Cop shoots man on smoke break outside Starbucks - Page 2

Site Notices

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Cop shoots man on smoke break outside Starbucks (Page 2 of 2)

Posted: 9/28/2004 8:02:21 AM EDT

[#1]

Quoted:
By your comment, you have probably never been before a grand jury. A grand jury has much more leeway for the state. A deciding State Attorney looks at the TRIAL, which is much more stringent. If the State Attorney is undecided, political or otherwise, it goes to the grand jury. Grand Juries can be ridiculously unforgiving. I've been there and seen it. We have people shoot people outside their sliding glass doors (peeping tom's) and it's ruled justified. LEO's get grilled everytime (rightfully so for all apparent reasons). You have a MUCH better chance of getting away an a non LEO than an LEO. I have cases to back it up. NOT just MHO.

ETA: Also, tasers are not a magic bullet. NOTHING works 100% of the time but Buicks and trains, (Hit somebody full on with either, they are gonna feel it). I saw a .45 ACP 240gr Speer Gold Dot stuck between a clerks eyes as he waited on customers. Thought the robber missed. The reason LEO's are held higher (righfully so) is the level of training. Non LEO's do not have that hinderance. Plus public perception of "Disarm him," "shoot him in the leg," etc. It's a tradgedy, but like others have said, if he would do this to a uniformed officer, what would he do to your mother?

I'm just glad we all love AR's!!!!!

No pal you have me for sure, I have not been in front of a grand jury. I've served on them but have not done anything that has got passed a cops scrutiny to need a grand jury. Rather not, thanks.

Someone punches me, I guess I'd rather just punch them back rather than deal with the hassle of shooting them. I guess it's a redneck thing.

Tj

Posted: 9/28/2004 8:10:04 AM EDT

[#2]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Sounds like a good shoot.
I agree. Don't bring patio furniture to a gunfight.

Wrong but funny...

Tazer had no effect? Were the batteries run down or something... Well, that should be some fuel for the people who don't think that officers should carry anything but lethal weapons. Fuck tazers and pepper spray and... hey wait... did he try using pepper spray on the guy. I can just see it... cops having to go through an entire Batman utility belt full of non-lethal weapons that don't work worht a shit before finally being able to draw down on an aggressor with a bullet shooter. When people decide to get physical with a cop they should always expect the worse... do people have no common sense or simply no respect for authority (or the gun on their belts)? Ridiculous.

Posted: 9/28/2004 8:25:36 AM EDT

[#3]

Quoted:
Note to myself, don't light up at Starbucks, and don't attack police officers

Posted: 9/28/2004 8:53:01 AM EDT

[#4]

All that over a damn cigarette.....sad.

Posted: 9/28/2004 8:58:57 AM EDT

[#5]

See what too much caffeine can lead too.

Death by coffee overdose

Sad.

Posted: 9/28/2004 9:29:08 AM EDT

[#6]

From the details in the article it sounds like the cop tried to play Rambo. Instead of pulling out his taser he should have called for backup, now knowing that the guy was confrontational. If he had no initial respect for the uniform, what makes the cop think a taser was going to make him all nice and cudley?

The cop should have known he couldnt take this man down by himself. The man was also with friends. The cop should have brought backup first. But instead, he tried to handle the situation by himself. He got himself beat and somebody killed. He put himself and all the innocent bystandards at risk to play Hero.

Sylvester Stallones' dont make good cops.

Posted: 9/28/2004 9:34:28 AM EDT

[#7]

I don't understand... was this guy doing something illegal? It sounded as if he was outside smoking in public which, while I don't support it, is legal in my jurisdiction.

As an aside, we need more officers like that here. I bought gas yesterday and had to stand in line for several minutes to some unwashed smoke factory while he continued to smoke his cigarette while standing in line to pay for gas. I wish he'd decided to smoke at the pump instead. Anyway, I like the thought of summary execution for someone so inconsiderate.

Posted: 9/28/2004 9:37:30 AM EDT

[#8]

Quoted:
I don't understand... was this guy doing something illegal? It sounded as if he was outside smoking in public which, while I don't support it, is legal in my jurisdiction.

As an aside, we need more officers like that here. I bought gas yesterday and had to stand in line for several minutes to some unwashed smoke factory while he continued to smoke his cigarette while standing in line to pay for gas. I wish he'd decided to smoke at the pump instead. Anyway, I like the thought of summary execution for someone so inconsiderate.

'

Move to China.

Posted: 9/28/2004 9:38:13 AM EDT

[#9]

Would have expected no less response from a Californian Jeeper 21. .

Posted: 9/28/2004 9:41:33 AM EDT

[#10]

Quoted:
Quoted:
I don't understand... was this guy doing something illegal? It sounded as if he was outside smoking in public which, while I don't support it, is legal in my jurisdiction.

As an aside, we need more officers like that here. I bought gas yesterday and had to stand in line for several minutes to some unwashed smoke factory while he continued to smoke his cigarette while standing in line to pay for gas. I wish he'd decided to smoke at the pump instead. Anyway, I like the thought of summary execution for someone so inconsiderate.
'

Move to China.

huh?

Posted: 9/28/2004 9:42:44 AM EDT

[#11]

Quoted:
I don't understand... was this guy doing something illegal? It sounded as if he was outside smoking in public which, while I don't support it, is legal in my jurisdiction.

A business can set it's own rules. Not following those rules, then refusing to leave when asked is a type of tresspassing under Cali law.

Posted: 9/28/2004 9:51:31 AM EDT

[#12]

Quoted:
Quoted:
I don't understand... was this guy doing something illegal? It sounded as if he was outside smoking in public which, while I don't support it, is legal in my jurisdiction.

A business can set it's own rules. Not following those rules, then refusing to leave when asked is a type of tresspassing under Cali law.

That makes sense but I didn't catch where that had transpired... the article, IIRC correctly (not having reread it) said something about him smoking outside and giving the employees "trouble" but I don't remember it saying anything about the guy being asked to leave or being on private property...after all, the article said "outside" and I simply presumed that he was therefore not on store grounds...didn't know if there was any facts on that point one way or the other. I also wonder if the officer was uniformed or ever identified himself.. I hadn't caught those facts either.

eta: while I know a lot of cafes have outdoor areas for customers, I have never seen a Starbucks with one...do they exist? was this one of them?

Posted: 9/28/2004 9:53:56 AM EDT

[#13]

Quoted:
Quoted:
I don't understand... was this guy doing something illegal? It sounded as if he was outside smoking in public which, while I don't support it, is legal in my jurisdiction.

A business can set it's own rules. Not following those rules, then refusing to leave when asked is a type of tresspassing under Cali law.

San Jose is a "No Smoking City".........that's no smoking in resturants open to outdoors or not and hotels even. What he was doing was illegal by city statute. That even means no smoking at outdoor tables at McDonalds or a cafe with public table on the city sidewalks.

Shitty law that ultimately the root cause the entire mess. I'm pretty certain Starbucks would prefer it the otherway since it would be increased business much as the bars in Cali would.

Still it's one damn sorry ass reason to get yourself shot.

But then he was guilty of disturbing someones concept of ambiance.

Tj

Posted: 9/28/2004 10:04:10 AM EDT

[#14]

Quoted:
San Jose is a "No Smoking City".........that's no smoking in resturants open to outdoors or not and hotels even. What he was doing was illegal by city statute. That even means no smoking at outdoor tables at McDonalds.

Shitty law that ultimately the root cause the entire mess. I'm pretty certain Starbucks would prefer it the otherway since it would be increased business much as the bars in Cali would.

Still it's one damn sorry ass reason to get yourself shot.

But then he was guilty of disturbing someones concept of ambiance.

Tj

+1

Cop did what he had to do. Feel sorry for the 'refugee', sounds like he had been through some tough experiences and had the mental scars to prove it.

Shame on CA and the stupid liberals that think they need to micro-manage everyone's lives...

Posted: 9/28/2004 10:04:47 AM EDT

[#15]

Thanks TJ, that was what I was asking. dumb law, dumb habit, bad deal

Posted: 9/28/2004 10:47:33 AM EDT

[#16]

Quoted:
Someone punches me, I guess I'd rather just punch them back rather than deal with the hassle of shooting them. I guess it's a redneck thing.

Tj

That's what I was thinking too. It must be a redneck thing

I wouldn't challenge anyone without a damned good reason either. Cops don't have that luxury if the starbucks people are watching. They sent the cop to do what they wouldn't (ask the guy to leave that is)...

Posted: 9/28/2004 11:32:13 AM EDT

[#17]

Quoted:
I'm pretty certain Starbucks would prefer it the otherway since it would be increased business much as the bars in Cali would.

You don't REALLY think that the "no smoking" rule keeps people out of bars in this state, do you?

It might have the first week it was enacted, but since then, the people who always went to bars are still going. Even tourists, who are often shocked and angry about the law, aren't angry enough to leave the bar.

If this was a city ordinance, and you could drive 5 miles to a smoking bar, it would be different, but that's not the case.

-Troy

Posted: 9/28/2004 11:59:03 AM EDT

[#18]

Well, if I were being beaten by a chair, I imagine I'd shoot as well. I'd rather run the risk of doing 10 - 20 then doing eternity.

Posted: 9/28/2004 12:06:55 PM EDT

[#19]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I don't understand... was this guy doing something illegal? It sounded as if he was outside smoking in public which, while I don't support it, is legal in my jurisdiction.

A business can set it's own rules. Not following those rules, then refusing to leave when asked is a type of tresspassing under Cali law.

That makes sense but I didn't catch where that had transpired... the article, IIRC correctly (not having reread it) said something about him smoking outside and giving the employees "trouble" but I don't remember it saying anything about the guy being asked to leave or being on private property...after all, the article said "outside" and I simply presumed that he was therefore not on store grounds...

This took place in Cali, where 90% of the Starbucks have outdoor patios. They also have huge problems with bums who ask for a glass of water then loiter on the patio all day.

CPC 602.1(a) Interfering with a business, can be something as minor as some filthy bum whose odor is offending the paying customers, or who has positioned himself so the paying customers must walk around him.

Posted: 9/28/2004 12:18:33 PM EDT

[#20]

Quoted:
Quoted:
I'm pretty certain Starbucks would prefer it the otherway since it would be increased business much as the bars in Cali would.

You don't REALLY think that the "no smoking" rule keeps people out of bars in this state, do you?

It might have the first week it was enacted, but since then, the people who always went to bars are still going. Even tourists, who are often shocked and angry about the law, aren't angry enough to leave the bar.

If this was a city ordinance, and you could drive 5 miles to a smoking bar, it would be different, but that's not the case.

-Troy

Yep, not interested in picking up chicks, only want a drink, and a smoke, why bother. I've only been in a bar in CA once since they passed the law same for the other business people I travel with that smoke. Rather setup drinks in a hotel room and save some money than go to bar and constantly go outside to smoke. Most areas are now opening up cigar sections while CA goes the otherway.

It's a hypocritical law. Come here and drink alcohol for alcohol is better than smoking. BTW, now drive home. Next will be outlaw bars for they promote drunk driving. It's a trend.

Tj

Posted: 9/28/2004 1:21:27 PM EDT

[#21]

As usual the guys from other states are hypothesizing on a CA situation without the slightest clue on the law or other things in CA.

Yes many Starbucks and similar establishments have outdoor areas, because we don't have snow or bad weather to worry about most of the year. And smoking indoors is illegal in businesses and cities or businesses can regulate smoking outside.

And calling for back-up is a nice concept, but it takes time and frankly you don't call for back-up to tell somebody to not smoke. And he sure as hell didn't have time to retreat and call for back-up once things went sideways.

And yes that would have been a good shoot for a (legally) armed civilian. CA has no duty to retreat in that circumstance.

Penal Code

197. Homicide is also justifiable when committed by any person in
any of the following cases:
1. When resisting any attempt to murder any person, or to commit a
felony, or to do some great bodily injury upon any person; or,

if the civilian was carrying illegally he would have CCW violations to worry about but not homicide.

(Yah ever notice how many ACLU Blame the Police First types we have on this board?)

Posted: 9/28/2004 1:31:47 PM EDT

[#22]

Why was this guy released from Napa State Hospital (state loony bin)?? He sounds like a time bomb with a short fuse. I hope the PO sues the hospital/doctor/judge who released this lunatic.

Quoted:

Relatives and friends of Bojcic described him as a quiet but increasingly troubled survivor of a Croat-run concentration camp in Dretelj.

According to the Contra Costa Times, he was arrested in 2002 for smashing the windows of a patrol car and attacking police officers with lumber. He had just learned that his impounded car had been sold. He then spent a year at Napa State Hospital, which treats the mentally ill, said his cousin, Sejad Premilovac.

Posted: 9/28/2004 1:54:29 PM EDT

[#23]

Quoted:
you don't call for back-up to tell somebody to not smoke.

You're right, they just shoot them.

Posted: 9/28/2004 4:07:31 PM EDT

[#24]

Quoted:
Why was this guy released from Napa State Hospital (state loony bin)?? He sounds like a time bomb with a short fuse. I hope the PO sues the hospital/doctor/judge who released this lunatic.

Quoted:

Relatives and friends of Bojcic described him as a quiet but increasingly troubled survivor of a Croat-run concentration camp in Dretelj.

According to the Contra Costa Times, he was arrested in 2002 for smashing the windows of a patrol car and attacking police officers with lumber. He had just learned that his impounded car had been sold. He then spent a year at Napa State Hospital, which treats the mentally ill, said his cousin, Sejad Premilovac.

Like I stated earlier, seems the guy had a psychotic break or had hard core PTSD. Whatever it was, seeing the uniformed officer made him snap. Being in a Croat run concentration camp probably proabably isn't such a good thing for one's mental health.

Posted: 9/28/2004 4:26:28 PM EDT

[#25]

A cop is carrying a gun in plain sight, and it must be assumed that an attacker is 1) attacking knowing full well the person they are attacking is armed, and 2) can take the gun and now be an armed attacker, once in close hand-to-hand fighting. Grappling with an attacker (not subduing someone running, but someone who is actively attacking you) is ASSuming they are going to be a mighty fine gentleman and fight fair, without reaching for your gun.

Posted: 9/28/2004 7:13:17 PM EDT

[#26]

The officer reported that he fired his taser, which had little effect on Bojcic, who allegedly began punching and kicking.

But I thought tasers were the perfect non-lethal weapon guaranteed to peaceful end any confrontation.....

Suck ass situation for all but IMHO the shot was justifiable.

Posted: 9/28/2004 7:16:54 PM EDT

[#27]

that outta teach you NOT to smoke in kali!!

naw, damn that sucks, feel sorry for the cop and the dead Croatian, just a bad hand

Posted: 9/28/2004 7:49:35 PM EDT

[#28]

Just to point out to a few....the officer did in fact call for backup when the subject became confrontational. Seems like he did the right thing; drew a tool, called for backup, then dealt with the situation as it needed to be dealt with.

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Cop shoots man on smoke break outside Starbucks (Page 2 of 2)

General » General Discussion

Warning

Confirm Action

About AR15.COM

Stay Connected

Newsletter

Contact Us