Swatting Arrest

[cordex]

I am not as hot about this as I was the other day, but I still think it is a bad shoot (innocent guy was shot by police so I find it hard to define any other way).  I am just not sure it is criminal or unjustified without more concrete info on exactly what happened.  

Agreed.

The problem I run into is I don't know what SOP changes could be made to prevent this that don't have negative issues in other ways.

Again, agreed.

 The courts always say the cops are not responsible for anyone's personal safety.  So I think it would be best if the SOP the cops use stay on the side of not killing innocent people rather than being the cavalry riding to the rescue.  

I'm not sure how you make that work.  In the case of a falsely reported active shooter, absolutely I want the cops to step back, sort things out and not rush in.  In the case of a real active shooter, I want them to run in and try to put a stop to it ASAP even if it puts their lives at risk because most of the time when an active shooter is confronted by an armed response they either suicide or commit suicide by proxy - which means they stop killing people. 

After the Sandy Hook shootings our own "ask/question/verify" Hawkmoon was up in arms that it took five minutes before cops made entry to the building.  But now we're expecting them to delay making contact in order to investigate prior to addressing the supposed threat?  Some people have such a strong and persistent anti-police bias that they will vehemently condemn the police no matter what they do or don't do.  Others simply condemn the police whenever there is a bad outcome (which, again, can happen even if they do everything "right") because they expect the cops to know at the time what everyone knows when the dust has settled.  As though any of us would do a better job when faced with this kind of situation.  I say: criticize the police for where they screwed up when it was preventable.  We must also recognize that there are times when cops, doctors, vehicle drivers ... anyone ... can do their best, follow reasonable procedure, and still end up with a bad result.  One last time: maybe this case was one where the cops completely screwed the pooch from start to finish, but the solutions thus far proposed in this thread to prevent future cases like this one have been absolutely laughable and worse than that almost certainly counterproductive.

Do you really think it is 100% okay for cops to come to someone's home and put them at gun point and shoot them if they don't behave just right all on what is essentially hearsay?  No, I don't think they should assume the 911 call is correct and truthful.  Stepping back from this incident, you are basically saying if someone makes a report to police against you, your rights are meaningless.  IMO, the only reason police tend to do just that is because completely fake 911 calls are don't happen very often.  

I don't know the right way to design a system such that cops never rush to make a mistake but are also always rushing in when they are needed ASAP.  If you've got a solution (hopefully more considered than we've heard so far) I'm interested to hear it.

[Hawkmoon]

I'm not sure how you make that work.  In the case of a falsely reported active shooter, absolutely I want the cops to step back, sort things out and not rush in.  In the case of a real active shooter, I want them to run in and try to put a stop to it ASAP even if it puts their lives at risk because most of the time when an active shooter is confronted by an armed response they either suicide or commit suicide by proxy - which means they stop killing people.  

Most times, when there's an active shooter there's at least one gun. If the subject isn't holding a gun, he isn't a shooter. (Maybe was a shooter two minutes ago, but no gun = no shooter.)

After the Sandy Hook shootings our own "ask/question/verify" Hawkmoon was up in arms that it took five minutes before cops made entry to the building.  But now we're expecting them to delay making contact in order to investigate prior to addressing the supposed threat?

Where did I even suggest they delay making contact? All I expect is that they'll delay killing long enough to have some indication that the person they're killing is actually a criminal perpetrator. "Making contact" doesn't have to start with putting the subject in the cross hairs and putting your finger on the trigger. What if they had done like the deputy in Texas and just had someone walk up to the house and look through a window? Wasn't that making contact?

[cordex]

Most times, when there's an active shooter there's at least one gun. If the subject isn't holding a gun, he isn't a shooter. (Maybe was a shooter two minutes ago, but no gun = no shooter.)

Ah.  Well, if you would share your crystal ball with the police then they might know ahead of time who is armed at a reported active shooting scene and who isn't.  Or do you contend that guns cannot be concealed about one's person?

Where did I even suggest they delay making contact? All I expect is that they'll delay killing long enough to have some indication that the person they're killing is actually a criminal perpetrator. "Making contact" doesn't have to start with putting the subject in the cross hairs and putting your finger on the trigger. What if they had done like the deputy in Texas and just had someone walk up to the house and look through a window? Wasn't that making contact?

No, looking through the window is not making contact.  Nor is it the appropriate solution to all calls.  During the Sandy Hook shootings how long would it have taken to look in the available school windows?  Probably longer than the 5 minutes which you decried as too long.  Police should absolutely be hesitant to shoot someone, but if a person at a reported murder scene makes a bad move - even if they are completely innocent - the police cannot in that instant determine that they are no threat to anyone.  Yes, it very rarely results in a good person getting shot, but I have yet to hear a reasonable alternative.

[zxcvbob]

So is there any news yet about whether the swatter is going to be charged with capital murder?  (Either premeditated, or under the "felony murder" rules)  I don't know how much the cops were at fault, but that guy needs to get the needle or be put away for life w/o parole -- probably the latter, but the former needs to be on the table.

[Fly320s]

So is there any news yet about whether the swatter is going to be charged with capital murder?  (Either premeditated, or under the "felony murder" rules)  I don't know how much the cops were at fault, but that guy needs to get the needle or be put away for life w/o parole -- probably the latter, but the former needs to be on the table.

I haven't heard anything, but that brings up an interesting problem.  Most likely, the shooting won't be considered murder.  It will be considered justifiable homicide or something similar.  So, if the shooting was justifiable, how can the SWATer guy be charged with murder? 

[makattak]

I haven't heard anything, but that brings up an interesting problem.  Most likely, the shooting won't be considered murder.  It will be considered justifiable homicide or something similar.  So, if the shooting was justifiable, how can the SWATer guy be charged with murder?  

When the police shoot a member of a criminal conspiracy (e.g. bank robbery) or accidentally shoot an innocent bystander, the criminal and/or his accomplice(s) can be charged with felony murder. I don't see how this is any different.

(Edited to add an example: https://www.yahoo.com/news/florida-man-charged-murder-bystanders-death-police-shot-205322027.html The laws in Kansas may differ, but I would guess that felony murder will work the same.)

[Fly320s]

When the police shoot a member of a criminal conspiracy (e.g. bank robbery) or accidentally shoot an innocent bystander, the accomplice(s) can be charged with felony murder. I don't see how this is any different.

Didn't know that.  Thanks.

[MechAg94]

Agreed.
Again, agreed.
I'm not sure how you make that work.  In the case of a falsely reported active shooter, absolutely I want the cops to step back, sort things out and not rush in.  In the case of a real active shooter, I want them to run in and try to put a stop to it ASAP even if it puts their lives at risk because most of the time when an active shooter is confronted by an armed response they either suicide or commit suicide by proxy - which means they stop killing people. 

After the Sandy Hook shootings our own "ask/question/verify" Hawkmoon was up in arms that it took five minutes before cops made entry to the building.  But now we're expecting them to delay making contact in order to investigate prior to addressing the supposed threat?  Some people have such a strong and persistent anti-police bias that they will vehemently condemn the police no matter what they do or don't do.  Others simply condemn the police whenever there is a bad outcome (which, again, can happen even if they do everything "right") because they expect the cops to know at the time what everyone knows when the dust has settled.  As though any of us would do a better job when faced with this kind of situation.  I say: criticize the police for where they screwed up when it was preventable.  We must also recognize that there are times when cops, doctors, vehicle drivers ... anyone ... can do their best, follow reasonable procedure, and still end up with a bad result.  One last time: maybe this case was one where the cops completely screwed the pooch from start to finish, but the solutions thus far proposed in this thread to prevent future cases like this one have been absolutely laughable and worse than that almost certainly counterproductive.
I don't know the right way to design a system such that cops never rush to make a mistake but are also always rushing in when they are needed ASAP.  If you've got a solution (hopefully more considered than we've heard so far) I'm interested to hear it.

My thoughts were more in line with removing barriers to people defending themselves and others no matter where they are rather than solely depending on police to show up quickly.  Lots of different cases and situations.  There is likely no perfect answer since police can't be everywhere. 

I was wondering if the shooting in Colorado fits into this discussion but I haven't read much on it yet.

[zxcvbob]

I haven't heard anything, but that brings up an interesting problem.  Most likely, the shooting won't be considered murder.  It will be considered justifiable homicide or something similar.  So, if the shooting was justifiable, how can the SWATer guy be charged with murder? 

IMO, the cop was the murder weapon, not the murderer.

[230RN]

"I was wondering if the shooting in Colorado fits into this discussion but I haven't read much on it yet."

It was apparently an ambush the cops situation.

https://www.denverpost.com/2017/12/31/officers-down-and-swat-on-scene-in-douglas-county/

You can data mine more from that original information, but I'm so upset about it that frankly, I've been avoiding "studying" it.

Why can't these puckheads just put a stout plastic bag over their heads to avoid splatter and just off themselves outside near an emergency ward, where the staff is used to handling gory messes.

That kind of increase in the suicide statistics I would like to see.

Terry :-(

[cordex]

My thoughts were more in line with removing barriers to people defending themselves and others no matter where they are rather than solely depending on police to show up quickly. 

I completely agree with that as well.

[Jim147]

Swatter been charged with making a false report.

[KD5NRH]

Why can't these puckheads just put a stout plastic bag over their heads to avoid splatter and just off themselves outside near an emergency ward, where the staff is used to handling gory messes.

Oddly, I've personally known one, and heard accounts from the finders of two other handgun suicides where the gun had been unloaded except for the single round, the victim was in the bathroom, and had at least made some effort to have the mess be contained.  Seemed oddly considerate, especially since they all did it in a place where those closest to them would still end up being the ones to find the bodies.

Personally, I've always figured if it came down to a situation where it was the only option, (like an excruciatingly painful terminal illness or something) I just want to wander off in the woods and do it somewhere the coyotes and feral hogs can deal with the mess.  More likely, though, I'd just take up enough suitably "extreme" activities (the sort of things I currently don't do because of the likelihood of dying from them, like free climbing and cave diving) that I'd almost certainly be killed by one of them.

[230RN]

I think R. M. McKenna, who wrote ""The Corps" series, set one up fictionally where the party removed all but one round from his 1911 mag so the slide would lock back, showing the finders that the gun was no longer loaded.

Medically-assisted suicide was recently legalized here in Colorado, but I never looked into it any deeper than just picking it up on a news report.  My first thought was that would hopefully reduce the gun (EEK!) suicide (EEK ! EEK !) statistics.

[KD5NRH]

I think R. M. McKenna, who wrote ""The Corps" series, set one up fictionally where the party removed all but one round from his 1911 mag so the slide would lock back, showing the finders that the gun was no longer loaded.

A former coworker who had been a deputy for years claimed that was pretty common among the ones who put some thought into it.  Also said it was why he hated suspicious vehicle calls; his first year, he found two suicides while checking suspicious cars, one with a slide-locked auto.

[tokugawa]

So if the cops acted reasonably because they were fed a unverifiable load of crap over the phone, what does that mean for us all?
 
 I am dead serious here- if the cops have no ability or reason to validate a message that has such severe repercussions and effectiveness, consider the implications in a political context- this is about as consequence free as an assassination gets.
 
 I think that cop was trigger happy or had buck fever- and have reason to believe, based on many comments by police officers,  that the current training tends to reinforce the "don't hesitate, shoot first, make sure you come home at the end of your shift" mentality.
  The thing about this that really bugs me, and I suspect bugs the others who are upset, is that there was NO other indications- no shots, no neighbors calling, , no nothing to indicate there was really any bad stuff going on. None. No actions on the part of the victim, either. 
 You guys supporting the position of the cops keep bringing up how everybody condemned the police because of their lack of speed in responding to other shooting- but almost every one I can recall, there was a definite situation going on, and they knew i. Nobody claimed at Columbine or Orlando that they had any question about the general situation- It was pretty damned clear there was some bad stuff  going on.

  One of the best comments about this I have read was by a guy who trained entry teams in Iraq. He said they got a lot of calls by disgruntled neighbors or people who has a feud with others, saying Mr X was a terrorist bad guy, hoping he would get taken out by the raid team. He said the Army had spent a ton of money and time trying to resolve the issue and largely failed- his comment was. "once the team starts rolling it is very very hard to keep them from shooting someone, or words to that effect.
 
 

[Blakenzy]

"paramilitary police State on parade..."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T6mNDTkGzEw&list=RDMMluuqhAS0x6o&index=3

[Scout26]

IMO, the cop was the murder weapon, not the murderer.

This.

[Blakenzy]

But the cop isn't a mindless tool (like a weapon), he is a sentient individual trained in the judicious use of lethal force with full control over his actions and as such is ultimately responsible for everything he does. Unless laws, police policy and training as a whole are corrupt, placing zero value on citizen life by design promoting negligence and guaranteeing impunity...

...what the hell kind of morons are being drafted into the police force?
Are we there already?



More police officers need to go to prison until the ranks are cleared of the inept.

[MechAg94]

Will big lawsuits against the local governments get enough attention to force a change in police procedures/training on this or will it require police going to prison?  Or perhaps I should ask if the known incidents are generating enough publicity to encourage changes, will it take more incidents, or will more be needed? 

I am not in a position to know past history on that.  

[Pb]

When cops kill completely innocent people, they are rarely punished.  This is a serious problem.

What would happen to CCWers who shot innocent people making "furtive movements"?

[MechAg94]

When cops kill completely innocent people, they are rarely punished.  This is a serious problem.

What would happen to CCWers who shot innocent people making "furtive movements"?

A CCWer would be in prison.  However, if the CCW was told by someone else that person was a threat, then they would be okay. 

[Fly320s]

What would happen to CCWers who shot innocent people making "furtive movements"?

Who knows?  What other circumstance contributed to the shooting?  Is there more to the story?  Did the CCWer adequately describe the reasoning behind the shooting?  What jurisdiction?  How does the DA feel about CCWers?

In other words, you can't just simplify a complex situation down to one issue.

[Fly320s]

A CCWer would be in prison.  However, if the CCW was told by someone else that person was a threat, then they would be okay.  

There are hundreds or thousands of similar situations every year that normal people get caught up in.  What percentage of those people are prosecuted?

[MechAg94]

There are hundreds or thousands of similar situations every year that normal people get caught up in.  What percentage of those people are prosecuted?

How similar?  You are painting with a broad brush.  

Are you saying there are hundreds of thousands of situations where a CCWer shoots someone because they moved their hand toward their waist?  I doubt that.  That doesn't happen to police that often.

This particular incident was a little different, but beyond the short clip of video, not a whole lot is confirmed.