I just had a stunning insight: it is clear to me after reading hundreds of news articles and seeing untold numbers of news reports that the only way to be safe is to become a parasitic thug, and do whatever is necessary to stay that way. Why? Because if you are innocent of the blood of others, or try to turn your life around, you become a marked man. The cops will hunt you down and execute you. Seriously. Look how often that happens. Every piece of shit the cops kill either "never hurt nobody" or "was starting to turn his life around."

Protect yourself. Beat, shoot, rob or stab an unoffending human today - and every day hereafter. For your own good.

Quoted: Protect yourself. Beat, shoot, rob or stab an unoffending human today - and every day hereafter. For your own good.

I think you're on to something here.  Heck, you'll even get a $2K debit card, an interstate plane ride, new digs and a new crib.

Crime does pay.

Just ask the guys from NOLA who were arrested their first night here when just outside Kelly Base they were arrested selling - crap, can't remember exacly what it was - crank, meth, coke ??

(Continued satire)

Quoted: Okay, a non-LEO here who AGREES that the guys history was bad, and that escaping, robbing a store, stealing a car and carrying a knife represents a failure to "try and clean himself up"... but I have to question one thing about the story... He was shot 11 times??? WTF?  I was taught that anything more than what is required to eliminate the threat is EXCESSIVE. one shot or double-tap usually makes a person drop a knife, and unless he was close enough to rush you to stab you, it's not a distance weapon. (Is he gonna thjrow it at you?) No, not an "innocent lamb" as a previous poster mentioned, but how did they find 11 shots to be a justified shoot?  Couldn't it be a case of bad guy & bad cop?  In so far that it was a bad decision of the cop. No Expert

I wondered how long it would take someone to complain about how many times the kid was shot.

USUALLY the mere sight of a drawn weapon is enough to make people drop their weapon and give up. USUALLY people are smart enough not to try to kill cops.

USUALLY is only usually until the person isn't a usual person, and then you have to do what you have to do.

Quoted: I just had a stunning insight: it is clear to me after reading hundreds of news articles and seeing untold numbers of news reports that the only way to be safe is to become a parasitic thug, and do whatever is necessary to stay that way. Why? Because if you are innocent of the blood of others, or try to turn your life around, you become a marked man. The cops will hunt you down and execute you. Seriously. Look how often that happens. Every piece of shit the cops kill either "never hurt nobody" or "was starting to turn his life around." Protect yourself. Beat, shoot, rob or stab an unoffending human today - and every day hereafter. For your own good.

He was a good boy ...will that get me a couple of million when I sue?

Okay, so I get two people willing to discuss this, and one knucklehead deciding to flame me for my opinion.  'Bout right.

anyway, the article said:

Police said Richard Sanchez got out of the pickup and confronted Vincent before he was shot. Investigators have not revealed details about that confrontation, including whether Sanchez was armed.

All I'm saying is that there are alot of people who are jumping up and down on a little information ready to give this cop an award for killing a known bad guy under dubious circumstances possibly in a manner excessive to the situation.

Yes, I am familiar with the 21 foot rule, and I agree it is questionable on if it is far enough to actually give a defendent time to react to an assailant with a knife INTENT upon attacking you.

I also understand adrenaline, but again we are talking about training, reaction to stress, and questioning if maybe there is more to it than just that.

WE DON'T KNOW....by the article as written.  

Was the bad guy a bad guy... yep. Was he a fugitive?  Yep.  
Was he a threat when he was shot? dunno.
Did ELEVEN shots have to be fired to stop him? Dunno... but unlikely unless he was hopped up or actually continuing to be a threat to someone with a weapon. (hostage or civilians within reach)

A few here may think that I am disparaging the police as a whole... I am not. I am not even saying the officer was wrong (with information given) to having had to use his weapon.

All I'm asking was... with the information we had... how can you justify (and revel in) the means because of the end...when there is question to the method of his actions?

Yes, USUALLY the bad guy drops his non-firearm weapon when presented the business end of a LEO's firearm.... did this guy?  Dunno.  A shoot-first and "it's okay cause he was a bad guy" attitude will only bite you at some point and make the police look bad (or worse to those that already voice loudly now)

I mean, is this the guy who kicks down the door at 565 Elm and kills the guy rushing the door when he was called to a problem at 655 Elm?   Shoots the kid playing "cops & robbers" at the park cause the "kid had a gun".  I don't know.... it'd devils advocate to the extreme.... but some here are just the opposite with the fact that "bad guy dead, cop did nothing wrong cause bad guy is dead."

Whatever happened to discussion? Did you guys suddenly subscribe to the DU method of thinking and are gonna ban me for questioning something that is questionable?

Remember that the next time one of you cop-bashers complains about the JBTs harassing you for wanting to own a EBR or have a CCW.... cause when he "unreasonably" impedes your "RTKBA"... I hope he doesn't shoot you eleven times.

No Expert

Quoted: Okay, so I get two people willing to discuss this, and one knucklehead deciding to flame me for my opinion.  'Bout right. anyway, the article said: Police said Richard Sanchez got out of the pickup and confronted Vincent before he was shot. Investigators have not revealed details about that confrontation, including whether Sanchez was armed. All I'm saying is that there are alot of people who are jumping up and down on a little information ready to give this cop an award for killing a known bad guy under dubious circumstances possibly in a manner excessive to the situation. Yes, I am familiar with the 21 foot rule, and I agree it is questionable on if it is far enough to actually give a defendent time to react to an assailant with a knife INTENT upon attacking you. I also understand adrenaline, but again we are talking about training, reaction to stress, and questioning if maybe there is more to it than just that. WE DON'T KNOW....by the article as written.   Was the bad guy a bad guy... yep. Was he a fugitive?  Yep.   Was he a threat when he was shot? dunno. Did ELEVEN shots have to be fired to stop him? Dunno... but unlikely unless he was hopped up or actually continuing to be a threat to someone with a weapon. (hostage or civilians within reach) A few here may think that I am disparaging the police as a whole... I am not. I am not even saying the officer was wrong (with information given) to having had to use his weapon. All I'm asking was... with the information we had... how can you justify (and revel in) the means because of the end...when there is question to the method of his actions? Yes, USUALLY the bad guy drops his non-firearm weapon when presented the business end of a LEO's firearm.... did this guy?  Dunno.  A shoot-first and "it's okay cause he was a bad guy" attitude will only bite you at some point and make the police look bad (or worse to those that already voice loudly now) I mean, is this the guy who kicks down the door at 565 Elm and kills the guy rushing the door when he was called to a problem at 655 Elm?   Shoots the kid playing "cops & robbers" at the park cause the "kid had a gun".  I don't know.... it'd devils advocate to the extreme.... but some here are just the opposite with the fact that "bad guy dead, cop did nothing wrong cause bad guy is dead." Whatever happened to discussion? Did you guys suddenly subscribe to the DU method of thinking and are gonna ban me for questioning something that is questionable? Remember that the next time one of you cop-bashers complains about the JBTs harassing you for wanting to own a EBR or have a CCW.... cause when he "unreasonably" impedes your "RTKBA"... I hope he doesn't shoot you eleven times. No Expert

What?


What's your point, exactly?  

There's never enough info to *really* say what's going on, so why get all bent out of shape if someone twists what little is reported IN THE NEWS one way or the other?

I'm not a father but is this universal feeling of  YOUR boy is really good/ having a hard time/ etc unavoidable?

Quoted: I'm not a father but is this universal feeling of  YOUR boy is really good/ having a hard time/ etc unavoidable?

Nope.

Then reality knocked on the front door.

BTDT.

Quoted: I wonder why it is in these situations you never see the family member apologize to the police involved and to society in general for raising a useless parasitic POS, instead of the usual Watts Wail they always engage in...?

I had a family tell me that they were sorry that their son put me in the situation that he did.  They told me they felt terrible that their son's actions could have killed me.  The parents were good folks.  Their kid found the wonderful life of drug abuse.

So it happens, it's just not newsworthy.

Life is just full of little choices.....

Quoted: I'm not a father but is this universal feeling of  YOUR boy is really good/ having a hard time/ etc unavoidable?

No, but I suspect that the parents who have kids like this have their heads up their asses further than most.  

That includes the "I'm a badass and so's my kid" kind of people, as well as the "We're just ordinary God-fearing folk, and have *no idea* why little Johnny turned out to be such a hellion" parents as well.

11 rounds, I bet if the hooked me up to a timer I could get 11 rounds off in 2 seconds or less.

There is appx a .75 second delay built into the OODA loop due to the time it take to run through the loop.

I have seen a few videos where the GSW-recipient does not react to being hit, until they fall down DRT.

Quoted: 11 rounds, I bet if the hooked me up to a timer I could get 11 rounds off in 2 seconds or less.

Actually one of the drills I practice. I can get about 10 rounds in 2 secs and if I am pulling the trigger on someone at close range I will empty the frickin mag on them. I would expect nothing less of any JBT LEO.

Dad said he came to Oklahoma to straighten out his life. Sounds like he took the advanced course.

Another turd flushed from the gene pool..............fuck'em

Quoted: Whatever happened to discussion? Did you guys suddenly subscribe to the DU method of thinking and are gonna ban me for questioning something that is questionable? No Expert

You are certainly free to discuss whatever you wish.

But when you obviously have no CQB training with firearms, don't expect to be taken seriously.

Complaining about 11 shots is amateur hour, and it shows.

So straightening out your life means robbing stores at knife point, escaping from custody and eluding police during a high speed chase on the highway.  Then confronting siad police.  

If thats a strait life then I'm just all kinds of messed up, what with my steady job, wife, owning my own home, paying taxes................hinking.gif

Quoted: Quoted: Whatever happened to discussion? Did you guys suddenly subscribe to the DU method of thinking and are gonna ban me for questioning something that is questionable? No Expert You are certainly free to discuss whatever you wish. But when you obviously have no CQB training with firearms, don't expect to be taken seriously. Complaining about 11 shots is amateur hour, and it shows.

Yup.

Sigh,

Original article did not say he was armed when police confronted him... the poster made that assumption.

My point, for those that asked, is how incredulous it is that so many are applauding the death of a bad guy, under questionable circumstances.  11 shots, (in a "2 second adrenaline rush" or not) into a posssibly unarmed person... is not a valid option.

The concensus appears to be that he had a record, he deserved to die. I'm not saying I'm shedding tears over his death... I'm saying that maybe the father is right and that he didn't need to die when/how he did.

In Detroit here a few years ago, Malice Green was a drug abuser, but did not deserve to be beaten to death by cops for not opening his hands... cause I am pretty sure whatever he had concealed in his closed fist, was not likely going to kill anyone. He was down, and restrained, he could have been cuffed with his hand closed.  Instead, he was beaten to death.

I support LEOs where I can, the ones that are friends of mine as well as ones I don't know personally... but sometimes wrong is wrong.  

In another thread here, there are a bunch of accolades passed on to a 19-yr old ARFCOMer who defended himself in a store from a guy using his can of mace.  Had he had a CCW, and emptied 11 rounds into the guy who was approaching him, he'd have likely been put in jail.

Does the badge, which implies training and greater knowledge of responsibilty, mean a free "it's okay, he deserved to die"?  Everything is not black and white.... except to some of the people here.

No Expert

Quoted: In Detroit here a few years ago, Malice Green was a drug abuser, but did not deserve to be beaten to death by cops for not opening his hands... cause I am pretty sure whatever he had concealed in his closed fist, was not likely going to kill anyone. He was down, and restrained, he could have been cuffed with his hand closed.  Instead, he was beaten to death. No Expert

How incredulous it is of you to say that an unidentified object in Green's hand was "not likely going to kill anyone."

See a pattern?

That's all from me about this.

Quoted: Sigh, this may be the only sentence that I don't argue with. Original article did not say he was armed when police confronted him... the poster made that assumption. Perhaps, I guess the youth that is arrested, convicted, and placed on probation for a crime, is placed into custody for violating probation, escapes from custody, commits auto theft, armed robbery, is invovled in a high speed pursuit, then CONFRONTS the officer that had been chasing him, oh and claims to be a "former" member of a violent street gang, aspect of the story didn't register with you. My point, for those that asked, is how incredulous it is that so many are applauding the death of a bad guy, under questionable circumstances.  11 shots, (in a "2 second adrenaline rush" or not) into a posssibly unarmed person... is not a valid option. Again if confronted by a threat, that justifies the use fo deadly force, you fire UNTIL that threat ceases to be a threat. If that takes 1 shot, 11 shots, or 100 shots. Saying he was "shot too much", is like people saying officer shouldn't carry .45 ACP caliber handguns, only .40 S+W or smaller, because .45 is "too deadly". Next, if the VIOLENT FELON refused to show his hands while approaching the officer, remembering he is the suspect in an armed robbery, the officer can use that information in deciding whether or not the use of deadly force is justified. Further, since the suspect is a violent felon the officer may also use force to eefect an arrest, or prevent escape. The concensus appears to be that he had a record, he deserved to die. I'm not saying I'm shedding tears over his death... I'm saying that maybe the father is right and that he didn't need to die when/how he did. As Oly-M4gery has said before, the police are not always right, but thety are predictable. If you commit an auto theft, armed robbery, attempt to elude the police, THEN CONFRONT THE OFFICER THAT STOPS YOU, the officer WILL shoot if he percieves a threat. If the suspect tried to make the police believe he was armed etc. to get away, or not "go easy" the police will have plan to deal with that. If you act in a threatening manner, and refuse to follow directions, the police will formulate a plan for that too. In Detroit here a few years ago, Malice Green was a drug abuser, but did not deserve to be beaten to death by cops for not opening his hands... cause I am pretty sure whatever he had concealed in his closed fist, was not likely going to kill anyone. He was down, and restrained, he could have been cuffed with his hand closed.  Instead, he was beaten to death. Great story, has nothing to do with this. I support LEOs where I can, the ones that are friends of mine as well as ones I don't know personally... but sometimes wrong is wrong. Would you know the difference between right and wrong? In another thread here, there are a bunch of accolades passed on to a 19-yr old ARFCOMer who defended himself in a store from a guy using his can of mace.  Had he had a CCW, and emptied 11 rounds into the guy who was approaching him, he'd have likely been put in jail. No shit Sherlock. That was angry unarmed guy, who was talking tough, while calling names. The other guy had commited 3 felonies, including ARMED ROBBERY. Do you get the difference? Does the badge, which implies training and greater knowledge of responsibilty, mean a free "it's okay, he deserved to die"?  Everything is not black and white.... except to some of the people here. Again, police aren't always right, but they are predictable. Threaten an officer, be non-compliant, possibly armed, after committing felonies, and the police treat you as the serious threat you are. No Expert  You got that right

Quoted: Quoted: In Detroit here a few years ago, Malice Green was a drug abuser, but did not deserve to be beaten to death by cops for not opening his hands... cause I am pretty sure whatever he had concealed in his closed fist, was not likely going to kill anyone. He was down, and restrained, he could have been cuffed with his hand closed.  Instead, he was beaten to death. No Expert How incredulous it is of you to say that an unidentified object in Green's hand was "not likely going to kill anyone." See a pattern? That's all from me about this.

I don't have a problem with the shooting of this young thug - NOR Malice Green's death, either - good riddance to both scumbags, IMO...



 - georgestrings

Quoted: Live by the sword - die by the sword.

How about "Live by the sword....Get shot by those who don't"

Just another case of:  Sucks to be Richard Lee Sanchez.  

Richard Lee Sanchez =    = Police  

Richard Lee Sanchez =    

Quoted: Sigh, Original article did not say he was armed when police confronted him... the poster made that assumption.

News reports are notoriously bad about giving relevant details, especially those that are reporting the entire story from the perspective of the father who is trying to sue for all of this. If you think reporters would say that there was a gun in the dead guy's hand, then you obviously haven't dealt with many reporters.

My point, for those that asked, is how incredulous it is that so many are applauding the death of a bad guy, under questionable circumstances.  11 shots, (in a "2 second adrenaline rush" or not) into a posssibly unarmed person... is not a valid option.

You assume an awful lot. The "questionable" circumstances is that this guy fits the description of an armed robbery suspect. When hit with the blue lights, he decided to run. Does that make him guilty? No, but it DOES give the officer reasonable cause to believe that this person is potentially dangerous. When someone is suspected of armed robbery and runs when you light them up, they get treated differently than a little old lady who is speeding.

There are good reasons for that.

The concensus appears to be that he had a record, he deserved to die. I'm not saying I'm shedding tears over his death... I'm saying that maybe the father is right and that he didn't need to die when/how he did.

His record is indicative of what likely happened in the second or two when he was shot. This was not an innocent young man on a nice casual sunday drive. This is a convicted felon who matches the description of an armed robbery suspect. The officer who tried to pull the guy over was not aware of his criminal record. He/She was merely aware that this man fit the description of an armed robbery suspect.

If the kid was innocent, a ten minute stop would have cleared all of that up.

The father's opinion on the situation is worthless. He was not there when the events took place. The officer most likely has a dashcam that was there as an unbiased eye watching the whole thing transpire. The thing is that police departments actually conduct professional investigations into officer involved shootings and don't talk about them while in progress, while the press will go to someone who wasn't even there to get the story of what happened.

Which is why almost EVERY police use of force story or citizen use of force story is negative on the good guy.

A good example is a CCW holder here in Virginia. He was involved in a shooting and the headlines across the state were Man Shoots 14 Year Old. The story opens with interviews of the dead kids mother, friends, teacher, all of whom say how wonderful a boy he was, and how he was nice, and how they can't imagine why anyone would want to shoot someone like him. In the last line of a story that took up several paragraphs, the paper finally mentions that a rifle was found on scene that had the dead kid's fingerprints on it.

Translation? The kid tried to ROB the CCW holder with a rifle, and the CCW holder responded with deadly force. He didn't shoot the 14 year old kid for kicks.

But the press doesn't report stories that way.

In Detroit here a few years ago, Malice Green was a drug abuser, but did not deserve to be beaten to death by cops for not opening his hands... cause I am pretty sure whatever he had concealed in his closed fist, was not likely going to kill anyone. He was down, and restrained, he could have been cuffed with his hand closed.  Instead, he was beaten to death.

One can conceal a razor blade in their closed fist. One can also use said blade to slash the arteries in your neck and kill you.

Yet more evidence that you haven't dealt with stuff like this before.

"Closed fist" in a news report could mean that the guy's hands were not visible because he had them hidden under his body, but you won't know that because the press doesn't care about reporting fact. They make their living on the sizzle, not the steak.

I support LEOs where I can, the ones that are friends of mine as well as ones I don't know personally... but sometimes wrong is wrong.

What is particularly disturbing is that you immediately jump to the conclusion that the officer gunned down this guy with no solid reason based solely on a story written entirely from a point of view most sympathetic to the dead guy, and without much objective evidence whatsoever.

It has been my experience that most of the time when the police shoot somebody, there was a pretty compelling reason for it. Thus in such a report I am inclined to give the officer the benefit of the doubt rather than the dead gang banger.

I guess I am just funny that way.

In another thread here, there are a bunch of accolades passed on to a 19-yr old ARFCOMer who defended himself in a store from a guy using his can of mace.  Had he had a CCW, and emptied 11 rounds into the guy who was approaching him, he'd have likely been put in jail.

An angry dude getting maced is a whole lot different than an officer responding to an armed robbery call, trying to pull over a suspect matching the description given, having the suspect run, and then having the chase end with a challenge to the officer.

Does the badge, which implies training and greater knowledge of responsibilty, mean a free "it's okay, he deserved to die"?  Everything is not black and white.... except to some of the people here. No Expert

What a damnably silly statement.

Quoted: Quoted: In Detroit here a few years ago, Malice Green was a drug abuser, but did not deserve to be beaten to death by cops for not opening his hands... cause I am pretty sure whatever he had concealed in his closed fist, was not likely going to kill anyone. He was down, and restrained, he could have been cuffed with his hand closed.  Instead, he was beaten to death. No Expert How incredulous it is of you to say that an unidentified object in Green's hand was "not likely going to kill anyone." See a pattern? That's all from me about this.

What's so incredulous about a closed fist?  The officers said they thought he was holding DRUGS in his hand.

Did I say he waved his hand around with some unidentified object protruding from  his grasp that he was waving at police which they mistook for a weapon?  No, I said he refused to open his hands...closed fists.

It seems like the majority here read what they want out of the details given, to justify their own accountability for bloodlust.

Why is it seen that there is a need to be 100% behind the cop "no matter what"?  Is it really so simple of a mindset that "guy had record, hence he deserved to die"?

No Expert

Edited to add....  Sorry that most people just want to make it personal, I guess I'll keep my discussions to the weapons only forums.

Ifs, whens, maybes, and "you don't know" are good enough I guess.

Thanks for the discussion.

No Expert

Quoted: What's so incredulous about a closed fist?  The officers said they thought he was holding DRUGS in his hand. Did I say he waved his hand around with some unidentified object protruding from  his grasp that he was waving at police which they mistook for a weapon?  No, I said he refused to open his hands...closed fists. It seems like the majority here read what they want out of the details given, to justify their own accountability for bloodlust. Why is it seen that there is a need to be 100% behind the cop "no matter what"?  Is it really so simple of a mindset that "guy had record, hence he deserved to die"? No Expert

Because it has nothing to do with this thread. I appluad your orginality, most would just satart hemming an hawing about Ruby Ridge, Waco, etc. But you brought up a different situation.

Drug suspect confronted by multiple officers, killed in a struggle, has what excatly to do with probationer, escapee, armed robber, car theft, high speed chase, suspect being shot by a lone police officer that the suspect confronted after the both vehicles in the chase were disabled? What?

That's right there is NONE. I'm sure I could got to ODMP.COM and pop up a couple of thousand memorials to officers that didn't use force when they should have.

Never mind, I will.

Police Officer Larry Lasater
Pittsburg Police Department
California
End of Watch: Monday, April 25, 2005

Biographical Info
Age: 35
Tour of Duty: 5 yrs
Badge Number: 257

Incident Details
Cause of Death: Gunfire
Date of Incident: Saturday, April 23, 2005
Weapon Used: Handgun
Suspect Info: Apprehended

Officer Lasater succumbed to gunshot wounds sustained two days earlier while attempting to arrest two robbery suspects on the Delta De Anza Regional Trail. The two suspects had just robbed a supermarket and bank branch and were fleeing from officers when they crashed their vehicle in a residential area. The two then fled onto the trail on foot.

As the officers searched for the suspect, Officer Lasater spotted one of them hiding in the bushes near the trail. As he ordered the suspect out of the bush at gunpoint, the suspect opened fire, striking Officer Lasater in the neck and leg. Other officers returned fire and took the suspect into custody. The second suspect was arrested a short distance away.

Officer Lasater was taken to a local hospital where he remained on life support for two days so that his organs could be donated.

Officer Lasater was a US Marine Corps veteran and had served with the Pittsburg Police Department for 5 years. He is survived by his expectant wife.

odmp.org/officer.php?oid=17741

Quoted: Because it has nothing to do with this thread. I appluad your orginality, most would just satart hemming an hawing about Ruby Ridge, Waco, etc. But you brought up a different situation. Drug suspect confronted by multiple officers, killed in a struggle, has what excatly to do with probationer, escapee, armed robber, car theft, high speed chase, suspect being shot by a lone police officer that the suspect confronted after the both vehicles in the chase were disabled? What?

The guy was believed to be armed and in immediate flight from a violent crime. I believe that even under Garner that alone justifies the use of deadly force to reduce him to custody, if the officer concluded that he presented a threat to the public. While a shooting on those facts alone is probably not permissible under most departmental guidelines, I'm pretty sure it passes constitutional muster.

I applaud No_Expert's candor in his choice of screen names, although "No_Clue" might have been more accurate.