FBI agent arrested in shooting

[TGS]

I think there is a difference between the law and the interpretation of the law. These days, the interpretation seems to be moving quickly and not in favor of LE.

The irony here, given the Alaska/FBI thread and the fictitious legal standard that you thought LEOs have to meet.

Hmm. Our statute requires, some form of identification as an LEO, either uniform or 'proper identification'

21-3413. Battery against a law enforcement officer. (a) Battery against a law enforcement officer is:

(1) Battery, as defined in subsection (a)(2) of K.S.A. 21-3412, and amendments thereto, committed against: (A) A uniformed or properly identified university or campus police officer while such officer is engaged in the performance of such officer's duty; or (B) a uniformed or properly identified state, county or city law enforcement officer, other than a state correctional officer or employee, a city or county correctional officer or employee, a juvenile correctional facility officer or employee or a juvenile detention facility officer or employee, while such officer is engaged in the performance of such officer's duty; or...

I can understand the desire to enhance penalties for those who assault undercover officers, etc. Don't know how that would apply, if it would.

18 USC 111 generally applies if you've either ID'd yourself, or if you're on-duty but your status as a federal officer is still unknown to the assailant. So, generally, if a federal LEO is in plainclothes but working (to include UCs), they don't have to ID themselves before 111 applies...it doesn't even have to be a federal LEO for that matter, any federal employee that is assaulted on account of their duties is covered. The FLETC legal handbook covers 18 USC 111 on pages 156-159 if you want to google it (the PDF comes up in the first few options).

[TGS]

I'm trying to figure out how this SA was supposed to know this aggressive person wasn't someone off his meds looking to put a blade into somebody. How long does it take to pull a blade on someone and use it, a second or less. No weapon in his hand doesn't mean much when an assailant is 2' away. I think the SA told him several times to back away.

Someone getting up in your grill isn't necessarily justification to shoot them, however. If a shooter can articulate that he/she believed the person was armed, that changes things. In the context of the current domestic USA, you generally can't just assume a person is armed and shoot them, saying, "Oh, well they could've knifed me if they had a knife...but no, I don't actually have any indication they were armed". That's not kosher.

The proper response for the former is fisticuffs and intermediate force adjuncts. Introduce a weapon, and now you've changed the facts, which changes the answer. For instance, if a LEO for some reason feels compelled to have preemptively drawn their sidearm and then the dude comes after the LEO, that's introducing a weapon, which changes things, as the courts have mostly respected the idea that anyone trying to close with/put hands on you while you have a gun out can be assumed to be attempting to gain control of the weapon. However if the weapon is holstered, you generally can't say, "Well I was afraid he was going to take my gun" and shoot them without some sort of stimulus that they wanted to take the LEOs gun, such as reaching for it, feeling their hands on/around it, verbalization/intent, etc.

LEOs get in fights with people all the time; we can't shoot people simply because they get close to us or the conversation goes to blows.

Note: None of what I'm writing here is speculation about the SSA's incident. I'm just addressing the broader concept on use of force.

[Hambo]

I guess I'm just wishing for a world where prosecutors -and the court of public opinion- actually go after bona-fide bad guys with such diligence.

You're generalizing and catastrophizing. All prosecutors do not let bad guys walk while persecuting the law abiding and LE. The same is true of public opinion. Just because something gets splashy headlines doesn't mean it's universal.

[KeeFus]

I'd rather fade heat for spraying OC in a train car than for an indicted shooting...

^^^This. I’d of hosed the guy.

[psalms144.1]

^^^This. I’d of hosed the guy.

Not sure about the FBI, but they took our OC away from us over a decade ago, replaced by Harry Potter wands, I mean 16" ASPs. Which not a single agent I know carries readily accessible on their person, because they suck at pretty much any application. Mine rides in my backpack, next to my spare cuffs and blow out kit, unless I'm kitting up for a planned operation.

[GJM]

The irony here, given the Alaska/FBI thread and the fictitious legal standard that you thought LEOs have to meet..

The Homer FBI raid was not the agency's finest hour.

[vcdgrips]

"So, generally, if a federal LEO is in plainclothes but working (to include UCs), they don't have to ID themselves before 111 applies...it doesn't even have to be a federal LEO for that matter, any federal employee that is assaulted on account of their duties is covered."

Solid point made above.

It is a matter of public record that I have charged this offense where the victim was a federal agent, a contract guard ("blue coat" court security officer), a federally deputized task force officer, a mail carrier, a mail sorter and a social security benefits authorizer.

[JRB]

You're generalizing and catastrophizing. All prosecutors do not let bad guys walk while persecuting the law abiding and LE. The same is true of public opinion. Just because something gets splashy headlines doesn't mean it's universal.

Perhaps not in your area, but in Albuquerque we've got a massive problem with judges RoR'ing some seriously bad people over and over again. Meanwhile they've got an absolute passion for throwing the book at LE and regular folks.

[TGS]

Not sure about the FBI, but they took our OC away from us over a decade ago, replaced by Harry Potter wands, I mean 16" ASPs. Which not a single agent I know carries readily accessible on their person, because they suck at pretty much any application. Mine rides in my backpack, next to my spare cuffs and blow out kit, unless I'm kitting up for a planned operation.

Oh jeez. What was the reasoning for that? Or was it absent any justification, like when they took away your 5.56 carbines?

We get the 16" ASPs and OC. I got a big one (4oz?) and small pocket clip one.....not sure what they're issuing out current day.

[Borderland]

Perhaps not in your area, but in Albuquerque we've got a massive problem with judges RoR'ing some seriously bad people over and over again. Meanwhile they've got an absolute passion for throwing the book at LE and regular folks.

I can see that. I think cops gravitate to the use of force necessary to keep a lid on the crime. Cops here in Seattle, going back a few years, used to be pretty heavy handed with the criminal element. The DOJ investigated.

https://www.npr.org/2012/04/06/15012...-investigation

That's how Seattle ended up with CHOP and 25% of the SPD resigning, including the Chief.