Again I remind you - The Police are not your friends

That was terrible. The cop was obviously looking for a reason to shoot him and in his fear and panic and confusion the guy gave him just enough of a reason. Just like people in general there are good cops and bad cops and this guy was neither a good cop or a good person
 
marty79 said:
And why is that when my stance is as everyone else....weirdo
Click to expand...


Go back, re read the entire thread. Then read your comment.


I'll stand here and talk to the concrete and pretend it's you. This way I get an intelligent response.
 
CasterTroy said:
Something none of you mentioned. Maybe you didn't know.....the report I saw also stated the guy was drunk as HELL

Now, the shooter probably didn't know that, and not sure it mattered to him. But how many of YOU could follow instructions that crazy and do so while not getting distracted by your falling shorts while drunk as hell?

There's no excuses here. For his death, for his actions or for the verdict. EVERYONE loses. I told my wife though, thank GOD he wasn't black
Click to expand...

The cop asked them if they were drunk, and they both said no. He then followed that up by asking that they shouldn't have any trouble understanding what he tells them. They both again said no. If the guy was drunk, then he fooked up by saying no.
 
Jeff B said:
the kid was scared as hell and probably having some kind of an anxiety attack. Hell, the first time he put his hands behind his back, looked to me like he was trying to go into a cuffed position or maybe as said, pull his britches up. either way, it was a wrong move.
.
Click to expand...

I thought the same thing. It looked like he was trying to go into a cuffed position. The dude has probably watched the cops TV show many times and everyone ends up in that position.
 
Last edited:
I think the cop was afraid as hell of being shot himself, which I can completely understand if he was responding to a call about a gun.
 
drkelly said:
The cop asked them if they were drunk, and they both said no
Click to expand...


I go out for dinner, have 3 beers. I don't feel drunk. However I know better then to drive home. If I get pulled over I am drunk. Legally impaired at .08% they use that level because that's when one begins to loose inhibitions.

He may not have felt he was drunk, however he still may have been drunk. Either way, I think the cop confused him. The cop directed the woman differently then the man. Her gave her one command at a time, gave him couple commands at a time.
 
Jeff B said:
I go out for dinner, have 3 beers. I don't feel drunk. However I know better then to drive home. If I get pulled over I am drunk. Legally impaired at .08% they use that level because that's when one begins to loose inhibitions.

He may not have felt he was drunk, however he still may have been drunk. Either way, I think the cop confused him. The cop directed the woman differently then the man. Her gave her one command at a time, gave him couple commands at a time.
Click to expand...

I don't know, she appeared to do exactly what the cop said right from the get go. Duder fooked up a couple of times right from the start and it obviously made the cop tense as he got louder and nervous.
 
Anyone who has ever taken a drunks keys, or tried to convince them not to walk...somewhere knows "I'm not drunk I only had xyz beers" means I'm probably shit faced and this is going to be a chore..
 
Tell me why with all that cover he could not walk to the young man and check for a weapon ? He was not acting aggressive at all as in most of these situations .
That is the most F up thing I have seen . If that were my child I think I would lose it
 
Sad yet funny thing is with all this nonsense pigs out there...that badge is the only..the ONLY reason they hold power or authority and right to abuse it. Someday that badge won't mean nothing when people fight back to take control of this corrupt system and on that day, these pigs will get what they have coming to em. I'd love to meet that pig one on one and see how tuff he thinks he is...I'm sure in his town there are many many who will beat me to it. Oh the rage in my blood over these crooked bastards. (Yeah I watched it couple more times, now I'm ready for ww3 lol) dam pigs
 
It only takes me the first few minutes to decide this guy Did Not Need a uniform, much less a gun. He completely catches these folks off guard and then precedes to tell them in very explicit terms: make a mistake and you have a high probability of being shot.

This isn't protect and serve. This is test and kill.

The military is for killing and then they have strict protocol.

If this guy wasn't found guilty then his piers and department should be for gross negligence.

His job isn't Judge Dread. He clearly overly escalated a very non leathal situation. Emotions are not something that should ever dictate his tac. Even when it's very poor.

I'll go further to say even the little banter on the dust cover is extremely unprofessional for a public servant.

He is the bad Apple that spoiled this fellas life. The thin Blue Line makes mistakes just like those opposing it. It still doesn't mean they don't have too reap the repercussions.
 
There were obviously wrongs on both side of the equation. I think at the end of the day, this sums it up best:
WARRIORWELDING said:
This isn't protect and serve. This is test and kill.
Click to expand...
 
This is ONE fucked up cop who clearly made a very wrong decision even though the kid didn't obey him, it was easy enough to tell he probably wasn't a threat, BUT he did reach behind his back and I'm sure all the training says at that point shoot.
If you judge all cops on this, (and the crap that the media has reported) you are a dick too.
 
R Q said:
This is ONE fucked up cop who clearly made a very wrong decision even though the kid didn't obey him, it was easy enough to tell he probably wasn't a threat, BUT he did reach behind his back and I'm sure all the training says at that point shoot.
If you judge all cops on this, (and the crap that the media has reported) you are a dick too.
Click to expand...

To be fair, I think the "Everyone is a threat" and bullshit escalation of force rules that police seem to be going by these days is absurd and they do need to be critically judged.
I say bring back billy clubs and put a body cam on any officer that carries a firearm period.
 
benXJ said:
There is a pic of the cop on a thread about this on Pirate. Nothing else needs to be said. Explains everything.

Sent from my Moto G (4) using Tapatalk
Click to expand...


This one?
mesa25n-3-web.jpg
 
It sure would be neat if they'd give these fuckboys some actual marksmanship training and teach how to NOT hit center mass. If you're going to fire, you don't have to shoot to kill.

Yea yea yea i know, if you've gotta shoot, make it count. But at the same time it not a cops job to take a life.

Also, fuck the police.
 
This is definitely wrong but in general my decades or experience with law enforcement has been positive . This guy never deserved a badge he just wanted to Kill.
If You think because of this all cops are farm animals then you have big issues.
That is like saying all off-roaders want to trash the trails when in reality it is just a few.
 
Ron said:
We havent done this in a while....


Police Body Cam Vid Shows 'Execution' of Daniel Shaver, Officer Found Not Guilty


Not guilty.
No punishment.
Despite weeks before this murder he was previously admonished for excessive force in another arrest case.
Dear old dad was a retired officer as well and headed up the internal affairs unit.

Not all cops are bad. Not all cops are bad. Not all cops are bad.
The ones that are can do more damage than the good ones can fix.
Click to expand...


For once I agree with @Ron, but with a few caveats. Cop was a straight up douchebag and has no business in law enforcement at any level higher than Paul Blart. That said, here are the problems that I have with this:

1) According to the Washington Post article, he was in a 5th floor hotel room and the reason for the police involvement was that someone spotted him pointing a rifle down at the street. From a ground floor vantage point, it would be impossible to mistake someone just "showing off a gun to someone in the room" and someone taking up a sniper position from an elevated position. Thus the reason for officers being on high alert and combat style approach. HOWEVER - once you determine that the scenario is just a drunk dude and you have him secured with his hands on the floor in plain sight, there is no reason you cannot approach and restrain his hands. Either way, at that point, your finger should be on the trigger guard, NOT on the trigger.

2) Once the subject has surrendered, the fewer commands you have for him, the better. Misunderstanding of your commands might be confused for non-compliance (which is what appears to be what the jury believed happened), so commands need to be simple concise and clear. By trying to have him crawl forward without his hands approaching his waist is straight up confusing, even for my college educated sober mind, so his level of understanding must have been sufficiently less.

3) The fact that he had "Your F*cked" etched on his weapon tells me that he either took a department issued weapon and had it etched on his own or it is his privately owned weapon, not a department issued service weapon. I have a real problem with that being acceptable either way. I have an even bigger problem with the judge throwing out that evidence as prejudicial. It IS pertinent - not so much to the shooters mental state for the moment, but the level of professionalism of the department and his superiors in general. That's just unprofessional and contrary to what his approach should EVER be.

4) It is clear to me that either through procedural issues or just lack of legal fortitude, the officers legal team was able to run wild shuttering evidence and keeping it from being seen. From what it appears, all the officers defense had to do was prove, "Here are the established procedures that our department has in this situation, here's how he did all of them and here's how the perp didn't comply" and the jury had no choice but to say, "well, then he was right to shoot". Problem is that those should NOT be acceptable tactics. This is as much on the legal system as it is just an inept cop. Again, had he not stuck a scoped rifle (even if it was a pellet gun) out a 5th story window, he would never have met his death.

5) Unfortunately for Daniel Shaver - between when this transpired and when the jury acquitted - we have experienced the worst mass shooting by a lone rifleman from an elevated vantage point and I am 100% sure that the events of Las Vegas have been fresh in their minds. Being told a story of a "hero cop" who took down a potential shooter probably would have been an easy tale to swallow if the other video and "prejudicial" evidence is disallowed.

6) I have HUGE problem with the fact that his father was a cop and in charge of internal affairs. Every company I've ever worked for had policies to keep this type of thing from happening - why is this different?

7) (afterthought) The more I think about this, the more I am doubting a bit of the story in the room. According to the story, he uses the pellet gun for his pest elimination business in Texas for shooting birds that have gotten into businesses. The part that doesn't jive with me is that his business is in Texas and he was in Arizona. Plus, you would not use a pellet gun on a live bird inside a store. No sense risking damage to the store, fixtures or inventory when a bird can be captured. So to me the story is sketchy, but that still doesn't add up to being shot while complying with police orders. Just seems that there are bits of the story that don't add up.
 
Last edited:
tkeaton said:
It sure would be neat if they'd give these fuckboys some actual marksmanship training and teach how to NOT hit center mass. If you're going to fire, you don't have to shoot to kill.

Yea yea yea i know, if you've gotta shoot, make it count. But at the same time it not a cops job to take a life.

Also, fuck the police.
Click to expand...
I can't hit the like button enough with this statement!
I guess I think of morals and ethics people live by and too many cops don't have good morals otherwise they wouldn't be so hard up to "shoot to kill" at first sight. In war/battle that is different but civilian police in these similar scenarios should focus on saving lives. As MP for little while, we got taught MANY ways to take someone down with our sidearm, shots that inflict damage even major but not lethal. Too many cops seem to forget their training..oh wait I guess they just don't care, sorry bastard
 
Well there is always Civil Court . Not the same but can cause pain.
 
Only a dumbass "shoots to wound". There is no military training that teaches "non lethal" shooting because it's dumb and contradictory.
The issue is with the escalation of force straight to a rifle from the 6 officers standing there. The issue is with the "us vs them my life is more important" mentality. And the issue is zero accountability for this kind of shit whenever it happens.
 
Back
Top