OIS today in Austin - bloggers already at it

[pcgizzmo]

Had a class yesterday & in last night about 9:00 so I am late to this party.
When you start this from square 1 & the basic simplest points that cannot be argued or oppinionated this is pretty cut/dried to me.

1. The law says nothing about a LEO having the right to disarm. It says they have the authority to disarm. For the officer to ASK for the weapon was a great show of trust in itself.
2 As soon as he refused that is an offence in itself. Refusing to obey the LAWFUL order of a Piece Officer.
Whether anyone agrees or not w/ him reaching for the gun, I still see that as a last gesture of trust.
He could have drawn his own weapon of taser & called for all backup. Roughly put the guy on the ground & taken the weapon.
If a person refuses ANY lawful order & the officer "lets it go" then from that time on the person is in control & not the officer.

Great points.

Totally agree. Lesson to be learned assuming it went down as the officer said. If an officer asks you for your gun whether you think he's right or not at this point in time you need to act like he's right and take it up in court or you could be taking up with your maker as the man in this story unfortunately is. There is no arguing w/a police officer. You will never win. Best to do what they say and work it out later.

I have to disagree with you on principle. Now, let me preface that by saying I personally would have "surrendered" the firearm when asked, I do not want to be shot or go to jail. That being said, a good many of us do not have money to run to court over any little thing. If I were pressed to come up with the money because it was something serious, then I would. But it would hurt my family, for certain. Human beings make mistakes, it is impossible not to make mistakes. And if said mistake leads to interaction with an improperly or under-informed LEO that we aren't even allowed to question on the subject, then are we automatically in the wrong? Isn't that tantamount to guilty until proven innocent, unless you can afford to go to court to prove otherwise? I'm sorry, but that seems like a bad thing. I am not advocating for criminals; I have not, and do not plan on doing bad stuff to others, in fact I've had exactly one speeding ticket in my life to this point, in Sherman in 1993. I'm not talking of belligerently arguing with law enforcement, but simply about asking questions, etc. And, I do not want this taken as an attack on LEOs because I am not doing so. I am speaking about a mindset, a overall viewpoint.

Well, and let me say I don't disagree w/you. : ) My point is that "yes" the LEO may have very well be mistaken but your not going to be able to discuss that with him at that point in time. LEO's are trained to take control and that they have authority. (I'm sure you know this already) I'm just saying that the time in place to take it up w/anyone is in court or w/there superior and not at the time. It's not that were guilty or wrong but the officer obviously believes he has reasonable cause to disarm so we really have to comply even if we think he's making a mistake.

I've never seen situation where trying to get an officer to think through his course of action has changed his mind not that it might not have happened. I have seen a situation where complying goes a lot better for the citizen than it could have gone if they had not.

[Charles L. Cotton]

The news report claims the police dispatcher asked the homeowner to leave his gun in the house when police arrived and he refused. If true, this information would likely have been given to the responding officer and it certainly wouldn't have helped the situation. There may/should be audio, but I'd be surprised if the dash camera caught it, but hopefully I'm wrong.

This is a tragedy for everyone involved.

(BTW, see below.)

Chas.

(b) The use of force against another is not justified:

• (2) to resist an arrest or search that the actor knows is being made by a peace officer, or by a person acting in a peace officer's presence and at his direction, even though the arrest or search is unlawful, unless the resistance is justified under Subsection (c);
  
  . . .
  
  (c) The use of force to resist an arrest or search is justified:
  • (1) if, before the actor offers any resistance, the peace officer (or person acting at his direction) uses or attempts to use greater force than necessary to make the arrest or search; and
    
    (2) when and to the degree the actor reasonably believes the force is immediately necessary to protect himself against the peace officer's (or other person's) use or attempted use of greater force than necessary.

[jimlongley]

The news report claims the police dispatcher asked the homeowner to leave his gun in the house when police arrived and he refused. If true, this information would likely have been given to the responding officer and it certainly wouldn't have helped the situation. There will may/should be audio, but I'd be surprised if the dash camera caught it, but hopefully I'm wrong.

This is a tragedy for everyone involved.

(BTW, see below.)

Chas.

(b) The use of force against another is not justified:

• (2) to resist an arrest or search that the actor knows is being made by a peace officer, or by a person acting in a peace officer's presence and at his direction, even though the arrest or search is unlawful, unless the resistance is justified under Subsection (c);
  
  . . .
  
  (c) The use of force to resist an arrest or search is justified:
  • (1) if, before the actor offers any resistance, the peace officer (or person acting at his direction) uses or attempts to use greater force than necessary to make the arrest or search; and
    
    (2) when and to the degree the actor reasonably believes the force is immediately necessary to protect himself against the peace officer's (or other person's) use or attempted use of greater force than necessary.

So, next scenario:

LEO arrives, sees man with gun in waistband approaching him and draws while ordering the man to, simultaneously "GET ON THE GROUND" "DROP THE GUN" "STAY WHERE YOU ARE" "GIVE ME THE GUN" and in line with subsection c, the man draws his gun to defend himself and, drawing against a trigger, becomes deceased.

Just too many possibilities and I'll bet we will never know the real truth.

[bayouhazard]

"We're from the government. We're here to help you.".

[Gordie Howe]

I grew up with a DRAGNET, 1 ADAM 12, TJ HOOKER and CHiPS, image of police, but something has changed the past 20 years.

There have always been corrupt and burned out police, but it was the smallest minority of them. Now, they seem to act like an occupying army, and all dress in tactical uniforms, these days. What has changed? It may just be how rotten people in general have gotten, that also now reflects in the new breed of police.

Antonio Buehler did 3 tours in Iraq, and is a West Point graduate, he really beleives Austin PD are corrupt, and incompetent. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antonio_Buehler" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Redneck_Buddha]

I grew up with a DRAGNET, 1 ADAM 12, TJ HOOKER and CHiPS, image of police, but something has changed the past 20 years.

There have always been corrupt and burned out police, but it was the smallest minority of them. Now, they seem to act like an occupying army, and all dress in tactical uniforms, these days. What has changed? It may just be how rotten people in general have gotten, that also now reflects in the new breed of police.

Antonio Buehler did 3 tours in Iraq, and is a West Point graduate, he really beleives Austin PD are corrupt, and incompetent. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antonio_Buehler" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Buehler has used up his capital with me. Seems like he's devolved into a knee-jerk cop hater and lacks discernment in the area of police interaction. He needs to slow his roll.

[texanjoker]

I grew up with a DRAGNET, 1 ADAM 12, TJ HOOKER and CHiPS, image of police, but something has changed the past 20 years.

There have always been corrupt and burned out police, but it was the smallest minority of them. Now, they seem to act like an occupying army, and all dress in tactical uniforms, these days. What has changed? It may just be how rotten people in general have gotten, that also now reflects in the new breed of police.

Antonio Buehler did 3 tours in Iraq, and is a West Point graduate, he really beleives Austin PD are corrupt, and incompetent. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antonio_Buehler" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Buehler has used up his capital with me. Seems like he's devolved into a knee-jerk cop hater and lacks discernment in the area of police interaction. He needs to slow his roll.

Agreed. He may have an impressive background, but he goes out looking for trouble. In addition he is charged with spitting in an officers face which I have an issue with. If he wants to film, do it, but don't interfere. Personally I think he likes the publicity. It seems like each time he is ready to go to court, he gets his name in the paper was well. He has an upcoming court date: (all public information from the internet) He is a prominent blogger and after each OIS is on the blogs slamming APD like many others do w/o the facts.

BUEHLER ANTONIO D-1-DC-12-200007 03/20/13 09:00 331ST UDS HARASSMENT OF PUBLIC SERVANT
BUEHLER ANTONIO FRANCIS C-1-CR-12-200043 03/21/13 08:30 CC3 OTH RESIST ARREST SEARCH OR TRANSPORT
BUEHLER ANTONIO FRANCIS C-1-CR-12-214216 03/21/13 08:30 CC3 OTH INTERFER W/PUBLIC DUTIES
BUEHLER ANTONIO FRANCIS C-1-CR-12-215816 03/21/13 08:30 CC3 OTH INTERFER W/PUBLIC DUTIES

[goose]

Because I started a thread asking about when it would be prudent to shoot back at LEO (in relationship to the recent events in LA with the disgruntled former LEO) I thought I should chime in.

I see NO reason in this situation to escalate any tensions with LEO when you're starting from a point of all hands clear, no guns drawn. My thoughts are not original, others have already said it. The place to take up a beef with LEO is, usually, best outside of the current situation. Maybe if a supervisor shows up or something, at best. Let the officer do his/her duty. A thorough investigation is prudent for every one involved. We should all be ready to argue with LEO across a meeting room table or in a court room or forum. But those are obviously much less tense and hopefully more productive arenas.

I carry every day assuming that if I have pulled the trigger on my firearm in a completely justified manner well inside the statute parameters of our laws, I am going to be disarmed by the investigating officer(s). I would have to believe that the very first thing I could do to screw up a "no bill" would be to resist an officer's command/request to disarm.

[texanjoker]

Search warrant released. Deceased was a CHL holder. He should have known better. You can read the entire search warrant at the link below.

http://austin.ynn.com/content/top_stori ... th-officer" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Schaefer told the dispatcher he was still armed and had a concealed handgun license. The dispatcher asked him to put away his weapon before police arrived, but Schaefer refused.

Two Austin police officers arrived on scene, inducing John Whitted, a veteran of APD since 2009. When the officers arrived, they again asked Schaefer to put away his weapon which was in a holster on his waist, but he again refused to disarm.

“In an effort to make the scene safe,” the warrant reads, “Officer Whitted attempted to handcuff Schaefer. Schaefer resisted by pulling away and stated, ‘Don’t do that,’ and then reached for and drew his side arm and pointed it at Whitted

[Topbuilder]

"First objective is to survive the encounter. Survival ensures a plethora of choices. Being dead does not offer those options."

Nice

[C-dub]

I still don't know what the deceased did that was illegal. And by that, I mean something that would have given the officer the legal ability to attempt to handcuff the guy. Was the dispatcher's advice to leave his gun inside legal notification that he could not carry on his own property? Is the mere presence of a gun that threatening? I don't know about Texas, but I think courts in other states have already said that where it is legally allowed the mere presence of a holstered gun is not reason enough to suspect someone of committing a crime. Or something like that. I know I kind of butchered it up a bit, but hopefully not too bad.

If the officer had no legal basis for attempting to handcuff the guy wouldn't that be considered assault to the level that the guy could defend himself? Maybe not, but I'm not sure.

[gigag04]

I can see a valid detention for safety if an armed subject refuses to disarm...

...The threat to officer safety would be thus proven by the CHL holder threatening deadly force....


...if the story we got is accurate.


Again, if it went down as reported, don't point guns at cops. Still tragic but quite preventable.


(These opinion subject to change as more info/video is released)

[puma guy]

Search warrant released. Deceased was a CHL holder. He should have known better. You can read the entire search warrant at the link below.

http://austin.ynn.com/content/top_stori ... th-officer" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Schaefer told the dispatcher he was still armed and had a concealed handgun license. The dispatcher asked him to put away his weapon before police arrived, but Schaefer refused.

Two Austin police officers arrived on scene, inducing John Whitted, a veteran of APD since 2009. When the officers arrived, they again asked Schaefer to put away his weapon which was in a holster on his waist, but he again refused to disarm.

“In an effort to make the scene safe,” the warrant reads, “Officer Whitted attempted to handcuff Schaefer. Schaefer resisted by pulling away and stated, ‘Don’t do that,’ and then reached for and drew his side arm and pointed it at Whitted

I will refrain from making any judgements on who's right or wrong in this incident. I'll let all the facts come to before I do that. I am disturbed by this statement “In an effort to make the scene safe,” the warrant reads, “Officer Whitted attempted to handcuff Schaefer. Schaefer resisted by pulling away and stated, ‘Don’t do that,’ and then reached for and drew his side arm and pointed it at Whitted" If it's true I can only say that's insane. To attempt to handcuff an armed individual has to go against every LE policy and procedure in every jurisdiction of the land.

[gigag04]

Everybody I handcuff is considered armed until searched...but I agree that handcuffing a known armed suspect might require an alternative route.

[C-dub]

Search warrant released. Deceased was a CHL holder. He should have known better. You can read the entire search warrant at the link below.

http://austin.ynn.com/content/top_stori ... th-officer" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Schaefer told the dispatcher he was still armed and had a concealed handgun license. The dispatcher asked him to put away his weapon before police arrived, but Schaefer refused.

Two Austin police officers arrived on scene, inducing John Whitted, a veteran of APD since 2009. When the officers arrived, they again asked Schaefer to put away his weapon which was in a holster on his waist, but he again refused to disarm.

“In an effort to make the scene safe,” the warrant reads, “Officer Whitted attempted to handcuff Schaefer. Schaefer resisted by pulling away and stated, ‘Don’t do that,’ and then reached for and drew his side arm and pointed it at Whitted

I will refrain from making any judgements on who's right or wrong in this incident. I'll let all the facts come to before I do that. I am disturbed by this statement “In an effort to make the scene safe,” the warrant reads, “Officer Whitted attempted to handcuff Schaefer. Schaefer resisted by pulling away and stated, ‘Don’t do that,’ and then reached for and drew his side arm and pointed it at Whitted" If it's true I can only say that's insane. To attempt to handcuff an armed individual has to go against every LE policy and procedure in every jurisdiction of the land.

Someone did something wrong here. One of them or both of them, but I don't know which one. I would be surprised if neither of them did anything wrong, but I suppose anything is possible.