User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 5/13/2024 10:04:43 PM EDT
[#1]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By 1stID: Cuz it's dumb too. If they're a good guy, you've scared them without a reason to. If they're a bad guy, you've removed the cover and concealment you previously had, and now are nicely framed in the door for an easy target. I just don't answer the door. If they break in, they're probably not leaving under their own power. Exactly. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/13/2024 10:06:04 PM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By TaskForce: lol never mind I read that wrong. Do whatever you want. I was discussing the logic of it not attacking anyone. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By TaskForce: Originally Posted By TAG_Match: It’s my door and I’m not a scared fag. I’ll answer it the way I want to. lol never mind I read that wrong. Do whatever you want. I was discussing the logic of it not attacking anyone. I’m sorry dude that was meant to be funny, not snark. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/13/2024 10:08:26 PM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By TaskForce: I've knowm many people that answer the door armed or at least claim to in order to sound cool. I never thought it made sense. If you thought you needed a gun to deal with whoever is at the door then why answer it? You have every advantage by not doing so. My UPS guy is known to deliver after dark. Often he rings the bell and just walks away. I don't want my package out all night, so Ill go to get it. But what if it wasn't the UPS guy? That's what the gun is for. I'm sure there are hundreds of similar circumstances. I generally agree, that you don't answer the door in more clearly sketchy circumstances. But it's smart to be ready for threats, in what are seemingly less threatening circumstances. Same mindset as CCW. Plenty of people think CCW is dumb and unnecessary. I'm not one of those people. Shit can and does happen. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/13/2024 10:08:56 PM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By TAG_Match: I’m sorry dude that was meant to be funny, not snark. All good. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/13/2024 10:10:59 PM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Missilegeek: My UPS guy is known to deliver after dark. Often he rings the bell and just walks away. I don't want my package out all night, so Ill go to get it. But what if it wasn't the UPS guy? That's what the gun is for. I'm sure there are hundreds of similar circumstances. I generally agree, that you don't answer the door in more clearly sketchy circumstances. But it's smart to be ready for threats, in what are seemingly less threatening circumstances. Same mindset as CCW. Plenty of people think CCW is dumb and unnecessary. I'm not one of those people. Shit can and does happen. That's why I really like how so many delivery services now take a pic of the package at your door and email/text it to you. Depending on how your account is setup. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/13/2024 10:11:51 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By TaskForce: Exactly. So many bad situations with homeowners could have been prevented if they'd only played Doom as a kid. You never run out in the middle of the open courtyard to blast the goons with your NIN nail gun, you patiently wait where you have cover and concealment, then fill them full of holes. Again, if you are not expecting someone, never answer your door at night, and never ever answer it if it's the cops. Why would you? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/13/2024 10:15:52 PM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By 1stID: So many bad situations with homeowners could have been prevented if they'd only played Doom as a kid. You never run out in the middle of the open courtyard to blast the goons with your NIN nail gun, you patiently wait where you have cover and concealment, then fill them full of holes. Again, if you are not expecting someone, never answer your door at night, and never ever answer it if it's the cops. Why would you? Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By 1stID: Originally Posted By TaskForce: Exactly. So many bad situations with homeowners could have been prevented if they'd only played Doom as a kid. You never run out in the middle of the open courtyard to blast the goons with your NIN nail gun, you patiently wait where you have cover and concealment, then fill them full of holes. Again, if you are not expecting someone, never answer your door at night, and never ever answer it if it's the cops. Why would you? All good advice. But as for “why would you”: I personally never expected the police to be the most dangerous entity that I interacted with at the front door. That has sure as fuck changed, so: Copy that. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/13/2024 10:16:08 PM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By TaskForce: I should have clarified. I'm not talking about answering the door for LE. I meant answering the door in general. When it comes to the home, how people act on the outside greatly determines the actions of those inside. Open the door! Step back! Is far from a normal interaction. Not selling cookies and real ly sets the tone. If the 1st or 2nd announcement was even heard. The mere presence of the homeowner having a firearm doesn't cut it. Who was exercising more discretion? Homeowner or officer? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/13/2024 10:21:09 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By TAG_Match: All good advice. But as for “why would you”: I personally never expected the police to be the most dangerous entity that I interacted with at the front door. That has sure as fuck changed, so: Copy that. The criminal justice system, including cops, are often the most dangerous aspect of any use of force scenario. The actual shoot out is you against one, maybe two, usually dopped up losers, and it's hardly like they spend their free time reading Guns and Ammo and comparing red vs. green dots. Afterwards, you have to deal with a never ending legion of cops looking to do anything for a promotion, DA's who'd send you to prison for the rest of your life in return for a 2% bump in their polling numbers, judges who need to stay on the good side of their political masters so they can get the move up from a crummy district criminal spot to a statewide position, etc. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/13/2024 10:24:16 PM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By TaskForce: That's why I really like how so many delivery services now take a pic of the package at your door and email/text it to you. Depending on how your account is setup. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By TaskForce: Originally Posted By Missilegeek: My UPS guy is known to deliver after dark. Often he rings the bell and just walks away. I don't want my package out all night, so Ill go to get it. But what if it wasn't the UPS guy? That's what the gun is for. I'm sure there are hundreds of similar circumstances. I generally agree, that you don't answer the door in more clearly sketchy circumstances. But it's smart to be ready for threats, in what are seemingly less threatening circumstances. Same mindset as CCW. Plenty of people think CCW is dumb and unnecessary. I'm not one of those people. Shit can and does happen. That's why I really like how so many delivery services now take a pic of the package at your door and email/text it to you. Depending on how your account is setup. Yeah. And if I were more squared away, I could use cameras. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/13/2024 10:26:27 PM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Missilegeek: Yeah. And if I were more squared away, I could use cameras. #metoo |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/13/2024 10:36:32 PM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By dogsandhogs:
I have more respect for the murderer than the pieces of shit defending him. They’ve had time to think about it. |
|
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 5/13/2024 10:45:13 PM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Samsound: Which portion is that a response to? 'trained to be street cop?' Are you suggesting crew members on armed platforms have the same use of force parameters and training as police? Or is it a part you didn't quote? I can't figure what you're trying to say. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Samsound: Originally Posted By Francisco_dAnconia: Originally Posted By TAG_Match: You are the reason Jesus Christ changed his middle name to Fucking. A gunner on an AC130 is cross trained by default to be a street cop? Just stop. Your assertion IS retarded but you can obviously read. That means you are just trolling. |
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 5/13/2024 11:08:15 PM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By BMSMB: You literally said this: "I heard that the ROEs in Iraq and Afghanistan were messed up, but learning that the ROE overrode your right to self-defense is a VERY sad day." Stop trying to gaslight. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By BMSMB: You literally said this: "I heard that the ROEs in Iraq and Afghanistan were messed up, but learning that the ROE overrode your right to self-defense is a VERY sad day." Stop trying to gaslight. If I would have done what this Deputy did, in Baghdad, I would have violated the ROE. The enemy has to show hostile intent. So even if your claims that this was a legal shoot were legit (they aren't) it's a VERY sad day when our Army does better at protecting the basic rights of people in a 3rd world country we are occupying, than a Deputy can do in Florida. You still need to explain how you got from that to accusing me of believing that you don't need positive ID and a threat for self-defense. You still haven't explained what questionable situations you think I'm putting myself in. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/13/2024 11:10:11 PM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Francisco_dAnconia: That particular bit of exchange started with TAG_Match insinuating that American soldiers were untrained with (small) arms, unprofessional, didn't have to deal with the worst scum of the universe (like ISIS) and take them prisoner if possible with the least amount of force necessary (despite multiple veterans posting that their ROEs were more restrictive than our law enforcement.) Interspersed with this exchange he demonstrated that he did not care to argue in good faith. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Francisco_dAnconia: Originally Posted By Samsound: Originally Posted By Francisco_dAnconia: Originally Posted By TAG_Match: You are the reason Jesus Christ changed his middle name to Fucking. A gunner on an AC130 is cross trained by default to be a street cop? Just stop. Your assertion IS retarded but you can obviously read. That means you are just trolling. That is way out there.  Your quote tree proves it. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/13/2024 11:13:17 PM EDT
[Last Edit: BMSMB]
[#16]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Francisco_dAnconia: I did say that. I was responding to this statement:Are you claiming that he was incorrect about or misunderstood the ROE or under a different ROE than you were? You still need to explain how you got from that to accusing me of believing that you don't need positive ID and a threat for self-defense. You still haven't explained what questionable situations you think I'm putting myself in. You said, in response to half the ROE, that it made people not able to practice self defense... IE there were far lesser requirements, in your mind, for the use of lethal force than the ROE. Hence, you think that you need less than positive ID (which I added to show the full ROE), and either a hostile act or hostile intent... which is why you shouldn't be making decisions on when to use lethal force. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/13/2024 11:24:51 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Jason280: That, sir, is a profound way of looking at this whole mess. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Jason280: Originally Posted By dogsandhogs: I have more respect for the murderer than the pieces of shit defending him. They’ve had time to think about it. That, sir, is a profound way of looking at this whole mess. The shooter will have a LONG time to think about it. Or a short time depending on how his prison stay goes as a former cop |
|
|
|
FM, USA
|
Posted: 5/13/2024 11:26:24 PM EDT
[#18]
The Arfcuck cops here defending the murderer will be the ones in a few years defending the cops who use lethal force when they’re enforcing gun confiscations.
Too bad the deceased didn’t get a few rounds off in response. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/13/2024 11:27:18 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By TaskForce: That's why I really like how so many delivery services now take a pic of the package at your door and email/text it to you. Depending on how your account is setup. glad that’s what you got out of the comment. |
|
|
|
NM, USA
|
Posted: 5/13/2024 11:28:40 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By super223: No. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By super223: Originally Posted By SmilingBandit: You have a better ear than me if you can determine that’s what was said. And let’s forget that it was a cop for the moment. Would his actions be illegal if it was any random person at the door? No. But it was okay for the cop to kill in response to something perfectly legal? |
|
|
NM, USA
|
Posted: 5/13/2024 11:29:54 PM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By super223: Target shooting and domestic violence calls to L/E are completely different situations. This was a criminal complaint of D/V.. the idiot who had the gun in his hand KNEW IT WAS THE POLICE. HE SAID "DID YOU CALL THE POLICE?!!?" AFTER the cop ID'ed himself (multiple times) and the SUSPECT acknowledged a L/E presence at the door he decided to arm himself. Not sure if you can think of a reason why?? Does ARF think opening the door for L/E (if someone calls the cops on YOU for beating your wife) give you the right to open the door armed? If the police want to interview you/ask a question or do a welfare check.. are you saying opening the door for announced LE with a firearm is reasonable? To each their own. Good shoot by the officer. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By super223: Originally Posted By Plank_Spanker: I own a modest 5 acre plot with a house, a pasture & a couple of horses, chickens, ducks, etc. When I developed the pasture for the horses my wife had, I also built a berm for a gun range. 150 yards to the berm from where we shoot. For the 1st few months, I would have the sheriffs dept show up due to some karen neighbor calling in about gun fire. According to some in this thread, the responding deputy would be well within his rights to gun all of us down because we were carrying pistols, rifles, shotguns, etc. I mean we might have had 40 different types of firearms on display at any one time. This is at my private residence. It's funny that not one deputy ever drew his weapon down on any of us while we were engaged in actively target shooting when they pulled up. I even approached said deputy with a pistol on my hip, one in my hand & a SBR slung on my shoulder as he was exiting his patrol car. Not a peep from him to disarm, lay on the ground or "step back". Does this change anything for the airmen's family? no. But it does show that deputy quick draw did not have the ability to define a threat correctly. I bet the dept. training will show a very aggressive posture that dictated the outcome we see here. Target shooting and domestic violence calls to L/E are completely different situations. This was a criminal complaint of D/V.. the idiot who had the gun in his hand KNEW IT WAS THE POLICE. HE SAID "DID YOU CALL THE POLICE?!!?" AFTER the cop ID'ed himself (multiple times) and the SUSPECT acknowledged a L/E presence at the door he decided to arm himself. Not sure if you can think of a reason why?? Does ARF think opening the door for L/E (if someone calls the cops on YOU for beating your wife) give you the right to open the door armed? If the police want to interview you/ask a question or do a welfare check.. are you saying opening the door for announced LE with a firearm is reasonable? To each their own. Good shoot by the officer. Can you open your door armed? Yes. He wasn't brandishing. So what right did the cop have to kill the resident? |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/13/2024 11:36:34 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By swolliepop: glad that’s what you got out of the comment. Thank you. |
|
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 5/13/2024 11:37:19 PM EDT
[#23]
Haven't kept up with this thread and don't know if this has already been posted.
William Kirk's take on it.  The Florida Man Who Was Executed for Exercising His Constitutional Rights Interesting. |
|
|
HI, USA
|
Posted: 5/13/2024 11:43:19 PM EDT
[#24]
oof
|
|
|
FL, USA
|
Posted: 5/14/2024 12:09:14 AM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By jDrexler: With all due respect, what in the ever flying fuck do these two incidents have in common? Sounds like you’d be in favor of abolishing the second amendment simply because there are pedophiles out there. Well, a lot. You are saying if accused of a crime there is nothing wrong with answering the door to a responding LEO with a pistol or long rifle in hand. (despite LEO identifying themselves.) Normalizing opening the door armed when confronted by announced law enforcement over a possible crime is a really stupid stance. |
|
|
FL, USA
|
Posted: 5/14/2024 12:10:19 AM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By jDrexler: Are you a LEO? Why should it go from legal to capital offense because of the person at the door? And no walking your shit back into an argument about if it was smart or not, I want to hear why you think they should be vastly different legal situations. Because the person at the door is a cop. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/14/2024 1:21:25 AM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By FullOtto: Haven't kept up with this thread and don't know if this has already been posted. William Kirk's take on it.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IWepSw11YiAInteresting. So now we have a lawyer publicly saying the same thing as the majority of people here. The Deputy murdered that guy, for rightfully exercising his 2A rights, in his own home. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/14/2024 1:23:53 AM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By super223: Because the person at the door is a cop. How does that boot taste? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/14/2024 1:32:40 AM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By super223: Well, a lot. You are saying if accused of a crime there is nothing wrong with answering the door to a responding LEO with a pistol or long rifle in hand. (despite LEO identifying themselves.) Normalizing opening the door armed when confronted by announced law enforcement over a possible crime is a really stupid stance. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By super223: Originally Posted By jDrexler: With all due respect, what in the ever flying fuck do these two incidents have in common? Sounds like you’d be in favor of abolishing the second amendment simply because there are pedophiles out there. Well, a lot. You are saying if accused of a crime there is nothing wrong with answering the door to a responding LEO with a pistol or long rifle in hand. (despite LEO identifying themselves.) Normalizing opening the door armed when confronted by announced law enforcement over a possible crime is a really stupid stance. Well the Airman answering the door with a gun, wasn't the problem. The idiot who shit his pants over it and shot him for no reason... That was the actual problem. So perhaps cops shouldn't be allowed to bring their guns if they want to knock and talk. And perhaps, when seeking a voluntary audience with a citizen, they should be polite, unless given a reason. It's not uncommon for home invaders to announce themselves as police and to even dress as police. If this guy wanted to be treated as a non threat, he wouldn't have pounded on the door loudly. He wouldn't have shouted and demanded an audience. He would have allowed himself to be seen through the peep hole. Instead he was posturing to get it on. If you could reasonably claim that answering an unknown at your own door, armed is unreasonably aggressive (it's not); then you could still justify it here, because there's clearly an aggressive and agitated asshole at your door. |
|
|
|
VA, USA
|
Posted: 5/14/2024 2:13:25 AM EDT
[#30]
I’d love for anyone defending this cop to please explain to me how their defense lines up with the 2nd amendment, because if you can’t be armed while answering your own door, that feels like the right to bear arms is being infringed.
Even outside of a 2A perspective, for those of you defending this, how do you think this is going to impact the police profession? Will literally anything come from this that is positive for police, or is this likely to cause even more financial damage and hurt relations with the public? I am not saying ACAB, I don’t believe that since members of my own family are police. However, being a cop and defending this cop’s actions is why people say that. For every cop that shoots someone unnecessarily, there’s a dozen who will defend it. At least that’s how many I counted in this thread. Let me put it into terms the average GD’er will understand. A radical Muslim commits a terror attack, or an honor killing, etc. And then muslims all over the world preach about how killing infidels is justified, converting people by the sword, etc. Do you make a distinction between the person who blew themselves up, and the imam who praised it? Or do you feel that anyone who supports that kind of behavior is fundamentally unamerican and shouldn’t be tolerated? That comparison might feel shocking to some of you, but what do you expect? Terrorizing a population is terror, even if you’re doing it with qualified immunity and the backing of the state. I shouldn’t have to worry about getting shot by some radical muslim because I exercised my 1A rights, and I shouldn’t have to worry about getting shot by some unhinged cop because I exercised my 2A rights. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/14/2024 4:14:17 AM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Francisco_dAnconia: That particular bit of exchange started with TAG_Match insinuating that American soldiers were untrained with (small) arms, unprofessional, didn't have to deal with the worst scum of the universe (like ISIS) and take them prisoner if possible with the least amount of force necessary (despite multiple veterans posting that their ROEs were more restrictive than our law enforcement.) Interspersed with this exchange he demonstrated that he did not care to argue in good faith. Derpfagtagstic. You got some stuff on your chin there officer. |
|
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 5/14/2024 5:02:05 AM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By SmilingBandit: 1. It proves a point that nobody was countering. Congratulations. 2. Wow. He didn't drop the pistol before the photo taken a little bit later where it was in his hand? Thank goodness we had your professional powers of observation here to clear that one up. 3. His hand was down and he was in a non-threatening stance. That was until his murderer started pointing a gun at his chest. Yeah, that's at least as bad when that was the initial way we see him. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By SmilingBandit: Originally Posted By Francisco_dAnconia: It proves he was holding and displaying a pistol when he opened the door. It proves he didn't drop the pistol. It proves he didn't have his hand up in a defensive posture (until it was way too late.) 2. Wow. He didn't drop the pistol before the photo taken a little bit later where it was in his hand? Thank goodness we had your professional powers of observation here to clear that one up. 3. His hand was down and he was in a non-threatening stance. That was until his murderer started pointing a gun at his chest. Yeah, that's at least as bad when that was the initial way we see him. How many people saw the picture with Fortson's hand up and presumed he had his hand up before the deputy drew? How many people realized his hand only reached that position too late for the deputy to abort his decision to shoot? How many people realize that the deputy's eyes are above his arms and would have obscured the gesture? How many people think that the gesture, if the deputy had noticed it, eliminated the deputy's justification to use force? That's why it's dishonest and misleading. |
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 5/14/2024 5:09:01 AM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By BMSMB: You said, in response to half the ROE, that it made people not able to practice self defense... IE there were far lesser requirements, in your mind, for the use of lethal force than the ROE. Hence, you think that you need less than positive ID (which I added to show the full ROE), and either a hostile act or hostile intent... which is why you shouldn't be making decisions on when to use lethal force. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By BMSMB: Originally Posted By Francisco_dAnconia: I did say that. I was responding to this statement:Are you claiming that he was incorrect about or misunderstood the ROE or under a different ROE than you were? You still need to explain how you got from that to accusing me of believing that you don't need positive ID and a threat for self-defense. You still haven't explained what questionable situations you think I'm putting myself in. You said, in response to half the ROE, that it made people not able to practice self defense... IE there were far lesser requirements, in your mind, for the use of lethal force than the ROE. Hence, you think that you need less than positive ID (which I added to show the full ROE), and either a hostile act or hostile intent... which is why you shouldn't be making decisions on when to use lethal force.  You have me really confused here. You're the one who brought positive ID into this and it is hard to be more positive than "that guy right there with the gun". Normal reasonable people would be threatened by someone answering the door with a pistol visibly in hand which covers the "hostile act/hostile intent". That's both elements satisfied. I still don't know what questionable situations you think I'm putting myself in. Originally Posted By haveTwo: But it was okay for the cop to kill in response to something perfectly legal? Originally Posted By BourbonBeast: I’d love for anyone defending this cop to please explain to me how their defense lines up with the 2nd amendment, because if you can’t be armed while answering your own door, that feels like the right to bear arms is being infringed. Even outside of a 2A perspective, for those of you defending this, how do you think this is going to impact the police profession? Will literally anything come from this that is positive for police, or is this likely to cause even more financial damage and hurt relations with the public? Let me put it into terms the average GD’er will understand. A radical Muslim commits a terror attack, or an honor killing, etc. And then muslims all over the world preach about how killing infidels is justified, converting people by the sword, etc. Do you make a distinction between the person who blew themselves up, and the imam who praised it? Or do you feel that anyone who supports that kind of behavior is fundamentally unamerican and shouldn’t be tolerated? |
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 5/14/2024 5:13:51 AM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By TAG_Match: Derpfagtagstic. You got some stuff on your chin there officer. You said there was only one armed professional there when, as a soldier, that was literally Fortson's profession. You said that only the deputy was trained in using minimal force when multiple examples of the allegedly more restrictive ROE were already posted. I'm sure Fortson had POW training. etc. What's Derpfagtagstic is where you came up with the idea that I'm an officer. Did you mean military or police officer? |
|
|
AL, USA
|
Posted: 5/14/2024 6:49:49 AM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Francisco_dAnconia: You have me really confused here. You're the one who brought positive ID into this and it is hard to be more positive than "that guy right there with the gun". Normal reasonable people would be threatened by someone answering the door with a pistol visibly in hand which covers the "hostile act/hostile intent". That's both elements satisfied. You're fucking special ed. There is nothing threatening about carrying a gun in your hand. You are not being aggressive simply by bringing your weapon with you. He made ZERO attempt to actually use the firearm in any way whatsoever. |
|
|
NM, USA
|
Posted: 5/14/2024 7:10:19 AM EDT
[#36]
Cool, so it's okay for a cop to block his own view of the resident, and kill them because he's scared.
I mean, may likely hell be protected by the government. Because that's what they do. Twist the rules to protect their own. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/14/2024 7:45:40 AM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By haveTwo: Cool, so it's okay for a cop to block his own view of the resident, and kill them because he's scared. I mean, may likely hell be protected by the government. Because that's what they do. Twist the rules to protect their own. That is what certain people in this thread are trying to obfuscate. From his initial knock and then going six feet down the hall he purposefully hid from the peephole. The Airman didn't have an opportunity to identify him so answering the door with a gun makes sense give the sketchy paranoid behavior of the Deputy. Again why so many here keep trying to divert from it. I'm sure it will be core to the lawsuit that is filed. Also core will be the 3rd party non existent DV victim. The paranoid deputy had no reason to be there. All this is before Deputy mag dumps in under a second on a guy with his gun pointed at the ground. No part of this scenario is defendable, but they keep trying. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/14/2024 7:51:44 AM EDT
[Last Edit: BMSMB]
[#38]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Francisco_dAnconia: You have me really confused here. You're the one who brought positive ID into this and it is hard to be more positive than "that guy right there with the gun". Normal reasonable people would be threatened by someone answering the door with a pistol visibly in hand which covers the "hostile act/hostile intent". That's both elements satisfied. I still don't know what questionable situations you think I'm putting myself in. Attorney Andrew Branca from The Law of Self-Defense spends a good part of his video on the incident beating down the idea that Fortson had to be doing something illegal to be justifiably shot.Click To View Spoiler It has nothing to do with answering the door while armed, the 2A, or whether the guy answering the door is the homeowner or a squatter. Answering the door with a gun visibly in your hand is reasonably perceived as a threat by the knocker and that activates their right to defend themselves. The incident will impact little. The lies told about the incident by the family and their lawyer will. The misunderstanding of the use of force, police tactics, and Florida law will. WTF? Killing infidels is not self-defense. Back to trying to gaslight? I included positive ID simply so that the entire ROE was shown, not just half of it. It has nothing to do with the airman being murdered, and I'm including it because I don't want you walking around even more misguided than you currently are. The entire point of missilegeek bringing up ROE was likely because in the middle east, they were allowed to walk around with AK's... the simple fact that someone is armed is not hostile intent, and surprisingly, the 2nd ammendment covers people at their own doors. So someone opening their door holding a handgun straight down is not in any way, shape, or form, hostile intent or a hostile act. So please try again, and don't try and dodge it this time, with why you think you need less than positive ID and hostile act or hostile intent before using lethal force... |
|
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 5/14/2024 8:19:31 AM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Francisco_dAnconia: Make your estimates: How many people saw the picture with Fortson's hand up and presumed he had his hand up before the deputy drew? How many people realized his hand only reached that position too late for the deputy to abort his decision to shoot? How many people realize that the deputy's eyes are above his arms and would have obscured the gesture? How many people think that the gesture, if the deputy had noticed it, eliminated the deputy's justification to use force? That's why it's dishonest and misleading. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Francisco_dAnconia: Originally Posted By SmilingBandit: Originally Posted By Francisco_dAnconia: It proves he was holding and displaying a pistol when he opened the door. It proves he didn't drop the pistol. It proves he didn't have his hand up in a defensive posture (until it was way too late.) 2. Wow. He didn't drop the pistol before the photo taken a little bit later where it was in his hand? Thank goodness we had your professional powers of observation here to clear that one up. 3. His hand was down and he was in a non-threatening stance. That was until his murderer started pointing a gun at his chest. Yeah, that's at least as bad when that was the initial way we see him. How many people saw the picture with Fortson's hand up and presumed he had his hand up before the deputy drew? How many people realized his hand only reached that position too late for the deputy to abort his decision to shoot? How many people realize that the deputy's eyes are above his arms and would have obscured the gesture? How many people think that the gesture, if the deputy had noticed it, eliminated the deputy's justification to use force? That's why it's dishonest and misleading. I have no basis to estimate those things. Furthermore, I won’t try to because none of them matter. |
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 5/14/2024 8:27:27 AM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Francisco_dAnconia: You said there was only one armed professional there when, as a soldier, that was literally Fortson's profession. You said that only the deputy was trained in using minimal force when multiple examples of the allegedly more restrictive ROE were already posted. I'm sure Fortson had POW training. etc. What's Derpfagtagstic is where you came up with the idea that I'm an officer. Did you mean military or police officer? Based on your writing style, I would not assume you were a military officer. Based on your carrying the water for police in this bad shoot I would guess you are a cop. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/14/2024 8:32:44 AM EDT
[#41]
People are overly focused on the legal side. The state wins legal questions more often then not since they control all aspects of the legal system.
Can anyone morally justify this shooting? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/14/2024 8:36:33 AM EDT
[Last Edit: anesvick]
[#42]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By 1stID: Cuz it's dumb too. If they're a good guy, you've scared them without a reason to. If they're a bad guy, you've removed the cover and concealment you previously had, and now are nicely framed in the door for an easy target. I just don't answer the door. If they break in, they're probably not leaving under their own power. Once they get through the door armor they gonna have some 'splainin to do to Saint Peter. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/14/2024 8:48:50 AM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Missilegeek: So now we have a lawyer publicly saying the same thing as the majority of people here. The Deputy murdered that guy, for rightfully exercising his 2A rights, in his own home. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Missilegeek: Originally Posted By FullOtto: Haven't kept up with this thread and don't know if this has already been posted. William Kirk's take on it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IWepSw11YiAInteresting. So now we have a lawyer publicly saying the same thing as the majority of people here. The Deputy murdered that guy, for rightfully exercising his 2A rights, in his own home. *ahem I did a video within hours of the press conference calling it a bad shoot. Which YT age restricted, and I won a rare appeal of it. Though I love watching the cop accounts on twitter doing gymnastics on this one. And I may do another now that I've had more time to research the case law and wait for all the bad takes. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/14/2024 10:22:52 AM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By LawyerUp: *ahem I did a video within hours of the press conference calling it a bad shoot. Which YT age restricted, and I won a rare appeal of it. Though I love watching the cop accounts on twitter doing gymnastics on this one. And I may do another now that I've had more time to research the case law and wait for all the bad takes. Please do @LawyerUp. This thread should have all conceivable bad takes in it already. |
|
|
|
GA, USA
|
Posted: 5/14/2024 10:29:54 AM EDT
[#45]
Its been said; but this seems to reinforce the "Don't open the door policy....."
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/14/2024 10:31:52 AM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By super223: Target shooting and domestic violence calls to L/E are completely different situations. This was a criminal complaint of D/V.. the idiot who had the gun in his hand KNEW IT WAS THE POLICE. HE SAID "DID YOU CALL THE POLICE?!!?" AFTER the cop ID'ed himself (multiple times) and the SUSPECT acknowledged a L/E presence at the door he decided to arm himself. Not sure if you can think of a reason why?? Does ARF think opening the door for L/E (if someone calls the cops on YOU for beating your wife) give you the right to open the door armed? If the police want to interview you/ask a question or do a welfare check.. are you saying opening the door for announced LE with a firearm is reasonable? To each their own. Good shoot by the officer. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By super223: Originally Posted By Plank_Spanker: I own a modest 5 acre plot with a house, a pasture & a couple of horses, chickens, ducks, etc. When I developed the pasture for the horses my wife had, I also built a berm for a gun range. 150 yards to the berm from where we shoot. For the 1st few months, I would have the sheriffs dept show up due to some karen neighbor calling in about gun fire. According to some in this thread, the responding deputy would be well within his rights to gun all of us down because we were carrying pistols, rifles, shotguns, etc. I mean we might have had 40 different types of firearms on display at any one time. This is at my private residence. It's funny that not one deputy ever drew his weapon down on any of us while we were engaged in actively target shooting when they pulled up. I even approached said deputy with a pistol on my hip, one in my hand & a SBR slung on my shoulder as he was exiting his patrol car. Not a peep from him to disarm, lay on the ground or "step back". Does this change anything for the airmen's family? no. But it does show that deputy quick draw did not have the ability to define a threat correctly. I bet the dept. training will show a very aggressive posture that dictated the outcome we see here. Target shooting and domestic violence calls to L/E are completely different situations. This was a criminal complaint of D/V.. the idiot who had the gun in his hand KNEW IT WAS THE POLICE. HE SAID "DID YOU CALL THE POLICE?!!?" AFTER the cop ID'ed himself (multiple times) and the SUSPECT acknowledged a L/E presence at the door he decided to arm himself. Not sure if you can think of a reason why?? Does ARF think opening the door for L/E (if someone calls the cops on YOU for beating your wife) give you the right to open the door armed? If the police want to interview you/ask a question or do a welfare check.. are you saying opening the door for announced LE with a firearm is reasonable? To each their own. Good shoot by the officer. Well the sheriff's dept responding to my place told me they were responding to a report of gunfire, not target shooting, so it would rise to the level of a potential deadly threat if I had to make that judgment. It has yet to be proven, to me anyways, that the airmen knew who was at his door. The law allows us to be armed at all times within our domicile in the state of FL so yes, he did not violate any law but received a death sentence for it. I hope you do not work in LE in any capacity, ever. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/14/2024 10:33:12 AM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By super223: I remember in 2021 when 2 FBI agents were tragically gunned down serving a warrant on a pervert. I believe he opened the door with a 20" AR.. 5 fucking FBI agents were shot and 2 were killed. They were arresting a pedophile.. Now ARF thinks this should be the standard way of approaching L/E when they knock on your door? Kick rocks.. you have me literally defending the FBI that's how stupid this debate is. Look below at the link and see what happened to 2 hero's because some pervert fuck had "right to open the door for the police locked and loaded." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2021_Sunrise,_Florida_shootout Freedom is scary, deal with it. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/14/2024 10:36:02 AM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By SmilingBandit: Based on your writing style, I would not assume you were a military officer. Based on your carrying the water for police in this bad shoot I would guess you are a cop. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By SmilingBandit: Originally Posted By Francisco_dAnconia: You said there was only one armed professional there when, as a soldier, that was literally Fortson's profession. You said that only the deputy was trained in using minimal force when multiple examples of the allegedly more restrictive ROE were already posted. I'm sure Fortson had POW training. etc. What's Derpfagtagstic is where you came up with the idea that I'm an officer. Did you mean military or police officer? Based on your writing style, I would not assume you were a military officer. Based on your carrying the water for police in this bad shoot I would guess you are a cop. Definitely not a military officer. Based on the limited vocabulary, below average reason ability, and agape anus for authority I would guess Level 2 Private Security Officer. |
|
|
|
VA, USA
|
Posted: 5/14/2024 10:45:05 AM EDT
[Last Edit: BourbonBeast]
[#49]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Francisco_dAnconia: You have me really confused here. You're the one who brought positive ID into this and it is hard to be more positive than "that guy right there with the gun". Normal reasonable people would be threatened by someone answering the door with a pistol visibly in hand which covers the "hostile act/hostile intent". That's both elements satisfied. I still don't know what questionable situations you think I'm putting myself in. Attorney Andrew Branca from The Law of Self-Defense spends a good part of his video on the incident beating down the idea that Fortson had to be doing something illegal to be justifiably shot.Click To View Spoiler It has nothing to do with answering the door while armed, the 2A, or whether the guy answering the door is the homeowner or a squatter. Answering the door with a gun visibly in your hand is reasonably perceived as a threat by the knocker and that activates their right to defend themselves. The incident will impact little. The lies told about the incident by the family and their lawyer will. The misunderstanding of the use of force, police tactics, and Florida law will. WTF? Killing infidels is not self-defense. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Francisco_dAnconia: Originally Posted By BMSMB: Originally Posted By Francisco_dAnconia: I did say that. I was responding to this statement:Are you claiming that he was incorrect about or misunderstood the ROE or under a different ROE than you were? You still need to explain how you got from that to accusing me of believing that you don't need positive ID and a threat for self-defense. You still haven't explained what questionable situations you think I'm putting myself in. You said, in response to half the ROE, that it made people not able to practice self defense... IE there were far lesser requirements, in your mind, for the use of lethal force than the ROE. Hence, you think that you need less than positive ID (which I added to show the full ROE), and either a hostile act or hostile intent... which is why you shouldn't be making decisions on when to use lethal force. You have me really confused here. You're the one who brought positive ID into this and it is hard to be more positive than "that guy right there with the gun". Normal reasonable people would be threatened by someone answering the door with a pistol visibly in hand which covers the "hostile act/hostile intent". That's both elements satisfied. I still don't know what questionable situations you think I'm putting myself in. Originally Posted By haveTwo: But it was okay for the cop to kill in response to something perfectly legal? Originally Posted By BourbonBeast: I’d love for anyone defending this cop to please explain to me how their defense lines up with the 2nd amendment, because if you can’t be armed while answering your own door, that feels like the right to bear arms is being infringed. Even outside of a 2A perspective, for those of you defending this, how do you think this is going to impact the police profession? Will literally anything come from this that is positive for police, or is this likely to cause even more financial damage and hurt relations with the public? Let me put it into terms the average GD’er will understand. A radical Muslim commits a terror attack, or an honor killing, etc. And then muslims all over the world preach about how killing infidels is justified, converting people by the sword, etc. Do you make a distinction between the person who blew themselves up, and the imam who praised it? Or do you feel that anyone who supports that kind of behavior is fundamentally unamerican and shouldn’t be tolerated? Please explain to me how you can line up the 2nd amendment right to be armed in your home / on your property with your stance that someone holding a gun means they can be shot. You can’t have both. Please explain yourself. Are you saying any cop anywhere is justified shooting anyone with a gun? If not, why? Killing infidels indiscriminately and justifying it using the Koran and killing citizens indiscriminately and justifying it using “muh reasonable officer” is the same level of twisted logic. You’re justifying terror. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/14/2024 12:10:46 PM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By TAG_Match: Definitely not a military officer. Based on the limited vocabulary, below average reason ability, and agape anus for authority I would guess Level 2 Private Security Officer. “Agape anus for authority.”  Best ARFCOM phrase of the year! 
|
|
|
|
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.
