Police in Idaho are investigating themselves after they shot a homeowner who was armed with a pistol in his own back yard while searching for a criminal suspect. As of now, the bodycam footage hasn’t yet been released. Meanwhile, not far away, the real suspect was arrested without incident.
Generally speaking, if law enforcement have saturated your neighborhood, the best course of action is to remain indoors with the doors locked. Prudent people won’t leave the safety of a residence to make sure a backyard shed is locked or to cook a steak on the grill.
In this case, not only did the homeowner leave his house, but he allegedly had a gun in his hand when police arrived. When they entered his yard and saw him, one of the cops fired a single, fatal shot mistakenly believing the homeowner was the criminal.
Obviously the bodycam video will likely answer a lot of questions.
NBC News reported the story:
The incident started when a Bonneville County sheriff’s deputy pulled over a vehicle in Idaho Falls for a broken tail light shortly after midnight Monday, according to a statement from the sheriff’s office. While the driver remained in the car, the passenger took off running, authorities said.
Idaho Falls police officers and Bonneville County sheriff’s deputies were called to the scene and began searching for the suspect, who was wearing a black shirt and khaki pants and headed in the direction of a residential neighborhood, according to a statement from Idaho Falls police.
A resident told an officer they had seen the suspect run through their yard, and the resident believed the suspect was armed with a gun. All officers were given this information, police said…
“Officers and deputies surrounded the residence and backyard in order to prevent the suspect from fleeing,” the statement said. “Due to the information that the suspect may be armed, and a prior history of violence when interacting with police officers, law enforcement personnel entered the location with their service weapons drawn.”
Officers said they heard yelling and saw a man in a black shirt. He was armed with a gun, and officers told the man to drop the weapon, according to the statement.
The link has more information. The bottom line here remains that cops shot the wrong person by mistake. When it’s eventually released, the bodycam video should reveal whether the officer’s actions were reasonable and prudent given the circumstances.
Oh boy…The the above race baiter turned the discussion. That said, When is the democRat Party going to be held liable for slavery, segregation, Jim Crow, the KKK, lynching, Eugenics, Gun Control and other race based atrocities?
Any race baiting democRat care to reply? Or better yet put their money where their race baiting piehole is.
Or for that matter, dragging us into WWI, WWII, dropping nuclear weapons on civilians (twice in 1 week!), Korea, and Vietnam!
I don’t think we were dragged into WWI&II, Korea or Viet Nam. I will vehemently disagree with you on dropping the 2 nucs on Japan. We should have dropped a minimum of 4 on Japan and a couple more on Mao Zedong in China. If we had of followed through, there would not have been a communist China, Korea or Viet Nam. And possibility a more humble Russia. You. Liberal idiots is why we never finish the job and keep paying in our blood.
Mack, the US population was originally against entering both WWI and WWII. In both cases the US president, conspiring with the lying media, did everything they could to convince Americans that absolutely fictitious atrocities were being committed.
All of the original combatants in WWI were running out of money and will power and likely would have concluded a reasonable peace. But the US entry into the war tipped the balance so strongly in the Allies favor that Germany was utterly crushed. In desperation Germany pulled Lenin out of prison and sent him back to Russia to start his revolution and take Russia out of the war. Russia did indeed drop out of WWI and we got the USSR and all of the glorious things that came with it including it’s international meddling in every budding would be communist utopia including China.
The US also facilitated all of the other powers going off the gold standard, and all of the central banks inflating our money away together.
The utter defeat of Germany and the absolute devastation wrought by the Treaty of Versailles set the stage for the rise of Hitler and Not Zs and everything that followed.
Remember that when Hitler and Mussolini rose to power many in America and England applauded them. American president spoke fondly about how organized Germany was and how wonderful fascism was.
When wonderful Germany and her allies began invading their neighbors the American people were hesitant to get involved in another European problem. Communist infiltrators in the US government and media sent and recruited by Lenin and then Stalin, and some in place as early as the 1920s, pushed out propaganda and bent the ears of politicians to get the US to back the USSR against the Not Zs. This would begin a series of programs through which the US government propped up the USSR for the rest of it’s existence.
Then the president goaded the Japanese into attacking the obsolete ships at Pearl Harbor while the newer more modern ships were out on maneuvers. This drove a massive change in position among Americans from anti war to pro war. Thus the president accomplished both getting the US into the war, and eliminating the congressional block on funds for the navy to buy shiny new toys.
After WWII, largely at the behest of the afore mentioned communist infiltrators in the US government and media, the US backed Mao instead of Chiang Kai-shek leading to the creation of communist China. The US also backed Castro in Cuba, again largely at the instigation of communist infiltrators here.
Vietnam was propping up the rubber industry in the French colonies. If the Chinese (helped by Lenin and Stalin and originally backed by the US) had not been there then Korea would not have been an issue at all. If Lenin had not been released and sent back to Russia communism would have withered and died.
All of the international problems and conflicts in the 20th and 21st century along with communism, the USSR, China, Korea, Vietnam, and all of the middle eastern conflicts grow out of US entry into WWI and that was driven by a lying president and media.
A fine history lesson from the jolly pirate!
Be forewarned, you may have provided more information than many on this list are willing to entertain.
“….absolute devastation wrought by the Treaty of Versailles …”
Pirate is spot on. Yet, the winners bury the truth as always. Wilson and his band of Ivy league educated idiots got us into WWI after promising the American People he would not.
TO: The Crimson Pirate, you make a few good points. Sadly, there’re a number of critical errors.
First, I must assume your comment, “In both cases the US president, conspiring with the lying media, did everything they could to convince Americans that absolutely fictitious atrocities were being committed,” expressly denies the Holocaust against the Jews. Six million plus people were exterminated by the Nazis in WW2, most of them Jews. Ti be frank, I lose respect for Holocaust Deniers.
Your comment, “In desperation Germany pulled Lenin out of prison and sent him back to Russia to start his revolution and take Russia out of the war,” is utterly false.
The facts are, ” After the outbreak of the February Revolution, German authorities allowed Lenin and his lieutenants to cross Germany en route from Switzerland to Sweden in a sealed railway car. Berlin hoped, correctly, that the return of the anti-war socialists to Russia would undermine the Russian war effort, which was continuing under the provisional government. Lenin called for the overthrow of the provisional government by the soviets; he was subsequently condemned as a “German agent” by the government’s leaders. In July, he was forced to flee to Finland, but his call for “peace, land, and bread” met with increasing popular support, and the Bolsheviks won a majority in the Petrograd soviet. In October, Lenin secretly returned to Petrograd, and on November 7, the Bolshevik-led Red Guards deposed the Provisional Government and proclaimed soviet rule.” https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/lenin-returns-to-russia-from-exile
Then you claim that Lenin was recruited by the US. Again that’s wrong. After the execution of his brother in 1887 Lenin joined the Russian revolutionary cause and in 1895 organized Marxist groups in St. Petersburg. Due to his activities he was arrested and sent to Siberia. Later, he was forced into exile. As stated above, in 1917 he returned to Russia.
You claim that FDR provoked Japan into attacking Pearl. How did he do so? Both the US and Japan had colonial interests in SE Asia and the SW Pacific. Most of our rubber and much of our oil came from the region. Keep in mid there was a worldwide depression. It was Japan’s encroachment on SE Asia that caused the contentions with the US AND Britain. Then there was China and the Rape of Nanking. These led the US to impose sanctions on Japan. It can be argued that those sanctions were the proximate cause of the Pearl Harbor attack. But should the US have permitted Japan to expand and commit atrocities in China? Or do you also deny those atrocities as well?
During and after WW2 the US supported Chiang Kai Shek, not Mao Zedong as you imply. It wasn’t until Pres. Nixon in 1979 that the US established recognized Communist China. Still, we recognized Taiwan until the serious mistake of Pres. Carter. That’s why we may well have a war over the S. China Sea.
The Korean War was due to a critical error on the part of Pres. Truman’s Sec of State, Dean Acheson. He made a speech outlining the US zone of influence from AK to Japan to the Philippines and Indonesia, leaving out Korea. Truman was advised by a State Department employee that if it wasn’t corrected, we’d be at war with CHINA within 3 years. He was ignored and we were in a proxy war with China and the USSR in 1 year. That person was my history professor in college.
During the Korean War Gen. MacArthur wanted to use nuclear weapons but was forced to retire by Pres. Truman after he attempted to go over Truman’s head to the American people. Perhaps had Truman heeded MacArthur’s advice the SE Asian Extended War might have been avoided and the threat of China mitigated.
By the way, I believe we LOST the Vietnam War due to a dishonest media and a cowardly Congress.
You are obviously ignorant of history, and I suggest that you refrain from making such absurd statements until you have brought yourself up to speed on the World Wars, plus why the A-bombs were dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
After paying closer attention to the cases of no knock warrants, and police shootings in general, I, a conservative heterosexual 2nd Amendment supporter and veteran, do believe we have a problem in the US with trigger happy police. I am not a BLM supporter, but when one starts checking the statistics, it is amazing how many whites are killed just like blacks for innocuous reasons, so it appears there might be a possibility of a joint effort by blacks, whites, and Hispanics to reduce police killings. And this is after supporting LEO’s for years.
Agreed. Unfortunately, the BLM crowd will refuse to join with other groups to actually fix the problem. Their key narrative isn’t about out of control police, it’s about racial persecution and the idea that blacks have a uniquely difficult time in America. If they acknowledge that police routinely murder folks of all races, they’re acknowledging that blacks aren’t facing specific racial persecution, which of course is very much NOT allowed
I’d call myself a libertarian instead of a conservative (if I call myself anything), but I agree with you. As a percentage of arrests, whites are killed by police even more often than blacks. And the abuse of police powers under the “war on drugs” is appalling.
Unfortunately, there’s virtually no recognition that this problem specifically affects white people, and we’re not really even allowed to point it out that it does. The Black Lives Matter movement, on the other hand, is a concatenation of idiot virtue signalers and people who want the government to point its money at them and its guns in the direction of their racial grievances.
“…As a percentage of arrests, whites are killed by police even more often than blacks….”
No one talks about this out loud but it’s true.
Technically true, as there are more whites than blacks in the USA.
The data from the FBI UCR indicates that blacks are now killed by LEOs at a greater rate than whites. However, this is a direct result of blacks being 12.7% of the population committing almost 40% of violent crimes.
You’re talking foolishness now. You must drink the Kool-Aid. You must be convinced that only police should have guns, because the police never make mistakes. Drink now, you’ll feel better in the morning!
“bodycam video should reveal whether the officer’s actions were reasonable and prudent.”
I’ll give you a hint: they were not. Unless the homeowner drew a bead on a uniformed officer (which, while theoretically possible, strikes me as highly unlikely), this was just another case of cops murdering someone for being armed on his own property. If I do that I go to prison for a long time, but if they do it they get taxpayer funded PTO. Oh and judging by the lack of riots I’m gonna assume the slain homeowner was white
Ding ding ding
I can tell you’ve never had training in real shootings. A gun in hand, is a gun in use. Action beats reaction, EVERY time. If the homeowner had “drawn a bead” on the officer, the officer would have been dead before he could react.
You are technically correct and morally wrong.
The rights of the people trump the understandable desire of law enforcement to avoid risk to themselves.
“Shoesmith is white, as was the victim, who has not been identified, police told NBC News. The officer who shot the victim is Latino.”
Well there it is folks. We don’t need proof of racism. If the media and democrats have taught me anything, it’s that when a cop of a different race kills someone, it’s because of racism. I expect the cable news shows and politicians will be talking about this incident for months. Brace yourself for fiery protests.
To the police, they are surrounded by threats and targets. But they will shoot anyone regardless of color.
Sad for everyone.
The bodycam video should be interesting. I wonder about the experience level of the officer. If he has a conscience, he will always second-guess his reactions with a “if I had waited two seconds would it have changed the outcome…?”
One of my personal fears was responding to a domestic or “bump-in-the-night” call and someone in the darkness of the home raising an apparent weapon, my training and muscle memory kicking in…and discovering seconds later that I had shot a child with a toy firearm. Thankfully, that scenario never occurred. Worst that happened was when a
bwitch with a baseball bat at a domestic put me into the hospital.
Those bwitchs armed with baseball bats are a bitch.
My late father in law who was a retired police officer was almost killed when a 300+ pound bwitch jumped down from a porch and landed on top of him. His reluctance to properly search a bwitch who was wearing merely a negligee resulted in her pulling a .25 auto on him. A right cross took care of that problem. He wasn’t certain where the pistol was hidden but it was wet and sticky.
I’m not going to make a shit out of the officer being Hispanic. I understand that even rural, red state police departments have been conditioned to suffer from a freudian phobia of being outgunned by the criminals
Why those guns were nickel plated.
Reminds me of the Sci Fi novel WE FEW by Weber and Ringo. The heroine needs to infiltrate the bad guys to rescue the hostages. The heroine is an alien known as a Mardukan. Think of a seven for tall, four armed frog, covered with mucus. The heroine thinks she is hot so she dresses up as prostitute to get past the human goons. The find express extreme disinterest in buying what the heroine is selling. The heroine replies “don’t knock out until you try it.”. The goons inside on a weapons check and search of the heroine before allowing her in. The heroine surrenders a large assortment of knives, Brad knuckles for all four of her hands, and a pistol. All of the weaponry had been hidden, somewhere. The heroine is then taken to the hostages. The unarmed heroine then proceeds to kill all of the goons using unspeakable techniques that the goons would not have wanted to acknowledge if they had survived.
The MARCH UP COUNTRY series would be enjoyable to any gun nut.
She must’ve been related to the Rifleman, Mucus McCain…
“…he will always second-guess his reactions with a “if I had waited two seconds would it have changed the outcome…?” ”
Really? Thinking it more likely the cop will self-justify: an armed person, in the dark, similar to the suspect, cop was in fear for his life. And if the cop is awarded any punishment, the cop will be reinforced in his opinion that it was a good shoot, and he is being singled out because….woke public.
But there is the odd chance you could be right. So, there’s that.
You conveniently left out the “If he has a conscience,…” conditional statement in my comment when you quoted my words in your speculative reply on how the involved officer will “more likely” react.
What I would be interested in knowing is, since this was a death in the apprehension of a suspected criminal, could the perp be charged with felony murder?
Statistically speaking, your chances of being killed by the police are an order of magnitude greater than being struck by lightning.
There is alot to be learned from the bodycam with regards to how the homeowner reacted when asked to drop his weapon and consequently what the police response was given a perceived threat. I have to say that the homeowner, (with good intentions to find the intruder and help law enforcement), used poor judgement being out there in the first place. Did he or his wife call 911 and alert the dispatch that the homeowner would be in the backyard, armed, and looking for the threat? Did the homeowner comply in a non-threatening manner when asked to disarm? With the presence of law enforcement in the neighborhood, the best response of the homeowner would’ve been to secure himself and his family in the house until the threat was caught or defend himself if the house was broken into. It’s just not a good plan – especially for an untrained person, to go out hunting for criminals.
Did the police identify themselves? Or did they shine torches into his eyes while yelling “get down”, “drop the gun”, “get down”, “drop the gun”. With a bright light in your eyes and multiple people yelling things, people are going to get confused, tragically
Did he or his wife call 911 and alert the dispatch that the homeowner would be in the backyard,
Is this America, or is it Nazi Germany, or Soviet Russia? I don’t call the police to wander about my own property.
I’m sorry the homeowner got mur er shot by the trigger-happy po-leeceman. But stay in yer home instead of making yourself a target…when my local trigger-happy boyz in blue charged through my yard some 18month’s ago(chasing a carjacker) they gave me & the missus a “shhhhush” movement. Little did they know I was as well armed as them(at least until the portly swat looking guy showed up with his fully-auto(?) AR). Funny but they showed NO SUCH BALLS when BlackLootersMurder showed up on May 31 last year…😖😏😕
MAN O MAN , ITS TOUGH CALL , EVEN WHEN YA HAVE A LTC .
I KNOW I WILL NOT CARRY MY WEAPON / HAVE IT OUT AROUND OUT SIDE OF MY HOME .
KNOW I DON’T WANT TO CHASE A THUG OUT OF MY YARD , HOWEVER FINE LINE .
I CARRY CONCEALED MOST TIME WHEN DOING YARD WORK . TAKE MY CHANCE .
STAY ALERT AND SAFE BEST YA ALL CAN .
If that officer 👮♀️ ever leaves his current department his reward will be no department will ever hire him. Nice huh!! Was a cop 🚓 for 43 years and have seen this stuff many times over the years.
I feel pity for the officer
He’s probably alone in true terror and thinking of his significant other. And now on top of all he’s going to go through he now he now has guilt for the rest of his life civilians have no clue as to what a person goes through in a shooting I know I spent 20 months in combat at the old age of 16! I don’t have PTSD and I sleep at night
The police officer is a civilian not to mention unless you lied about your age it should of been 18. Lots of holes in your story.
Fraudulent enlistment? You saw combat at 16? Easier to believe that you’re just another liar talking shit. Way, way back, in WW2, the youngest enlistee was 12 years old. My own stepdad lied about his age, and enlisted at age 15. But, things are vastly different today. I’m not really believing that you enlisted at age 15 or 16 any time in the past 50 years.
Marine Pfc. Dan Bullock lied about his age and enlisted at 14 years old and died in Vietnam at the age of 15 on the night of 6 June 1969
The deaths of James Ward and another juvenile soldier, Terry T. White, caused controversy and led the military to prevent minors from being in combat in Vietnam. By Feb. 1, 1965 the 1,200 to 1,400 youths in Vietnam were transferred to other stations, said historic newspaper articles. Now those enlisting to the Army must be of the age 18 or at the age of 17 they must have written consent from parents but can’t be in combat until the age of 18.
I’m curious to understand why the white residents of Idaho Falls aren’t burning and looting businesses because of this incident.
Because white lives don’t matter.
We are expected to to beg to be allowed to atone for our past privilege and that of our ancestors.
Good afternoon SC
Yea, my great greats immigrated fleeing poverty and famine. Many of them were indentured servants who, eventually, paid off their indenture. None of my research indicates that we ever owned another person of any ethnicity or color. Yet, I and my children are considered guilty and should “reparate” whole classes of people for the crimes we never committed.
Unfortunately, Dr. Kings “Dream” has been perverted and twisted by those Progressives whose pursuit of power knows no humility, no morality, no honesty…only the desire to control and subjugate.
Supposed to be -26 C tonight (still air, not wind chill). Would appreciate some of your 25 – 30 C Wx.
And we think it is cold if the mercury hits positive single digits. Compared to other places, we have no winter. Winter daytime temps in the low 20s are not uncommon. I’ve experienced -20 while skiing, but I was prepared for it. Yesterday mid 30s. Today rain and low to mid 20s.
Without a positive id, no matter what, it’s not a good shot.
The fact that body camera footage has not yet been released does not bode well. If the police had footage exonerating their officer, they would have had it on the news before the shell cases were cool.
“You conveniently left out the “If he has a conscience,…”
Actually, no. It is/was included as a condition….”having a conscience” is subjective, and subject to manipulation. I was including the possibility that in self-justifying, the cop could do that whether an outsider considers the person to “have a conscience”, or not.
To circling back (don’t you just love that phrase?) to an earlier comment regarding whether a person “is never the same again” after taking a human life, I noted killing hundreds of persons without a moments hesitation, and not “feeling” remorse or anything but a sense of a target successfully destroyed. And I still consider myself to have a “conscience” (which many could debate or reject).
So, a cop with an undisputed “conscience” can justify shooting first and asking questions later. That same cop, who is human after all, can, with good “conscience” consider themselves justified, and even victimized if later the action is called into question, with punishment resulting. This sense of justification and/or victimization is not evidence of lacking a “conscience”, or being morally upright.
With a culture that values going home safely after shift over most everything else, it would be “normal” to reject criticism of a shooting as described.
That’s a heck of an ego you have there!
Actually, Yes. You cherry picked the words you wanted to emphasize that allowed you an entry point for your supposition.
Sam, you remind me of a guy I used to work with… he would quibble his way out of everything and never accepted personal responsibility or criticism for his words / actions…in his mind he was NEVER wrong.
“killing hundreds of persons” it appears that you are quite the proficient warrior.
“What I would be interested in knowing is, since this was a death in the apprehension of a suspected criminal, could the perp be charged with felony murder?”
Hhhhhmmmmm. Intriguing. Fun idea to kick around.
This is absolutely a potential front murder case. The officer made a mistake. However; the citizen would not have gotten shot off the front hadn’t fled the traffic stop then trespassed.
“killing hundreds of persons” it appears that you are quite the proficient warrior.”
– Just one of thousands. Technology makes all the difference. No apologies forthcoming. No ‘Hamlet’ moments; none contemplated, none experienced.
“That’s a heck of an ego you have there!”
– No one has less right to “…a heck of an ego…” than me. I am an army of one, and only an army of one. Of that I have no illusions.
I originally posed that the cop who shot the innocent homeowner likely would not spend the rest of his life navel gazing over the shooting, and the reasons why. Another person inserted the “…has a conscience” condition. My response was that whether or not the cop “…has a conscience” is not the determining factor. Self-justification is not dependent on “…a conscience”. Essentially, my commend encompassed both the cop without a conscience, and one with a conscience.
Yes, Sam I Am engages in debate, speculation, explanation, counterpoint, discussion. Sam isn’t here for an echo chamber, or to endless repeat sophomoric insults. My intention here is to hopefully cause people to question and be honest with themselves. And, “A little song, a little dance; a little seltzer down your pants”.
Wow! I believe that I was the author of the original comment in the thread whereupon you responded with a partial quote of my words. I reminded you that you had ignored the conditional phrase I originally included. How, in your egocentric world, were you the originator and I the respondent supposedly adding a conditional to your incomplete quote?
Please go back and re-read your comment “killing of hundreds of persons” applying denotative and connotative analysis your words reflect a direct, personal claim. Now, you backtrack by claiming to be one of thousands. In the service, weren’t we all one of thousands…and even so, as an Army of One we still had personal responsibility and culpability.
As far as your stated intentions…Diogenes you ain’t.
Quite a few years ago, cops were called to a domestic disturbance involving a gun. They arrived to find a woman, in the garage, holding a shotgun. When she turned toward them, they shot her. Fortunately, she survived. She had just shot her violent ex-husband who wouldn’t obey the protection order against him. When someone gets your attention, your instinctive response is to turn toward them. When that someone is a cop answering a potentially violent call, you’re holding a gun and you match the description of the suspect, you are likely to get shot.
If you’re indoors and see a prowler outdoors, grab your gun, make sure your doors and windows are closed and locked, and call 911 for police. Stay indoors and out of sight of anyone outdoors whether it’s the prowler or the cops. If someone knocks at your door, make sure it’s the cops, not the prowler, and put your gun out of sight before opening the door.
“When she turned toward them, they shot her“
Under the Timur Rice rules of engagement, it’s a good shoot, no harm, no foul, right?
Legally yes. Graham V Connor and Scott V Harris answered this question.
This is what happens when an individual takes the law into their own hands.
Your government supplies you with law enforcement .
Let them do their job, and be a good citizen.
“How, in your egocentric world, were you the originator and I the respondent supposedly adding a conditional to your incomplete quote?”
Stating the condition was added would be an error in my explanation. The condition was there from the beginning, and my response included both a person who “has a conscience” and one who “doesn’t” (both conditions subject to inspection as to meaning). In the original exchange I posited that it was likely the cop would self justify. That assumption was not based on a “conscience” or not, even though the original commend noted, “…if he has a conscience.” The assumption was based on human failings that befall us all, “conscience” or not. The condition of “conscience” has no effect on my presumption that the cop will seek self-validation/justification.
To be blunt and direct, my response ignored the condition of “conscience” as being irrelevant to how the cop mostly would frame the situation in his mind. When reminded that the condition did exist in the comment to which I replied, I tried to brush “conscience” aside as a consideration, by asserting that my speculation was independent of “conscience”. Based on the ongoing conversation, the clarifications did not clarify, which is my fault. Just because the cop shot the wrong person does not mean an inescapable descent into worthlessness.
“Now, you backtrack by claiming to be one of thousands.”
No, did not “backtrack”. Only noted that I was not unique or special; an army of one among all the others who were/are warriors. I stand by the original statement. Not to demonstrate I am a superhero, but to put to rest the idea that taking a human life somehow puts a person on a life track different from the one they were on prior to the taking…even though many died as collateral damage in war.
In essence, all that “changed forever” tommyrot, deep self-analysis and admission of being somehow abnormal because of a shooting incident is a choice, not an inescapable consequence. Besides, it is blather emanating from the soft “sciences” where we are told a person is somehow irretrievably damaged as a result of enduring a deadly mistake. It is a leftist/progressive/woke technique to put people on a guilt trip from which they are never supposed to emerge; doubting themselves forever more.
Overall, my commentary was a rejection of “common wisdom”.
Thanx for the lengthy interchange.
Of course the cop identified himself. He said “drop the BANG gun,” didn’t he?
Wow. Some you folks are pretty riled up over this one. There’s nothing to worry about with this as the first sentence in the whole thing explains clearly.
“Police in Idaho are investigating themselves.”
See? I’m sure it’ll work out fine……
C’mon, all. Statistics is just plain fun. Maybe numbers don’t lie, but you can make numbers dance to whatever tune you wish.
“However, this is a direct result of blacks being 12.7% of the population committing almost 40% of violent crimes.”
More fun time with statistics. Do those numbers tell us that blacks actually commit 40% of violent crimes, or that blacks are arrested more often than other demographic groups? Do those numbers tell us, maybe, that whites are under counted because they are caught in crimes less often than backs (or others)? Do those numbers tell us that blacks are more likely to be convicted because they cannot afford legal representation as often as whites? Do those numbers tell us that perhaps the Public Defender program is a hopeless attempt?
Stats are not developed from some cosmic, unbiased, totally accurate source, and stats can be manipulated to one’s desires.
In Upper Slobovia, a town in the state of Confusion, in a single morning, the unemployment rate went from zero to fifty percent. What does that tell us? From that statistic, can we know that Upper Slobovia only had two people employed (the rest were all so wealthy they need no job), and one retired?
Or how ’bout this: a not to distant poll reported that 57% of the US population of likely voters were unhappy with the direction of the country? How many are unhappy because they think the political leadership are not doing their jobs? And how many are unhappy because they think the political leadership are doing too much?
So, is the 40% statistic totally wrong, flawed, to be ignored? Who knows? Just be aware that a story can be supported by statistics, regardless of the truth. The validity of any statistic is based on the “purity” of the underlying data set. Be skeptical.
Get rid of “immunity” for ALL public officials, not just cops, and you would see shootings by police decrease. Immunity gives cops a “get out of jail free” card because in almost every case, THEY investigate themselves.
It was a big mistake for the supreme court to rule that cops have immunity regardless of their behavior.
You obviously don’t understand qualified immunity. That’s understandable, given the vast amount of disinformation about it on the internet.
Qualified Immunity does not protect officers from criminal acts. It says they can’t be sued for committing an act, in the scope of their job, that is legal (at least at the time the act was committed). It prevents frivolous lawsuits, it does not keep cops from going to jail when they break the law.
So essentially they saw someone exercising a constitutional right and without any discussion or inquiry, they just decided to label him a criminal and execute him on the spot?
Based on what?
If you simply believe the source of the 40%, you are committed to believing every stat that source develops. I posed a bunch of questions (not an exhaustive list) that need answers. Disinterest in understanding just what those questions could elicit is irresponsible.
On a related note, we saw how POTG wanted to compare all risks to children 0-4yrs, to the rising rate of children dead due to firearm use; apples and oranges, but the deflection of one stat into consideration of another calls our standards into question.
Blind trust in numbers is not prudent.
Legally this is a good shoot. Real world, it is an unfortunate incident. It may have been preventable by better training, but there is not enough info released to say definitively yet.
Use of Force incidents are judged criminally by the precedent set in Graham V Connor and Scott V Harris. Thank God it is not judged on the emotional responses of TTAG readers.
This is a lose lose situation, regardless.
“It prevents frivolous lawsuits, it does not keep cops from going to jail when they break the law.”
Actually, cops have immunity even when they violate the law. SC ruled that citizens cannot claim ignorance of the law, but police can. Heien v. North Carolina.
“…plus why the A-bombs were dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.”
Exactly. They were dropped to kill people and break things, which is the point of all wars. The military that is best at it prevails; there are no second prizes. (well, back in the day, the American military and nation would destroy enemies, then build them back up, so maybe that’s a little different)
Yes, it was Russian intervention in machukuo that put the final nail in the coffin of the Empire of the Sun, but Japan could not face more (presumed) A-bombs combined with Russian invasion. Millions are alive today because the bombs and the Russians put an end to the war.
Why are they chasing someone with the intent to shoot him over a broken tail light in the first place?
“The rights of the people trump the desire for law enforcement to avoid risk to themselves.”
The right to life is the first listed in the DOI. LE have a right to life also. Rights in conflict. Not conducive to simple slogans.