No but he had just tried to kill the officer. The officer said he feared there could be a second gun. The post I quoted mentioned where there is one gun, there are often two .Originally Posted by 0ddl0t
No but he had just tried to kill the officer. The officer said he feared there could be a second gun. The post I quoted mentioned where there is one gun, there are often two .
That's true, but it's a very tenuous point on which to stand legally.
We may lose and we may win, but we will never be here again.......
I agree, that was the point of my post. Even in a case where a dude tried to kill a cop, it wasn't enough to convince a jury.
Your earlier post about Oklahoma LE is spot on. The stories from years ago are crazy even considering the time. Other parts of Oklahoma are still of the old school mentality, but OKC and Tulsa seem to be going the opposite direction. Some for the better, some for the worse.
I had a retired state trooper for a chief. He had been a troop commander and he was adamant that we not shoot at moving cars or from moving cars. It was hard to teach and caused a lot of heated discussions. We taught it as a last resort. I made peace with by saying even after you neutralized the threat (the driver) you still have a moving car. He told me that in his experience ; shootings involving moving cars too often went bad. I wish everyone was taught the pit maneuver for these type of situations. Maybe district attorney’s should be required to have police training? Hopefully then at least they would understand the concepts we teach. I can dream
Last edited by Poconnor; 11-29-2019 at 07:52 AM.
Tennessee v Garner, regarding the use of deadly force to apprehend a fleeing suspect, and Graham v Connor regarding the use of force.
I don’t know what happened out there.
Was the officer acting off of what he actually knew, as in personally witnessed, or did he happen to kill the right suspect and there’s after-the-fact confirmation going on.
At 3am knowing that a handgun was thrown from the truck is an after-the-fact tidbit of knowledge. No one can see a handgun getting ditched in a pursuit in the middle of the night, maybe they saw an object, but until someone went back, picked it up, and did a follow up investigation to link it to the suspect, it was just an object thrown from the suspect’s vehicle. By that same token, did the officer actually witness the suspect shoot at officers or the private citizen? We can’t even delve into the reasonableness of using deadly force to apprehend a fleeing suspect or active shooter, if he didn’t know he was shooting at the right suspect.
Whether you think you can or you can't, you're probably right.
That's an interesting concept.
FLETC brought down a bunch of AUSAs and had them go through some aircraft countermeasure familiarization training to get them to understand why a LEOs threshold for shooting a subject is going to be very low compared to street settings, and it was apparently very eye opening and appreciated by the attendees.
FLETC has an entire shrink-wrapped aircraft interior mockup on standby waiting to be shipped for demonstration when a shooting goes to court, which thankfully hasn't happened yet.
Last edited by TGS; 11-29-2019 at 08:54 PM.
"Are you ready? Okay. Let's roll."- Last words of Todd Beamer
That is Federal Budget Awesome! Most agencies can do similar on a smaller scale. They have to want to...and the audiance has to be accepting. TLG mentioned FoF in law school was an eye opener for his classmates...
pat.
Those rulings resulted from federal civil rights lawsuits under 42 USC 1983 and the Fourth Amendment. The prosecution will be based upon Oklahoma's state criminal statutes. The twain aren't going aren't going to meet.
I had an ER nurse in a class. I noticed she kept taking all head shots. Her response when asked why, "'I've seen too many people who have been shot in the chest putting up a fight in the ER." Point taken.
That’s an interesting point. I’d been taught that Graham v Connor was the “gold standard” for reasonable use of force. So it only applies in Federal cases?
I think “it only applies to civil cases” is more accurate.
Formerly known as xpd54.
The opinions expressed in this post are my own and do not reflect the opinions or policies of my employer.
www.gunsnobbery.wordpress.com
Reply With Quote