Police Respond To Wrong House And Shoot Its Homeowner when he refuses to put down gun
163 replies, posted
[QUOTE=MaximLaHaxim;50492232]What?[/QUOTE]
We've already established that if someone has intent to shoot and raising their gun they're already shooting. You said you know multiple countries where that's the only condition someone can shoot. I asked which countries.
[editline]10th June 2016[/editline]
[QUOTE=MaximLaHaxim;50492242]Then it requires fast reaction time, something a police officer should have anyways.
I will never accept police resorting to violence unless the suspect clearly has hostile intentions.[/QUOTE]
You're not going to react faster than a bullet. This isn't a video game where they move so slow oh can dodge them.
you also never answered how you know it's so easy to determine if they want to kill you.
[QUOTE=uber.;50492241]You're constantly ridiculing that officer to make him look like an incompetent, stupid, "gotta kill em all", misantrophic bastard. Even though you don't know what exactly happened you constantly twist every aspect of the situation to his disadvantage. [/QUOTE]
I said they clearly intended to shoot him and that someone holding a weapon is not a justification to shoot. What the fuck are you talking about?
[QUOTE=catbarf;50492257]I said they clearly intended to shoot him and that someone holding a weapon is not a justification to shoot. What the fuck are you talking about?[/QUOTE]
Welp. Mixed up the both of you. My mistake. Sorry.
[QUOTE=plunger435;50492246]We've already established that if someone has intent to shoot and raising their gun they're already shooting. You said you know multiple countries where that's the only condition someone can shoot. I asked which countries.[/QUOTE]
Please read about [url=http://resources.learningforlife.org/exploring/lawenforcement/study/shootordont.pdf]the jeopardy triangle[/url] because what you are saying is absolutely wrong. Justifying use of lethal force requires identifying ability, opportunity, and intent. A man carrying a gun in your presence has ability and opportunity, but until he demonstrates intent it is not a justified shoot.
[QUOTE=catbarf;50492286]Please read about [URL="http://resources.learningforlife.org/exploring/lawenforcement/study/shootordont.pdf"]the jeopardy triangle[/URL] because what you are saying is absolutely wrong. Justifying use of lethal force requires identifying ability, opportunity, and intent. A man carrying a gun in your presence has ability and opportunity, but until he demonstrates intent it is not a justified shoot.[/QUOTE]
Im not the one saying aiming the gun is the only proof of intent. That's who I'm quoting.
[QUOTE=plunger435;50492306]Im not the one saying aiming the gun is the only proof of intent. That's who I'm quoting.[/QUOTE]
What?
[QUOTE=MaximLaHaxim;50492113]I would've waited for the guy to point his gun at me with [B]clear intent to shoot[/B] before I'd put a bullet in his neck.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=plunger435;50492178]Alright so all that does is establish that you would fail training in any country where cops carry.[/QUOTE]
He said that he would wait until there is clear intent before shooting, and you said he'd fail despite the fact that what he is expressing is actually US law and law enforcement training verbatim. You can quibble on whether there are other ways to demonstrate clear intent besides the weapon being raised but there are a lot of people in this thread saying that merely having the gun is enough to justify a shoot, and by US law that's dead wrong.
[QUOTE=catbarf;50492319]What?
He said that he would wait until there is clear intent before shooting, and you said he'd fail despite the fact that what he is expressing is actually US law and law enforcement training verbatim. You can quibble on whether there is clear intent besides the weapon being raised but there are a lot of people in this thread saying that merely having the gun is enough to justify a shoot, and by US law that's dead wrong.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=MaximLaHaxim;50492113]I [B]would've waited for the guy to point his gun at me [/B]with clear intent to shoot before I'd put a bullet in his neck.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=RearAdmiral;50492148]Cops aren't trained to take that risk, people can draw and shoot incredibly quickly.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=MaximLaHaxim;50492200]I'd still take the risk, shooting just because someone is holding a gun is absolute bullshit. It's pretty easy to tell when someone wants to shoot and doesn't want to, anyways.[/QUOTE]
Read all posts in the post chain next time.
Don't cherrypick posts in the thread.
[QUOTE=DaMastez;50492244]Context doesn't exist to you I guess. Anyone else isn't responding to 911 calls about armed persons and shots fired.
Moreover, there doesn't seem to be any video of this, or really a solid account from any party publically available. The homeowner could be a dumbshit who brandished a gun at persons who identified themselves as police officers (being legally right, if the homeowner even was--I don't know the laws--doesn't magically protect you from the bullets those cops are likely to fire), or the police officers could be trigger happy fuckups who gunned down an innocent person the second they saw him.
There's no point in jumping to conclusions, like it seems everyone bitching out the cops for getting the address wrong did:
[url]http://www.myajc.com/news/news/crime-law/gbi-officers-respond-to-wrong-house-shoot-homeowne/nrcj8/[/url][/QUOTE]
Is it somehow better because they just rolled the dice and picked a random house to raid? No, they still killed the wrong guy for no reason.
[QUOTE=plunger435;50492325]Read all posts in the post chain next time.
Don't cherrypick posts in the thread.[/QUOTE]
Ooooookay lemme just quote all of them:
[QUOTE=MaximLaHaxim;50492113]I would've waited for the guy to point his gun at me [b]with clear intent to shoot[/b] before I'd put a bullet in his neck.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=plunger435;50492178]Alright so all that does is establish that you would fail training in any country where cops carry.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=MaximLaHaxim;50492200]I'd still take the risk, [b]shooting just because someone is holding a gun is absolute bullshit[/b]. It's pretty easy to tell when someone wants to shoot and doesn't want to, anyways.
[editline]10th June 2016[/editline]
I know of multiple countries that only allow shooting when a suspect has [b]clear intent to shoot[/b].[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=plunger435;50492218]Oh I hadn't realized you were not only a cop, but had also already been in these exact situations numerous times before. You can raise a gun and pull a trigger in less than a second.
[editline]10th June 2016[/editline]
What country only lets armed police shoot if they're already shooting you?[/QUOTE]
Under US law he's right and you're wrong, there has to be clear intent before you can shoot, and the only person cherry-picking is your strawman that he's claiming you can't shoot unless you're actively under fire.
[QUOTE=catbarf;50492369]Ooooookay lemme just quote all of them:
Under US law he's right and you're wrong, there has to be clear intent before you can shoot, and the only person cherry-picking is your strawman that he's claiming you can't shoot unless you're actively under fire.[/QUOTE]
His entire post chain equivocates raising a gun as intent.
And even if that wasn't the case, acting belligerent, raising the gun quickly in a threatening manner is intent under the law anyways. Nothing you posted has relevance to the case present or the case he's making.
For interests sake; what would happen if the homeowner had fired first, believing that they were not police? The situation in the article makes that less likely, but say, during a raid wherein they bust the door down at night.
He'd be in for murder, or something like voluntary manslaughter? He's awoken in the middle of the night to his property being broken into, somehow missing any "Police! police!" calls and opens up on someone wielding a weapon who he's convinced must be a robber or otherwise.
And just another thought on the article, say it was the correct address (and the phone call specified the wrong address), and the exact same thing happens. IMO, the police would be justified and legal in their response and actions.
Now I don't know how the american self defense laws work or w/e, but going back to the hypothetical raid scenario I mentioned before; the only way a civvie can be legally justified in killing someone else is self defense. The mistake the guy in the scenario makes is not identifying the intruders as police.
As for the horrible series of events in the article, I feel it was a terrible mistake on whoever messed up the address (in the police's hands, that is). The homeowner was lawfully justified in his actions, the police on scene's actions were completely justified but illegal. The fault is very clearly in the address error, whoever in the team fucked that up should be punished and the shooter be in for at least manslaughter (the law is the law, unless there's a law that covers police for this).
[QUOTE=Grenadiac;50492367]Is it somehow better because they just rolled the dice and picked a random house to raid? No, they still killed the wrong guy for no reason.[/QUOTE]
yea bruh they just picked a house and killed a man with a gun at random
[QUOTE=Code3Response;50492449]yea bruh they just picked a house and killed a man with a gun at random[/QUOTE]
If they didn't know where they were going and still tried to carry out a raid and raided the wrong house and killed some innocent dude obviously there is a flaw with their methodology.
[QUOTE=Grenadiac;50492367]Is it somehow better because they just rolled the dice and picked a random house to raid? No, they still killed the wrong guy for no reason.[/QUOTE]
"Raid". The homeowner came out; they didn't smash in his door in the middle of the night.
You also say the police officers "rolled the dice". Do you have sources? Is there a video or recording? Or are you just making something up to fit the narrative you want?
Again, there isn't a full story anywhere that I can find, but piecing the plemanary bits together there's:
[quote]Henry County police were responding to a call to 911 reporting gunshots and a woman crying for help.[/quote]
[quote]The operator was never given an exact address even after contacting the caller a second time, he said.[/quote]
[url]http://www.myajc.com/news/news/crime-law/gbi-officers-respond-to-wrong-house-shoot-homeowne/nrcj8/[/url]
[quote]“Based on the directions given to the police officers there, they wound up at the residence of Mr. Powell,” stated Scott Dutton with the GBI.[/quote]
[url]http://www.cbs46.com/story/32176215/officers-respond-to-wrong-house-man-shot-in-neck[/url]
[quote]They canvassed the neighborhood and believe they found the home the caller was talking about, Dutton said. A person at that home said there had been an argument, but that no one screamed for help and no gunshots were fired, he said.[/quote]
[url]http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/homeowner-shot-georgia-police-wrong-home-dies-39749952[/url]
Oh gee, maybe the actually did some police work and came to a plausible conclusion instead of taking out a D20 and rolling to choose a house to investigate?
Mind, there's also:
[quote] A preliminary review of the 911 call indicates “the officers were at the wrong location,” said Scott Dutton, spokesman for the GBI, which is investigating the shooting.[/quote]
[url]http://www.myajc.com/news/news/crime-law/gbi-officers-respond-to-wrong-house-shoot-homeowne/nrcj8/[/url]
But, without more details (how does the call indicate that [is it when combined with what is known now]? was the information relayed to the officers correctly? etc...?) no conclusion can reasonably be made.
[QUOTE=Grenadiac;50492459]If they didn't know where they were going and still tried to carry out a raid and raided the wrong house and killed some innocent dude obviously there is a flaw with their methodology.[/QUOTE]
Huh didnt know responding to a 911 call is now a raid... and somehow raided the house without anyone saying they did...
Actually everything about your post is wrong
[quote]According to police, Powell ignored orders to put down his handgun. One of the officers then fired at the homeowner, who had just emerged from his garage.[/quote]
[QUOTE=ilikecorn;50492506]Actually police aren't protected at all under the law during situations like this. Any attempt to unlawfully arrest someone or unlawfully gain entry into a person's home can be legally met with deadly force.
That being said, in the US you're going to get shot for doing that, at least 18 times (thanks to glorious police magdump)[/QUOTE]
I can't believe those filthy pigs raided his driveway.
[QUOTE=ilikecorn;50492547]What?
[B]He asked, I answered. And then informed him of the repercussions of choosing to defend yourself from the police if they're doing something unlawful to you.
Shooting them is a terrible idea, and will get you shot. A lot. Better to comply then laugh all the way to the bank when you sue the fuck out of them for unlawful actions.
Are you saying that police don't magdump? Because they do. They want the threat down, and to do so they'll fire as many shots as need be to put down the threat. It's not like they fire a single shot and say "oh man we've gotta wait and see if he drops". It's not a bad thing if it's properly aimed, I'd rather one dead guy than one dead guy and one dead cop; but if it's not properly aimed then you run the definite risk of injuring innocent people.[/B][/QUOTE]
I would love if you could bold where I said any of that in my one sentence reply. Especially that bit on magdumping. P
You said they unlawfully gained entrance to his house, when he came out to meet them.
[QUOTE=Code3Response;50492511]Huh didnt know responding to a 911 call is now a raid... and somehow raided the house without anyone saying they did...
Actually everything about your post is wrong[/QUOTE]
How is an armed police incursion on a dark house at midnight not a raid? It doesn't matter if they made it inside: they were there to arrest the occupant, and it was the wrong house, and they killed him.
Did he knowingly ignore police orders to put down his gun or did he ignore what he assumed to be robbers? Are we just assuming this Air Force vet in his 60s chose this specific moment to be a rebel and totally had it coming for not listening? You're so quick to absolve the police of blame in a case where they "responded at" the wrong house, snooped around enough to wake the innocent homeowner, and shot him when he came out to figure out why people were shining lights through his windows carrying a gun for protection.
Nah, I'm sure he was totally aware they were cops who had the wrong house and just decided he was gonna go out with a bang. Thanks hero cops for killing this villain.
[img]http://i.imgur.com/iSBQT4V.png[/img]
Those are the eyes of a cop killer
[QUOTE=Grenadiac;50492692]How is an armed police incursion on a dark house at midnight not a raid? It doesn't matter if they made it inside: they were there to arrest the occupant, and it was the wrong house, and they killed him.
Did he knowingly ignore police orders to put down his gun or did he ignore what he assumed to be robbers? Are we just assuming this Air Force vet in his 60s chose this specific moment to be a rebel and totally had it coming for not listening? You're so quick to absolve the police of blame in a case where they "responded at" the wrong house, snooped around enough to wake the innocent homeowner, and shot him when he came out to figure out why people were shining lights through his windows carrying a gun for protection.
Nah, I'm sure he was totally aware they were cops who had the wrong house and just decided he was gonna go out with a bang. Thanks hero cops for killing this villain.
[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/iSBQT4V.png[/IMG]
Those are the eyes of a cop killer[/QUOTE]
Because the driveway is a path of transit and isn't even grounds for trespassing let alone a raid? Not to mention police officers do identify themselves, they're not black ops in full kit sneaking around silently.
Thank god you posted a picture of the man at the moment he ran out holding his gun! Oh wait
Is that seriously how you operate in the real world? "He has a gun, but he doesn't look like a gang banging hood, so even though we got calls he might have murdered someone we'll just leave him alone."
Yeah nice now I'm a racist too, I'm not even going to humor that
[QUOTE=Grenadiac;50492731]Yeah nice now I'm a racist too, I'm not even going to humor that[/QUOTE]
I didn't mention race anywhere in my post?
Yeah I'm sure there was nothing meant by this:
[QUOTE=plunger435;50492716]but he doesn't look like a gang banging hood, so even though we got calls he might have murdered someone we'll just leave him alone."[/QUOTE]
Shove it up your ass.
[highlight](User was banned for this post ("Flaming." - Pascall))[/highlight]
[QUOTE=Grenadiac;50492749]Yeah I'm sure there was nothing meant by this:
Shove it up your ass.[/QUOTE]
Yeah it does mean something, it means he doesn't look like a gang banger. Which again, how does that have anything to do with his race or race at all?
You insult my and others' intelligence by playing dumb, that term carries a strong racial connotation and you fucking know it
[QUOTE=plunger435;50492716]Is that seriously how you operate in the real world? "He has a gun, but he doesn't look like a gang banging hood, so even though we got calls he might have murdered someone we'll just leave him alone."[/QUOTE]
Is 'An old guy on his own property has a gun but isn't being threatening with it, but isn't heeding the command to drop the gun I shouted at him from the dark half a second ago so OPEN FIRE TAKE HIM DOWN' the necessary alternative?
Unless he actually did something threatening, it was a bad shoot. 'Don't kill a homeowner for investigating intruders at his home' doesn't have to mean 'ignore a guy with a gun until he starts shooting', it means obey the law and treat the situation accordingly and don't unnecessarily escalate use of force.
[QUOTE=Grenadiac;50492803]You insult my and others' intelligence by playing dumb, that term carries a strong racial connotation and you fucking know it[/QUOTE]
I think you might be overthinking that in a concerning way.
[img]http://i.imgur.com/IwJBTN6.jpg[/img]
These cops wear dark uniforms, their squad cars are shut off and the lights aren't going, they're slinking around his house at night shining lights into his windows
He wakes up, thinks "wtf", grabs his gun and goes outside to see who's sneaking around
They yell at him and from the witness testimony it doesn't sound like he had much time to react but even if he did who knows if he believed them? I wouldn't, they had no reason to be there and he wasn't doing anything illegal, the odds are better that they're casing his house than that they're cops who just decided to raid his home
They shoot him because he doesn't satisfy their demands in the nebulous allotted time period, he dies in the hospital
They should not have been there, they dropped the ball. They obviously didn't identify themselves adequately because this guy is an Air Force vet in his 60s and doesn't strike me as the kind of person to take any opportunity to shoot cops like you're suggesting. For their repeated fuckups, William Powell lost his life even though he wasn't doing anything wrong.
And you're sitting here trying to justify their trigger happiness and lack of attention by pinning the blame on the victim for having a gun
And now you're trying to tell me I think he looks non-threatening because he's an old white man and not a "gang banging thug" which very obviously carries a racial connotation. Your post was baiting bullshit and you and I and everybody else knows it. Stop playing dumb.
[QUOTE=Grenadiac;50492848][img]http://i.imgur.com/IwJBTN6.jpg[/img]
These cops wear dark uniforms, their squad cars are shut off and the lights aren't going, they're slinking around his house at night shining lights into his windows
He wakes up, thinks "wtf", grabs his gun and goes outside to see who's sneaking around
They yell at him and from the witness testimony it doesn't sound like he had much time to react but even if he did who knows if he believed them? I wouldn't, they had no reason to be there and he wasn't doing anything illegal, the odds are better that they're casing his house than that they're cops who just decided to raid his home
They shoot him because he doesn't satisfy their demands in the nebulous allotted time period, he dies in the hospital
They should not have been there, they dropped the ball. They obviously didn't identify themselves adequately because this guy is an Air Force vet in his 60s and doesn't strike me as the kind of person to take any opportunity to shoot cops. For their repeated fuckups, William Powell lost his life even though he wasn't doing anything wrong.
And you're sitting here trying to justify their trigger happiness and lack of attention by pinning the blame on the victim for having a gun
And now you're trying to tell me I think he looks non-threatening because he's an old white man and not a "gang banging thug" which very obviously carries a racial connotation. Your post was baiting bullshit and you and I and everybody else knows it. Stop playing dumb.[/QUOTE]
Who said their cars and lights were shut off?
[quote]A neighbor told The Atlanta Journal-Constitution that police didn’t do a good enough job identifying themselves.
“I think the police should identify themselves more if they show up at someone’s house in the middle of the night, instead of just shining lights in their windows,” said Darrell Cooper, who has known Powell for at least 30 years. “He’s a fine man.”[/quote]
[url]http://www.myajc.com/news/news/crime-law/gbi-officers-respond-to-wrong-house-shoot-homeowne/nrcj8/[/url]
The only mention that their lights were on was after the shooting. They were snooping.
[QUOTE=Grenadiac;50492848][IMG]http://i.imgur.com/IwJBTN6.jpg[/IMG]
These cops wear dark uniforms, their squad cars are shut off and the lights aren't going, they're slinking around his house at night shining lights into his windows
He wakes up, thinks "wtf", grabs his gun and goes outside to see who's sneaking around
They yell at him and from the witness testimony it doesn't sound like he had much time to react but even if he did who knows if he believed them? I wouldn't, they had no reason to be there and he wasn't doing anything illegal, the odds are better that they're casing his house than that they're cops who just decided to raid his home
They shoot him because he doesn't satisfy their demands in the nebulous allotted time period, he dies in the hospital
They should not have been there, they dropped the ball. They obviously didn't identify themselves adequately because this guy is an Air Force vet in his 60s and doesn't strike me as the kind of person to take any opportunity to shoot cops like you're suggesting. For their repeated fuckups, William Powell lost his life even though he wasn't doing anything wrong.
And you're sitting here trying to justify their trigger happiness and lack of attention by pinning the blame on the victim for having a gun
[B]And now you're trying to tell me I think he looks non-threatening because he's an old white man and not a "gang banging thug" which very obviously carries a racial connotation. Your post was baiting bullshit and you and I and everybody else knows it. Stop playing dumb.[/B][/QUOTE]
It has nothing to do with him being white, which is why I never mentioned that. It has to do with him being old as shit in a collared business shirt.
Nor does him being a veteran have anything to do with the situation. Because I never suggested he walked outside to shoot cops.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.