WA SWAT Team Win Shootout – With 911 Caller

Vancouver WA SWAT team that had shootout with 911 caller (courtesy kgw.com)

“The [911 caller] had told Vancouver police that he spotted 59-year-old John Kendall in the 700 block of Northeast Blanford Drive,” kgw.com reports. “A manhunt was under way at the time for Kendall, who deputies said had shot his neighbor earlier that morning.” Things went dramatically downhill from there. “Investigators then confirmed Kendall’s cell phone was in the immediate area according to the Vancouver Police Department. A SWAT team arriving at the scene spotted a man who matched Kendall’s description. They were unaware that the citizen who called 911 was still there . . .

“Law enforcement personnel watched as the citizen (believed to be Kendall) exited his vehicle and circled behind his trunk,” police explained. “Fearing that he armed himself, law enforcement fired multiple shots at the individual in order to stop the perceived threat before the citizen could enter the woods.”

Wait. What? The SWAT team shot at the wrong guy because they thought the right guy would escape? I’m no cop, but this “stop him before he goes in the woods” ballistic solution doesn’t strike me as a justifiable use of lethal force – even though the right guy was wanted for murder. I wonder how many rounds were expended in this proscriptive fusillade Anyway . . .

The man was shot in the leg. He took cover behind a gravel pile and fired a shot back, then he called 911 again, this time to report that he had been shot.

Officers made contact with the man and provided first aid until he was taken to a local hospital for treatment.

Kendall was found nearby a short time later with an apparent self-inflicted gunshot wound. He was dead before police arrived, but he and his vehicle were obscured from the view of the SWAT team, according to the police statement.

I’ve said it before, I’ll say it again: if you’re ever in a defensive gun use it ain’t over until the cops arrive – and don’t shoot you. Take all appropriate steps to make sure that doesn’t happen, including leaving the scene. [h/t TP]

comments

  1. avatar Jolly Roger Out says:

    And the officers who fired at this “dangerous individual” will continue to protect and serve, completely unaccountable for their grossly irresponsible use of force.

    1. avatar Roscoe says:

      Shot him on sight just like they’d shoot a dog, no questions asked.

      1. avatar BorisRoberts says:

        I value my dog much more than I value most people.

        1. avatar doesky2 says:

          If you have a moral compass….it’s REALLY broken.

        2. avatar 505markf says:

          Nope. I’m siding with Boris on this one. If I value my dogs more than most people, I’ll take the judgment on lack of a moral compass. Totally comfortable with that.

        3. avatar Drew in Michigan says:

          yup i’m good with a broken compass, would choose my (thrown away = abandoned) yellow lab over quite a few “humans” i know! dam the piece of trash that dumped him on our dirt road, but i thank God he calls our place his home now!

        4. avatar Scorpion says:

          So, just to make sure, you’re ok with me pulling my dog out of the way of the oncoming truck, but leaving your mom/kid/best friend to get squashed.

        5. avatar doesky2 says:

          Yikes, great example of what secularism has wrought.

          Dennis Prager occasionally brings up the scenario about saving your drowning dog or a stranger and the implications thereof.

          Here is a written version and one take away line…

          The results of all these polls provide examples of the terrible moral price we pay thinking that secularism is as good a guide to moral behavior as revelation.

          http://townhall.com/columnists/dennisprager/2013/08/20/dogs-strangers-and-god-n1668450/page/full

        6. avatar Duke says:

          @doesky2

          What a huge false equivalency. I completely agree with you that any person’s life is worth far more than an animal, and as an atheist I’m as secular as they come. I think you’ll find that whether or not someone has belief in the spiritual or not a poor indicator of the value they place on human life.

        7. avatar Roscoe says:

          @ doesky2
          Then MY compass must be really smashed.

        8. avatar doesky2 says:

          @Duke,

          I think you’ll find that whether or not someone has belief in the spiritual or not a poor indicator of the value they place on human life.

          I bet your wrong…very wrong. I’d agree with Prager that there would be a significant difference in results if….

          If you don’t believe me, pose the dog-stranger question to ten people who believe Genesis is divine writ and ten people who believe the Bible is written entirely by men.

          As Prager notes….

          We need to teach — as we did throughout American history until the 1960s — that human beings are created in God’s image and animals are not. That is the only compelling reason to save a human being you don’t love before the dog you do love.

          I’d wager my paycheck that if this question was asked in the 50’s people would laugh at the concept of the question.

        9. avatar doesky2 says:

          @Roscoe….aka Flounder

          …ahhhh….bragging about your lack of moral compass….

        10. avatar scoutino says:

          @doesky2: Morality has nothing to do with religion. As a matter of fact people do not need fear of gods to be moral. Created to someone’s picture or not, humans are more important than animals.
          I agree with Duke. Disagree with Prager.

        11. avatar scoutino says:

          @doesky2: Morality has nothing to do with religion. As a matter of fact people do not need fear of gods to be moral. Created to someone’s picture or not, I’m human so humans are more important than animals.
          I agree with Duke. Disagree with Prager.

    2. avatar v v ind says:

      Lawyer up and prepare for battle. $$$$$ I’d want to be living of the PD’s dime after negligence like this.

      1. Wow. So much fail I dont know where to start. I hope someone takes the fall for the this. Either the chicken sh&t pseudo operators or their captain, or PD chief etc

      2. avatar Thomas Paine says:

        did you mean to say the taxpayer’s dime?

    3. avatar JSIII says:

      It is alarming to me in more ways than one how the Police are starting to treat lawful American citizens with the same disregard in the ROE as we treated Iraqi civilians in 2003. “Well he COULD have been a spotter so we shot him”. “Well; he was driving a TRUCK so we shot him” . This is unacceptable; the American Public is not(yet) a hostile foreign population. Who the HELL are the cops protecting by lighting up all these random civies. The cop in this case should rot in jail and lose everything he owns; YES he made a mistake but it could have killed an innocent man who did nothing wrong. Those idiots in California who lit up the two Latina women and the surfer during the Dorner thing should have gone to jail too. LEO’s are no different than civies; if I shoot someone over a bogus reason I go to jail. If a LEO shoots someone for a bogus(unlawful) reason he should go to jail too.

      1. avatar Milsurp Collector says:

        I’m pretty sure your average U.S. soldier works under ten times the scrutiny and far stricter rules of engagement than any cop here in America, and that’s just sad. If you recall Chris Kyle’s autobiography, he pulled the trigger on a man in a situation that was less than 100% by the book. Kyle was a sniper on a SEAL team, a job that comes with a significantly higher chance of having to take another man’s life, and he had two army investigators on his ass over that one shot in no time flat.

        If a soldier overseas accidentally tossed a flashbang into a baby’s crib, there would be calls for a public hanging, largely by the same people who propagandize their anti-gun/anti-liberty agenda towards us. Some soldier wannabe swat trooper actually does this, and those same people remain silent while the courts won’t even prosecute. The inmates have been running the asylum for a long time now.

    4. avatar Fred says:

      The newspaper headline probably read “Heroic Officers Provide Medical Care to Victim”.

  2. avatar outwardhound says:

    “Fearing that he armed himself, law enforcement fired multiple shots at the individual….”

    Wow, so much wrong with that attitude. I’m speechless – not surprised , just speechless.

    1. avatar JasonM says:

      Isn’t that the same sentiment that the clueless ones claim stand your ground laws promote? “He might be a potential threat; I should kill him!”
      I’m waiting for the protests demanding the repeal of officer safety laws.

      1. avatar TimB says:

        Ummm… WHAT “officer safety” laws? The term “officer safety” is nowhere codified in law. It’s merely “procedure” implemented by cop shops and deferred to by most courts as a “professional courtesy”. It’s simply understood as a logical, expected way for professionals to think and act regardless of law, custom, good sense or community outrage. If it was a law, it could be repealed. As a (almost) universally recognized court “rule”, it’s far more difficult to counter.

      2. avatar narcooseee says:

        JasonM –

        Please read up on SYG laws before embarrassing yourself further.

        That is all.

      3. avatar Mecha-Ben says:

        I guess you’re trying to be clever/sarcastic? Anyway, stand your ground means if someone is threatening you, you as a law-abiding citizen have no “duty to retreat.”
        I’ve never seen one person, other than those attempting to willfully misinterpret the law, say stand your ground means you can shoot if you just think someone’s armed, or whatever it is you’re claiming up there. I have, however, seen MDA supporters say they can and will call 911 on gun owners with the hope that the cops will show up and kill them. So there’s that.

        1. avatar Timmy! says:

          I read Mr. M’s statement to mean that is what the anti’s claim SYG means. He was in no way putting that forth as his opinion. In other words, your flames on him were saying the same thing he was trying to say… I think.

        2. avatar Another Robert says:

          I think the fact that he characterized the sentiment as “what the clueless ones claim” might be what we call, well, a “clue”. I understand sarcasm is sometimes hard to pick up on a printed page, but that was a pretty clear statement that what followed was not the author’s own opinion.

      4. avatar Mecha-Ben says:

        By Jove, Timmy!, I think you may be right. If that’s the case, then I apologize, JasonM.

  3. avatar Rokurota says:

    Assuming the cops were in uniform, why would anyone fire back?! I might be reluctant to leave cover with my hands up, but shooting back was not the right move.

    1. avatar Vhyrus says:

      I highly doubt the guy even saw the cops before he was shot. The fact that he called 911 again rather than yelling out “Hey I’m the guy that called 911!” supports my theory.

      1. avatar BLAMMO says:

        Agreed. It sounds like he thought he was being fired upon by the perp. I mean, why would he think he was being shot at by the police?

        Oh, wait …

    2. avatar Justin_GA says:

      If a police officer is shooting at me it is my legal right to defend my life. Even if that means shooting the police officer. Obviously I would rather just identify myself and have no shots fired but if the officer is going to shoot first and ask questions latter I have to eliminate that threat.

      1. avatar uncommon_sense says:

        I believe this is a specific example of who, when, and where to shoot at government officials in response to Kirsten Powers’ question the other day.

      2. avatar FedUp says:

        Better 850,000 dead cops than one dead me, if I’m the one the cops decided to murder.

        Who said we don’t need ‘high capacity clip ammunition thingies’?

    3. avatar Mack Bolan says:

      Because at that point he had an attempt made on his life and was legally justified to do so.

      Your right to self defense doesn’t end at the point the cops show up…and start trying to off you because they are too stupid.and/or trigger happy.

    4. avatar Chadwick P says:

      The only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun. Shooting at an innocent person means that the officers were criminals. I was under the assumption that when a criminal shoots at you that you shoot back and silence the threat. That is of course if escape is not possible but who’s to say they wouldn’t light up all your neighbors? Eliminate the threat. The civy wasn’t a threat and they had no probable cause to engage. Innocent men getting shot and shooting back at the threat… Innocent guy is the bad guy haha land of the free indeed.

    5. avatar Escaped from Illinois says:

      Friendly fire, isn’t.

  4. avatar Vhyrus says:

    Until the police cannot shoot anyone they want at anytime with zero repercussions we do not live in a free country.

    1. avatar John Lilburne says:

      The police in the United States are out of control.

      Police In England And Wales Went Two Years Without Fatally Shooting Someone
      http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/police-in-england-and-wales-went-two-years-without-fatally-shooting-someone/

  5. avatar Mike says:

    “The man was shot in the leg. He took cover behind a gravel pile and fired a shot back, then he called 911 again, this time to report that he had been shot.” Who did he think he was shooting at? Was he aware the police were there? What time frame are we talking about start to finish? Not a comment on this incident but if you call 911 be prepared to provide additional information. Your vehicle description, physical description, location, in possession of a weapon, etc. This can be a 911 dispatch issue but try to stay online until the situation has been resolved. As pointed out by the author, not being there is the easiest way to prevent getting shot.

    1. avatar Vhyrus says:

      Just a guess here, but I am pretty sure he thought he was shooting at the guy he just called 911 about.

      1. avatar Mike says:

        I agree. Without the facts it is the logical conclusion.

        1. avatar Omni says:

          He shot at the guys shooting at him. What other reason is needed?

    2. avatar Bob101 says:

      It kind of sounded to me like the guy was simply reporting a suspicious vehicle, that he wasn’t expecting SWAT to respond or that the car belonged to someone they were currently chasing.

      1. avatar BGrahan says:

        You are absolutely correct – it was me. As a former police officer and current armed security professional I was simply reporting a suspicious vehicle, I had no clue it was associated with an earlier crime. When I inspected the vehicle, parked in a totally unnatural place and standing, I noticed rifle cases in the back seat. I thought that warranted a 911 “non-emergency” call. 8 minutes after calling 911 (due to calling work to tell them I was slightly delayed on my way to a plain clothes armed workplace violence suppression activity), I exited my 2010 Crown Victoria Police Interceptor complete with push bars and spot light, was appx. 10′ from my vehicle when SWAT opened up on me with 3 223’s, luckily hitting me only once. I had no idea LEO was even in the area or interested in the vehicle, and it was a heavily wooded area with no houses or commercial buildings near. I thought that whoever owned the vehicle with the rifle cases had opened fire on me. Against my formal training I fired one shot from my previously concealed Glock Model 22 to let the bad guy know I was armed. Knowing I was hit I jumped and rolled to a concealment position behind some trees, not a gravel pile as reported. A responding marked unit came up from behind me, casually exited his car until I instructed him to get down, and that I had been hit. He then pulled his weapon, taking cover behind my car…..he had no clue at that point that his own SWAT team had engaged me. A few minutes later when the SWAT van arrived and rendered me first aid I heard one of the SWAT officers ask another “is this the guy we engaged, suspect or RP?” The other officer responded “yes, it’s the RP.” (reporting party). At that point there was discernable tension between the officers. They were snapping at each other and it seemed to me they were pissed off at each other….. I was just glad to get a tourniquet and a ride to the hospital….escorted code 3 of course. The hospital went on “lock down’ as there were two victims there shot by an unidentified gunman at that point. Thanks for commenting, I hope this helps with the truth. I can send pictures of the 223 exit wound if you like……
        Respectfully,
        BG

  6. avatar Alexander says:

    Bottom line – for your safety – do not call the police!

    1. avatar John Lilburne says:

      Yep, their increasingly bad behavior influenced my decision the other day to not call the police.

      Long story short. Couple of shaggy-looking guys driving a very tired-looking car were stuck at intersection waiting for son to come give them a jump start.

      At first I thought I’d call the police to provide traffic-safety assistance.

      But reading about so many situations that go wrong when the police show up, I decided not call.

      I figured the police would probably start questioning them, pressuring them to search the car, etc. because they didn’t look “respectable.”

      I was also thinking of an acquaintance’s recent experience where an officer who stopped for assistance tried to do the same thing…questioning, pressure to search car…probably because he’s Hispanic-looking.

      1. avatar Grindstone says:

        In the past couple years my Hispanic wife has been pulled over at least four times, all for BS reasons (headlight out when it’s on when she drives up to the house, etc) and yet I (a white guy) have NEVER been pulled over driving the same car. Marrying into a minority really opened my eyes.

    2. avatar bontai Joe says:

      but, but, but, but they are “highly trained”, Mike Bloomberg told us so! (heavy sarc)

  7. avatar Tex300BLK says:

    Count this up there with the Fudd who shoots his dog/son/hunting buddy because he heard motion in the brush and thought it was the deer he was tracking… so much fail

  8. avatar Tom in Oregon says:

    The marksmanship of this highly trained swat team is simply amazing.
    Multiple shots fired and only one leg hit.
    Send them all back to patrol.

    1. avatar MontieR says:

      How about send them back to the range.

      1. avatar Another Robert says:

        How about send them behind a desk? Or to the property room, or watching the drunk tank, or somewhere that they won’t be indiscriminately shooting the place up…

        1. avatar bontai Joe says:

          How about firing all their sorry butts, and starting the whole dept over from scratch? Maybe move them over to the road crew to plow snow or fill pot holes.

  9. avatar george from fort worth says:

    folks, face facts….

    ALL police agents consider ALL civilians a deadly threat, ALL the time. if you are not a threat this moment, you will be; better to put you out of action now.

    how many warnings do you need? avoid police agents. if confronted (ah, i mean contacted) by police, surrender immediately, your life may depend on it. do not assert your rights. doing so may be considered threatening the police. do nothing that can be made an excuse for deadly force directed at you. you cannot enjoy your rights if you are dead. live to fight a different day.

    and dat’s de name of dat tune.

    cheers, ya’ll

    1. avatar uncommon_sense says:

      George,

      And that is the very definition of tyranny.

      1. avatar george from fort worth says:

        ah, but it can’t happen here !

    2. avatar Accur81 says:

      How about you don’t judge me by the actions of these a$$hats?

    3. avatar Gene says:

      ” do not assert your rights. doing so may be considered threatening the police.”

      Wtf?

      Citizens need a better union.

  10. avatar Garrison Hall says:

    Criminals may not always be the brightest bulbs on the tree, but they are smart enough to know how to adapt to new situations. Increasingly, criminals are finding it advantageous to impersonate police when committing crimes. In this case, the cops fired on someone who just happened to be armed and who fired back in defense. But they could have just as easily been imposters. How was this guy to know who was shooting at him?

    So, what do you do when someone accosts you claiming to be police when you know you haven’t done anything wrong? Even more serious what do you do if somebody who looks like cops starts shooting at you when you know you haven’t done anything wrong? Asking shooters to please stop doesn’t strike me as a very effective deterrent to being killed by someone doing a particularly effective impersonation of the police. There are enough videos on YouTube showing SWAT tactics, anybody with a little imagination and malicious intent can acquire the hardware to look like a SWAT team.

    1. avatar mikeinid says:

      If they rob you, rape you and then shoot you, they are criminals. If they just shoot you, they are cops.

      1. avatar Julian says:

        Except there are many documented cases of sexual assaults by actual cops in uniform, and have you heard of “civil asset forfeiture”?

        It’s So Easy to Steal Stuff With Civil Forfeiture That Cops Are Getting Picky

      2. avatar Grindstone says:

        There’s a couple cops on trial in my state right now for rape.

  11. avatar MotoJB says:

    WTF??? I seriously hope he sue’s the pants off the city for that BS. Unbelievable.

  12. avatar R Long says:

    Wonder if he’ll be brought up on charges for firing back?

    1. avatar Omni says:

      No, he was in reasonable fear of his life. In WA state, there is no protection for LEOs (as there should not be) for that protection. So… If you reasonably think someone is going to murder you, you are well within your rights.

  13. avatar Sian says:

    I’ll be shocked if he isn’t prosecuted for his justified return fire.

  14. avatar Anonymous says:

    I’ve said it before, I’ll say it again: if you’re ever in a defensive gun use it ain’t over until the cops arrive – and don’t shoot you. Take all appropriate steps to make sure that doesn’t happen, including leaving the scene.

    Because cops don’t understand firearm safety rule No. 4?

    Identify your target, and what is behind it. Never shoot at anything that you have not positively identified.

    Cops don’t follow condition white, yellow, orange, or red. They follow condition “officer safety”:

    Condition “officer safety”: Alerted to everyone. All objects are potential targets and threats. Shoot them before they shoot you, regardless of perceived action, threat, or otherwise. All cops must go home safely.

  15. avatar Nelson says:

    one more reason to ABOLISH all govt ‘police’ PERIOD.

    these are just overgrown teenage roid-head morons and operator-wannabes with toys they can’t and aren’t qualified to handle.

    plus, these monkeys need to be liable for EVERY damage caused by them, NOT the insurance companies that underwrite respective municipalities/muni-corporations.

    and frankly, any supervising ‘officer’ or those city council morons who approve of local PD’s protocols, who ALLOW these things to happen too should be held liable.

    these govt terrorists… seriously, whenTF in any other spheres of interaction is it possibly okay to claim “oops, sorry we shot ya”??

    these are EMPLOYEES, as in BENEATH you, in hierarchy. So whyTF do the sheeple citizenry routinely allow their dogs to dictate when to be fed, housed, and excused??

    1. avatar Drew says:

      Sorry we shot you? How often do we get even that?

      1. avatar John Lilburne says:

        An apology would indicate they made a mistake.

        Police don’t make mistakes.

  16. avatar Hannibal says:

    “Fearing that he armed himself,”

    And he had. What I want to know is was he carrying concealed,openly or was walking around with it in his hand? It may have made sense to him to do the latter, but it would also make sense for the police to shoot him in that case if he didn’t drop it.

    Not enough facts to determine much yet.

    1. avatar Drew says:

      The very statement you quote would indicate that he was carrying concieled.

      1. avatar Hannibal says:

        If you believe the implication (not even a full assertion) from a news report, maybe.

        I’ve seen reporters release information they don’t have too often to be sure.

    2. avatar Omni says:

      PD did not see the gun. WA state has nearly 10-18% of the eligible population with a CPL.

      It is very likely he was already armed, and I know of plenty of people who carry a rifle in their car out here as well.

      Unless he was threatening the lives of people, there was zero justification to shoot. Even if he was openly carrying a firearm. That is NOT justification to commit attempted murder.

      1. avatar Ron Burgundy says:

        A loaded rifle in your car is illegal in WA state, a misdemeanor.

        http://app.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=77.15.460

  17. avatar Brandon says:

    Kendall shot himself??? I don’t even know if I believe that any more. It wouldn’t surprise me if these cop shot him and then said “he shot himself.”

    1. avatar Mack Bolan says:

      And you hit on the crux of the very problem the public and police now face.

      The police have done a fantastic job of delegitimizing their use of force, so much so that they can no longer be trusted on their word.

    2. avatar Swarf says:

      I hadn’t thought of it until now, but that’s actually a good argument for NOT carrying the same ammo as the cops!

      Just kidding… right?

      1. avatar george from fort worth says:

        let’s hope the personal defense lawyers all read your comment. should stop a rogue (aren’t they all) prosecutor from trying to convince a jury not using PD ammo is some sort of crime itself.

  18. avatar Bob101 says:

    I have often wondered why good people who live in the high crime areas of deeply urban America sometimes refuse to call the police. I think I just connected a few more dots. Knowing this area, I bet that someone is going to lose their job over it. Still, it reflects a serious issue with their training and perhaps their rules governing deadly force. Even if this guy was the bad guy, even if he was going to retreat to the forest, I am sure it would still be considered a bad shoot. Last I heard, shoot a fleeing felon is not exactly an accepted practice anymore.

  19. avatar Frank says:

    Hold the clowns in costume to the same standard that the average Joe is. Just because you wear a “uniform” with shiny stuff on it doesn’t mean anything. These Bozos should be facing the same charges that you or I would face.

    I can hear it now. I thought that Fred armed himself but wasn’t sure. I saw Bob behind his truck and thinking he was Fred, I shot him.

    1. avatar Swarf says:

      If the police have no legal obligation to actually help the people they are hired to protect, they sure as hell shouldn’t have protection from the law when they harm us.

  20. avatar george from fort worth says:

    maybe we are expecting too much from a small town PD. vancouver washington is not vancouver island b.c.

    “Vancouver is a city on the north bank of the Columbia River in the U.S. State of Washington. Incorporated in 1857, it is the fourth largest city in the state, with a population of 161,791 as of April 1, 2010 census. Wikipedia”

    1. avatar Omni says:

      I know, it is quite a tall order to ask cops not shoot bystanders or suspects that are not a threat.

      It’s just to much fuckin paperwork!

  21. avatar Lemming says:

    “911! Help! There’s a murderer on the loose! DANGER CLOSE!”

  22. avatar KarVer says:

    The cops should have hollered POLICE!! FREEZE! ANYTHING. Before AnY shots fired. The swat say POLICE before entering buildings and as an identifier. Sometimes other cops may be on scene. . .

  23. avatar miforest says:

    being wanted for murder is not the same as being convicted of murder. and shooting someone who is not aware of you or been given an opportunity to surrender in no part a justice system. It ‘s just plain attemped murder.

  24. avatar former water walker says:

    Yeah I saw this on the news. I would have been in my house “sheltering in place”. I’ve called 911 and got the third degree trying to be a good citizen. Now I don’t blame people for not getting involved. It’s a damn shame you can’t trust the POlice.

  25. avatar Tiostiont says:

    ᴜᴘ ᴛᴏ I sᴀᴡ ᴛʜᴇ ᴅʀᴀғᴛ sᴀʏɪɴɢ $5385 , I ᴅɪᴅ ɴᴏᴛ ʙᴇʟɪᴇᴠᴇ ᴛʜᴀᴛ…ᴍʏ… ᴍᴏᴍ ɪɴ-ʟᴀᴡ ᴀᴄᴛᴜᴀʟɪᴇ ᴇᴀʀɴɪɴɢ ᴍᴏɴᴇʏ ᴘᴀʀᴛ ᴛɪᴍᴇ ᴏɴ ᴛʜᴇɪʀ ᴀᴘᴘʟᴇ ʟᴀʙᴛᴏᴘ. . ᴛʜᴇʀᴇ ʙʀᴏᴛʜᴇʀs ғʀɪᴇɴᴅ ʜᴀs ʙᴇᴇɴ ᴅᴏɪɴɢ ᴛʜɪs ғᴏʀ ᴏɴʟʏ ᴛᴡᴇɴᴛʏ ᴏɴᴇ ᴍᴏɴᴛʜs ᴀɴᴅ ᴊᴜsᴛ ᴘᴀɪᴅ ғᴏʀ ᴛʜᴇ ᴍᴏʀᴛɢᴀɢᴇ ᴏɴ ᴛʜᴇɪʀ ᴀᴘᴀʀᴛᴍᴇɴᴛ ᴀɴᴅ ᴘᴜʀᴄʜᴀsᴇᴅ ᴀ ʙʀᴀɴᴅ ɴᴇᴡ Sᴀᴀʙ 99 Tᴜʀʙᴏ . sᴇᴇ ᴛʜɪs…………………….http://2.gp/Fgra

    1. avatar JohnF says:

      It’s really good to know there are opportunities for the illiterate. This truly is a great country!

  26. avatar Swarf says:

    This guy.

  27. avatar Steve says:

    I’m confused. It sounds like this 911 caller did arm himself. Which is another reason armed vigilantism is a bad idea. When the cops show up they don’t know who the bad guy is. Imagine if there were more than one armed vigilante.

    1. “Fearing that he armed himself, law enforcement fired multiple shots at the individual in order to stop the perceived threat before the citizen could enter the woods.”

      It is clear that they did not see that he was armed.

      They did not shoot him because he was armed, they shot him because they thought he was the suspect.

    2. avatar brentonadams says:

      What in the hell are you talking about? Is a person that calls 911 to report a suspect an ‘armed vigilante’ now?

      He fired back at people that were trying to kill him, not only is that justified, its perfectly reasonable course of action.

      They happened to be trigger happy police. That doesn’t change anything.

      I don’t think you under stand what ‘vigilante’ means.

    3. avatar JasonMfromSoDakota says:

      If “More than one armed vigilante”, as you put it, was there the concerned citizen who called to try and help the police find a murderer would have had back up and an important lesson in the consequences of America’s newly accepted tyranny. Calling 911 in this present day and age is the same as asking mercy from the robed men of the Inquisition, because you are expected to confess all important details and then you are still sentenced to death for trying to cooperate. At least in Washington the executioners can’t carry out the sentence with lead, but now the victim is going to be burned in the media.

  28. avatar Rick says:

    Know this: when cops come to your house, for Any reason you are Fucked! Your dog is shot to death and probably your loved ones including children. Sooo,don’t shoot the vest. Shoot the God Damn paid criminals in the head with buckshot. Because you are truly afraid for your lives.

  29. avatar Rick says:

    Know this: When cops show up at your house for Any reason they are going to shoot your dog to death. They will most likely shoot you and your loved ones to death. Sooo don’t shoot at the vest, shoot for the head with buckshot. You are fucxed anyway.

  30. avatar SNNN says:

    “….the American Public is not(yet) a hostile foreign population. ” Just give it
    a little time… How we treat folks in foreign places always filters back to
    the local neighborhood near you in just a bit.

    Actually the folks in blue DO hold the public IN contempt already so none of
    this surprises me at all. I NEVER call 911 now. Authorities keep wondering
    why folks just watch or walk away…its a no brainier really.

  31. avatar WT actual F says:

    “He took cover and fired a shot back” is this correct?

  32. avatar Aaron says:

    Geez, lots of comments judging ALL cops as criminals and murderers. My hometown cops have always been courteous and professional (although a nearby jurisdiction has a hard-on for dubious traffic enforcement).

    1. avatar george from fort worth says:

      just as we treat all guns as loaded (until they are not, else we could never clean them), we should treat ALL cops as a threat (until they prove otherwise, else we may make an innocent mistake that costs us our lives).

      just sayin’

      like the man said, “treat everyone courteously, and have a plan to kill them.”

  33. avatar Xlint says:

    This whole story is a sham, but if it were true which I can prove its not, the officers involved should be brought up on charges for attempted homicide. We shouldn’t have to fork out a dime in tax ayers money for there insubordination. Contact me if you wanna know what I know

Write a Comment

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

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email