Search found 2 matches
Return to “Officer involved shooting...”
- Mon Jul 25, 2005 12:34 pm
- Forum: General Gun, Shooting & Equipment Discussion
- Topic: Officer involved shooting...
- Replies: 8
- Views: 1821
- Mon Jul 25, 2005 8:46 am
- Forum: General Gun, Shooting & Equipment Discussion
- Topic: Officer involved shooting...
- Replies: 8
- Views: 1821
Officer involved shooting...
http://www.click2houston.com/news/4764331/detail.html
This happened right down the street from my office...
Not that I am too concerned about the outcome...I was a bit hyper-aware of what was going on when I opened up the office this morning...Knowing that the woman's accomplice was out and about...
I first heard this on the live news this morning, so when I got the link I decided to post this and ask a question to our Law Enforcment folks that post here...
What was said at the last portion of the broadcast on this story struck me as a bit off...
Why would a "reasonable" Law Enforcement officer need to actually state that they were in "fear for their lives" before justifying a shoot??? That of course was coming from the reporterette...I understand there may be some dramatic licensing by the news media to hype the story etc etc...
I know no one is just supposed to be able to arbitrarily use deadly force unless certain criteria are met...
I have never know that a commisioned Law Enforcement officer had to have reason to fear for their own safety (other than the primordial finality of that fear, which to me is reasonable) to be the main factor in their decision to shoot a suspect...
I'm not trying to turn a hornets nest here, because it has been turned over a lot over the years...With slight differences in details in each case like this...
Whereas a Law Enforcement officer who is involved in a shooting will more than likely fly a desk during the investigation, or just stay at home until things get resolved...
A civilian (and this has been discussed before here, and in other places) will sometimes be handled a little differently...
I just guess that that one statement this morning peaked my interest in discussing the whole "fear for my life" statement...
That a "reasonable" civilian needs to be "primarily" in fear for their life to somehow justify a clean shoot in an incident...
And a Law Enforcement officer, which I believe does not have to "primarily" be in fear for their lives to serve and protect their communities...
Bottom line, I think the reporting seriously misinterprets the "station" that the two separate entities (L.E. and civilian) have when it comes to situations like this...
Heck, I'm too long on the jaw this morning I suppose...Ramblings of an idle mind maybe...
This happened right down the street from my office...
Not that I am too concerned about the outcome...I was a bit hyper-aware of what was going on when I opened up the office this morning...Knowing that the woman's accomplice was out and about...
I first heard this on the live news this morning, so when I got the link I decided to post this and ask a question to our Law Enforcment folks that post here...
What was said at the last portion of the broadcast on this story struck me as a bit off...
Why would a "reasonable" Law Enforcement officer need to actually state that they were in "fear for their lives" before justifying a shoot??? That of course was coming from the reporterette...I understand there may be some dramatic licensing by the news media to hype the story etc etc...
I know no one is just supposed to be able to arbitrarily use deadly force unless certain criteria are met...
I have never know that a commisioned Law Enforcement officer had to have reason to fear for their own safety (other than the primordial finality of that fear, which to me is reasonable) to be the main factor in their decision to shoot a suspect...
I'm not trying to turn a hornets nest here, because it has been turned over a lot over the years...With slight differences in details in each case like this...
Whereas a Law Enforcement officer who is involved in a shooting will more than likely fly a desk during the investigation, or just stay at home until things get resolved...
A civilian (and this has been discussed before here, and in other places) will sometimes be handled a little differently...
I just guess that that one statement this morning peaked my interest in discussing the whole "fear for my life" statement...
That a "reasonable" civilian needs to be "primarily" in fear for their life to somehow justify a clean shoot in an incident...
And a Law Enforcement officer, which I believe does not have to "primarily" be in fear for their lives to serve and protect their communities...
Bottom line, I think the reporting seriously misinterprets the "station" that the two separate entities (L.E. and civilian) have when it comes to situations like this...
Heck, I'm too long on the jaw this morning I suppose...Ramblings of an idle mind maybe...