Cop execution in BR

[alphaman]

Originally Posted by Matt G

As a law enforcement officer, how do you approach a call in which someone pulled a gun on another person? Gun drawn? Same way as you would someone jay walking? I'm honestly curious. Is that something you were trained in, or does the situation dictate the approach? I would imagine adrenaline is high and emotions are on edge. Especially if the call were in a crime ridden part of town.

As far as the guy not being able to get to that gun, I call BS. Watch the video closely. At no point in time did they have full control of his right hand. I'll bet you two guys could try to restrain me in the same manner and I could get to whatever was in my pocket. Anyone who has been in any sort of physical altercation would probably make the same bet. Not to mention that he had on baggy pants which would only make it easier to get to the gun, He wouldn't have even had to get it out of his pocket to get a shot off. Basically a variation of retention shooting.

I feel terrible for the man's family. It was heartbreaking watching his son break down at that press conference. But at the end of the day all of this could have been avoided had he just complied.

OK. So your saying 2 trained officers cant grab 1 mans arms that's laying on his back? 1 person obviously kneeling on one arm and the other on top of chest area.

Let's roll play these scenarios so you can see how that possible and not possible to reach in your pocket with 2 200lb people on you.

Fellas I'm looking at this from an officer point of view

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N920A using Tapatalk

[Matt G]

Originally Posted by alphaman

OK. So your saying 2 trained officers cant grab 1 mans arms that's laying on his back? 1 person obviously kneeling on one arm and the other on top of chest area.

Let's roll play these scenarios so you can see how that possible and not possible to reach in your pocket with 2 200lb people on you.

Fellas I'm looking at this from an officer point of view

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N920A using Tapatalk

I'll roll play. Even if I don't make it into my pocket, it could still be fun.

See above post....... They tried. He was Hell bent on not complying and their takedown didn't work like it does in class.

I'm looking at this entire thing objectively and I see a guy who thought he could fight his way out of an arrest.

[alphaman]

Originally Posted by Matt G

As a law enforcement officer, how do you approach a call in which someone pulled a gun on another person? Gun drawn? Same way as you would someone jay walking? I'm honestly curious. Is that something you were trained in, or does the situation dictate the approach? I would imagine adrenaline is high and emotions are on edge. Especially if the call were in a crime ridden part of town.

As far as the guy not being able to get to that gun, I call BS. Watch the video closely. At no point in time did they have full control of his right hand. I'll bet you two guys could try to restrain me in the same manner and I could get to whatever was in my pocket. Anyone who has been in any sort of physical altercation would probably make the same bet. Not to mention that he had on baggy pants which would only make it easier to get to the gun, He wouldn't have even had to get it out of his pocket to get a shot off. Basically a variation of retention shooting.

I feel terrible for the man's family. It was heartbreaking watching his son break down at that press conference. But at the end of the day all of this could have been avoided had he just complied.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N920A using Tapatalk

[simplepeddler]

and one thing more..............I further admire the hell out of you for trusting enough in this group of guys to come here and post.............

You are the real deal..........

[alphaman]

This is a problem in the low income communities.....its just like the way this horse is thinking he can't go anywhere but you can. And the gov. Helps with making that a reality..



Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N920A using Tapatalk

[simplepeddler]

Originally Posted by alphaman

This is a problem in the low income communities.....its just like the way this horse is thinking he can't go anywhere but you can. And the gov. Helps with making that a reality..



Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N920A using Tapatalk

spot on my brother

[seachaser250]

Originally Posted by alphaman

This is a problem in the low income communities.....its just like the way this horse is thinking he can't go anywhere but you can. And the gov. Helps with making that a reality..



Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N920A using Tapatalk

They(people that use government assistance as a career path) ALLOW the government to make that a reality. Pardon the pun here but...no one is forcing them at gun point to take that assistance. They seek it out.

[MathGeek]

Having legally carried for many years some close relatives and I have had a number of occasions for interactions with law enforcement while armed. Most have been positive with good LEOs who appreciated and were committed to honoring RKBA with a few notable exceptions.

The exceptions tend to occur when the government employee does not really completely trust citizens with guns or some other factor tips the balance from what should be a respectful interaction into something less positive. As far as we can tell here are some things that tip interactions to the negative:

1. The gov't employee just does not trust citizens, even law abiding citizens, with guns.

Sometimes this is less obvious until they encounter a citizen with a configuration of legal guns of which they are more suspicious, such as an AR style. We've encountered it most often when the second lawfully carried pistol brings the grief. Hint: Answering the question, "Why do you need two guns?" with "For the same reason you do." Is not always the best plan.

2. The gov't employee or a buddy has an agenda.

A close family member started a new gun range near some land owned by the family of a local LEO who perceived their property values to be significantly decreased. Everything was legal, but the neighbors set out to harass him in person after their efforts with the zoning board and the local prosecutor failed.

3. Some member of the community has made an exaggerated report.

It is unclear why gov't employees place so much more trust in those making anonymous reports than in property owners, drivers, and CHL holders even after they know the property owner, driver, and/or CHL holder is law abiding.

All in all, our experience is that gov't employees more accustomed to rural areas are more comfortable with guns and less likely to infer that a report of a "man with a gun" or "shots fired" means that some kind of criminal activity is occurring. Wildlife officers tend to be the best, followed by deputies of rural agencies. The closer you get to urban areas, the worse it gets.

Other than long hair, lots of guns, and (sometimes) a hispanic appearance, our family does not tend to have actions or appearances that tend to suggest drug use or other criminal activities, so I'm not sure how tatoos, bling, a meth head appearance, slurred speech, or simply being black would further complicate interactions with law enforcement while armed.

[duckman1911]

Originally Posted by MathGeek

Having legally carried for many years some close relatives and I have had a number of occasions for interactions with law enforcement while armed. Most have been positive with good LEOs who appreciated and were committed to honoring RKBA with a few notable exceptions.

The exceptions tend to occur when the government employee does not really completely trust citizens with guns or some other factor tips the balance from what should be a respectful interaction into something less positive. As far as we can tell here are some things that tip interactions to the negative:

1. The gov't employee just does not trust citizens, even law abiding citizens, with guns.

Sometimes this is less obvious until they encounter a citizen with a configuration of legal guns of which they are more suspicious, such as an AR style. We've encountered it most often when the second lawfully carried pistol brings the grief. Hint: Answering the question, "Why do you need two guns?" with "For the same reason you do." Is not always the best plan.

2. The gov't employee or a buddy has an agenda.

A close family member started a new gun range near some land owned by the family of a local LEO who perceived their property values to be significantly decreased. Everything was legal, but the neighbors set out to harass him in person after their efforts with the zoning board and the local prosecutor failed.

3. Some member of the community has made an exaggerated report.

It is unclear why gov't employees place so much more trust in those making anonymous reports than in property owners, drivers, and CHL holders even after they know the property owner, driver, and/or CHL holder is law abiding.

All in all, our experience is that gov't employees more accustomed to rural areas are more comfortable with guns and less likely to infer that a report of a "man with a gun" or "shots fired" means that some kind of criminal activity is occurring. Wildlife officers tend to be the best, followed by deputies of rural agencies. The closer you get to urban areas, the worse it gets.

Other than long hair, lots of guns, and (sometimes) a hispanic appearance, our family does not tend to have actions or appearances that tend to suggest drug use or other criminal activities, so I'm not sure how tatoos, bling, a meth head appearance, slurred speech, or simply being black would further complicate interactions with law enforcement while armed.

Of all of the LE experiences I've had while armed only one was less than pleasant. It was right after Sandy Hook. Wass in the AT&T store to get a new phone. Been in there for ten minutes or so open carrying a full size 45. Guy walks in and stands beside wearing normal clothes. Then he asks what department I'm with. Told him I'm not LE. Then he asks if I have a cc permit. Told him open carry was legal so I didn't need a permit. He then pulls out a badge and starts telling me I'm wrong. We had a small discussion in which he said he was gona make a phone call (and did) so he could get a unit there. I agreed to put my gun in the truck. He made the call then after he came back in. He told me after Sandy Hook everyone is nervous. No unit showed up and I over heard his phone call. Whoever he called set him straight on the law but he never apologized or admitted he was wrong.

[simplepeddler]

It is unclear why gov't employees place so much more trust in those making anonymous reports than in property owners, drivers, and CHL holders even after they know the property owner, driver, and/or CHL holder is law abiding.




Fear.............of the lawyers if things are not folllowed up on and turn bad.

[alphaman]

Yes they seek it out. But I think you missing my point. If a person can change they way they think. They can do better. Is what I'm saying. But by the government giving its not helping a person become better

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N920A using Tapatalk

[seachaser250]

Originally Posted by alphaman

Yes they seek it out. But I think you missing my point. If a person can change they way they think. They can do better. Is what I'm saying. But by the government giving its not helping a person become better

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N920A using Tapatalk

I agree with all that 100% except for one part. The government providing help has absolutely no bearing on the issue.

Cocaine dealers are just chomping at the bit to sell me some stuff, heck even give me a first taste for free.........despite that I have still never tried the stuff.

[alphaman]

He was Fighting i guess yes but the gun wasn t pointed at the cop so the focus should have been to put cuff on him once on the ground

The cop pulled the gun out his pocket at the end

Yes it was a critical situation but it wasnt a life threatening one. Bc the gun was in his pocket. End result shouldnt have been death. Should have been an arrested person

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N920A using Tapatalk

[Pat Babaz]

Originally Posted by alphaman

He was Fighting i guess yes but the gun wasn t pointed at the cop so the focus should have been to put cuff on him once on the ground

The cop pulled the gun out his pocket at the end

Yes it was a critical situation but it wasnt a life threatening one. Bc the gun was in his pocket. End result shouldnt have been death. Should have been an arrested person

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N920A using Tapatalk

I'm really interested in your take on this shooting due to you being law enforcement. Are the opinions of the other guys you work with that these Baton Rouge cops over reacted also?

["W"]

Originally Posted by alphaman

He was Fighting i guess yes but the gun wasn t pointed at the cop so the focus should have been to put cuff on him once on the ground

The cop pulled the gun out his pocket at the end

Yes it was a critical situation but it wasnt a life threatening one. Bc the gun was in his pocket. End result shouldnt have been death. Should have been an arrested person

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N920A using Tapatalk

You need to YouTube the video where a guy demonstrate today how you can shoot your gun ( same one Alton had) with it in your pocket

You kill the threat bottomline

No questions ask !! You as a officer have the right to go home to your family and not take the risk of getting shot by a low life thug

[marshrunner757]

I made a bad mistake by turning to CNN last night. Here's the CNN reporter who just happens to be family friends of the scum who was shot interviewing the family attorney and the aunt. Before I know it they've turned it around to this poor black man trying to support his 5 kids by selling CD's outside the store. The aunt says she didn't see a gun. They removed a cell phone from his pocket. The attorney says the man was actually outside guarding and protecting the store! These idiots will put any kind of twist on it possible. Besides that CNN should have never allowed a family friend to report on this. Totally biased media. Don't resist and comply! If you have nothing to hide, it's pretty easy. I view this as a public service by the police.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

[alphaman]

Emotions is the cause this shooting I say. He didn't shot him on purpose.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N920A using Tapatalk

[alphaman]

Over reacted and emotions are 2 different things

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N920A using Tapatalk

[alphaman]

You still have to be able to think when under a stressful situations as a police officer. Ask a cop is ok to let your emotions take over in a critical situation.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N920A using Tapatalk

[Matt G]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ckuUk9R5ES0

Watch the video. A the 6 second mark, the cop on top tries to grab his right hand and AS pulls it away. At that point they both seem to be wrestling near the guys right pocket when the first shot happens. The second officer is kneeling there staring blindly at what is happening. He’s basically no help to the other officer. The only good he's really doing is he has AS's left arm pinned with his knees.

Also, in the first video that came out, when the first officer goes for the takedown he grabs AS from behind and tries to slam him face down onto the ground/car. AS hits the hood of the car and rolls off landing on the ground face up. The officer attempted for a clean takedown that would have allowed him and the second officer to easily put the cuffs on him. Sadly it didn't happen that way. From my perspective, they did everything reasonably possible to subdue him. He fought them and lost.