How Do Criminals Carry?

[BehindBlueI's]

https://nypost.com/2018/07/15/police...adly-shooting/

Figure most of you saw this already, but appears to be an OWB holster and a spare mag carrier. I can't see it well enough to tell what kind.

[psalms144.1]

https://nypost.com/2018/07/15/police...adly-shooting/

Figure most of you saw this already, but appears to be an OWB holster and a spare mag carrier. I can't see it well enough to tell what kind.

And, of course, because it's the NYT, they identify the criminal as the "victim..."

[peterb]

And, of course, because it's the NYT, they identify the criminal as the "victim..."

One can be a criminal and a victim. Every homicide, even a justifiable one, has a victim.

[psalms144.1]

One can be a criminal and a victim. Every homicide, even a justifiable one, has a victim.

With all due respect, that's bull crap. The violent criminal offender who ends up shot by LE is NOT the victim. The LEOs forced to shoot him are the victims.

[RoyGBiv]

With all due respect, that's bull crap. The violent criminal offender who ends up shot by LE is NOT the victim. The LEOs forced to shoot him are the victims.

I agree... "justifiable homicide" removes "victim" status from the deceased. "Perpetrator"... "Attacker"... "Malefactor" has a certain panache.

[BehindBlueI's]

With all due respect, that's bull crap. The violent criminal offender who ends up shot by LE is NOT the victim. The LEOs forced to shoot him are the victims.

I've never been involved with a shooting investigation (non self-inflicted), fatal or not, where the person killed wasn't "victim" in all the paperwork, no matter how justified. The media can report however they like, but NIBRS an UCR require a "victim" for reporting unless something has changed very recently. I understand why it can anger the righteous shooter, LEO or otherwise, but who's the "victim" varies based on the context. It's not a judgement call or comment on the validity of the shoot.

[TGS]

I've never been involved with a shooting investigation (non self-inflicted), fatal or not, where the person killed wasn't "victim" in all the paperwork, no matter how justified. The media can report however they like, but NIBRS an UCR require a "victim" for reporting unless something has changed very recently. I understand why it can anger the righteous shooter, LEO or otherwise, but who's the "victim" varies based on the context. It's not a judgement call or comment on the validity of the shoot.

My agency conducts preciously few murder investigations, so homicide totally isn't my lane. I also get that you do more general investigations in one year than I probably will ever do in my whole career.

I understand what you're saying in that it's not a judgement call. As a frame of reference however, my training/overwhelming protocol at my last assignment was to never label a subject in reports as "victim" or any other label that assigns any connotation. It's simply Subject #1, Subject #2, etc. Never "Victim", "True ID", "Impostor", so on. This was true the first day at FLETC all the way through my ROIs and sworn documents.

I can't speak on behalf of psalms, but I'm guessing this background might be where he's speaking from as well given both of our agencies go through FLETC and their Behavioral Sciences Division for casework management and they pushed that stuff hard when I went though. I get it when you explain it, but writing "victim" to me, in our context, is assigning a connotation and bias. I totally get that other agencies may do it differently, and that the meat & potatoes of developed information is obviously the important part.

[Sammy1]

I've caught several gang bangers with .25 autos in their pocket but the last one had a Kimber 1911 in a purse! I haven't seen many illegal firearms in holsters.

[andre3k]

I've never seen one on a crook in a holster. Always stuffed in a pocket, or crotch, or off body. I just got this little jewel a couple of nights ago. I initially thought it was a cap gun or starter pistol. Electrical tape grips and bobbed hammer, what's not to like?

Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk

[HCM]

I've never been involved with a shooting investigation (non self-inflicted), fatal or not, where the person killed wasn't "victim" in all the paperwork, no matter how justified. The media can report however they like, but NIBRS an UCR require a "victim" for reporting unless something has changed very recently. I understand why it can anger the righteous shooter, LEO or otherwise, but who's the "victim" varies based on the context. It's not a judgement call or comment on the validity of the shoot.

If the deceased suspect assaulted or attempted to assault the officers the case can be investigated as an assault on the officer with the deceased designated as “suspect” and the officer as “victim.”

I’ve seen it done that way on at least one occasion.