Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Police shoot man running around with air rifle in Wal-Mart (video)

Oh boy, being a LEO for the past 24 years it is hard to make the call on this one. Did the officers challenge him?? Looks to me like they just shot him.

Wondering y he picked the gun up and was walking around the store with it??

One can only hope.

Yes according to testimony. They did challenge him

Bluedreaux,

I'm not sure I endorsed or insisted police use the same ROEs that we used in Iraq? Did I say that?

I am asking for a national conversation on when police should rightfully fire on someone holding a gun, which is a protected constitutional right. If someone in uniform can kill you for holding a gun, then "keep and bear arms" isn't much of a right.

In this instance, I just can't see the reason for the use of lethal force, but I wasn't there. From the admittedly "armchair quarterback" position I'm left with more questions than answers after watching the video a few times.

AFTER you have a few missions under your belt cruising around in an MRAP at night looking for IEDs, then comment about the engineers.

Feel free to post your bonifides...

"Snyper"

Cute name....

You're right. Misuse of words. But here they do have the power to subpoena witnesses, and documents. They don't call witnesses, but the prosecutor will work qith the Gj to gather evidence and hear testimony. That's how i should have phrased it.

And according to articles i read on the case, the Gj did see the video, and heard testimony from 18 witnesses.

ive got a cousin that will tell you being shot with a bb/pellet gun is not something to shrug off.....one into his gut nearly cost him his life....not his eye, not his head, into his stomach....

as others have pointed out why isnt the idiot walking around with the gun supposed to have any common sense...freedoms dont come without responsibilities....if your gonna march around a store with a bb gun that is sold in a box(ive seen the damn things on the shelf) with anything more than a serious look appears to be a normal firearm your a few cards short of a full deck OR your looking for the result you got, suicide by cop.....

Rattler,

Agreed to that, too.

You said it's "out of control" that the ROE would be more liberal for cops than what you had in Iraq. Then you said that anyone who thinks cops should have more liberal ROE than soldiers in Iraq was a "menace to the Republic" (which, by the way, was a nice deflection from your earlier statement of "enemy-foreign and domestic").

So yeah, I'd say that's a pretty plain endorsement of cops using the same, or more strict, ROE than you used in Iraq.





I've simply asked for clarification on which ROE you'd like to see implemented from the military? The ROE for drone strikes? You don't have to answer, it's rhetorical.
_______________________________________

As for my bonafides, I've already admitted you've got way more "gunplay" under your belt than I do. There's no need for you to embarrass me with my insignificant resume in front of all these folks.

LOL
Guess again yourself:


What was that you said about "credibility"?

LOL
I'm not playing your silly game just because you won't admit you formed your opinion without knowing anything about the case

Tell me again about the "toy gun with the orange tip" instead of just childish repetition about my SN

He's using that tactic to distract from his first post:


You'd think a highly trained Colonel would want to get the facts first.

If I might make so bold as to interrupt this juvenile pizzing contest between (when you get right down to it) mostly LIKE minded individuals.

ALL of the ammo is off the local Wal Mart shelves in my town , this AM, and one apparently has to present ID and ask specifically for what the robot on duty may or may not know is in stock, "In the Back".

Verification needed on the rumor that same same in Tucson.

Right, wrong, motivated by fear, poor training, a savage desire for neocon cops to do whatever,.....maybe a plot hatched out by joo bankers,....WHATEVER......

Lemme get on record that this event is going to SUBSTANTIALLY modify Wally World's corporate culture, and as well it's future activities in marketing arms of ANY sort.

All this chit slingin' going on, ....it behooves me to remind you to wash your hands before eating.

carry on.

GTC

Maybe "guess again" was too complicated a concept for you. When you're completely clueless, Wikipedia ain't necessarily your friend.

The grand jur*Y*, through the prosecutor guiding it, can issue subpoenas requesting appearance and/or other evidence. A grand jur*OR* sits and observes the presentation of that evidence by the prosecutor.

It ain't like a grand jurOR can just demand you empty your pockets, though if you were serving as one, I could see it happening.

I'm not sure what you're rambling about, but what I posted refutes the statement that was made, and has nothing to do with anything you've said.

Here is the (false) statement I was referring to:



Instead of whining about WIKI, why not prove it's incorrect if you believe that's the case, by showing your own source

David Walter is going to be really pissed when the SC trooper walks for shooting the perp in the parking lot and then gets his job and pay back.

"Snyper"

I did get the orange tip thing wrong.

I'm probably not wrong that you have absolutely nothing to do with being a sniper.

Did I say "cute name" yet?

Sherp,

I'm not worried about cops shooting "perps." I am concerned about shooting people in a big box who appear to be laying down their "gun" as they were told.

Sherp? Is that your real name like "Snyper?"

Oh, and "Snyper".

Grand Juries don't have any "rights." They have powers.

Look it up.

Well, I must admit I failed.

I tried to present my post in such a way that even a complete idiot couldn't misread it.

I failed to anticipate the depths of your stupidity.

As I clarified in the later post, which you also were unable to comprehend, grand jurors, sitting on grand juries, (the people from the community making the decision whether or not there exists probable cause to believe a crime has been committed, and the individual to be charged was involved in committing it), have no right to demand any additional evidence be presented. The prosecutor runs the show, for good or bad.

It's that simple.

Here is the story about the perp getting shot Dave:

http://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php/topics/9209206/1


Bet you lose your friggin mind when that officer gets exonerated and gets his job back. Anything the officer wants to do is up to the officer and it is not your place to 2nd guess them. Haven't you learned that from the officers on this site yet?

Yep, anything an officer wants done should be done. Whether it is ordering someone to drop a firearms in an open carry state or demanding oral sex. Doesn't matter if the department or legal systems clear them for it later either.