LA Drug Warriors Murder Innocent 80 Year Old

[88GT]

I've never beat my kids, but that doesn't mean it doesn't happen with frighten regularity.

Along with the consideration of CI information as factually based, I am equally perturbed at the low standard for requiring RAS/PC "evidence" to be factual as well. It shouldn't be enough for "Because I said so" to justify a warrant. But then if we stopped this silly war on drugs in the first place...

 

[GunnerDan]

There's a legitimate reason for that. Just FYI

Oh really, do tell... why so he can miss whatever the hell he is attempting to ghetto aim at...

Gunner

 

[phylodog]

Well, do tell. I never knew that

See how he has to bend his elbow around the shield? Try doing that then torquing your forearm to rotate your wrist back to being vertical and shoot with any hope of accuracy. Rotating the pistol on its side like that allows the sights to be brought back in front of the eyes with much less muscle fatigue resulting in less shaking or trembling. Sights work just fine rotated 90* at close range. If I'm shooting with one hand I rotate the top of the slide toward the centerline of my body for the same reason although less than 45*.

 

[GunnerDan]

OH wait a minute... Here is what officer ghetto aim needs...

 

[GunnerDan]

See how he has to bend his elbow around the shield? Try doing that then torquing your forearm to rotate your wrist back to being vertical and shoot with any hope of accuracy. Rotating the pistol on its side like that allows the sights to be brought back in front of the eyes with much less muscle fatigue resulting in less shaking or trembling. Sights work just fine rotated 90* at close range. If I'm shooting with one hand I rotate the top of the slide toward the centerline of my body for the same reason although less than 45*.

That doosh didnt have his eyes on the sights let alone have the weapon pointed at anything other than the ground in front of whatever he was "aiming" at.

Gunner

 

[88GT]

Oh really, do tell... why so he can miss whatever the hell he is attempting to ghetto aim at...

Gunner

I imagine it's because the cant provides a different set of dynamics for aiming and repeat fire when shooting around an obstacle, in this case the shield. There is a similar self defense cant when shooting someone up close and personal, though the rotation is in the opposite direction and its purpose is to decrease the chances that the shot grazes the abdomen of the shooter. The cant actually angles the barrel away from the shooter but still allows for full targeting of the attacker who is all up in ya space. Probably not the exact same concerns for the breaching officer, but similar enough.

EDIT: and I see I was on target with the assumption.

 

[phylodog]

Holy flaming ****balls Batman!!! You're right!!! In that instant he failed to point his pistol at something he didn't intend to destroy and he also didn't hold it in a manner you find acceptable. He must be a "doosh"!!!

 

[Tombs]

Mkay... just being fair and accurate. We really should try not to pick and choose where we apply negatively-charged words... like when people call Zimmerman a "murderer".

That's quite an impressive mind you have there.

Claiming that an 80 year old is comparable to a violent street thug. Much less, an 80 year old who was shot in his own bed 6 times, verses a thug who got shot after beating a man nearly to death.

Oh right, you're one of those people who think a uniform and a badge makes you above any sort of morals.

Holy flaming ****balls Batman!!! You're right!!! In that instant he failed to point his pistol at something he didn't intend to destroy and he also didn't hold it in a manner you find acceptable. He must be a "doosh"!!!

If you're a law abiding citizen who has their door caved in, is your first assumption police? If so, god damn what a sad world we live in.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

That's quite an impressive mind you have there.

Claiming that an 80 year old is comparable to a violent street thug. Much less, an 80 year old who was shot in his own bed 6 times, verses a thug who got shot after beating a man nearly to death.

Oh right, you're one of those people who think a uniform and a badge makes you above any sort of morals.

I believe if you read back, I claim nothing of the sort.

Both of these men killed someone. I don't care what the situation was, but in this country we have the rule of law. Neither of them "murdered" their victims in the literal law-weighted definition of the word. Neither are convicted of murder.

The officer that shot the man should be treated like anyone else, and sent to court, and summarily punished to the fullest extent.

Thank you for the compliment on my impressive mind, though. I know you meant it sarcastically, but since you obviously misunderstand my position, I'll take it how it should have been.

Words mean something. If you want to apply a negative word to this moron officer, use "killer". He is a killer, and he should be punished.

 

[GunnerDan]

Holy flaming ****balls Batman!!! You're right!!! In that instant he failed to point his pistol at something he didn't intend to destroy and he also didn't hold it in a manner you find acceptable. He must be a "doosh"!!!

Look at where his eyes are pointed. Then look at where his weapon is pointed. He is looking up and to the left and he is pointing his weapon down and to the right, there isnt a snowballs chance in hell he could hit anything at all like that. And in that particular tactical configuration he should be completely focused on the target at hand. Sheesh...

But then again I must be the idiot...

Gunner

 

[phylodog]

If you're a law abiding citizen who has their door caved in, is your first assumption police? If so, god damn what a sad world we live in.

How on earth did you come up with that question after reading my post that you quoted?

 

[88GT]

I believe if you read back, I claim nothing of the sort.

Both of these men killed someone. I don't care what the situation was, but in this country we have the rule of law. Neither of them "murdered" their victims in the literal law-weighted definition of the word. Neither are convicted of murder.

The officer that shot the man should be treated like anyone else, and sent to court, and summarily punished to the fullest extent.

Thank you for the compliment on my impressive mind, though. I know you meant it sarcastically, but since you obviously misunderstand my position, I'll take it how it should have been.

Words mean something. If you want to apply a negative word to this moron officer, use "killer". He is a killer, and he should be punished.

The definition of murder is not limited to a legal one. It has a vernacular use and in this particular it applies very well.

 

[phylodog]

Look at where his eyes are pointed. Then look at where his weapon is pointed. He is looking up and to the left and he is pointing his weapon down and to the right, there isnt a snowballs chance in hell he could hit anything at all like that. And in that particular tactical configuration he should be completely focused on the target at hand. Sheesh...

But then again I must be the idiot...

Gunner

No, no, no....it's quite obvious that you're an expert. Everyone knows you shouldn't look around in that type of a situation nor should you concern yourself with pointing a firearm at something you don't intend to shoot. Was there a target at hand or were they moving toward where they expected to find a target?

 

[ArcadiaGP]

The definition of murder is not limited to a legal one. It has a vernacular use and in this particular it applies very well.

I'm aware that people use words incorrectly, and often. When presenting a story to a group of readers (INGO), however, and it pertains to a recent killing that may/may not reach a courtroom... one should be careful not to jump ahead of the verdict.

Let's break this down, though: "the unlawful premeditated killing of one human being by another."

Calling this idiot a "murderer" requires you to create feelings of ill-will and intent to kill an innocent.

I don't think ill-will and intent were present here. Just a giant irresponsible muck up that ended with an innocent man dead. It'd be slander/libelous to label him otherwise, at this point.

Granted, I think we can give OJ a pass and call him a murderer, since he wrote that dumb book and all. :P

 

[Trigger Time]

End immunity for police. Simple

"if you have nothing to hide ......."

"if your not guilty ......."

" Tell it to the judge where you can plead your case ....."

 

[GunnerDan]

No, no, no....it's quite obvious that you're an expert. Everyone knows you shouldn't look around in that type of a situation nor should you concern yourself with pointing a firearm at something you don't intend to shoot. Was there a target at hand or were they moving toward where they expected to find a target?

Yea because an entry team shouldnt be focused on the immediate threat, they should be looking around all willy nilly especially the one on point. I guess he doesnt trust the other officers to provide cover.... Really... But again like I said I am the ignorant one...

Gunner

 

[Tombs]

How on earth did you come up with that question after reading my post that you quoted?

I'm sorry you're off topic, but the case being discussed in this thread included mention of an 80 year old who was shot in his bed.

Apparently he had a 22lr revolver and may or may not have had it pointed at the door when police ran in.

 

[GunnerDan]

I'm sorry you're off topic, but the case being discussed in this thread included mention of an 80 year old who was shot in his bed.

Apparently he had a 22lr revolver and may or may not have had it pointed at the door when police ran in.

Correct like an 80 year old, or for that matter a 25 year old shouldnt be pointing a weapon at an invading force after being woke up and having mere seconds to make a split second decision to defend himself and his family.

Gunner

 

[Tombs]

I'm aware that people use words incorrectly, and often. When presenting a story to a group of readers (INGO), however, and it pertains to a recent killing that may/may not reach a courtroom... one should be careful not to jump ahead of the verdict.

Let's break this down, though: "the unlawful premeditated killing of one human being by another."

Calling this idiot a "murderer" requires you to create feelings of ill-will and intent to kill an innocent.

I don't think ill-will and intent were present here. Just a giant irresponsible muck up that ended with an innocent man dead. It'd be slander/libelous to label him otherwise, at this point.

Granted, I think we can give OJ a pass and call him a murderer, since he wrote that dumb book and all. :P

Doesn't require those things to be murder. Legal Dictionary | Law.com

It "might" require more evidence to be claimed first degree murder, but it isn't disbarred from second degree.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

Doesn't require those things to be murder. Legal Dictionary | Law.com

It "might" require more evidence to be claimed first degree murder, but it isn't disbarred from second degree.

I can agree with that. 2nd Degree would be more accurate, but until convicted, he's a killer and an idiot.

Please do not mistake my defense of vocabulary and due process to be defense of this cop.