So the guy runs when he realizes that he's going to be searched and caught with a gun on him. While he's running, his fashionable saggy pants cant hold the gun and it falls onto the ground. He decides to stop and picks up the gun. So when he's shot, he has a gun in his hand. And that equals police brutality in your opinion? An interesting definition you have, both of that and of what a defensive gun use is. Keep in mind that while you might be able to argue that a civilian permit holder shouldn't be chasing a bad guy like this, at some level there is an expectation that a police officer will.
"The video shows Walker run away and McMillin give chase. The suspect then stops to bend over and pick up something he has dropped in the street. From the video, it is not clear what he is attempting to retrieve, but police say it was a loaded semiautomatic pistol. McMillin fires five shots at Walker, who had set off running again, which strike and kill the young man. The unedited footage shows Walker fall over into a ditch."
"Muskogee police Cpl. Mike Mahan said Walker had been threatening to kill his ex-girlfriend, saying he “had a bullet with her name on it,” KJRH reported."
“I really don’t think that that police officer felt like he had any other choice," said Danita Week, "but I feel really bad for the young man who was shot, too."
I watched it. And this speaks to the legality of police shooting an armed fleeing suspect. The officer was there because it had been reported that Walker had threatened to shoot his ex when she left the church. I believe Tennessee vs. Garner is the case concerning this,
"Tennessee v. Garner, 471 U.S. 1 (1985)[1], was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that under the Fourth Amendment, when a law enforcement officer is pursuing a fleeing suspect, he or she may not use deadly force to prevent escape unless the officer has probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a significant threat of death or serious physical injury to the officer or others."
That's total bullshit. The guy wasn't running towards his ex in order to murder her. He we fleeing from the cop, who murdered the guy rather than let him go.
"The guy wasn't running towards his ex in order to murder her."
According to reports, he was waiting outside the church she was in. He had told her he had a bullet with her name on it and was apparently waiting outside to make good on his promise. Just because someone is interrupted before the crime is complete, doesn't mean you get to run away and try again some other time. If the officer, as you contend shot him to prevent his escape, why did he wait till after he stopped to pick something up?
ss, that sounds like you favor summary execution before the commission of the crime. And shooting a guy in the back in order to prevent him from carrying out a threat, if technically legal, which I doubt, is a disgraceful moral injustice.
That's just about the worst cop shooting I've ever seen. Maybe the guy in New Mexico who liked to camp out in the hills was just as bad or probably worse. But that was cold-blooded. Like Nazi Germany.
From what I could tell, the cop did not draw his weapon until the guy running away stopped, turned toward the cop and picked up a gun from the ground. At that point the cop sees a man facing him with a gun. Should he wait and see if the guy plans on pointing the gun at him and shooting? How many shots should the cop let the other guy fire before shooting at him? I place this guys death at his own feet. It is very simple to not get shot by the police. I would say if the guy did not run and then pick up a gun the cop would not have shot him.
But he did wait. The cop didn't shoot while the guy was picking up the gun. He shot him a couple seconds later after the guy continued running away. His back was to the cop at the time of the shooting.
Mike, the cop drew his weapon when he saw the guy stop to pick up the gun. At that point the officer had probably decided to shoot before the guy could aim his gun at him. The officer did not wait, he aimed and fired. He continued to shoot until the man with the gun stopped moving. Even then, the officer would not approach the man until other officers arrived just in case the guy was faking. Again, it is pretty simple to avoid being shot by the police most of the time. Don't run away, and if you do, don't stop to pick up a gun you dropped.
Mike the officer started shooting as soon as he had his gun drawn and aimed. The officer was not running with his weapon in hand. You can tell that he pulls his weapon when he sees the guy stop to pick up the gun he dropped. If you freeze the video at the time the guy is picking up the gun the guy is completely facing the officer and in the process of picking up a deadly weapon. In that instance, the cop has to decide what to do. He drew his weapon, aimed, and fired until the armed suspect stopped moving. I am sorry but I see nothing wrong here. Again, if the guy did not run and pick up a gun he would not have been shot.
If the cop decided to shoot when the suspect was facing him and took another second or two to actually pull the trigger by which time the suspect had once again turned his back and was fleeing, it's a bad shoot.
I’ve stayed away from this one so far, because I don’t think it is cut and dry by any means, but you seem to be acknowledging something that is very important, Mike. There is a delay in human brain processing information and turning it into action. The officer has to make a decision on whether or not to shoot when he sees the guy picking up the gun. He doesn’t know whether his next action will be to turn and run some more, or raise the gun and shoot. If he waits for the later, it is too late for the officer. If the guy turns and runs, he is likely to get shot in the back. Humans are not robots that can operate in millisecond response times, so why are you so sure this is a bad shoot? I am far more concerned when there is no gun and it’s one of those “he was reaching for his waistband” shoots.
There was too much time for that to explain it, TS. And it's pretty inconsistent for you to talk about "a delay in human brain processing" in this case to excuse the cop's crime when you often tell us how a trained person can change magazines and resume firing extremely quickly. Now, all of a sudden, with finger on the trigger there's a delay?
Delay in processing information and then acting on that information has nothing to do with how long it takes someone to change a magazine. In fact, it's more in line with the time it takes for someone to notice that a spree shooter is reloading and try to do something, which is a worthlessly short amount of time (without your own gun). Still, it takes 2-5 seconds to do a mag swap, we're not talking about that amount of time here. The guy didn't start running after picking up his gun and then five seconds later the cop opens fire. If your only point is that the cop should have fired only three times instead of five, I might be inclined to agree with you, but he started shooting at an appropriate time. Unfortunately, he did chose wrong. The guy was going to run again instead of shoot at the cop, but there was no sure way of knowing that. So this shooting should be looked at closely and scrutinized. It's just far from murder, and far from the most egregious cop shootings out there to criticize.
One of the fundamental differences is when white people walk around armed they don't feel in danger from police. Often times if an LEO makes contact with them they are defiant and aggressive. We've seen the Open Carry Texas gun maniacs threaten Police Officers and State Representatives without fear of any kind.
It's a fundamental difference.
As to this incient, it's tricky, stopping to pick up the gun caused a reaction by the Officer at which point the time the decision makig process doesn't afford him the luxury of waiting to see if the 'pick up the gun' is followed by turn towards and shoot or turn away and run.
But, again it's the fact that a white guy with the stones to carry a gun would be threatening the Oficer with violating his 2nd Amendment Rights in similar cases instead of knowing gun=death sentence.
"As to this incient, it's tricky, stopping to pick up the gun caused a reaction by the Officer at which point the time the decision makig process doesn't afford him the luxury of waiting to see if the 'pick up the gun' is followed by turn towards and shoot or turn away and run."
Hi Gene, I am staring to see some claims out there that it wasn't a dropped gun, but a dropped cell phone. An observation was also made that Missouri is an open carry state and being caught with a gun wouldn't be a big deal. So the question is, what caused him to decide to run? Haven't heard for example whether he's a prohibited person, or in light of the domestic violence issues, whether a restraining order would have made him packing a no-no. I imagine it might be a little bit before we hear anything more substantive.
Well if its a phone this shot looks much much worse. And one of the points of my past was that open carry laws aren't designed for black men. They don't get that luxury. Ill see if the police report is online.
I haven't seen any kind of official report and my guess is that it might be a while, though hopefully not as long as the Michael Brown shooting. I'm more inclined to think it was a gun for the simple fact that the gun was laying on the ground near the body, which would suggest he was holding on to it.
The report appears not to have been released according to official statements the Police are claiming it is the gun that dropped and the 911 caller states the deceased came with a gun.
But, to unlike some off the other recent shootings I don't think the Officer overreacted or placed himself into "Officer created jeopardy" here, the at most 2 seconds we are talking of seeing the deceased drop something and the Officer having to decide threat/no threat make this a justified shoot.
Of course, my point that a white perp who came with a gun to shhot his ex-girlfriend at the wedding would have be hostile and beligerent and demanded the officer back off because 2A, still stands.
It's simple: If he pulled a gun on the cop, justified shooting; if he pulled a cell phone, not a justified shooting, and the cop should know the difference. I don't understand why he would have pulled a cell phone on the cop he was running from.
I watched this video several times. I put it up on a big screen, cut the sound and ran it in slow motion. He had a gun, he dropped the gun, he stopped to pick up the gun, he while in a half crouch pointed the gun at the officer. The cops recovered the gun, it was loaded with a full mag and one in the chamber, hammer back and safety off. He ran because he had the gun and probably possessed it illegally.
This was a proper shoot. The officer defended himself and in the process stopped a dangerous person from harming others.
I said "if" because I couldn't see it clearly. I don't have the ability to do what Gunsmoke did. Follow up on this and some of your other stories would be nice. IF it's correct that the guy made a death threat against his girlfriend, the cop had a duty to question him. Running from the police is never a good idea and would give credence that he might be guilty. Like many Americans it seems to me the cops are a little "trigger happy" but I have to rely on official investigations to decide if an action was justified. I know cops lie to protect each other. I support all cops wearing cams, but that doesn't always give us a definitive answer.
C'mon, man, you're saying with your sophisticated equipment you could see that he pointed the gun at the cop, decided not to shoot, and then turned away and resumed running? That still doesn't explain why the cop took so long to shoot him.
Cop didn't shoot until the perp picked up the gun and pointed, by the time the cop had drawn his the perp decided to run. Gun in the perp hand, confrontation with cop is a bad combination any way you look at it. You do that anywhere and your sure to be shot, period. A CHL holder may not legally shoot an armed bad guy running from him as a CHL holder is not bound by duty to protect the public at large, but a cop is. It's a good shoot.
Lols, sophisticated equipment? How about a 50 inch smart TV with Internet connection and built in editing software for less than 500 at Wally World. Speed it up, slow it down, blow it up, shrink it down. A five year old can do it. And all you have to do is watch the whole video YOU posted, all of it. It's all right there, plain as day.
I have watched this many times and there's not really that much that can be determined from it for certain.
In the story linkabove there is a part where the police determine MANY things which to me most seen like pure bullshit or irrelevant banter you get from these people. Maybe they have high def I don't know - we do not here. but - - - - -
What can be said FOR SURE is this man was shot in the back and killed by someone who is supposed to "serve and protect" while running away and posing at that moment little or no threat.
I don't know about the rest of you or some I do that when you have a society where it's legal to shoot people in the back running away from you (there's a caveat here of course and that is if there had been shots fired at this officer and there was not) you have serious issues about the power given to these people who have a badge a gun and a license to kill at will which they do often across the country.
I believe in Denver four people in the last seven months have been shot and killed by badges in their cars the cops said were being used as a weapon. The latest a 17 year old a couple days ago.
I don't give a shit these fuckers do NOT have to kill like they do. I'm fucking sick of it and their reasons why.
Sounds as if your decidedly anti-cop, One Fly. So without cops who are left to enforce all these all important laws that Fred reveres so much? So we don't need cops, right One Fly? I mean cops kill too many people after all. Without cops, we don't need laws, right Fred? How in the world will we ever be safe with these kill happy cops and laws that don't work. How?
This is what you call murder.
ReplyDeleteGood thing that the nice police officer managed to stop Mr "Wwanna kill my girlfriend before he got the chance to commit that bad ole murder!!!
DeleteI find the shooting more than a little troubling, but what "lie" did the cop tell?
ReplyDeleteWatch the video to the end.
DeleteSo the guy runs when he realizes that he's going to be searched and caught with a gun on him. While he's running, his fashionable saggy pants cant hold the gun and it falls onto the ground.
ReplyDeleteHe decides to stop and picks up the gun. So when he's shot, he has a gun in his hand. And that equals police brutality in your opinion? An interesting definition you have, both of that and of what a defensive gun use is.
Keep in mind that while you might be able to argue that a civilian permit holder shouldn't be chasing a bad guy like this, at some level there is an expectation that a police officer will.
"The video shows Walker run away and McMillin give chase. The suspect then stops to bend over and pick up something he has dropped in the street.
From the video, it is not clear what he is attempting to retrieve, but police say it was a loaded semiautomatic pistol.
McMillin fires five shots at Walker, who had set off running again, which strike and kill the young man. The unedited footage shows Walker fall over into a ditch."
"Muskogee police Cpl. Mike Mahan said Walker had been threatening to kill his ex-girlfriend, saying he “had a bullet with her name on it,” KJRH reported."
“I really don’t think that that police officer felt like he had any other choice," said Danita Week, "but I feel really bad for the young man who was shot, too."
http://news.yahoo.com/oklahoma-police-release-video-of-cop-fatally-shooting-armed--fleeing-man-172450903.html
Didn't you watch the video either? The guy was running away when the cop shot him.
DeleteI watched it. And this speaks to the legality of police shooting an armed fleeing suspect. The officer was there because it had been reported that Walker had threatened to shoot his ex when she left the church.
DeleteI believe Tennessee vs. Garner is the case concerning this,
"Tennessee v. Garner, 471 U.S. 1 (1985)[1], was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that under the Fourth Amendment, when a law enforcement officer is pursuing a fleeing suspect, he or she may not use deadly force to prevent escape unless the officer has probable cause to believe that the suspect poses a significant threat of death or serious physical injury to the officer or others."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tennessee_v._Garner
That's total bullshit. The guy wasn't running towards his ex in order to murder her. He we fleeing from the cop, who murdered the guy rather than let him go.
Delete"The guy wasn't running towards his ex in order to murder her."
DeleteAccording to reports, he was waiting outside the church she was in. He had told her he had a bullet with her name on it and was apparently waiting outside to make good on his promise. Just because someone is interrupted before the crime is complete, doesn't mean you get to run away and try again some other time.
If the officer, as you contend shot him to prevent his escape, why did he wait till after he stopped to pick something up?
ss, that sounds like you favor summary execution before the commission of the crime. And shooting a guy in the back in order to prevent him from carrying out a threat, if technically legal, which I doubt, is a disgraceful moral injustice.
DeleteThat's just about the worst cop shooting I've ever seen. Maybe the guy in New Mexico who liked to camp out in the hills was just as bad or probably worse. But that was cold-blooded. Like Nazi Germany.
ReplyDeleteFrom what I could tell, the cop did not draw his weapon until the guy running away stopped, turned toward the cop and picked up a gun from the ground. At that point the cop sees a man facing him with a gun. Should he wait and see if the guy plans on pointing the gun at him and shooting? How many shots should the cop let the other guy fire before shooting at him? I place this guys death at his own feet. It is very simple to not get shot by the police. I would say if the guy did not run and then pick up a gun the cop would not have shot him.
ReplyDeleteBut he did wait. The cop didn't shoot while the guy was picking up the gun. He shot him a couple seconds later after the guy continued running away. His back was to the cop at the time of the shooting.
DeleteMike, the cop drew his weapon when he saw the guy stop to pick up the gun. At that point the officer had probably decided to shoot before the guy could aim his gun at him. The officer did not wait, he aimed and fired. He continued to shoot until the man with the gun stopped moving. Even then, the officer would not approach the man until other officers arrived just in case the guy was faking. Again, it is pretty simple to avoid being shot by the police most of the time. Don't run away, and if you do, don't stop to pick up a gun you dropped.
DeleteThe officer did wait. The video shows that he did not shoot at the moment the fleeing guy stopped but after he started running away again.
DeleteMike the officer started shooting as soon as he had his gun drawn and aimed. The officer was not running with his weapon in hand. You can tell that he pulls his weapon when he sees the guy stop to pick up the gun he dropped. If you freeze the video at the time the guy is picking up the gun the guy is completely facing the officer and in the process of picking up a deadly weapon. In that instance, the cop has to decide what to do. He drew his weapon, aimed, and fired until the armed suspect stopped moving. I am sorry but I see nothing wrong here. Again, if the guy did not run and pick up a gun he would not have been shot.
DeleteIf the cop decided to shoot when the suspect was facing him and took another second or two to actually pull the trigger by which time the suspect had once again turned his back and was fleeing, it's a bad shoot.
DeleteI can't believe you're defending it.
I’ve stayed away from this one so far, because I don’t think it is cut and dry by any means, but you seem to be acknowledging something that is very important, Mike. There is a delay in human brain processing information and turning it into action. The officer has to make a decision on whether or not to shoot when he sees the guy picking up the gun. He doesn’t know whether his next action will be to turn and run some more, or raise the gun and shoot. If he waits for the later, it is too late for the officer. If the guy turns and runs, he is likely to get shot in the back. Humans are not robots that can operate in millisecond response times, so why are you so sure this is a bad shoot? I am far more concerned when there is no gun and it’s one of those “he was reaching for his waistband” shoots.
DeleteThere was too much time for that to explain it, TS. And it's pretty inconsistent for you to talk about "a delay in human brain processing" in this case to excuse the cop's crime when you often tell us how a trained person can change magazines and resume firing extremely quickly. Now, all of a sudden, with finger on the trigger there's a delay?
DeleteDelay in processing information and then acting on that information has nothing to do with how long it takes someone to change a magazine. In fact, it's more in line with the time it takes for someone to notice that a spree shooter is reloading and try to do something, which is a worthlessly short amount of time (without your own gun). Still, it takes 2-5 seconds to do a mag swap, we're not talking about that amount of time here. The guy didn't start running after picking up his gun and then five seconds later the cop opens fire. If your only point is that the cop should have fired only three times instead of five, I might be inclined to agree with you, but he started shooting at an appropriate time. Unfortunately, he did chose wrong. The guy was going to run again instead of shoot at the cop, but there was no sure way of knowing that. So this shooting should be looked at closely and scrutinized. It's just far from murder, and far from the most egregious cop shootings out there to criticize.
DeleteOne of the fundamental differences is when white people walk around armed they don't feel in danger from police. Often times if an LEO makes contact with them they are defiant and aggressive. We've seen the Open Carry Texas gun maniacs threaten Police Officers and State Representatives without fear of any kind.
ReplyDeleteIt's a fundamental difference.
As to this incient, it's tricky, stopping to pick up the gun caused a reaction by the Officer at which point the time the decision makig process doesn't afford him the luxury of waiting to see if the 'pick up the gun' is followed by turn towards and shoot or turn away and run.
But, again it's the fact that a white guy with the stones to carry a gun would be threatening the Oficer with violating his 2nd Amendment Rights in similar cases instead of knowing gun=death sentence.
"As to this incient, it's tricky, stopping to pick up the gun caused a reaction by the Officer at which point the time the decision makig process doesn't afford him the luxury of waiting to see if the 'pick up the gun' is followed by turn towards and shoot or turn away and run."
DeleteHi Gene, I am staring to see some claims out there that it wasn't a dropped gun, but a dropped cell phone. An observation was also made that Missouri is an open carry state and being caught with a gun wouldn't be a big deal.
So the question is, what caused him to decide to run? Haven't heard for example whether he's a prohibited person, or in light of the domestic violence issues, whether a restraining order would have made him packing a no-no.
I imagine it might be a little bit before we hear anything more substantive.
What caused the cop to shoot a fleeing man in the back is the bigger question.
DeleteWell if its a phone this shot looks much much worse. And one of the points of my past was that open carry laws aren't designed for black men. They don't get that luxury. Ill see if the police report is online.
Delete" Ill see if the police report is online."
DeleteI haven't seen any kind of official report and my guess is that it might be a while, though hopefully not as long as the Michael Brown shooting.
I'm more inclined to think it was a gun for the simple fact that the gun was laying on the ground near the body, which would suggest he was holding on to it.
The report appears not to have been released according to official statements the Police are claiming it is the gun that dropped and the 911 caller states the deceased came with a gun.
DeleteBut, to unlike some off the other recent shootings I don't think the Officer overreacted or placed himself into "Officer created jeopardy" here, the at most 2 seconds we are talking of seeing the deceased drop something and the Officer having to decide threat/no threat make this a justified shoot.
Of course, my point that a white perp who came with a gun to shhot his ex-girlfriend at the wedding would have be hostile and beligerent and demanded the officer back off because 2A, still stands.
It's simple: If he pulled a gun on the cop, justified shooting; if he pulled a cell phone, not a justified shooting, and the cop should know the difference. I don't understand why he would have pulled a cell phone on the cop he was running from.
ReplyDeleteHe didn't pull anything, Sandra. He was running away and dropped something, stopped to pick it up and continued fleeing. The cop murdered him.
DeleteI watched this video several times. I put it up on a big screen, cut the sound and ran it in slow motion. He had a gun, he dropped the gun, he stopped to pick up the gun, he while in a half crouch pointed the gun at the officer. The cops recovered the gun, it was loaded with a full mag and one in the chamber, hammer back and safety off. He ran because he had the gun and probably possessed it illegally.
DeleteThis was a proper shoot. The officer defended himself and in the process stopped a dangerous person from harming others.
This was not murder.
Sandra was right.
I said "if" because I couldn't see it clearly. I don't have the ability to do what Gunsmoke did. Follow up on this and some of your other stories would be nice. IF it's correct that the guy made a death threat against his girlfriend, the cop had a duty to question him. Running from the police is never a good idea and would give credence that he might be guilty.
DeleteLike many Americans it seems to me the cops are a little "trigger happy" but I have to rely on official investigations to decide if an action was justified. I know cops lie to protect each other. I support all cops wearing cams, but that doesn't always give us a definitive answer.
C'mon, man, you're saying with your sophisticated equipment you could see that he pointed the gun at the cop, decided not to shoot, and then turned away and resumed running? That still doesn't explain why the cop took so long to shoot him.
DeleteCop didn't shoot until the perp picked up the gun and pointed, by the time the cop had drawn his the perp decided to run. Gun in the perp hand, confrontation with cop is a bad combination any way you look at it. You do that anywhere and your sure to be shot, period. A CHL holder may not legally shoot an armed bad guy running from him as a CHL holder is not bound by duty to protect the public at large, but a cop is. It's a good shoot.
DeleteLols, sophisticated equipment? How about a 50 inch smart TV with Internet connection and built in editing software for less than 500 at Wally World. Speed it up, slow it down, blow it up, shrink it down. A five year old can do it. And all you have to do is watch the whole video YOU posted, all of it. It's all right there, plain as day.
DeleteI have watched this many times and there's not really that much that can be determined from it for certain.
ReplyDeleteIn the story linkabove there is a part where the police determine MANY things which to me most seen like pure bullshit or irrelevant banter you get from these people. Maybe they have high def I don't know - we do not here. but - - - - -
What can be said FOR SURE is this man was shot in the back and killed by someone who is supposed to "serve and protect" while running away and posing at that moment little or no threat.
I don't know about the rest of you or some I do that when you have a society where it's legal to shoot people in the back running away from you (there's a caveat here of course and that is if there had been shots fired at this officer and there was not) you have serious issues about the power given to these people who have a badge a gun and a license to kill at will which they do often across the country.
I believe in Denver four people in the last seven months have been shot and killed by badges in their cars the cops said were being used as a weapon. The latest a 17 year old a couple days ago.
I don't give a shit these fuckers do NOT have to kill like they do. I'm fucking sick of it and their reasons why.
Sounds as if your decidedly anti-cop, One Fly. So without cops who are left to enforce all these all important laws that Fred reveres so much? So we don't need cops, right One Fly? I mean cops kill too many people after all. Without cops, we don't need laws, right Fred? How in the world will we ever be safe with these kill happy cops and laws that don't work. How?
DeleteWell??