OIS today in Austin - bloggers already at it

[mojo84]

I just can't get my mind around the idea of one defending themselves against an attacking dog on the person's property being considered a crime.

[Redneck_Buddha]

Until we have all of the facts or see video of the actual incident, we do not know exactly what transpired to cause the officer to shoot. Speculation at this point is futile.

On both sides? And does that apply when dogs are shot too, or just when old guys are shot?

Bottom line is that neither you nor anyone but God and the physical witnesses know what really happened. I'm seeing much more automatic indictment of the officer than I am of the behavior of Mr. Schaefer. Frankly, I wish both camps would pipe down until we get a believable account.

Austin is brutal regarding perception of the police. In the Nathaniel Sanders case, Officer Quintana made a legitimate shoot, yet the race pimps, er, "civil rights" activists used his history with personal domestic calls and DUI to invalidate any justification of the shooting which led the Austin City Council to cave into a civil demand of $750,000 to the Sanders family as a settlement for the shooting.

Here's a pretty good page with factoids around the Nathaniel Sanders shooting. Quintana is no doubt a major screw up, but that fact needs to be compartmentalized from the facts of the shoot.

http://www.spartancops.com/austin-pd-of ... -shooting/

[gigag04]

Is shooting a vicious aggressive dog that is not yours but on your property a crime?

If so, on the scale of crimes, its so far below shooting a retiree in his own yard who allegedly threatened an LEO with deadly force while resisting a detention, its not even visible on the chart.

FIFY

[Keith B]

Until we have all of the facts or see video of the actual incident, we do not know exactly what transpired to cause the officer to shoot. Speculation at this point is futile.

On both sides? And does that apply when dogs are shot too, or just when old guys are shot?

Yes, both sides. I have seen some mean older people. They sometimes have more of a temper than someone who is younger. And, a senior citizen is as likely or sometimes more likely to argue with a young officer as they quickly move into the parent mode in a dispute. Not saying the officer was right, not saying the homeowner was right, just that we don't have any evidence to speculate at this point who was right and wrong. All we know is one guy is dead and that can't be reversed.

[texanjoker]

Don't cloud the thread with facts and assertions - here we have a great chance to bash police again and I for one won't have that right quelled because this looks to be a good shoot...

double

[C-dub]

Please don't mistake my questions or concern for a pitchfork and torch. If the deceased was in the wrong then I'm fine with that. It's sad that he died as a result of his stubbornness or the officer's mistake whichever way it turns out. I don't know which one was wrong and don't think I've said I think one way or the other.

I also understand handcuffing a BG to disarm them. And I've seen the penal code Keith B posted. I don't think of this guy as a BG though. I see him as a victim that was attacked and had to defend himself. Are victims that have been attacked by another person and defend themselves with a gun treated the same way? I'll also speculate that most people are more likely to comply with an officer's "request" to surrender or put the gun down when they approach after an incident. And I also agree that once the officer was starring down the barrel he really didn't have much of a choice but to defend himself.

Hypothetically, though, if the officer was in the wrong in his attempt to handcuff and disarm this man would the officer still have the right to defend himself? I ask this because if someone commits a crime with while they have a gun I don't think they can claim self defense if they shoot someone else trying to defend themselves from them, right? I don't want to argue the validity of the shooting itself because once the homeowner pulled his gun out and pointed it at the officer someone was going to get shot. I'm concerned with the officer's legal ability to disarm the victim in this or an incident like this. If there is a legal basis for that disarmament then the guy died because of his own ignorance and stubbornness.

[mojo84]

I have the same concerns and questions as c-dub.

[gigag04]

Text of the warrant. Interesting observations from the witness which seems to support the officer's version of the story.

http://content.austin.ynn.com/ausconten ... arrant.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;



Probably preemptive but I'm enjoying time off so...

[C-dub]

Text of the warrant. Interesting observations from the witness which seems to support the officer's version of the story.

http://content.austin.ynn.com/ausconten ... arrant.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;



Probably preemptive but I'm enjoying time off so...

[ Image ]

Great picture!

No new information in there. It says the dispatcher advised him to leave his gun inside. They do that on every 911 call I've ever heard when the victim says they shot the BG. Other than being alive, how do you think this would have gone if he had left the gun in the house?

[Keith B]

Text of the warrant. Interesting observations from the witness which seems to support the officer's version of the story.

http://content.austin.ynn.com/ausconten ... arrant.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;



Probably preemptive but I'm enjoying time off so...

[ Image ]

Great picture!

No new information in there. It says the dispatcher advised him to leave his gun inside. They do that on every 911 call I've ever heard when the victim says they shot the BG. Other than being alive, how do you think this would have gone if he had left the gun in the house?

Yeah, there is new informaiton. Witness says he observed officer and individual 'in a stand-off' with guns pointed at each other. If I am involved in a stand-off with someone that has a gun pointed at me, I am gonna pull the trigger. In this case, the deceased apprently made a very poor decision to pull his weapon and fight with an officer.

[gigag04]

Text of the warrant. Interesting observations from the witness which seems to support the officer's version of the story.

http://content.austin.ynn.com/ausconten ... arrant.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;



Probably preemptive but I'm enjoying time off so...

[ Image ]

Great picture!

No new information in there. It says the dispatcher advised him to leave his gun inside. They do that on every 911 call I've ever heard when the victim says they shot the BG. Other than being alive, how do you think this would have gone if he had left the gun in the house?

KeithB already identified the new info above me.

Had he left his gun inside, he would likely have not been detained, and it would have been consoderably harder for the old man to point it at the officer.

[dicion]

As has been stated many times in this forum and elsewhere.

99.9% of the time, the place to argue against an individual officer's actions & decisions is not in the field. It is in court.
If you feel you are being detained/arrested/disarmed etc unjustly, feel free to make a statement as such at the time, but comply nonetheless.

Now, obviously I'm sure anyone here can come up with extreme examples that would be an exception to the above, however, in normal day-to-day life, those examples are very, very, very..... very rare.

[Keith B]

Had he left his gun inside, he would likely have not been detained, and it would have been consoderably harder for the old man to point it at the officer.

He might not have even had to have left it inside, just not had it visible. Had it been properly concealed it might not even have become an issue.

[texanjoker]

Text of the warrant. Interesting observations from the witness which seems to support the officer's version of the story.

http://content.austin.ynn.com/ausconten ... arrant.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;



Probably preemptive but I'm enjoying time off so...

[ Image ]

Great picture!

No new information in there. It says the dispatcher advised him to leave his gun inside. They do that on every 911 call I've ever heard when the victim says they shot the BG. Other than being alive, how do you think this would have gone if he had left the gun in the house?

The incident would have been investigated. Had he been attacked by the dog in his own yard, there most likely wouldn't have been any criminal charges as you can shoot a dog under certain situations. Had he just shot the dog for no reason other then being loose he most likely would have been charged. Unfortunately he never let the police investigate the incident.

[C-dub]

Text of the warrant. Interesting observations from the witness which seems to support the officer's version of the story.

http://content.austin.ynn.com/ausconten ... arrant.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;



Probably preemptive but I'm enjoying time off so...

[ Image ]

Great picture!

No new information in there. It says the dispatcher advised him to leave his gun inside. They do that on every 911 call I've ever heard when the victim says they shot the BG. Other than being alive, how do you think this would have gone if he had left the gun in the house?

Yeah, there is new informaiton. Witness says he observed officer and individual 'in a stand-off' with guns pointed at each other. If I am involved in a stand-off with someone that has a gun pointed at me, I am gonna pull the trigger. In this case, the deceased apprently made a very poor decision to pull his weapon and fight with an officer.

Sorry. I thought that part was obvious and the witness just happened to look over at the right time. I wonder how long of a stand-off that might have been. How long would any of you guys wait while someone else has a gun pointed at you before pulling the trigger on yours? I can't imagine that would be very long. Plus, how often have we heard someone that witnessed some traumatic event like say that time seemed to slow down.