“Police were called to a home in Pine Bluff, Arkansas,” cnn.com reports. ”When they arrived, they were able to determine that an aggravated assault had occurred against two people at the residence,’ Lt. David E. Price, a Pine Bluff police spokesman, said in a statement. The two victims were led out of the house. It was not clear what role the suspect had in the aggravated assaults or what they were.” Not clear, eh? Sounds like ye olde SWAT team boo-boo blackout. Just sayin’ . . . “When officers approached a bedroom where [Monroe] Isadore was hiding, he fired through the door, authorities said. None of the police officers was hit by the gunfire. They retreated to a safer area and called for additional help, including SWAT officers who started negotiations with the suspect.” Yeah, negotiations between a 107-year-old man and a SWAT team. How do you think that went? Well . . .

SWAT officers slipped a camera into the room where Isadore was holed up and saw he was armed with a handgun, Price said.

After unsuccessful negotiations, officers slipped gas into the room through a window, he said, and Isadore fired rounds at them.

The officers broke the bedroom door and hurled in a distraction device, and Isadore fired at them again, according to the spokesman’s statement.

Officers returned fire, killing him.

A distraction device like, I dunno, a flash bang? Yeah, that would be my first choice too. No wait. I’d wait. I mean, the old guy’s got to fall asleep at some point, right? Well now he has. Permanently. Nice one guys.

173 Responses to BREAKING: AR SWAT Team [Not Shown] Take Out 107-Year-Old Perp

  1. I read this too. The only thing I could think of was “He’s 107.. couldn’t they have just waited til he died of natural causes?”

    • A gun in the hand of a 12-year old is just as deadly as in the hands of a 107-year old which is just as deadly as in the hands of a 20-year old gang banger. The old man actively tried to kill the police.

      • And yet, for all we know the man had every right to fire upon them. Remember, all you’re reading is what the police SAY happened.

        • Based on that logic, you may as well not read the news at all. After all, its only what they SAY happened.

        • The difference being that police have a long history of lying, “misplacing” evidence, and “accidentally” shooting people. The police have as much credibility as Kim Jong Il.

      • Ok…but the reaction time, hearing ability, vision and overall ability of a 107 year old “holed up” in a room is such that they could have kept the camera on him and waited till he fell asleep.

        • Sorry guys, but its a legit use of force. He had a gun, he fired on cops, and he showed no interest in relenting.

          Sure, they could’ve waited, but again, no one knows how long it takes and what he would get up to next.

          Age doesn’t matter. Perp with a gun.

        • To defuse a situation with the least harm appropriate to the task. That’s the very purpose and credo of hostage negotiation.

          What happened in Pine Bluff is a travesty, and there’s no excusing it.

        • Adm.Fookbar: In Sweden or England the cops would go to jail. The 107-year-old didn’t try to shoot cops. He couldn’t see them. They were negotiating, then suddenly they were gassing and flash-banging him from a safe (in full body armor) distance. They should have simply backed off to the the safest cover point and let things settle. If the cops we employ are so simple-minded that they cannot draw the distinctions, and cannot deescalate and regroup, they aren’t safe enough to employ. Jobs are scare. Hire some out-of-work engineers instead.

        • “If the cops we employ are so simple-minded that they cannot draw the distinction, and cannot deescalate and regroup, they aren’t safe enough to employ. Jobs are scare. Hire some out-of-work engineers instead.”

          YEAH! You put your finger on the entire issue… I cannot fathom why some people excuse and welcome these serpentine societal cripples. They’re a danger to polite society and would be better suited to zoo life than amongst the rest of us.

          They are not a privileged class and should never be treated as such.

      • He was IN A CLOSET; he did NOT go after them – they went after him. All they needed to do was withdraw and confer with their superiors. You remember those, right? He likely was suffering from confusion or dementia and couldn’t grasp what was happening to him.

        The problem at hand is a lack of valuing human life. It seems to be spreading like wildfire thought our militarized police forces.

        • I could have sworn I saw it, but it’s not there; probably someone else said it. Why is it so important? They shot a 107-year old man through the bedroom door, not the closet door. My bad.

        • Closet. No closet. Maybe the grassy knoll was in the closet. I may have just started an entirely new interwebz conspiracy theory. You read it here first.

        • I wonder if the old man was suffering from flash backs to WW1. Being swarmed, gassed, sounds of gun fire. He probably thought he was back in the trenches.

      • It sounds like they scared the hell out of an old man, and he reacted accordingly. They could have easily waited him out. After-all , the had visually verified that a single old man with a hand gun and no hostages was who they were dealing with. When did discretion fall to the wayside as an option?

    • TO: All
      RE: The ‘Waiting Game”

      I have to wonder if this SWAT team is on the payroll of the Obamacare Death Panel.

      In the Army we refer to Triage as….

      Give a doctor a gun.

      Regards,

      Chuck(le)
      [Coming to your door soon…..Obamacare ‘triage’…..Be Prepared…..]

      • I know, Chuck…. I KNOW! “You’re 65 years old; you don’t need a cataract surgery; here, take this white-tipped cane instead!”

        • Not that far along just yet…..

          And the cane I use is a walking stick I beat down an adult black bear with last week up at the mountain property.

          [Vikings are not known as ‘berserkers’ for no reason.]

  2. Always mean to ask RF or someone who knows. Why such intense hatred for police? Maybe you think the world would be safer without them? They were fired on, they returned fire, yet they are still assholes? Did a cop whip your ass once RF? Just curious.

    • The guy was 107 years old, alone in a room. He was not an immediate threat to anyone but himself. They could have pulled back, set up a perimeter outside the house, and waited. Instead forced the issue and killed the guy. There was no reason to go rainbow 6 on this guy other than they needed the target practice. Thats fucked up.

      • Maybe they were afraid he would become the oldest man in the world. Only 10 or so more years to go. Naah, blast ‘im, the shift’s almost over. Dumb…

      • Sure, this guy’s shooting out of his house towards people, but let’s have that continue. Close off the neighborhood until cranky old Mr. Johnson runs out of ammunition or takes a nap.

        No. Tough titties for him. I hardly feel sorry for some idiot who closes down a major highway because he’s texting and crashes, I’m sure as shit not going to blame police for shooting an attempted murderer, just because he happens to be a bit older.

    • They are an occupying army. There are swarms of them eating out our substance, enforcing all of the state’s many unjust laws without question. Most will do anything the state asks of them if their job were on line, including shooting you in the head next to a ditch.

      Yeah, Jerry, executing a 107 year old in his bedroom is what real men do. Afterall, you can’t outwait a 107 year old. Lord knows, they never ever go to sleep!

      May your chains rest lightly upon you Jerry.

      • +100,000. Best answer EVER.

        And yet… the dude got to *107*!! Now the secret of his longevity has died with him! Imagine what that would have been worth….

      • State, unless you are actively involved in resistance against this evil state you decry, you wear the same chains as Jerry. Enlighten us. Other than banging out overwrought rhetoric on the keyboard, what have you done to break the chains?

        • I don’t understand your point.

          I educate others, give money to local and national gun rights organizations, talk to my local representatives about anti liberty laws, and that’s about it. Do I have to start a blog or run for office or shoot at some cops to be legitimate in your eyes?

        • Sound like you are involved in the same activity as most of the rest of us. This overwrought hyperbole about chains and bootlicking detracts from an otherwise serious message.

        • @jwm, statey would be a douchebag if he was advising others to do what he won’t. Since he didn’t do that, I think his position is fair and rational.

          We do have some keyboard kommandos who urge armed resistance from the comfort of their living rooms. I think that they’re unintentionally humorous.

        • Ralph, I’m not saying he’s a douche. I’m just trying to make the point that that whole chain wearing, bootlicking meme takes what could be a reasonable statement and ratchets it up to hysterics that should be glanced at and then discarded. If that’s the effect he’s after, he’s achieved it.

        • jwm, it’s called “colorful language”; it’s used to make a point when the writer fears anything less will not adequately get his point across. If it’s hyperbole at all (and I don’t think it is at all, considering the mess we’ve allowed ourselves to get into), it’s not by much.

          It’s a literary and linguistic tradition as old as the Ancient Greeks, at least. It’s the language of poetry and teaching. I see no harm in it, and much that ‘s good. I’m curious as to what harm you perceive in it?

        • WB, it’s the breakdown of the discussion into the bootlicking, chain wearing meme that bothers me. Throw in a comparison to Hitler and you’ve probably aliented a fair number of the reasonable fence straddlers we’re trying to reach in these talks. I’m not talking about who was right or wrong in this instance. The old man was wrong and once he was isolated and didn’t have hostages the cops made the wrong move. 2 wrongs never make a right.

        • JWM, your post includes assumptions, distractions, and creative vocabulary, but provides nothing of use.
          Stateisevil is stating important points that should be known and kept in mind.
          I too don’t understand your point.

        • Patrick, i thought I was being pretty plain and straightforward in my comment. State was belittling the man for his chains. If Jerry is wearing chains we all are, including State. We live in the same country under the same laws. Simply sitting at a keyboard and insulting Jerry doesn’t make you any freer than he is. If your not actively involved in resisting the supposed chains, then you’re wearing them also. Plain enough?

      • Here in CA, the chains are getting pretty damn heavy. I imagine NY, NJ, CT, MD, IL, and others are feeling the same way. I hope WI, AZ, and Nevada stay free. I’d like to move to one of those states in a few years.

        • I look around and see no chains, just weak-minded, corrupt state government that’s sick and tired of hearing from me. But I and my ilk WILL persevere and persist. And one day the Formerly Free State will be free once again.

    • I’m actually lots more interested in why you think it’s only Robert. How long have you been reading here? You HAVE been reading, haven’t you?

      • My aoplogies guys. Yes the police should have waited, maybe for days, or better yet, just left. Hey, the guy is 107 who is he going to hurt right? Never mind he fired on them, at least twice. Maybe the should have not even responded to the 911 call. Sorry you got slapped around RF, but maybe time to get over it huh? I come here because I believe that every sane person should be allowed to own and carry a gun. Because most of you believe the same, I have ignored the sovreign citizen bullshit that some of you spout. Like the comment about the chains resting lightly. Shut up douche. Yeah Burke, i have been reading. I am often amazed at some of your nonsensical comments. Oh well, I did ask.

        • TL;DR: “SIEG HEIL!

          Don’t worry, someday your beloved thugs will attack you and you’ll be screaming “HOW COULD THIS HAPPEN TO ME?!”

        • @Jerry, it does not appear from the report that the cops returned fire and killed the old man. I could live with the old guy getting shot in self defense in the heat of the moment. The report says that the cops disengaged and were safe, so they bravely called in a designated killer to shoot the old timer. No matter how you try to gussy it up, that’s shameful.

        • What utter bullshit Ralph. They did no such thing. They attempted to arrest him by first using non-lethal gas and then using a non-lethal stun device. Didn’t work. I get the jokes about Swat teams shooting dogs, but how much tinfoil hat do you need to be wearing to think that police want to go shoot some grandpa? I don’t know, I believe in gun rights but sometimes I have to look around and wonder if I’m wrong just by the other people who advocate for them…

    • I’ve written about this before. Click here for the post Is TTAG Anti-Cop?

      Suffice it to say, yes, I did get my ass kicked by a cop once. And spat upon by a cop during my first-ever date.

      But it’s not hatred per se. It’s an intense generalized suspicion based on the effects of a police state on my family, slaughtered by forces loyal to the Nazi’s extermination campaign.

      The idea that cops are “the only ones”—the only civilians who can be trusted with firearms (including fully automatic rifles, grenades, tanks, etc.)—must be exposed as the dangerous delusion that it is. Regularly.

      While I respect and admire many of the police and ex-police members of the TTAG community, I reserve the right to expose police irresponsibility when and wherever it occurs. You know, when it’s gun-related.

      • Many people like to lick boots. They think that’s what America is about. I never developed a taste for it myself.

      • If you haven’t been reading this site long, here’s something to consider. I’m a cop. I think this is one of the best sites around. I don’t think RF hates me or my job, either. In fact, he has even been gracious enough to post more than one submission from me.

        I take great pride and pleasure at work on any call where I have the chance to stop some kind of governmental overreach, or protect the rights of some fellow citizen that were in danger of being ignored. Since I work for a city department, none of these occasions have been dramatic enough to make the news, but they do happen. And when it goes the other way, I want the public to hear about it. RF helps make that happen.

        “Never again” starts at the lowest level, to me.

      • He’s posted articles from me as well. I appreciate the fairness of TTAG, and the propensity for the Truth. History shows clear examples of the tyranny of the police state and how government have had insatiable desires for power and control.

        With that said, if a 107 year old shoots at me, I’m returning fire.

        I’m not saying that this incident could not have been handled differently, but I do get an inclination that this 107 year old was in the midst of a suicide by cop. I won’t automatically judge the use of police resources in the incident since I wasn’t there. I do sincerely wish that we had reporters who used a whole lot more facts in their reports, and actually had the stones to ask tough questions.

        The article did mention that negotiations failed – but wasn’t very big on details. A 107 year old who shoots at police is still a threat – the rounds out of his gun fly just as fast and hit just as hard as those from a 17 year old gang banger or 45 year old career criminal.

        • Police are just as entitled to self-defense as anyone else. But the report says that the intended targets had been evacuated and the cops were safe. They tried negotiations, and they failed. So go back and negotiate some more. But instead, they reengaged — why? What was the hurry? Shift over? Hungry? Or just needing to kill someone, there being no dogs handy? I don’t get it.

          Sometimes it’s not about self-defense, it’s about blood lust.

        • “I do get an inclination that this 107 year old was in the midst of a suicide by cop.”

          From INSIDE a CLOSET? Maybe I’m wrong, but that’s far from your typical suicide by cop.

        • Hmmm, lessee:
          SWAT – multiple officers, full bulletproof body armor, helmets, shields, automatic weapons, explosives and gas.
          107-year-old – gun, sheet, Depends.
          Yep, pretty well matched. SHODDY POLICING, IMO; amateur night in Pine Bluff.

        • Sorry Ralph, government employees are paid to give up their right to self defense. They don’t like it? Fine, let them find honest work.

        • Maybe in Chris Mallory world you give up your rights when you sign on with the government, but in the real world I still have mine.

        • Chris Mallory… you are a complete fool.

          So how long should police wait to capture an attempted murderer? How much money should be spent, how many lives disrupted? For me, that answer is less than “unlimited.” The world is bigger than one man who wants to shoot people.

    • I don’t think it’s an intense hatred… He just posts a lot of this kind of material to rebuke the notion that “only police should have guns because they’re trained and always 100% responsible”

    • Perhaps it’s just the seemingly frequent application of excessive force and resources far greater than the situation would appear to demand. I know, it’s arm-chair quarterbacking. But isn’t that what they do to us mere citizens when we use force to defend ourselves?

        • The armchair quaterback comment would apply if I had suggested, like several have, how the officers should have handled this. I never made any such suggestions so the comment is not appropriate. Maybe you should learn the meaning of terms before you use them Burke. That way, you don’t look like such an asshole.

    • Look, not ALL the police are bad, but if you are a member of the police and don’t speak up against his kind of excessive force, then that makes you an enabler and just as complicit. Police are fond of the phrase, “if you see something, say something,” unless that applies to corruption or brutality within their own ranks. Yeah, i understand you cannot just speak up because you have a wife and kids to support. But all that means is that you have been bought and paid for by the people in charge for your silence. There are other jobs. IRL, people will gravitate to the jobs that suit them. So, while not ALL the cops are bad, I think that most are at least complicit with their silence. And yes, Radley Balko has some stories in his book from real cops willing to speak up about the use of excessive force.

      • I think the overwhelming majority of cops are good, decent people with a tough job to do. If they are silent there is probably nothing there to yell about. Unfortunatley the sadistic and corrupt grab the spotlight, especially here. That’s just the way it is.

    • In answer to your question, yes, I’d like to go back to the days when the taxpayer was not having his pocket picked to fund this level of incompetence. Cops are a financial liability to the taxpayer from the moment they’re sworn in, they continue to be a liability when they’re retired. Their compensation plans alone are bankrupting cities and counties.

      The FBI stats show that crime has been going down for the last 20 years in the US, it’s high time we start reducing the amount of money we spend on police and law enforcement.

      • “But we did such a great job, we reduced crime drastically! And you want to ‘reward’ us by paying us less?”

        I agree with you, but I can see where they’d go with that. And I am not convinced that cops had much to do with the lower crime rate.

        Too often, the cops and the crooks are the same persons.

      • We do better collecting wild animals for zoos.

        This case is like so many reported in the last year: Four or five patrolmen. They call SWAT. But the guy or woman they’re after is cornered, mental confused, and old. I don’t in the least hate cops, but I hate stupid SOP’s. Here’s how much they value life: Instead of leaving two patrolmen with less-lethal in their shotguns, and putting a riot shield over the door to wait him out, they gas and flash-bang him. So he shoots because hell has descended upon him, and then they open up with rifle rapid fire. “He made us do it!” It was the COPS’ choice to push it. If it was their great-grandfather, would they have done so? No. Obviously.

    • Jerry, I’m not RF, but let me take just a little shot at this. First watch the video supplied above for SWAT tactics.

      The 4th Amendment says we have a right to be secure from unreasonable searches and seizures and no warrant shall be issued except upon probable cause. So far so good.

      The above tactics are apparently for a no-knock warrant. An entire squad of men equipped like military infantry break down the door, throw in a grenade, and all rush into the house yelling (all of them at the same time so that it is nearly impossible, even if you weren’t stunned by the flash-bang, to understand what is being said), “Police! Search Warrant!” But none of them that I can see actually has the search warrant to show anyone they encounter, nor, apparently, the intention to do so before they have subdued or shot anyone who tries to resist their assault. And what’s with the last guy in line taking up a defensive position outside the door watching for a counter-attack?

      These are NOT reasonable tactics for a civilian police force serving search warrant. These are tactics for a combat infantry squad in hostile territory taking over an urban structure known to be occupied by armed enemy combatants. The only possible reason I could consider these tactics acceptable is if they were service the warrant on a known and verified cell of heavily armed terrorists.

      How about all those guys surrounding the house and someone trying, however carefully, to actually serve the search warrant and gain compliance before the whole military style assault? Just exactly who do these SWAT guys think they are up against that these sort of tactics are justified against civilians who BY LAW are considered “Innocent until proven guilty in a court of law?”

      With this sort of manpower and firepower there is absolutely no valid reason to assault a residence without any warning or even attempting to present the warrant and the terms of the warrant to the occupants, although I know some will argue that the residents will start flushing evidence. The valve to cut off water to most buildings is located outside the building. At best they would get ONE flush.

      The only exception I could envision to this is if they are already taking fire from the house before making entry or have incontrovertible evidence that an armed force is inside, alert, waiting, and read to repel with violence their attempt to serve the warrant. And even then, why not wait them out? Cut the power, cut the water, block the doors and windows. How long could you last in your house under those conditions? And how many gang-bangers or other violent criminals keep gas masks handy these days? If you’ve ever experienced CS you would know that it is a very effective alternative to busting down the door and shooting everything up. But it’s not nearly as macho to handcuff guys puking on their front lawn as it is to wheel them out on gurneys.

      Hope that makes some sense.

      • “…have incontrovertible evidence that an armed force is inside, alert, waiting, and read to repel with violence their attempt to serve the warrant.”

        If that were the case they wouldn’t go in.

      • You keep going on about search warrants. Nothing to do with a warrant, they were at the residence in response to a 911 call, the old man fired at them through a closed door. Read the story before you try to educate me professor.

    • Let me put it this way;

      If a lone SWAT member were holed up in a room and scared witless, and suddenly a bunch of old men threw a flashbang at his ass and stormed in, guns drawn, you would expect the SWAT guy would fire and likely die as a result – Regardless we would all likely agree the old men were the bad guys.

      But you expect me, when of a bunch of SWAT guys, flashbang an old man and then rush in and kill him cause he fired at them in response….you expect me to still think the old guy is the bad guy?

      I would ask you, why such intense hatred for the elderly?

      • So the old man was just sitting in his room and SWAT just showed up and launched their assualt? Holy shit, that changes everything. Obviously they hate old people.

  3. It’s somewhat encouraging, at least, that all of the comments on the original story recognized and decried the growing “tacticalization” of American law enforcement.

    I can’t believe that no one anticipated that if you give a municipality a SWAT team, their going to want to swat somebody, deserving or not.

  4. Good work on the part of the officers involved.

    A bad guy with a gun is a threat,period.Let us not buy into the media hype that just because he over 100 means he wasn’t a danger.

    • Unbelievable comment. Have you no sense at all?

      First, why did they need to force an entry in the first place?

      Cops bashing in your door, warrant or not, should expect to get shot at by 107 year old men and women who can’t hear very well. Kudos to the man for resisting such arbitrary use of force.

      Courts have ruled that police officers are not allowed to be smart. This is more proof.

    • A monkey with a pistol is a danger if you try to take it away. That doesn’t mean he actually understands what’s going on. The guy was 107 years old. Hasn’t anybody heard of senile dementia? How about Alztheimer’s? There is a VERY strong possibility that he had no real understanding of what was happening around him or to him. He had no more room to flee, he chose to fight.

    • ST, you’ve already decided the guy was a ‘bad guy with a gun.’ For all you and the PD know, the other two in the house were abusing HIM. Seriously, if you believe the PD has the right to shoot anyone with a gun, who believes they are under assault with gas and explosions, you should rethink it. Most civilized nations insist that police use the minimum force necessary, based on known circumstances. They knew the guy’s age. They knew it was a pistol. They knew the house was otherwise clear. As far as I can figure, once a bunch of patrollers and SWAT get together in one place, they completely forget the possibility of deescalation and setting watch. BUT, I’d point out, when the PD wants to convict a minor drug dealer, they put cops on stakeout for days. No? Why the patience to get a conviction, but not to save an elderly life? Answer?

  5. The guy lived to 107. Think of all he’d lived through, only to die like that.

    For fuck’s sake, the guy’s 107. He’s probably bedridden, and if not, he’s got the bone strength of a baby bird. Wait ’til he falls asleep, take the gun away, and don’t let him get it back.

    Or, y’know, call the SWAT team.

    • I am actually surprised the tear gas did not cause him to black out from a choking fit. Seriously, roll in some hot French Fries and let him pass out at nap time.

      For those claiming the police were justified because he fired on them, shame on you. They had him cordoned. He was not going anywhere nor was he posing an immediate risk. His life and dignity were worth waiting for this matter to defuse.

      • And being SWAT they had a ballistic shield or two with which they could have covered the door. So many ways to spare his life, so little care to do so. They knew WHERE he was in the room, via the camera. It stuck me as a bunch of half-trained barbarians drafted into the legion. We have sound, gas, barricade devices, less-lethal, and hell, rubber buck (he’s 107). They say they are saving time and neutralizing a threat. No, eight guys aren’t needed, and are expensive. Two or three posted for three hours would cost less. And SWAT didn’t ‘neutralize a threat,’ they killed a 107-year-old man who couldn’t escape.

        If being a cop were as dangerous as being a fisherman or roofer, I’d be more sympathetic. But it isn’t.

        • “And SWAT didn’t ‘neutralize a threat,’ they killed a 107-year-old man who couldn’t escape.”

          BINGO. People excusing the behavior of savages here makes my stomach turn. LIFE IS NOT AN EFFING ACTION MOVIE. He could have been your great-grandfather.

          I’d like to see you t*rds say the same thing THEN.

  6. The old man probably thought he was being attacked by viscous thugs hell bent on harming him and–oh, wait.

    One of my biggest concerns as a gun owner is that I’m going to be the victim of a wrong address no-knock raid and get shot for defending my family from unknown intruders.

      • 3rd that… and all you’ll hear on the news is how I have a crap ton of ammo and guns.. and the media will count every damn round to make me sound as evil as possible, and how dare I defend my family against the always right police…!!

    • Yep. And this is why, despite past condemnation for doing so from the TTAG AI, I maintain a relationship with my city PD. They’re aware that I’m a firearms owner and competitor.

      In a community where this puts me firmly in the minority, I’d rather be known as a friendly. Who knows, it might cause someone to think twice before serving a no-knock warrant someday…

  7. TTAG has a lot of police who comment here regularly. AFAIK, none of them has ever assassinated a little doe, a puppy or a 107 year old man. And AFAIK, none of them approve of those actions.

    I don’t trust cops and there’s no reason why I should. I don’t trust anyone who can bring down the weight of an entire state or nation against me for no other reason than he feels like it at the moment, and then readily escapes liability for his own criminal actions. If anyone thinks I’m wrong to feel this way, read The Cato Foundation’s http://www.policemisconduct.net/ and then tell me that I’m being paranoid or foolish.

    Cops are dangerous because they are out of control. Bring them into line and we can talk about how the police are our friends. Until then, we will all be better served if they stay as far away from me as I try to stay away from them. I’m not a doe, puppy or 107 year old man.

  8. I wasnt there so I only have the word of this story.

    This may come as a surprise to some but a 107 year old person is capable of things younger people are. I have worked in emergency medicine for 12 years and have met 110 year olds who are on the ball as much as I am at my young 28 years. I have met 90 something year olds with a less extensive medical history than mine and a better back and knees to go with it. Heck, last month I had a 97 year old ballet dancer who could still get her legs up over her head.

    It is not impossible to have a 107 year old be a threat. Not common but not impossible.

  9. Honestly he lived to 107 in Pine bluff??!! They should have given him a medal!!! That town is as bad or worse than Little Rock and many other larger cities!!!
    As far as SWAT doing what they did, and I’m not trying to armchair QB, why the hell didn’t they just wait?? I mean really!! How long would they have to wait?? Did they even ask if maybe he was suffering from Alzhiemers or Dementia?? I’ve watched family members die from both diseases and is not a way I would want my worst enemy to go!!
    IMHO was just a blatant case of impatience and overkill!!
    And here is something for you to ponder about PD’s, and yes I have very good friends who are local, state and federal law enforcement,: did you know that many states have Police Officers who are also Homeland Security trained Liasons?? Wonder why some of these “over anxious” PD members get a little heavy handed?? JMHO!!

  10. For Jerry,
    It’s not hatred of cops, it’s reality. All they had to do was wait . . . .wait, at 107 he could have died from natural causes or fell aseep or pooped his pants and given up.

    Thus NO loss of life. SWAT teams are set up to charge and kill. Did we really need this or a negotiator with a few cops standing back to help?.

    There was no need for him to die. YES, they were assholes. They f**ked up and should be ashamed of themselves.

    These ASSHOLES have seen too many RAMBO movies.

    Take a lok at this link, (http://www.cato.org/publications/white-paper/overkill-rise-paramilitary-police-raids-america) the data is old, the estimate is that there were over 70,000 raids last year. . . enough said. And that’s why I do not like the police. . . they cover for themseives and KILL innocent people.

    • What I dislike about the incident, about the cops that display a 007-like belief that “if there’s a gun involved we get to take him down, even if we know we don’t have to!” attitude is this: It just makes it more and more difficult to hire good people to be LEOs. Recruiting people with the belief that the job is peace officer is just going become harder if they feel they’ll be branded as heartless Rambos regardless.

  11. How long between arrival and end? Did they try to determine is mental or physical states? Did he suffer dementia? Might explain his actions. Did he have a history of violence? How busy is the Pine Bluff SWAT team that they couldn’t wait out on old man? Did they just want to whack him to get home in time for corn flakes? Too many unanswered questions.

    • I would like more information on the two people they took from the home. What their relasonship was to the old man? Who’s home was it, and why did the old man attack them? Did they threaten him about putting him into a nursing home and taking every thing he had? Have they been using and abusing him over the years? I hope some one can answer these questions for me.

  12. TO: All
    RE: Heh

    It seems more and more obvious that the so-called Law Enforcement agencies are more interesting in protecting their fourth-point-of-contact than protecting and serving anyone else.

    The question becomes, when is the court system going to allow honest, law-abiding citizens to defend themselve in the face of illegal raids and other abuses of power?

    Regards,

    Chuck(le)
    [Be Prepared…..]

    • Seems to me I recall that one state (I think Indiana) allows for armed defense from po-lice if they don’t clearly announce and do a flash-bang home invasion. Just look for a polite state.

  13. I see it this way. If they can shoot and kill a likely confused 107 year old man,
    then no one is safe from being shot and killed by the police or their SWAT.
    The decision makers that gave the go ahead to engage should all be fired.
    Perhaps even the SWAT team that blindly followed those orders should be
    relieved of their burden of employment. I hate to be Capt. Obvious, but when
    has anyone ever heard of armed civilians storming the house/room of a 107
    year old man and shooting him to death? Oh, that’s right, guns in the hands
    of civilians will lead to shootouts and innocent people getting killed. My bad.
    I hope these SWAT doods are getting earfuls from their own grandparents.
    It will be interesting to see how many bullet holes they find in Mr. Isadore,
    if they tell us. If it’s more than 10, then these SWAT-holes should all be fired.
    The excuse of “We were just following orders.” isn’t going to cut it anymore.
    This possibly could be a chargeable offense of using excessive force that
    resulted in death.

    • “The decision makers that gave the go ahead to engage should all be fired.” I’m thinking more along the lines of manslaughter.

  14. This was not a no knock raid on the wrong house at 0dark30. The police responded to a call and when they got there they had victims of an assualt and when they approached the room where the joe biden devotee was at he fired thru the door. Any body approaching that door, family member, pizza delivery boy, cop would have been in mortal danger.

    After the shots fired thru the door is where things went wonky. If the house had been evacuated of all but cops and there were no hostages in immediate threat the cops should have waited. At least a couple of hours would have given the old guy a chance to cool off and maybe rethink his position.

  15. For fvck’s sake my grandfather is 80 and he tires from walking. This guy was 107. I don’t care if he was holding a handgun or a WASR-10 modded to be fully automatic. All the cops had to do was secure the perimeter, get to cover, and wait for him to surrender or pass out from fatigue in the closet hours later. Simply grabbing the bull horn and negotiating more would most likely have talked him out of it too. No mall ninjas needed.

    • And my grandfather is 78 and can whip the tar out of me and still do a full day of cattle ranch work. Everybody is different.

  16. Welcome to the fascist world of Democrats. Where a old man gets gunned down by paramilitary police and we arm Al Qaeda in Syria. makes you sick.

    • Um… at the risk of being the shot-dead messenger, those paramilitary cops existed before Obama took office. Let me think… wasn’t there someone in the White House before him?

      • Would love to see how the numbers of SWAT personnel and sh’tberg APC ownership have grown in the past decade of two.

      • One of those former occupents had a sign on the desk in the oval office. It read, “The Buck Stops Here.” The current holder of the office doesn’t have the smarts to figure that truth out or the sense of honor to apply it if he did.

        • He also hung a humongous banner on an aircraft carrier that proclaimed “MISSION ACCOMPLISHED”.

          Wonder how that worked out?

        • Truman never hung that banner on a carrier. The man at the top is responible for the actions of the troops. That is barry.

          Napolean is supposed to have said, ” there’s no such thing as bad soldiers, only bad colonels.”

          And we have a really bad colonel in his second term.

        • Um, Bush the Younger never used that slogan — although along with FDR, Truman and Clinton did.

          Only Bush did the banner thang.

          What are you saying…?

        • The man at the top, Russ, is the man that bears responsibility for the way the system works. Our current top man, barry, is solely responsible for the mess we have now. He’s into his second term and what has he changed or straightened out?

          Heaping scorn on previous occupiers of that office is a distraction and has no real bearing on what’s happening now. Bush the younger(aka Cheney’s meat puppet) may have hung that banner, but he and it are both gone now.

  17. They could have probably just waited 10 minutes until he fell asleep or his arm gave out. Or just rolled an iPhone in with an episode of M*A*S*H playing, those old timers sure do love their M*A*S*H.

    • Well if he would have taken down some of the SWATzis with him then at least maybe it would have had a chance of some well-deserved and prolonged discussion….. instead it just another ho-hum SWATassassination that gets buried with all the rest that are too numerous to keep track of.

      • Yes Nazis, assassination, exactly. Did I read the story wrong? Did they just show up and kill this old guy who was asleep in his easy chair? Or do you sling dumb comments around like half the sovreign citizen keyboard commandos around here? You people, the cops respond to a 911 emergency call, are fired upon, and they are the assholes.

  18. I just watched the ‘flash-bang grenade’ video through. Is it odd that one of my first thoughts was the proper response would be a real grenade? Opps, did I say that out loud?

  19. This comment section got nasty in a hurry. I felt like I accidentally stumbled into the comment section for an article at CNN.com.

  20. How was this man not posing a danger? He was shooting THROUGH things. If he shot through a door what makes you think he wouldn’t shoot through a window or wall and kill a neighbor. Oh I know, the police should have evacuated everyone within bullet distance from their homes so you all could be upset about the evil police forcing people from their homes for however long it took this guy to give up. Then they could take cover behind their armored vehicle which it’s an outrage for them to have and just waited. Then everything would have just been fine because everyone is always reasonable and the police are always wrong. You know what’s a really good way to make it to 108? You could start by not assaulting two people and then you could not shoot at people through a door.

    • FINALLY. Someone who knows the entire story!! Please fill us in on the details we’ve been discussing all day… where have you BEEN?

      Did he really rape and torture the two “family members” who luckily escaped the clutches of a spry, horny and evil 107-year old? What else did he do?

      • Well, we can be reasonably sure he was shooting blindly through a door. Unless we’re just going from the premise that the police just decided that they needed to kill an old guy to fill their quota, in which case there’s really no way to discuss this. I’m pretty sure that makes him a danger to just about everyone in the area. If your kid was hit with a bullet because everyone just chose to wait around to see if this guy would fall asleep what would you care how old he was or what his mental status was?

        • “I’m pretty sure that makes him a danger to just about everyone in the area.”

          As per the story, there was nobody else in the area but him and the police. If the police were to tactically withdraw, who does that leave? 1-X=?

          Shooting the old guy was tactically unsound, when other options were clearly available. But none were contemplated. If there’s nobody to shoot, he won’t shoot anybody. We can probably rule out him shooting himself, seeing as how he had 107 years to do so, but didn’t.

          Such a situation seems to call for causing the least harm. No cops in shooting range, no cops get shot. The old feller either runs out of ammo, falls asleep, or dies of natural causes.

          After all, it’s not as if HE had THEM cornered, now is it?

        • As the news articles clearly detailed, the SWAT team kept escalating the situation to the point where the geriatric resumed fire. The SWATzis got to use all their fun camera toys, flash grenades, and Aimpoints to take out the big nasty threat of a 107YO dude in his Depends huddled in a closet. I can see them doing the high-5’s at the end of the “mission”.

        • He didn’t have neighbors? None of them were home? Bullets don’t go through walls? Can someone tell me how long they did wait? Everyone seems to know but no one has put up a number. One thing I will note is that I read an article from another source indicating that the initial call was that the deceased was the victim of assault which lends credence to the Alzheimer’s theory, but that doesn’t change the fact that sometimes shitty situations only have shitty solutions.

        • Obviously true, but should the shitty solution be the first solution? Was it the ONLY solution? No other solutions were mentioned as tried, which you think the cops would offer in their defense. RIGHT?

          No, instead the cops settled on the FINAL SOLUTION.

        • I have never believed in mandatory sentencing. There are always extenuating circumstances to every situation. They had a camera on him. Unless they seen him put on body armor and grab a machine gun, they should have waited him out. You can’t say that the police have never planted drugs, or planted a throw away gun when they had to cover up a bad shooting. I believe that some one got trigger happy. I really don’t think it would have turned out to be another Waco. Even with drugs, how many people have unknowingly transported drugs, got caught and went to prison, and sentenced to a mandatory sentence. That is one of the reasons I don’t drive across the Border. It would be too easy for them to place some drugs in or on the car. Look at what happened to those Border Patrol Agents that shot that Drug Trafficker in the Ass, They went to Prison and the Drug trafficker went free. I wonder who’s shipment it was to have the power and influence to do that. I don’t think that its beyond my imagination that some higher ups in the Border Patrol are on take. Even some of the lower ranking agents.

        • Ummm, okay. Anyway, William, who says it was the first solution? It does say that they attempted to negotiate. None of us know for how long, maybe it was hours upon hours, yet everyone seems to want to jump right onto this “itchy trigger finger” bandwagon without really knowing any fact that actually substantiates this theory.

  21. Seeing how I have no trust in law enforcement and as this story is told from their side
    I call BS.

    Even if factual there are plenty of less lethal ways to deal with a 107 year old not limited to drugging of food and water given to the man.

  22. Glad to know the Pine Bluff swat team is keeping us all safe from those marauding band of 107 year old gangsters. We need to kill everyone over the age of 80; for the greater good.

    Think of the children!

  23. I’m genuinely curious.

    If the decreased had been, say, 50 or 60 would the situation be any different? Because I’m getting a vibe that the deceased’s age is the point of contention.

    (In before someone jumps on me for taking one side or the other)

  24. Regardless of age, mental state, or tactical decisions, this man had not invaded the cops’ houses. They entered his, because of alleged aggravated assault. Upon hearing gunshots as a result of their presence, the right thing to do would likely be to leave and reduce the changes of further violence (and/or approach the situation in a less aggressive manner).
    Regardless of some of your faithfulness to cops, who I admit do usually care about safety public, it is not the cops’ job to deescalate, but to carry out the will of bureaucrats. In the end the killer is the one who pulls the trigger. A human cop or soldier is not a robot, and the shooting must be last resort self defense, when escape is impossible.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *