skycop

Dude, I'd try not to defend the indefensible............ "Just 'cause I'm simple, don't mean I'm stewpid!"

Because they are pissed, if they can't control themselves after a chase because they are pissed, they are no better than the people they are chasing. These dumbasses are using up the capital the rest of us build up everyday. Like I've said before, I'll call a spade a spade. This is no different than Rodney King. Once there is that much of a numbers advantage in that close, there is no reason to hit the guy. These deputies are going to get jammed up, and for good reason. I've been in a shitload of chases and fights, there is no excuse for this type of behavior. "Just 'cause I'm simple, don't mean I'm stewpid!"

Well no shit, read my previous post. "Just 'cause I'm simple, don't mean I'm stewpid!"

I think it would be a safe bet there was a fight when the officer first went to arrest the guy on the warrant. During this fight a taser was either pulled, used or both. It doesn't, I don't care if he kicked the officers ass, you don't shoot someone in the back if they don't have a weapon as they are running away. You just don't, and he wasn't trained that way. Once the bad guy creates distance you use that to recover and regroup. The Michael Brown situation was the exact opposite, a fight in close quarters, a struggle over a gun, a shot fired, then initially Mr. Brown ran and created distance. The difference is he then turned around and came back, that was the game changer. There had already been a deadly force encounter with the gun, the officer doesn't have to let there be another one. "Just 'cause I'm simple, don't mean I'm stewpid!"

No one. "Just 'cause I'm simple, don't mean I'm stewpid!"

The passengers would have no idea of the maintenance history of the airplane. Our "victim" had an outstanding warrant for his arrest and ran from the officer. Those are intentional acts that have consequences. We both agree the consequence was far out of line for the offense. But it does not negate the intentional act that started the chain of events. Your analogies have been really lacking lately Bill.......... "Just 'cause I'm simple, don't mean I'm stewpid!"

I never said it mitigated ANYTHING, but the statement is very true. If one looks at trends in all the recent "incidents" there is one very large reoccurring theme. ALL the recent situations absolutely would have different outcomes if there was compliance. In this case there is no mitigation of the situation, the officer was COMPLETELY wrong in his actions and will pay a heavy price. To take your analogy a step further; A pilot knowingly flies an airplane with a timed-out engine and it crashes, do think the FAA would cut him any slack from a causational standpoint? We both know the answer to that question. I'm looking at this issue in the same unemotional way, hard facts and factors, period. A pilot recently intentionally crashed an airplane (from all indications) and killed over 100 people, yet there is not a thread bashing pilots. This is no different, this officer just made my job more difficult. I'm curious to see his service record, there are usually red flags from previous incidents. This guy could be a "bad apple" or he could have made an incredibly bad and potentially criminal decision. The facts will come out, and I'll call a spade a spade if the need be. Either way this guy is done, and from all appearances should be. "Just 'cause I'm simple, don't mean I'm stewpid!"

An actual answer to a factual statement. "Just 'cause I'm simple, don't mean I'm stewpid!"

So in other words you don't have an answer. "Just 'cause I'm simple, don't mean I'm stewpid!"

More riveting commentary. Please check the edit on the previous post. Yawn.......................really..............

http://attentiongainers.prochan.com/LE/t/7e5_1424356692 I now do a lot more passenger side approaches......... "Just 'cause I'm simple, don't mean I'm stewpid!"

Wow, Any credibility, see ya............... "Just 'cause I'm simple, don't mean I'm stewpid!"

Riveting commentary as usual. As I posted before, I just worked with a guy who had been shot a couple years ago while tracking a bad guy with a gun. He just did the same thing last night without hesitation, found the guy, took him into custody without incident. You my friend couldn't carry this guys jock, this will be the one and only answer to a troll. "Just 'cause I'm simple, don't mean I'm stewpid!"

I am trying to have an honest discussion, if you can't handle hard facts, I can't help that. Let's play: The "incident" involved a legal traffic stop, the person stopped then decided to run on foot. Once the officer yells stop, that by definition is verbal force, according to the use of force continuum. At this point this would be an "altercation" because of the use of force. This guy didn't want to be taken into legal custody, so who started the "altercation"? I don't think those facts are in dispute. Now who escalated the "altercation" to an unacceptable level, that appears pretty easy to tell as well. The officer So the officer was criminally charged, and rightfully so. But no one wants to acknowledge the causational factors leading up to the inappropriate and potentially/apparent criminal use of force. The officer was charged for good reason, I completely agree with it. I won't defend his actions. But the "victim" has some culpability in this as well, his actions precipitated the entire situation, many are ignoring that fact. Some of the detractors are comparing the guy who was shot to a rape victim. Now who is really trying to have an honest discussion? It's very similar to a guy going into the hood and getting shot while buying drugs. It's a crime and the perpetrator would be punished, but the "victim" wouldn't have been a victim if he chose a different behavior. "Just 'cause I'm simple, don't mean I'm stewpid!"

Altercation + incident= Semantics "Just 'cause I'm simple, don't mean I'm stewpid!"

He had a warrant for his arrest, and ran from a traffic stop. By any objective standard that is "starting" the incident. "Just 'cause I'm simple, don't mean I'm stewpid!"

I've done this for almost 30yrs without a formal complaint, I always policed as if someone was videoing me. I'm a huge proponent of body cameras, I've been wearing one for the last several years. The vast majority of times the camera provides evidence of bogus complaints, not "preventing abuses" like many detractors like to say. Sometimes they capture very ugly, but very justified actions. Even then the detractors still complain. People will see what they want to see, regardless of the reality. "Just 'cause I'm simple, don't mean I'm stewpid!"

Yes, Because causational analysis has proven to be so worthless.............. "Just 'cause I'm simple, don't mean I'm stewpid!"

I doubt the account had the ability to kill you. This is a perfect example of why we don't fire off press releases at the drop of a hat. Folks like you make comments like this, good luck on that account. Let me know if it runs around at 3am, through peoples yards, with a firearm. If it does, are you hiring? "Just 'cause I'm simple, don't mean I'm stewpid!"

There are hundreds of thousands of examples where everything was done right, or as close to right as can be expected. Last night we chased a guy who had pointed a gun at a female during a domestic. He ran and we chased him around for an hour at three o'clock in the morning, in an urban area. There were 4 agencies working setting up perimeters and chasing this dude around. A K-9 finally found him hiding, with the gun, he was challenged and dropped it and gave up. The dog didn't even bite him. As a side note, the dog handler had been shot a couple years ago while doing the very same thing. And he continues to work and put himself in danger. You won't read about this on the news, this was one incident. This same thing happens hundreds, if not thousands of times weekly throughout the country. "Just 'cause I'm simple, don't mean I'm stewpid!"

Those are media accounts, you or I have no idea what statements were made. "Just 'cause I'm simple, don't mean I'm stewpid!"

The media is taking this and running with it, as usual. The officer is screwed no doubt on this one. I watched it and all I can say is WTF? This guy was criminally charged, and rightfully so, but he is still innocent until proven guilty, should be interesting. The lesson to be learned is, this was 100% preventable. If the guy would have paid his child support, this wouldn't have happened. If he would not have run and started some type of altercation, this wouldn't have happened. The officer failed to follow policy and applicable law, if he would have, this wouldn't have happened. I agree whole heartedly with that statement. "Just 'cause I'm simple, don't mean I'm stewpid!"

You have no idea of that outcome, it's an assumption based on hyperbole. Forensics don't lie, of course except in the case of Michael Brown............ "Just 'cause I'm simple, don't mean I'm stewpid!"

Jealous? "Just 'cause I'm simple, don't mean I'm stewpid!"

Shooting ranges can be dangerous places, ask David Petraeus. "Just 'cause I'm simple, don't mean I'm stewpid!"