Plenty of time, space and opportunity for all participants to walk away.
Plenty of time, space and opportunity for all participants to walk away.
Okay, I'll play.
Alternate scenario:
It looked the shooter was reaching for the dead guys waist area with his left hand. Dead guy thought shooter was trying to grab his (poorly) concealed carry. Dead guy reacts to create space and slaps the shooter and backs up to deploy bear spray. Shooter sees dead guy as a threat since he is armed. All down hill from there.
All parties involved coulda/shoulda de-escalated. Bottom line - too many assholes in one location and shit happens.
Speaking as someone who has actually been through the armed guard certification process in Colorado this is my experience.
The company's prerequisites are irrelevant because they're different for every company and they're very flexible.
The first company that I worked for required former law enforcement experience or POST certification or prior military experience in a combat arms MOS or 5 years experience as licensed security guard.
The company that replaced them had the same requirements but wouldn't accept the 5 years experience.
In both cases there was an employee of the security company who had retired from the City Utility which was the client. He met none of the requirements but was hired as an armed guard anyway because the client company (The Utility) told both security companies to waive their requirements and hire him anyway.
I met the requirement because I had military experience in a combat arms MOS. I was artillery. I really don't see how shooting cannons qualifies me to work as an armed guard.
Requirements for armed guard vary from city to city.
In Colorado Springs I was required to take an MMPI and attend 40 hours of training. The company I worked for gave us the NRA Basic Handgun Safety Course. Which meets the state requirement for a concealed handgun permit. I think that in and of itself the course was good training I don't think it qualifies you to act in a quasi police capacity interacting with the public.
Our use of force training consisted of familiarization with the force continuum and an admonition to use the minimum amount of force necessary.
I had maybe three hours of training on how to put handcuffs on somebody with zero training on when or under what conditions that might be necessary or acceptable. The only definitive answer I ever received was if you pepper spray somebody you should handcuff them for their own safety.
Zero training on when I might need to use OC.
My weapons retention training consisted of being told to fall on the gun, curl up in a ball and take a beating but under NO circumstances to give up that gun.
Two of the security companies I worked for issued weapons to their employees and forbade us to use any non issue equipment under any circumstances. The third company required employees to provide their own equipment from an approved list.
Two companies issued you your ammunition and again you were not allowed to use anything else. I once had to write a statement and sign a receipt for one round.
The third company required employees to provide their own ammunition from an approved list.
Both of the companies that issued weapons required the weapon to be under lock and key when you were not actually on shift. By the exact letter of company policy driving to and from work the gun was supposed to be locked up in a case in your car.
The general consensus for every security company I've ever worked for was that if an armed guard ever actually drew their weapon they'd be fired.
ETA in Colorado Springs the city requires that armed guards carry a gun was at least a 4 inch barrel. Single action only weapons are not permitted (no 1911s no SAA revolvers). Revolvers can only be .38 Special or .357 magnum. Semiautomatic pistols may only be 9 mm or .40 Smith & Wesson.
Last edited by Cypher; 10-14-2020 at 10:38 AM.
I have a question that may sound random AF, but I really am asking.
In close up photos of the deceased’s strike, there are rings on his fingers, plural. Some of us oldsters may recall the idea of “fighting rings.” I haven’t seen any good footage of the dorsal side of dead guy’s left hand, but if it was stacked with three skull rings or iron cross or similar heavy “biker” rings—“consisting of projections or studs which would contact the individual receiving a blow" (to borrow from CA statute wording)—one could make a case of the strike being weapon-bearing. At any rate, I’m sure the slap had an edge to it that *did not* feel fleshy.
Just throwing it out there, and curious as to opinions from our LE that have dealt with “biker ring” or “multi-finger ring” bling worn by the respective subcultures that wear them on the street.
On the question of less than lethal, does not make me want to carry it less. There are plenty of scenarios I could find myself in where force is justified but a firearm is not. I would much rather OC someone than knock them out and then be charged with manslaughter because their head whacked the curb. More tools and options are always better.
I completely agree that the dead guy was looking for trouble, played stupid games etc. I do specifically question whether or not the slap or the spray would justify deadly force, I tend to think it didn't since the shooter was charged. Flip side of that is so was the kid from Kenosha, and that looked to be pretty clearly self defense from my laymans point of view.
Really looking forward to a more informed opinion on this one.
FYI Michelle Malkin has some really good info.
Lots of other pictures and videos of incident.
Unless a crazy conspiracy is shown ( that victim was set up in advance) it looks like shooter may have a very slim but real chance at a self defense claim.
I also wonder if he has a startle response on the striker fired weapon.
Turns out the shooter and his newsguy were watching this incident the whole time.
He sees a large guy torqued up after a heated confrontation with another agitator ( black guns matter guy is all over the twitter space starting shit at events). Large agitated guy now with bear spray approaches your newsman. He is shouting orders and threats.
You step in. Get slapped and shoved. Now you see someone as a potential assailant with spray.
He could have backed up. But why take eyes off a potential threat?
I dunno thinking out loud here.
Not sure I would have fired but I surely can’t 100% fault the guy for at least drawing.
Weren't the police literately like 20 feet away? It would be hard to think you life is in danger from pepper spray if LE is that close. After the altercation it appears the guy with the spray moves back and the shooter went strait to his gun. It could be the guy with the spray sees him drawing his gun and decided to spray him in order to get him to stop.
We could isolate Russia totally from the world and maybe they could apply for membership after 2000 years.
Given the outcome, this assertion doesn't seem to hold...Originally Posted by 5pins
Hain’t we got all the fools in town on our side? And ain’t that a big enough majority in any town?
Here are the individual shots by the Denver Post photojournalist:
https://www.denverpost.com/2020/10/1...full-sequence/
If the impressive sync footage in post #200 is accurate -- especially the audio portion with subtitles apparently attributed to the decedent -- the above supposition proves spot-on: decedent, already well into monkey-dance zone, gets next-level triggered realizing he's on camera.
Hain’t we got all the fools in town on our side? And ain’t that a big enough majority in any town?
Reply With Quote