in Phoenix PD's "S.W.A.T" team. However, I am very concerned by this incident. This is not the first person Steve has killed during an entry. It's not the second or third either. From having trained with Steve, I would have never believed him capable of shooting someone without positively identifying the threat. On the other hand, I wasn't there so I don't know what the lighting was like, persons at the location and their positions, layout of the premises, or even what equipment Steve was using. His standard loadout included a surefire light on his AR. In the meantime, I'm going to reserve judgment, wait for the facts, and pray. |
|
As long as we're picking on people from closed threads, Thats nice. Anyone in the military automatically has a secret clearance, and anyone who even handles a SINGARS is suposed to have top secret. But thanks for trying to sound important. That's bullshit. You don't automatically have a Secret clearance, and you don't have to have a TS to use a SINCGARS. You have to have a clearance to load crypto. If you don't know all that, you don't know what a TS/SCI is either, so stick to what you know - violating people's rights and generally being an asshole. But, thanks for trying to sound important. |
|
Quoted: [qb]Yes that's true , BUT YOU DO HAVE TO MAKE SURE THERE IS REALLY A FUCKING THREAT. THE MURDERING SCUMBAGS SHOULD BE JAILED WHEN THEY SHOOT UNARMED PEOPLE![/qb] Where do you think that that's the legal standard? If thats what you believe, you are wrong, and its no wonder you get so upset at LEO shootings. The legal standard is what the shooter believes at the moment the trigger is pulled: So we are supposed to take the word of a cop that just killed someone what the hell they were thinking? They wouldn't have any motive to lie would they occifer? I don't give a fuck what you thought you saw or were thinking at the time , if my family member didn't have a gun then the person who killed them better get right with God because I will exact revenge PERIOD! Now tcsd1236 go ahead and scream I'm threatening cops, I'm not, all I'm saying is that any person period who harms my family will pay what [b]I[/b] think they owe. You don't like vigilantly justice? Stop shooting unarmed people, simple. We as regular every day citizens have to be right on the money if we use deadly force so should you be held to the same or higher standard. Can you imagine if I shot someone to death and said "gee I thought he had a gun" You think you can hide behind that tired line of , "I believe the suspect had a gun, it turned out to be a cell phone oops" The law of averages dictates that sooner or later one of you trigger happy officers will shoot the relative of a very highly trained individual who will then lose it and God help you and our second amendment rights when that day does arrive. |
|
Quoted: I don't give a fuck what you thought you saw or were thinking at the time , if my family member didn't have a gun then the person who killed them better get right with God because I will exact revenge PERIOD! So by what you're saying if you were involved in a shooting and killed the person you would expect that their realtives should kill you in cold blood? At the time of the incident you believed the person was armed and about to use deadly force agains you. After the shooting he was found to be unarmed. Just curious if you feel the same way if you were the shooter. |
|
Quoted: As long as we're picking on people from closed threads, Thats nice. Anyone in the military automatically has a secret clearance, and anyone who even handles a SINGARS is suposed to have top secret. But thanks for trying to sound important. That's bullshit. You don't automatically have a Secret clearance, and you don't have to have a TS to use a SINCGARS. You have to have a clearance to load crypto. If you don't know all that, you don't know what a TS/SCI is either, so stick to what you know - violating people's rights and generally being an asshole. But, thanks for trying to sound important. yeah, i caught that too... he missed where Paul stated [b]top[/b] secret to begin with and also clearly missed that Paul is/was E-9 in the Navy. IMHO clearly not trying to sound any more important than he really is. (which would be damn difficult anyway!) i was rather cheerfully awaiting a response from Paul when the thread got locked. [b]THINGS TCSD1236 HATES[/b] 1. The Consitution 2. The Bill of Rights 3. The rights of the Citizens of New York 4. The rights of non-LEO's 5. Drugs 6. Drug users 7. People who know drug users 8. People who once took drugs 9. People who defend people who once took drugs 10. People who don't choose theit friends wisely. 11. People who loan out their cars without conducting a field sobriety test or a background check. 12. Mothers who don't choose their sons wisely 13. Patriots 14. Armed patriots 15. Armed patriots who defend their rights to do things 1-14 against JBT's who think they are ordained to decree otherwise. If you dont agree they tell you "I didn't make the law, why don't you change it! Now get into this boxcar here and give me all you sheckels." [:)] |
|
Quoted: You yourself, have said you will enforce NY gun laws........ Peace officer, or JBT??? I guess, it's in the eye of the beholder....... As is my job. If NY'ers want to change the laws, then they should work to do so. They should not expect officers to pick and choose which laws they will enforce on some personal whim. Kinda like I was [b]just following zee orders? As in[/b] Plez step into the OVEN...opps I mean showers before [b]I BREAK YOUR FUNKIN HEAD IN?[/b] |
|
Quoted: So we are supposed to take the word of a cop that just killed someone what the hell they were thinking? They wouldn't have any motive to lie would they occifer? I don't give a fuck what you thought you saw or were thinking at the time , if my family member didn't have a gun then the person who killed them better get right with God because I will exact revenge PERIOD! Now tcsd1236 go ahead and scream I'm threatening cops, I'm not, all I'm saying is that any person period who harms my family will pay what [b]I[/b] think they owe. You don't like vigilantly justice? Stop shooting unarmed people, simple. We as regular every day citizens have to be right on the money if we use deadly force so should you be held to the same or higher standard. Can you imagine if I shot someone to death and said "gee I thought he had a gun" You think you can hide behind that tired line of , "I believe the suspect had a gun, it turned out to be a cell phone oops" The law of averages dictates that sooner or later one of you trigger happy officers will shoot the relative of a very highly trained individual who will then lose it and God help you and our second amendment rights when that day does arrive. Your post merely reaffirms that you don't care WHAT the legal standard is. You simply want to hate cops.We are a nation of law. Period. And no, the reasonable man standard is the same standard that you would have to meet; it has nothing to do with LEO vs non-LEO. The Court will examine what YOU believed at the moment that you used deadly physical force. You are obviously unbalanced, and I question your suitability to possess firearms with your demeanor. |
|
Quoted: As long as we're picking on people from closed threads, Thats nice. Anyone in the military automatically has a secret clearance, and anyone who even handles a SINGARS is suposed to have top secret. But thanks for trying to sound important. That's bullshit. You don't automatically have a Secret clearance, and you don't have to have a TS to use a SINCGARS. You have to have a clearance to load crypto. If you don't know all that, you don't know what a TS/SCI is either, so stick to what you know - violating people's rights and generally being an asshole. But, thanks for trying to sound important. Thats not what they advised my unit; everyone with access to the radio was required to get TS |
|
Quoted: Quoted: I don't give a fuck what you thought you saw or were thinking at the time , if my family member didn't have a gun then the person who killed them better get right with God because I will exact revenge PERIOD! So by what you're saying if you were involved in a shooting and killed the person you would expect that their realtives should kill you in cold blood? At the time of the incident you believed the person was armed and about to use deadly force agains you. After the shooting he was found to be unarmed. Just curious if you feel the same way if you were the shooter. To answer your question , yes I would expect them to try and exact revenge, whether they can or not would be up to how skilled they are and how lucky or unlucky I am. |
|
Quoted: THINGS TCSD1236 HATES 1. The Consitution Not true 2. The Bill of Rights Not true 3. The rights of the Citizens of New York Again, not true. 4. The rights of non-LEO's Again,not true. Where do you get your material, anyway?Kind of repetitous. 5. Drugs Modify that to illegal drugs and we'll be in agreement. 6. Drug users Same as above; total losers. 7. People who know drug users If you choose to lie down with dogs, expect the fleas that go along with it. You are judged by the company you keep. 8. People who once took drugs If they were that morally weak before, where else are they weak in their lives? 9. People who defend people who once took drugs Why would they defend such people unless they themselves used? 10. People who don't choose theit friends wisely. Already covered. Choose your friends better. 11. People who loan out their cars without conducting a field sobriety test or a background check. That goes along with choosing your friends better, doesn't it? Choosing wisely seems to solve the problem, while people of a criminal mindset seem to bond together. 12. Mothers who don't choose their sons wisely Failure to properly raise/ supervise their children. Outside influences can weigh in later in lfe, but if you as a parent don't lay the proper foundation, your kids will turn out to be garbage. 13. Patriots 14. Armed patriots I'll lump these two together. I ahve no problem with a law abiding person being armed. The tin foil hat crowd isn't very mentally balanced. 15. Armed patriots who defend their rights to do things 1-14 against JBT's who think they are ordained to decree otherwise. If you dont agree they tell you "I didn't make the law, why don't you change it! Now get into this boxcar here and give me all you sheckels." You mean your typical tinfoil -sheathed wingnut. |
|
Quoted: oh, one more thing... this isnt JBT.com or whatever site you are used to. to quote here you must use {quote} {/quote} to make proper use of board code. i noticed in a few of your posts that you LEO UBB training was lacking. I post on so many boards that i forget the code for certain boards sometimes. I try to proofread posts, but don't always get to it. To keep you from spinning into a tizzy, I will track that a little closer |
|
Quoted: Your post merely reaffirms that you don't care WHAT the legal standard is. You simply want to hate cops.We are a nation of law. Period. And no, the reasonable man standard is the same standard that you would have to meet; it has nothing to do with LEO vs non-LEO. The Court will examine what YOU believed at the moment that you used deadly physical force.. [blue][b]Sure they will[/b], do you still believe in the Easter Bunny?[/blue] Quoted: You are obviously unbalanced. [blue][b]Your opinion and who gives a fuck what you think, wait a minute maybe lon horiuchi cares what you think[/b][/blue] Quoted: I question your suitability to possess firearms with your demeanor. [blue][b]"demeanor" what does my candor about cops who shoot first and make up lies later have to do with my rights to own guns? Second of all it ain't up to you who owns firearms slick, and last, why don't you come down here and take em ?[/b][/blue] |
|
Quoted: Quoted: To answer your question , yes I would expect them to try and exact revenge, whether they can or not would be up to how skilled they are and how lucky or unlucky I am. You really ARE uncivilized.What kind of a world do you live in? The same violent world you live in and if you think I'm an enigma then you really are naive. I just tell the truth officer and if you also think I am in the rare minority then you have been severely mislead. I will also state for the record ONE MORE TIME, I do not hate cops, I detest scumbag murdering JBT's. |
|
Quoted: Quoted: To answer your question , yes I would expect them to try and exact revenge, whether they can or not would be up to how skilled they are and how lucky or unlucky I am. You really ARE uncivilized.What kind of a world do you live in? The same one we all live in...jrzy just yells louder than a lot of us. |
|
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: To answer your question , yes I would expect them to try and exact revenge, whether they can or not would be up to how skilled they are and how lucky or unlucky I am. You really ARE uncivilized.What kind of a world do you live in? The same one we all live in...jrzy just yells louder than a lot of us. I know I come off as a violent person sometimes and it is true I have solved certain problems with extreme violence in the past but I can honestly say those who I have harmed had it coming and I have never hurt an innocent person in my life. |
| Whether there is an inconveinence or collateral damage as a result of the service of a search warrant that is facially defective or at the incorrect address, all law enforcement officers involved should be held immune from all criminal and civil action as they are acting upon the best information available at the time. |
|
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: To answer your question , yes I would expect them to try and exact revenge, whether they can or not would be up to how skilled they are and how lucky or unlucky I am. You really ARE uncivilized.What kind of a world do you live in? The same one we all live in...jrzy just yells louder than a lot of us. I know I come off as a violent person sometimes and it is true I have solved certain problems with extreme violence in the past but I can honestly say those who I have harmed had it coming and I have never hurt an innocent person in my life. You think I was criticizing? Oh, I did find a pic of jrzy - [img]http://www.samkinison.org/images/Thumnails/Photos02/images/samreach.jpg[/img] |
|
Quoted: Quoted: Now, I suppose, if I just did a home invasion, under color of authority, I would EXPECT resistence........... A warrant execution is NOT a home INVASION.Don't even try to compare the two. [red]I suppose, that view point depends, on whether or not one is the invader, or, the invadee..[;D] If I'm in my own home, not intruding on the rights of others, and my door gets kicked in, by whoever, I'm being invaded.[/red] I really get a kick out of you guys, who believe it's just fine, to do anything a legislator, and a judge says you can, in the name of "freedom, liberty, and justice".... That IS the standard of what is legal, which dictates how we do our job. Do you have any other alternative? No? OK then. You yourself, have said you will enforce NY gun laws........ Peace officer, or JBT??? I guess, it's in the eye of the beholder....... As is my job. If NY'ers want to change the laws, then they should work to do so. They should not expect officers to pick and choose which laws they will enforce on some personal whim. You have a personal responsibility, to abide the Constitution. NY gun laws do not meet that standard, regardless of what the black robes say. Neither, do drug laws. |
|
Quoted: I know I come off as a violent person sometimes and it is true I have solved certain problems with extreme violence in the past but I can honestly say those who I have harmed had it coming and I have never hurt an innocent person in my life. I find you to be much too reserved and I might be so bold as to suggest a little more action in your approach to life's little problems. (By the way, do you smile ?)[img]http://www.click-smilies.de/sammlung0304/fragend/confused-smiley-013.gif[/img] |
|
Quoted: Quoted: I know I come off as a violent person sometimes and it is true I have solved certain problems with extreme violence in the past but I can honestly say those who I have harmed had it coming and I have never hurt an innocent person in my life. I find you to be much too reserved and I might be so bold as to suggest a little more action in your approach to life's little problems. (By the way, do you smile ?)[url]http://www.click-smilies.de/sammlung0304/fragend/confused-smiley-013.gif[/url] Yes I do smile , I did just now when you suggested I get a little more proactive in my problem solving, any more proactive and I would need the dream team lawyers LOL |
|
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: I know I come off as a violent person sometimes and it is true I have solved certain problems with extreme violence in the past but I can honestly say those who I have harmed had it coming and I have never hurt an innocent person in my life. I find you to be much too reserved and I might be so bold as to suggest a little more action in your approach to life's little problems. (By the way, do you smile ?)[url]http://www.click-smilies.de/sammlung0304/fragend/confused-smiley-013.gif[/url] Yes I do smile , I did just now when you suggested I get a little more proactive in my problem solving, any more proactive and I would need the dream team lawyers LOL Well ! You [b]DO[/b] have a sense of humor. [:)] |
|
Quoted: I suppose, that view point depends, on whether or not one is the invader, or, the invadee. If I'm in my own home, not intruding on the rights of others, and my door gets kicked in, by whoever, I'm being invaded. Yup, the point of view will differ. Believe what you want to. [quoteYou have a personal responsibility, to abide the Constitution. NY gun laws do not meet that standard, regardless of what the black robes say. Neither, do drug laws. Thats your personal opinion.I don't have any obligation to abide by what amounts to nothing more than your personal opinion.Everyone has opinions. I will stick with whats in the law books and court rulings. |