In the space of eight months, Philadelphia Police Officer Larry Shields twice made the decision to shoot.
The first time, Shields shot and wounded a man who he said had pointed a Glock at him in a North Philadelphia house. The wounded man has since sued the city, but he was arrested after the encounter and police Internal Affairs and the District Attorney's Office have backed Shields.
The second time, Shields fired upon an unarmed man in the victim's Southwest Philadelphia house.
This spring, the city paid the wounded man $2.5 million to settle a lawsuit, the biggest such payout in connection with a police shooting in at least a decade.
But again, the District Attorney's Office ruled it a justified shooting.
Too bad this dangerous cop wasn't disarmed the first time he shot someone who didn't need shootin'. Maybe after the third or fourth such incident they will. Pro-gun crybabies will be happy to know that around here we believe in equal treatment for reckless gun owners, cops as well as civilians.
"On April 25, 2011 Officer Shields was off duty and in civilian clothing, when he was helping a relative move on the 4000 block of Worth Street. As he was unloading a truck he observed Joshua Taylor outside of another home on the street with a gun in his hand. Officer Shields identified himself as a police officer and approached Taylor; Taylor took off and ran inside a home on Worth Street. Shields ran after Taylor following him inside the home. Once inside Shields was confronted by Taylor, who had the gun in his hand and was pointing it at the officer. Officer Shields then fired one time striking Taylor in the chest. Taylor’s firearm, which was loaded with seventeen live rounds, was recovered from the floor of the home."
ReplyDeletehttp://phillyda.wordpress.com/2011/10/07/officer-cleared-of-criminal-charges/
This isnt sounding as reckless as your article suggests.
You're right, only the second incident was reckless and merited the one-strike-you're-out treatment.
DeleteYou're right, only the second incident was reckless and merited the one-strike-you're-out treatment.
DeleteSo, to which shooting are you referring here?
Too bad this dangerous cop wasn't disarmed the first time he shot someone who didn't need shootin'.
Since, ss showed me the details of the first shooting, my complaint lies only with the second one, as it would any time a guy with a gun shoots an unarmed guy.
DeleteSince, ss showed me the details of the first shooting, my complaint lies only with the second one . . .
DeleteAre you starting to understand yet why many of us tend not to trust your headlong rushes to judgment, with your shrill demand to "arrest the white male gun owner!" given your obvious disinterest in gathering sufficient facts first?
That's Shield's version of events.
DeleteYou are naive and gullible if you believe the police version of either shooting by Officer Larry Shields. The Philadelphia police department is world famous for its brutality and corruption; just check out its Wiki page for misconduct, the longest of any police force on earth. One website even named Larry Shields as "America's Most Dangerous Cop". The fact that Shields shot two residents in their own homes in separate incidents suggests that something is seriously wrong with the officer.
DeleteYet, if I come out against this maniac cop, people like Kurt will come to his defense. Typical of the capriciousness of the gun rights fanatics, whatever a gun control advocates says, they oppose in a knee-jerk response.
DeleteI never defended Shields--he may very well be just as dangerous as he is being made out to be. I merely pointed out one of the many obvious reasons that your judgment on that issue cannot be trusted.
DeleteOh, so you agree with my judgment but my judgment cannot be trusted. Good one, Kurt.
DeleteYour glib, insulting comments are no longer welcome, Kurt. Those which are limited to on-topic remarks which contain no personal attacks are, as always.
DeleteThe DA ruled the second shooting as justified. That would be the DA that you want to swoop in whenever there's a shooting of any kind, make an arrest, put the shooter on trial, and secure a conviction. Except the DA didn't see a crime here.
ReplyDeleteSo will you now demand a new government entity in your quest for gun control?
Well, that covers it. DAs are never influenced by politics or bias.
DeleteAs would be any tribunal that you propose to decide whether we get to own and carry guns or not. Get it?
DeleteSure, they can be. Of course, in my experience that bias tends to run more in your direction when it comes to treatment of common folks who carry. With cops, yes, there is bias toward protecting them, but it's not because of some bias toward guns, it's because it's their team, and screw the "civilians" (which they are too), their team must be protected at all costs.
DeleteMore of your insults calling us crybabies. And where did you start using this term? Why, when we said that people should be treated equally under the law.
ReplyDeleteI know, it's such a horrible, irrational request.
Go sit in the corner.
You rock, Tennessean.
DeleteInquisition cop is becoming the norm in the US. What people are not aware of is a video black market. State of the art, these victims are being targeted for rendition, police walking off with light sentencing, if any, and rewarded with alternative careers afterword.
ReplyDeleteJosh taylor is my husband and he was found not guilty the cop was found at fault,thank you for you opinions but none of you were there,you only read what the media puts out there
ReplyDeleteso it's o.k.for any idiot to run into your home with street chothes on with a gun in his hand and this homeowner can't defend himself. Any moron or thug cop can scream that he's a cop,and your supposed to fall to the ground begging this credant not to kill me . I WILL DEFEND MY HOME WITH DEADLY FORCE IF SOME NO GOOD BRUTE IS BREAKING IN. period. dw
ReplyDeletedon't bother !!!!!!!! dw
ReplyDelete