Dad's lesson ends in tragedy - Page 6
Page 6 of 7 FirstFirst ... 4567 LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 64

Thread: Dad's lesson ends in tragedy

  1. #51
    Are DHS troops really LEOs? Or perhaps RegimeEOs.

  2.   
  3. #52
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    SE FL and SE OH
    Posts
    5,602
    Quote Originally Posted by superprincess View Post
    Seems like LEO needs to spend more time in the classroom studying how to handle crisis situations, instead of going through 5000 rounds in one day for training. Geez what good is it to know how to shoot? If you don't know when it is appropriate to shoot.
    My guess, they will be told to shoot and not ask questions. Either of themselves or higher ups.
    NRA Certified Pistol Instructor
    NRA Certified RSO
    Normal is an illusion. What is normal to the spider is chaos to the fly.

  4. #53
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Posts
    3,832
    Quote Originally Posted by Chris Rakes View Post
    just another reason the LE should not have lethal force.
    That makes no sense. "Police report to an armed bank robbery in progress"... "Police report to a domestic violence case concerning a man with a gun...
    armed robbery in progress at the 7-11, police report


    If you were a cop, would you go unarmed?
    "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb contesting the vote."
    ~ Benjamin Franklin (maybe)

  5. #54
    I read the articles, listened to the tapes, watched the video (many times). My two cents:
    .
    The father was in no way at fault in this event. This obviously was a very troubled young man.
    .
    I agree that the chase should not have been continued. Though not ordered to back off, the suggestion was made twice, and that clearly would have been the best course of action. By forcing the chase through this suburban area, the police unnecessarily increased the risk of potentially grave injury to everyone in the area. Sheer luck is the only reason other people weren’t hurt during this event. As noted in the audio, they knew who he was, what he was driving, and they most likely could have picked him up at leisure later in the day…and if they didn’t, so what? It’s not like they were after someone who had just shot 3 people in a holdup. I’ll return to the kind of thinking that leads to this later.
    .
    Having stipulated that I believe the chase should have been terminated, then clearly the end of the encounter wouldn’t have occurred the way it did. Assessing the end of this encounter as it happened is a completely different matter. I found the written news reports to be either erroneous or misleading as to what happened versus what I saw on the dashcam video. Too many reporters tend to “fill in” or interpolate meaning beyond what is factually there, or what they are told by witnesses. They try to fashion a “story.” Regardless, the video clearly shows young Mr. Comstock intentionally ramming the police cruiser with the pickup at least 3 times. In all 50 states, such an act of violence is felony assault with a deadly weapon. The last ramming took place approximately 2 seconds before the officer opened fire, just after he (the officer) had exited his vehicle. The pickup was still in motion (though not much at that instant…switching gears…? I don’t know) at the moment the officer starts shooting. I hear what sounds like an engine racing. I disagree with those whose assessment is that the officers involved were in no danger. At the end of this encounter, they were definitely in danger (and I mean of grievous injury or death), and it was imminent. Mr. Comstock had clearly demonstrated he was willing to use his vehicle as a weapon, and had done so just 2 seconds before he was shot. From the information available to us and presented on this forum, I believe the local district attorney’s assessment was correct. I also believe that ultimately, young Mr. Comstock made an unforced decision to attack police with a pickup truck. Like most people, I would rather this had ended differently. My recommendation to anyone is don’t intentionally ram occupied police vehicles (or anyone’s vehicle for that matter) and then complain if you get shot.
    .
    Why did it go the way it did? The meme of militarization of our police forces has been steadily occurring across our country, particularly over the last decade or so. Not just in weapons and tactics, but in attitude and culture. In the military when the enemy is met, pursuit to an overwhelming decisive encounter and victory is most desired, and highly encouraged. That mindset is not well suited to civilian police work in most instances. First, the populaces the police work among are not “the enemy,” but seem to be all too frequently treated as just that. Second, most police work does not require and should not culminate in the overwhelming use of force. I believe the mindset of decisive encounter with overwhelming force, and a mindset of “he’s now the enemy,” are what kept the chase going which ultimately led to the demise of young Mr. Comstock. I’m not looking at the world through rose-colored lenses either. There’s plenty of evil out there, and no shortage of sh!theads. There are times and places that civil police work calls for immediate and decisive force; I submit that young Mr. Comstock’s situation was not one of them. At the end, I don’t blame the officer for shooting. I blame a poor decision to engage in a dangerous pursuit when it wasn’t called for, that ultimately led to the shooting.

  6. #55
    Quote Originally Posted by S&W645 View Post
    I want to see pictures of the police car that got rammed. Bet there isn't much if any damage to it. Because the ramming could very well have been the cop hitting the truck and not the other way around. In traffic, the mind can make it look like you are sitting still when you aren't or even moving when you are not. Where is the dash cam video of the chase?
    I get that police have the right to defend themselves but it seems that "He tried to ram us!" is now becoming a license to kill for cops across the us. What is "ramming"? was there actual gross damage to the car that would justify deadly force? was there incidental contact because a scared person didn't act appropriately? It also seems like "he tried to ram us" also allows the cops to shoot you any time after the "alleged" ramming incident, even after the "threat" is over.

    It takes me back to the days of my youth watching South Park

    Steady gun, sight reference, trigger control.


  7. #56
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    SE FL and SE OH
    Posts
    5,602
    Quote Originally Posted by JCliff View Post
    I read the articles, listened to the tapes, watched the video (many times). My two cents:
    .
    The father was in no way at fault in this event. This obviously was a very troubled young man.
    .
    I agree that the chase should not have been continued. Though not ordered to back off, the suggestion was made twice, and that clearly would have been the best course of action. By forcing the chase through this suburban area, the police unnecessarily increased the risk of potentially grave injury to everyone in the area. Sheer luck is the only reason other people weren’t hurt during this event. As noted in the audio, they knew who he was, what he was driving, and they most likely could have picked him up at leisure later in the day…and if they didn’t, so what? It’s not like they were after someone who had just shot 3 people in a holdup. I’ll return to the kind of thinking that leads to this later.
    .
    Having stipulated that I believe the chase should have been terminated, then clearly the end of the encounter wouldn’t have occurred the way it did. Assessing the end of this encounter as it happened is a completely different matter. I found the written news reports to be either erroneous or misleading as to what happened versus what I saw on the dashcam video. Too many reporters tend to “fill in” or interpolate meaning beyond what is factually there, or what they are told by witnesses. They try to fashion a “story.” Regardless, the video clearly shows young Mr. Comstock intentionally ramming the police cruiser with the pickup at least 3 times. In all 50 states, such an act of violence is felony assault with a deadly weapon. The last ramming took place approximately 2 seconds before the officer opened fire, just after he (the officer) had exited his vehicle. The pickup was still in motion (though not much at that instant…switching gears…? I don’t know) at the moment the officer starts shooting. I hear what sounds like an engine racing. I disagree with those whose assessment is that the officers involved were in no danger. At the end of this encounter, they were definitely in danger (and I mean of grievous injury or death), and it was imminent. Mr. Comstock had clearly demonstrated he was willing to use his vehicle as a weapon, and had done so just 2 seconds before he was shot. From the information available to us and presented on this forum, I believe the local district attorney’s assessment was correct. I also believe that ultimately, young Mr. Comstock made an unforced decision to attack police with a pickup truck. Like most people, I would rather this had ended differently. My recommendation to anyone is don’t intentionally ram occupied police vehicles (or anyone’s vehicle for that matter) and then complain if you get shot.
    .
    Why did it go the way it did? The meme of militarization of our police forces has been steadily occurring across our country, particularly over the last decade or so. Not just in weapons and tactics, but in attitude and culture. In the military when the enemy is met, pursuit to an overwhelming decisive encounter and victory is most desired, and highly encouraged. That mindset is not well suited to civilian police work in most instances. First, the populaces the police work among are not “the enemy,” but seem to be all too frequently treated as just that. Second, most police work does not require and should not culminate in the overwhelming use of force. I believe the mindset of decisive encounter with overwhelming force, and a mindset of “he’s now the enemy,” are what kept the chase going which ultimately led to the demise of young Mr. Comstock. I’m not looking at the world through rose-colored lenses either. There’s plenty of evil out there, and no shortage of sh!theads. There are times and places that civil police work calls for immediate and decisive force; I submit that young Mr. Comstock’s situation was not one of them. At the end, I don’t blame the officer for shooting. I blame a poor decision to engage in a dangerous pursuit when it wasn’t called for, that ultimately led to the shooting.
    Just like a citizen can't shoot a robber fleeing that does not pose an eminent danger, this cop shot the kid while the truck was stopped. Show clearly that in the dash cam video. The rear of the truck was against the right front fender of the car. The other officer was way off to the side and not in danger. When a deadly threat ends, so does the right to use deadly force. This officer was trigger happy.
    NRA Certified Pistol Instructor
    NRA Certified RSO
    Normal is an illusion. What is normal to the spider is chaos to the fly.

  8. #57
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Iowa
    Posts
    2,072
    My whole problem with police shootings, is when you take the same situation and put John Q Public in their shoes, would they be judged the same. I say no and that is just plain wrong. It's especially wrong in place like Iowa that doesn't even have Stand Your Ground or Castle Doctrine. It's B-U-L-L-S-H-!-T.


    I used to be a government-educated stooge. By the grace of God, I repent. -Robert Burris

  9. #58
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    SE FL and SE OH
    Posts
    5,602
    Quote Originally Posted by SR40c View Post
    My whole problem with police shootings, is when you take the same situation and put John Q Public in their shoes, would they be judged the same. I say no and that is just plain wrong. It's especially wrong in place like Iowa that doesn't even have Stand Your Ground or Castle Doctrine. It's B-U-L-L-S-H-!-T.
    Florida House just had a committee meeting and vote on doing away with the SYG and SYG in the home. It was a rather lopsided vote. 11 to keep and 2 to repeal. Back in 2005 when we got that, the vote in the Florida Senate was 94 to 20.

    And I agree, a common citizen would be sitting in jail for the same thing a cop is excused from. Like the innocent victims of police gunfire in NYC. Or Miami. Or Chicago. Or DC.
    NRA Certified Pistol Instructor
    NRA Certified RSO
    Normal is an illusion. What is normal to the spider is chaos to the fly.

  10. #59
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Republic of Dead Cell Holler, Occupied Territories of AL, former USA
    Posts
    7,415
    Quote Originally Posted by JCliff View Post
    I read the articles, listened to the tapes, watched the video (many times). My two cents:
    .
    The father was in no way at fault in this event. This obviously was a very troubled young man.
    .
    I agree that the chase should not have been continued. Though not ordered to back off, the suggestion was made twice, and that clearly would have been the best course of action. By forcing the chase through this suburban area, the police unnecessarily increased the risk of potentially grave injury to everyone in the area. Sheer luck is the only reason other people weren’t hurt during this event. As noted in the audio, they knew who he was, what he was driving, and they most likely could have picked him up at leisure later in the day…and if they didn’t, so what? It’s not like they were after someone who had just shot 3 people in a holdup. I’ll return to the kind of thinking that leads to this later.
    .
    Having stipulated that I believe the chase should have been terminated, then clearly the end of the encounter wouldn’t have occurred the way it did. Assessing the end of this encounter as it happened is a completely different matter. I found the written news reports to be either erroneous or misleading as to what happened versus what I saw on the dashcam video. Too many reporters tend to “fill in” or interpolate meaning beyond what is factually there, or what they are told by witnesses. They try to fashion a “story.” Regardless, the video clearly shows young Mr. Comstock intentionally ramming the police cruiser with the pickup at least 3 times. In all 50 states, such an act of violence is felony assault with a deadly weapon. The last ramming took place approximately 2 seconds before the officer opened fire, just after he (the officer) had exited his vehicle. The pickup was still in motion (though not much at that instant…switching gears…? I don’t know) at the moment the officer starts shooting. I hear what sounds like an engine racing. I disagree with those whose assessment is that the officers involved were in no danger. At the end of this encounter, they were definitely in danger (and I mean of grievous injury or death), and it was imminent. Mr. Comstock had clearly demonstrated he was willing to use his vehicle as a weapon, and had done so just 2 seconds before he was shot. From the information available to us and presented on this forum, I believe the local district attorney’s assessment was correct. I also believe that ultimately, young Mr. Comstock made an unforced decision to attack police with a pickup truck. Like most people, I would rather this had ended differently. My recommendation to anyone is don’t intentionally ram occupied police vehicles (or anyone’s vehicle for that matter) and then complain if you get shot.
    .
    Why did it go the way it did? The meme of militarization of our police forces has been steadily occurring across our country, particularly over the last decade or so. Not just in weapons and tactics, but in attitude and culture. In the military when the enemy is met, pursuit to an overwhelming decisive encounter and victory is most desired, and highly encouraged. That mindset is not well suited to civilian police work in most instances. First, the populaces the police work among are not “the enemy,” but seem to be all too frequently treated as just that. Second, most police work does not require and should not culminate in the overwhelming use of force. I believe the mindset of decisive encounter with overwhelming force, and a mindset of “he’s now the enemy,” are what kept the chase going which ultimately led to the demise of young Mr. Comstock. I’m not looking at the world through rose-colored lenses either. There’s plenty of evil out there, and no shortage of sh!theads. There are times and places that civil police work calls for immediate and decisive force; I submit that young Mr. Comstock’s situation was not one of them. At the end, I don’t blame the officer for shooting. I blame a poor decision to engage in a dangerous pursuit when it wasn’t called for, that ultimately led to the shooting.
    On the wider problems contributing to this event (military mindset etc.), I agree 100%. On the point about "imminent" threat, I get the rationale, but cannot agree on the "imminent" part. All the vehicles were in the grass and there wasn't enough traction available to get over 5 or so mph. Any imminent threat that McPherson faced was due to him getting out of his vehicle and (somewhat) exposing himself to a direct hit by the truck, but considering that he opened fire while the truck was on the opposite side of his vehicle from which he just exited, that potential never had a chance to develop into a real threat, imminent or otherwise. The worst threat any of those officers faced if they had only used their cars to pen the truck in was to be jostled around - that's it.

    That said, there is probably not a better post analyzing the chase and ending, or the media coverage, or the misinformation, in this thread. I get that the shooting was probably "legal," but legal and justified are not the same concepts, though Chiefs of Police and the courts seem to think they are. You add that to all the problems with modern policing that you so eloquently summarized, and I find no true justification for the shooting to hang my hat on. Other than that, great post, thanks for it.

    Blues
    No one has ever heard me say that I "hate" cops, because I don't. This is why I will never trust one again though: You just never know...

  11. #60
    Link to an excellent article on NRO (also posted in LEO Encounters thread) by Mark Steyn, "The Drift Towards Despotism."
    .
    The Drift toward Despotism | National Review Online
    .
    I think you'll like this one Blues.

Page 6 of 7 FirstFirst ... 4567 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Quantcast