Facebook
Fark
Digg
Reddit
Stumble
Sam Morris / Las Vegas Sun
A Metro crime scene investigator moves a barrier into place at the scene of an officer involved shooting outside a Speedee Mart at 3011 East Desert Inn Road Monday, November 15, 2010.
By Jackie Valley (contact) 
Published Monday, Nov. 15, 2010 | 6:58 a.m.
Updated Monday, Nov. 15, 2010 | 9:40 a.m.
Map
Metro Police said an officer fatally shot a man outside a convenience store this morning who threatened officers with what appeared to be a wooden walking stick.
Officers responded at 5:50 a.m. to Speedee Mart, 3011 E. Desert Inn Road, at the corner with Pecos-McLeod Drive after receiving reports of a man and a woman involved in an argument outside the store. Three officers arrived and noticed the argument appeared to be escalating, said police Capt. Patrick Neville, with Metro's homicide bureau.
Police said the man wasn't following the commands of officers. An officer tried to use a Taser on the man, but it appeared to have no effect on him, police said. The man then moved away from police, prompting an officer to use the Taser a second time, also with no results.
Neville said the officer then used "low-lethal force," in the form of a weapon that fires bean bags.
"It hurts, but it's not lethal," Neville said.
Police said that also didn't appear to have an effect on the man.
"They deployed a lot of strategies and a lot of lower-level force to get the individual in compliance," Neville said.
Police said the man had what appeared to be a wooden walking stick with a pointed end. Neville said the man made a threatening motion toward officers with the object.
"I don't know which end of it was pointed at the officers," Neville said.
One officer fired a single shot at the man, killing him, police said. The man was described as white and in his early 30s.
Neville said police believe surveillance video cameras from the Speedee Mart captured the incident. Police were working with management at the store to obtain the video.
Police were interviewing the woman who had been arguing with the man. The woman wasn't injured.
The officers were placed on paid administrative leave during the investigation. This is the 24th officer-involved shooting this year in Metro Police's jurisdiction.
The names of the man and the officer weren't being released this morning. The Clark County Coroner's Office will identify the man and police will identify the officer about 48 hours after the shooting, which is standard procedure in officer-involved shootings.
Police tape was blocking a small portion of the road but traffic was moving through the intersection of Desert Inn and Pecos-McLeod this morning.
Once Metro has erased all video evidence, details will follow.
It has been reported that the man who was shot and killed was armed with a stick. Let the Metro bashing begin.
Get them Metro. most likely an illegal drunk slapping around his wife/girlfriend over her spending the unemployment check on crack and not giving him a piece of the rock.
Sounds like another case of bang bang bang,DROP THE GUN!!!Metro's finest at work again.Shoot first,ask questions later!My wife and I are so glad we left when we did!And you people wonder why your economy is declineing?If the casions dont rip you off,the cops will get you!And yes news like this go's nation wide too.
Yeah! Let's hear it for easy access to guns...it makes us all safer doesn't it.
Whether it is a stick or gun, when easy access to guns is a given, everyone will be more on edge with more tragic mistakes occurring every day.
If you carry a gun in public you have certain responsibilities. Neglect those responsibilities, then you become responsibile. What happens next is your choice. If you do something stupid, YES YOU WILL BE SHOT BY THE POLICE. Daaa! Dumbies just can't figure that out. Officers are human, so is the offender but if you think (as the offender) for one second you will win. Here is your sign......(PAN-DA-HO)!!!
Chunky says:
Here come the cop haters, speculators and ambulance chasers!
That's what Chunky thinks and he'll reserve the rest of his commentary until more details are released!
Leave it to someone to turn this into a debate on guns. The debate is a waste of time because those who want to kill will find a way to do it, with or without guns. You cannot unmake guns; you'd be better off trying to address the core reasons of violence. Humans can be violent and all the laws in the world will never, ever stop that.
As for the story, I look forward to more information as it becomes available.
Another military center mass killing. Why can't they shoot somebody in the legs? Back East, they do it all the time. We live in a redneck, white trash hell. God, get me out of here...
How many more cop killings are we going to allow? The streets are unsafe because the police are on duty! It's time that we prosecute the dirty scumbags that have been hired, supposedly, to protect us!!!
It is nice to see all that firing squad practice coming through in the field.
Who are they recruiting for POST? Insecure types and then training them to shot first.... What if the victim had a HEARING PROBLEM?? Mental illness?? Was in a hurry and not paying attention??
What appeared to be a walking stick? It was actually a rifle??? The man was tasered and it had no apparent effect on him?? Bean bags fired at him with no apparent effect?? Who was he, superman?? I can't wait to hear the explanation for this one.
Taser DID NOT WORK.
Bean Bag gun DID NOT WORK. The man did not feel it.
What are they supposed to do when confronted by someone who is likely high on meth? You could suggest "batoning" the pooh out of the guy (that is what NYC would do) but after two non lethals fail, it is likely two cops with batons might not win that fight.
Don't criticize unless you have a solution for "what these officers should have done"
A wooden walking stick or a rifle? If it was a rifle the police wouldn't have been attempting to taser the victim or use the bean bag gun. More to come on this story!
Hey, it looked like a 44 magnum walking stick or maybe the police thought it was a light saber.
I'm sorry... a walking stick does not justify homicide. If Metro is too scared to deal with confrontational people who do not have firearms in their possession, they should call me and I will take care of the situation! The officer that fired clearly had time to shoot and incapacitate the suspect in a non-lethal way if he felt that shooting was necessary. Disobeying authorities is not a capital offense.
Schaffer can keep his walking sticks...I'll keep my firearms.
I read on a different publication's site, which apparently has less journalistic integrity, that there was a rifle on the ground near the victim. Apparently what they reported as a rifle was actually this walking stick. My bad. I'll own up to making that mistake.
"military center mass killing. Why can't they shoot somebody in the legs? Back East, they do it all the time. We live in a redneck, white trash hell."
What they're not aware of, that murder causes one of the sharpest karma reactions and in case they wonder, why their next 10 lives or so will be screwed up, this is the explanation.
Oh come on, now. That's the best they could initially come up with for this killing? I guess anyone with a walking stick should be extra careful if confronted by Metro officers. Yet another police killing that really stinks, at least from the initial reports. We'll have to wait and see what else comes out of it. An argument outside a store turns into a killing?
"The man then moved away from police, prompting an officer to use the Taser a second time, also with no results."
The man may have been entirely within his rights to walk away from the police. What was the probable cause for suspecting what crime? Arguing in public? Ridiculous. These amped-up, bully boy officers need to calm down and learn to defuse a situation , not escalate it -- maybe even back off once in a while. I wish this officer had been drug-tested at the scene, but we know union boss/thug Chris Collins wouldn't want that.
Another officer on several months of taxpayer-paid vacation ("paid administrative leave"). When does it stop? When an innocent tourist on the Strip is killed by one of these guys?
"If you carry a gun in public you have certain responsibilities."
Aaronboy -- don't you mean "If you carry a stick in public you have certain responsibilities"? Read and think before you post -- "Daaa! Dumbies just can't figure that out."
Our cops need to be put back on their leash, they're way too trigger-happy and getting it away with it!
"If the government becomes a lawbreaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. To declare that in the administration of the criminal law the end justifies the means - to declare that the government may commit crimes in order to secure the conviction of a private criminal - would bring terrible retribution. Against that pernicious doctrine this court should resolutely set its face." -- Olmstead v. United States, 277 U.S. 438 (1928), Justice Brandeis dissenting
"well you see, there was a glitch with the video equipment, and it didn't capture the event on camera". lol or something like that.
Honestly, this dude was threatening people, but really? A walking stick?
Maybe the 2 tasers were ineffective because they missed him.
Who knows. Bottom line. Don't carry walking sticks folks and get into a dispute.
#2 follow cops commands otherwise you will be shot, even if you only have a walking stick.
2 Taser shots and a bean bag shot and he still diden t go down?
Possible suggestions: Obiwankenobi with his walking stick; Tony Stark in costume? Tom Cruise with a samurai sword? What next? Godzilla? I think I'm going to side with Chunky until more facts come out.
There is no such thing as shoot to wound. The only reason to use a gun is to kill your target, period. At least it was a single shot.
That said, there are a lot of questions here about the justification. Let's all hope the video survives if it has information on it.
Gee, I wonder if the store's surveillance system was broke too.........
Another concern is that the pictures show a whole lot of Metro personnel doing absolutely nothing. Do we really need 30 people to take care of an investigation and 1 dead body? No.
Can't we just give Metro something that can throw a net on a suspect? It would stop a lot of these shootings.
when will this end???
Mr. Shaffer,
While I think it is absurd for cops to use deadly force on a man wielding a walking stick, taking guns away from police is stupid - it didn't work in England.
The cop just needed an extended vacation.
Hey you guys, stop complaining. Remember you re-elected the honorable Sheriff Gillespie by an almost 2-to-1 margin. Obviously this is the kind of police force you want, Las Vegas. America's dumbest city lives up to its name...
"Police were working with management at the store to obtain the video."
LOL yeah i bet
Lets put it like this Mr. KillerB. You are a citizen. You have certain rights one of those rights is to do as you are told by the police or authorities. Once you DO NOT COMPLY, you are making a choice. If the choice isn't the right one then you give up your rights. That is Aaronboys Law, called Common Sense. Basic 101. Once these losers learn to comply then some of the problem will cease. Become aggressive BINGO you lose. Real semple
Sounds pretty ridiculous right now. Though, the fact that the man wasn't able to be taken down by non-lethal methods suggests to me that he was on drugs.
thank goodness the perp was white otherwise he'd be blamed.
whatever happened to the officer (Yant?) who shot trevon cole and later lied about buying drugs from someone who turned out to be in another country at the time of the drug buy? amazing if he never got fired. what am I saying amazing this is metro
Did he have a concealed walking stick permit?
How many Officers were on site? They can't disarm a person with a walking stick? Seems to me the Officer decided he had done enough and shot the man. These shootings are getting ridiculous.
2 taser shots and a bean bag hit with no effect, maybe the cops thought they were dealing with a cyborg from the future at that point?
Where was Yant when this was going on?
I'll reserve my judgement for two reasons. Metro beat cops don't carry bean bag guns than I'm aware of. The above picture showed did not show a "beat" cop, it showed a SWAT team member. SWAT wears black. I know from personal experience involving an incident in my neighborhood several years ago. The "beat" cops were escalating the situation with an armed man. When SWAT arrived and replaced the "beat" cops, SWAT was able to difuse the situation and take the armed man into custody.
Yeah, that's not SWAT, that's a CSI type.
This wasn't a SWAT operation, it was a shooting by patrol units.
Gotta say, shooting a guy for pointing a stick at somebody seems like a pretty thin justification, even if the dude was tweaking.
Cops are supposed to defuse situations, not escalate them.
Also, why is the body still at the scene? This guy didn't get transported to UMC for any kind of treatment?
I'm sure if I shot someone threatening me with a cane,I'd be going away for a while.
Too many reports of LV police shooting to kill when it's not justified. If it truly was a walking stick, then normally when one uses a stick like this, it's because they are lame.
The man could have been stalled by having one leg shot. Then we read about another shooting less than 4 miles away about 4 hours later today.
Trigger-happy in Las Vegas - thank goodness I don't live there!
I appreciate the fact that the officers deployed the non-lethals as a remedy to this problem which also tells me that the officers had already evaluated that he had no lethal weapon such as a fire arm, or a knife, I would feel better knowing that a felony take down could have been attempted before a firearm being discharge but that is my opinion only.
As to the question about the officers compensation while being held-out-service I have no problem with that because it was not the officers who requested to be removed from service that is a departmental procedure and the officer should not under go a financial set back that could carry s/he into bankruptcy.
Know I do believe when an officer is involved in critical incidents such as this and or accidents on public right of ways they should be tested for drug and alcohol use as well, The reason I say that is some steroids make a person irritable or edgy.
Hey SUN! Will the new inquest rules apply here?
Has that been enacted yet?
If not, then "justifiable" as usual.
Obey the law, obey police commands..you'll be fine.
It's not rocket science. What does "get down on the ground mean"???
Swing a stick at an officer!?!?!?
Another loser off the streets.
Ive worked security at bars and clubs since I was 20 years old unarmed.. do you know how mnay baseball bats sticks and clubs I have taken away from pople who were going to attack me with them....I'm 42...I dont see the need to shoot three cops can easliy subdue one guy with a stick come on..... they got a green light to shoot and they took it
I've watched Monty Python, a pointed stick is far deadlier than Trevon Cole's chapstick.
The people of Vegas gave metro the green light when you voted that dip stick back for more "I run this city with my good ol boys"! We live over 1500 miles from vegas,and the story made the news the first 5 mins this evening!My wife and I drink our coffee together every morning before work and sit back and laugh at your problems that you bring on yourselves.Get rid of the scum that runs your city and maybe just MAYBE people will come back?Oh ya you voted those fools back into office! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.............
Wow! And the man did not even enter a Costco with his walking stick! What's this town coming to if you can't carry a walking stick without getting shot by the police for not putting it down when they tell you to? Oh I forgot they shot a teen several years ago for not putting down his basketball when they told him to.
Deadly force in the USA is not authorized when a citizen refuses to obey a command of a police officer, only if they are a threat to the life and safety of the officer or others. If Metro believes that using deadly force on citizens for failing to obey orders is justified then maybe it is time for us citizens to evaluate what it means to be Americans and whether we want to tolerate this kind of behavior by our police or live under this kind of rule!
Don't blame me, I voted for Bisch. The actions that bring such mis-trust and disrespect upon Metro can be laid squarely at Sheriff Doug's feet.
Granted, this case is going to be interesting once all the facts are known (please let the video be good) but even at a first glance it raises questions.
On the other hand, the later shooting at PT's seems to be righteous on the surface.
There is one issue that is common to both, though. And that is the large number of personnel involved in the follow up. How many officers did that take off the street? (I'm open to an argument that taking officers off the street enhances public safety.)
Goodie! About time! We can now try out the new inquest procedures and arrive at the expected conclusion that the shooting was justified.
Also, plans should be made to eliminate the use of tasers as apparently there are no use for them, just dead weight.
The coroner's inquest should be lots of fun.
Coroner: "What happened, exactly, in your own words?"
Officer: The suspect was running with a stick, so I had to shoot him so he wouldn't poke his eye out."
Jury: "Justified!"
I was getting worried..Metro didn't blow anybody away in a few days, but today they made up for lost time..Anyone want to bet on the inquest ruling? Even with a new and improved inquest hearing, walking stick? JUSTIFIED...
And once again here come those among us who have no use for the Constitution or respect for the millions of soldiers who died defending it. While I respect their rights to spout all this Hate America talk, I still wonder if they are trying to turn America into Iran or North Korea and I am frightened by them.
3 people shot dead by the police today in 3 different shootings.
Is that a record for Las Vegas Valley?
I would personally feel better if the subjects of these shootings actually had firearms aimed at police or an innocent bystander before being shot. It is a total cowardly act to shoot an unarmed person who is not a real threat to you or someone else.
My bad.....there is only 2 dead.
But the day is still young.
I love all the Metro haters on here. It's easy to make a judgment when you're not the officer dealing with the situation. These are the types of attitudes that empower a lot of people believe that if they don't agree with the law or "think" they are justified, they don't have to obey an officer when instructed to do so. A 3 foot walking stick is considered a lethal weapon, just like a pipe, baseball bat, 2 X 4, etc.
Yes, the police could have tried to charge the suspect, but if 2 blasts from a tasser and a bean bag fired from a shotgun didn't put the guy down, chances are good he was high on something that diminished his capacity to feel pain. If the officers would have attempted to go hands on with the suspect they would have put themselves in danger. Many of these walking sticks have knife blades that eject from them or have steal heads on them or both.
So what do you do? Beg the guy to give up and drop the weapon? You only have seconds to make a life or death decision. "Oh pretty please Mr. Suspect, put down the stick", Yea, right. Or be macho man and try to take the stick away. Good plan, but he might just split your skull with it or worse.
The bottom line is, if you have a weapon and refuse to follow the orders of police, be prepared to lose your life.
United-727 & Rocco pretty much sums it up for me,at least for now.Thanks for the carpal-tunnel delay for me.Chunky-,I thought you were a little more open minded;not cop haters,just trying our best to use our God given capabilities to use our brains to understand the occurances around us that seem to defy a rational persons expectations of a resonable outcome.Walk this way,without the big stick.
"It is a total cowardly act to shoot an unarmed person who is not a real threat to you or someone else." - totellitasitis
Maybe this one didn't involve what most would call an "armed" person (and some walking sticks are by all means weapons) but the second one today was decidedly armed, a man holding a woman at knife point. That counts as "armed" and a "threat to others" in anyone's book, I hope.
The guy wasn't complying. What do you do? Rush 3 officers at him where he swings his stick and strikes one in the head while the other 2 are able to tackle him??
Ridiculous. Another cockroach off the streets. It's simple. OBEY police commands. If you can't do that or refuse to you have put your life in danger
Question's that should be asked at the inquest.
1. Was the shooting officer wearing kevlar?
2. Was there a motorcycle officer there that had a helmet and a kevlar vest?
3. Did any officers on scene receive hand to hand self defence training at the academy in this simulated situation.
When a group of people are never held accountable for there actions this is what happens. be they police, actors, presidents or whoever!
Group of people not held accountable?
Does this include citizens?..or in Las Vegas many non-citizens?
Can't have it both ways.
"In compliance" is a scary term. It reeks of gestapo. If you are disorderly - highly inappropriate, sure, but not immediately endangering people's lives or property - you will be forced through escalating means to become "compliant." When these violent methods do not work, you will be complianced to death, apparently.
There. The big scary man with a STICK is fully "in compliance."
Why is it that every time a cop shoots someone the bullet kills the person when in "normal" violent acts oftentimes the person will survive the wound and be given a chance to tell his or her story or at the very least see their day in court? But when a Metro cop is involved, more times than not, the person is killed. Shooting to force "compliance" does not seem to be the same thing as shooting to kill the person, at least not in my view. There are people with mental/emotional problems all around the world and there needs to be someone in the situation that can have the wherewithal and circumspection to disarm the person without having to take their life. If they can not step up to that difficult task, they should not be given a badge. For those officers we do not hear about who act bravely and appropriately, my hat is off to you men and women, because it *is* difficult work.
And, by the way, "low-lethal force" is the most idiotic terminology I have seen in the news in quite awhile, and that's really saying something. It is either lethal or it is not. You can't "kinda" kill someone.
Police enforce laws which maintain the safety and fabric of society. Were they not to force compliance with THE LAW'S demands, the United States would be a much darker place. For this reason, as is also sanctioned by local, state, and national government, they have the right to use any force necessary to ensure the well-being of the very people with the indepence to speak out against them.
A walking stick could easily prove to be a deadly weapon in the hands of an aggravated citizen able to withstand the voltage of a tazer gun, as well as the impact of a bean bag gun.
Also, METRO, as well as all current police departments in the state of Nevada, has extensive investigations into the actions of its officers to ensure moral conduct on their behalf.
Nobody grows up wishing to be a police officer in the hopes of the chance to end someone's life. This is a decision which haunts officers for much of their lives, many times leading to their resignations and worse.
1) Kevlar vests do not stop blunt force trauma to the head. They also don't stop edged weapons (with the exception of specially made vests for corrections officers)
2) Nope no motorcycle officers, just patrol officers. So no helmets.
3) Self defense training is not when the other person is swinging a weighted stick around, can crack you in the head and take you right out of the fight. Its when the other tools aren't working, or you have succesfully closed the distance and are wrestling to get someone into handcuffs. Hard to close the distance with Rafiki (think Lion King) doing the 'Bruce Lee' impersonation.
As an aside,
The officers also have an obligation to render aid/protect the other side of the domestic fight (the female), hard to do when they are being attacked.
When a phaser with stun capability is invented ala Star Trek/Star Wars, officers wouldn't have to shoot suspects to reliably incapacitate them.
Until that day comes (and Tasers aren't the answer yet) you will have incidents like this because there are drunk, high, crazy, weirdos in the world.
To Christopher, I give two peices of advice:
1. Use less hipocrisy to get a real point across.
2. Learn the meaning of "idiotic" to understand your hipocrisy.
Also, you cannot hold someone accountable for not using not-yet-invented technology to subdue a suspect, as RowdyYates added.
@TomD1228... Actually I think the article described the suspect as completely human. Maybe your soul has been damaged enough to belittle the loss of human life, but I have faith in my community that the loss of any life is something that we hope to never see. I respect your right to hate America and all this country stands for, but I can't respect anyone as with a heart as dark as yours.
bghs1986
I used to not understand the 'sheep' mentality that causes many to hope for the best no matter what and even occasionally in the face of direct evidence to the contrary, but now I take it as an example that our society works as intended overall.
Understand that all of us (myself included) sleep peacably in our beds because rough men stand ready to do violence on our behalf.- Attributed to author George Orwell although not an exact quote I'm sure.
Bottom line,
Your positive outlook comes from having others take care of the evils in the world while you are free to focus on other pursuits.
Mr. Calicott,
The term may seem to be an oxymoron (like military intelligence) but its not meant to be that way.
Low lethal weapons simply mean they have a lower mathematical liklihood of a lethal outcome.
A gun is a lethal weapon.
A bean bag round fired from a 12 gauge shotgun is a low lethal weapon, unless fired from within 5 yards. It will leave a big welt, more of a pain compliance weapon at 7-10 yards.
Within 5 yards it is considered the same as a handgun due to the kinetic energy delivered.
Good job Metro.
Police shooting the bad guys doesn't make me feel safer, it terrifies me.
If every single one of these incidents warrants shooting to kill what the heck is happening to our city?
Is it so unsafe, are the "criminals" so dangerous, they have to be shot and killed?
These "incidents" seem to be increasing.
Is Las Vegas becoming a dangerous place to visit?
These shootings will hurt our tourist industry if they haven't already.
Who would want to visit a town with one of the highest murder rates in the nation?
RowdyYates,
I beg to differ with you. I sleep peacefully in my bed because I know I have various means to protect myself available, including three dogs, and *Not* because there are "rough men stand ready to do violence" on my behalf. I do not depend upon others as my primary means of protection. Nor should anyone.
Other than in rare occasions such as the other shooting today at P.T.'s, police are usually little more than garbage collectors who show up after the fact.
Hmmmmm, wonder why they did not use a K-9.
I guess bullet(s) are cheaper than dog food?
Is there any dispute here that a Taliban fighter, under the rules of engagement imposed upon our troops, stands a better chance of going home to his cave than someone acting erratically outside a Speedee Mart in Las Vegas?
Tell me it ain't so
Guy could have injured the dog with the stick. That's why. It's very simple. "drop the stick and get on the ground"....if you refuse to listen, all bets are off as to what can happen next. This guy created this situation, not the police
General Petraeus: "Every Afghan civilian death diminishes our cause"
Maybe The Sheriff can modify the above and incorporate it into Department Training and Re-Training
Disgusting actions by Metro yet AGAIN.
I dont know whats scarier; the police or the all the angry, scared people that carry guns in Las Vegas.
Boftx
That quote pretty much sums up the bulk of society.
Based on that and other posts you have made, it seems pretty clear that you, however, are among the minority that takes personal responsibility for your safety instead of 'hoping for the best'.
As for the police being reactive in many situations, I have to agree. But, they are also proactive in conducting 'silly' traffic enforcement. Many people are put out of commission prior to being able to act due to the enforcement of the minor statutes, as well as crimes against the state. The problem is, aside from crime rates (which are at 10 year lows) there is no direct way to measure this, and never will be.
The now executed Timothy McVeigh got picked up by an Oklahoma Trooper for expired tags on his car and carrying a concealed weapon. Nobody knew what he had done for several days while he sat in custody.
Numerous examples like this.
Spinebob,
Had a K9 unit been there, they would have used it.
These situations develop rapidly and there are only about 20 or so K9 officers (each with 2 dogs).
Unless they happen to be really close by, it's just not an option.
A few years ago I watched the Seattle police standoff with a man who was CRAZY and wielding a HUGE sword in the middle of a busy downtown intersection.
They waited him out for hours. In the end, they we able to use a water hose to take him down ALIVE. Why, because he did not have a gun and was not an IMMEDIATE threat to police or bystanders.
Shooting because you don't want to wait it out is bad policy.
cnev,
The simple fact is that there have been fewer officer involved shootings this year than in years past.
Simply because you perceive more doesn't make it so.
Police don't shoot to 'kill', they shoot center mass depending upon the suspects position in relation to the officer when they present a significant threat.
The thickest part of the body is the chest. It also is generally the widest and least likely to result in overpenetration to hit someone behind the suspect. (Like the woman he was fighting with in this case)
With the 'shoot to wound' theory all you are doing is setting the stage to injure a bystander by shooting into shallow tissue unable to absorb the kinetic energy imparted by a bullet.
I would be VERY concerned/afraid of the police if the bullets were flying and hitting unintended targets. They aren't. Suspects are being hit when they present a threat.
Want to blame someone? Find the suspect's parents. They failed to teach these people adequately.
Gotta love this paper.If you go against whats been posted,they remove it.I thought this was America,and you could speak your mind?Not true if you go against what they want you to know!Next thing they'll tell you is there is a santa clause,and whats worse,they beleive it themselves!Talk about a one sided paper.And if it really matters to anyone,I am an ex badge,and i would be embaressed to call myself a member of metro!
Metro is out of control.
This would not have been the outcome, say in the Bay Area, if so people would have been rioting. The Bart cop got two years for shooting an unarmed man.
No wonder Las Vegas is considered the stupidest city around, the pro-metro pro-angle people keep proving it...in this case especially.
I guess they taught him a lesson "don't go to a gunfight with a stick" !! Police acting as judge, jury and executioners!!
ronster,
What you cite occurred in 1997. That incident unfolded without the suspect charging at anyone whatsoever. The police can stand around FOREVER when someone has a bat/knife/sword/axe and there is enough distance bewtween them. That's NOT how these incidents unfolded today. You are comparing apples and oranges.
See below.
According to a contemporary news report, an off-duty police officer was first alerted to a leather-jacketed and camo-pantsed man with a sword disturbing (presumably in the psychological sense) passers-by. The officer followed the man from Pike Place Market. At the corner of Second and Pike, the man took what the police report described as a "defensive stand" and refused to drop his sword. The officer called for back-up. So began the great Seattle Street Samurai Standoff of 1997.
Apollo -- for that was who he declared himself to be -- made no aggressive moves, apart from the occasional dramatic poses and cryptic pronouncements. The police, cautious of his martial prowess, chose not to provoke him. Instead they cordoned off the streets and commenced negotiations via bullhorn.
At least these nice pics gives free advertizing to CD's Sports Lounge
Arguing, now punishable by death. It's amazing that the woman he was arguing with was completely unharmed, yet it took 3 Metro cowboys, 2 taser shots, a bean bag shot, and a fatal gunshot. To get him to stop arguing.
It did, unfortunately, take 3 Metro OFFICERS, 2 taser shots, a bean bag shot, and a fatal gunshot to stop the man, but this was his own doing. How hard could it have been for him to comply with the demands of the police officers and to avoid violence? The woman had no problem with it.
James Reza wrote this: "Leave it to someone to turn this into a debate on guns. The debate is a waste of time because those who want to kill will find a way to do it, with or without guns. You cannot unmake guns; you'd be better off trying to address the core reasons of violence. Humans can be violent and all the laws in the world will never, ever stop that."
I assume that, given your logic, you would tell us that a knife or stick is exactly the same as a gun? This would mean that the military could go back to using swords and archery and forgo modern weapons? Unless there is some more fundamental difference you are busy trying to obscure...
Let's see the video it may show that he didn't weiled the walking stick at all we are just being told this, And how much does a walking stick weigh twelve to fourteen ounces.
No need for lethal force here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TqRQ0VRRO...
Metro should have called this officer out to the scene:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TXXzvpnkv...
Mark Schaffer, you cannot stop the violence of human beings by limiting their access to weapons that have already been invented. And yet, that is the fantastical delusion of the gun-control crowd.
We will all die eventually, and no amount of governmental interference (via gun control laws, government administered health care, or laws against smoking or drugs) will ever stop that. Ever, ever, ever.
You are better off, as someone who desperately believes that you can have some impact on human death by violence, trying to understand and alleviate the immediate causes of such violence, because humans are all capable of it, given the proper circumstances, and it matters not if a gun, a knife, a car, or one's hands are used, as the result is the same.
As for your query regarding "modern weapons," gunpowder is about 760 years old.
Let's hope the film is good. Another life seems wasted when officers could have shot to stop - Not Kill - the suspect.
Any officer is expected to shoot to kill to protect their lives or a citizens life - but a cain com'on.
There is a disconnect from the Public to the Police Force. Retraining, Discipline and enforcement of police guidelines is needed.
Well let's see . . the cops are in the news every other week this year for shooting someone . . they just shot me twice with a taser . . a couple times with a very loud and usually painful beanbag from a shotgun and are pointing guns at me screaming at the top of their lungs get on the ground or I will shoot you! Gee, I wonder if they are serious. I know, let me threaten them with this pointy stick and find out.
Sounds like suicide to me folks. At face value it seems maybe something else could have been done but I was not there, were you? Bottom line this guy had to know he was rolling the dice. I wouldn't poke a bear at the zoo with a stick anymore than I would threaten a copper with one after he shot me three times with tasers and bean bags.
They are just an organized gang. High school punks that can finally and legally pay back others that picked on them. There is no way I can teach my children that the police are here to help them. Lets see what our sheriff will do now...oh wait...probably nothing. This story will fade away like all the others till they kill again.
At the very least the supervisors should also be on suspension. Cop training will then focus on helping and not on hurting. It's obvious the coroners inquest is to protect the cops not the public. The system is BROKEN!
Las Vegas has the police force it deserves - overpaid, corrupt, and trigger-happy.
I wouldn't give a nickel for the whole lot of them.
Again, he was arguing. He didn't assault anyone. He didn't threaten anyone. There was no probable cause to FORCE compliance, let alone murder him in cold blood. The next time you have a disagreement with someone, no matter how benign, are you willing to be forced to the ground and handcuffed, just for raising your voice? Think about that. Next time they get your order wrong at the drive-thru and you raise your voice, that is now punishable by death. Next time you can't get those kids off your lawn, if you raise your voice, it is now punishable by death. Next time you call your local sportsradio station to rant about a 3rd string quarterback, be prepared to be forced to the ground, searched, and handcuffed. Refusal to willingly sacrifice your basic constitutional rights is now punishable by death.
@Sandy
Until police have a firm understanding of what you are yelling about...yes, you better allow yourself to be forced to the ground and handcuffed if that is their decision. You can work out the details of whether you were in the right or the wrong later.
You want to go thru life chancing an encounter with police by not complying..be my guest. You might find yourself in the morgue. Comply, and then once the details are known about Carls Jr. putting too many onions on your burger and this was why you were raving like a lunatic...I'm sure once you've calmed down you'll be released. Better than a trip to the morgue.
I can't emphasize again. Comply, comply, comply...and then make your case. Trying it the other way around is a good way to end up hurt or dead. Just basic common sense. Police have no idea they put too many onions on your burger.
"Again, he was arguing. He didn't assault anyone. He didn't threaten anyone. There was no probable cause to FORCE compliance, let alone murder him in cold blood."
It's quite likely, that he was a murderer in this or one of his previous lives and this was the way to pay back karma debts. Nothing happens by accident.
Millions of Jews complied in Europe. That worked out well.
"Millions of Jews complied in Europe. That worked out well."
For sure - the suckers are too lazy, to do the research themselves.
"You have certain rights one of those rights is to do as you are told by the police or authorities. Once you DO NOT COMPLY, you are making a choice. If the choice isn't the right one then you give up your rights."
Aaronboy -- you proved here you are a) completely ignorant of what being a citizen really means, and b) a good boy for this police state. Read the Constitutions, with emphasis on the Bill of Rights (Article I's "Declaration of Rights" in Nevada's) then try again for a relevant post.
"The Fuhrer is always right." -- Joachim von Ribbentrop, the 1939 Konigsberg address
Originally, the Bill of Rights did not restrict the power of the states. So if a state wanted police to shot people at will then they could.
But Bill of Rights have been updated by court rulings and most of it restricts states. They have picked and choosed which one applies and which ones don't.
ACSLATER this is what I read in the article, Neville said police believe surveillance video cameras from the Speedee Mart captured the incident. This was in the story on the main page.
Unless something is done to curb these trigger happy cops YOU may be next.
"But Bill of Rights have been updated by court rulings and most of it restricts states."
SgtRock -- wrong. The 14th Amendment was passed by Congress, not the courts.
Leave it to the Anti-Gun NUTS to turn a story about a walking cane into a rifle... Shows just how desperate they really are!
Get on the boards and post....but don't actually do anything about it.
Vote in the same people, get the same results.
Nothing will change if people don't make it change.
Form someone who has been in law enforcement- it would appear by some of these comments that some think Metro enjoys fragging people- killing another human is unbelievably tramatic- these officers are not playing war games- let the facts come out- something doesnt sound at all right
dobrdad-
Perhaps people think Metro enjoys shooting because Metro has done nothing to counter that perception. There is at least one rock solid case of an officer murdering a man in cold blood in the past two years. That officer is still on the job, and even after additional questionable shootings, the department has seemingly kept its "head in the sand" and done nothing to alleviate the concerns about police use of force held by the public.
Right or wrong, many will question every time the police use deadly force. Sometimes deadly force is clearly justifiable, as was the case in the P.T.'s shooting yesterday. A knife was at the throat of an innocent person and the police shot the bad guy. Cool.
But to shoot a guy with a stick is clearly questionable. Police are only supposed to use deadly force when they or others are threatened with deadly force. A stick isn't the same as a firearm. The police could have simply backed up a few steps and been completely out of the range of this guy and his "sharpened" stick.
Instead, they shot him dead where he stood. They didn't defuse the situation. They didn't try to calm the guy down, or isolate him and call for more help. They killed a guy for waving a stick around.
That action deserves the scrutiny of the public, not a blind "attaboy."
Can we see a photo of this "sharpened walking stick"? Or how about the video please? Then we can spare everyone all of the innuendo.
As an aside, as I run into such questions in my line of work:
Let me ask you all this question:
What if you believe excessive force is being used against you by a member of law enforcement, and you become convinced that unless immediate action is taken, you most certainly will be killed....what are your rights under the Constitution to protect your own life with equal measured force, or at least enough force to stop the threat?
Furthermore, what are the odds that a jury will see things the way you did?
Here's my response: 1) we all do have rights. How and why the F- do you think we ever took the colonies from the British Empire?
2) Caveat to the above, regarding the jury... In Las Vegas or Clarke Country, you'd be Fu*@ed 6 ways to Sunday if you ever did anything like that.
Here's the breakdown friends. Whatever it is you do, you may have a right to do. But at the end of the day you are going to be judged by 12 of the dumbest people in the country, according to recent surveys. What is the conclusion: Don't ever do anything that will put you in front of any kind of jury in Clarke County. You are, in it's truest essence of the term, rolling the dice. And again, you may be totally in the right.
Finally, if you're a smart guy (or gal), you'll know ahead of time that an officer is begging for you to give him the opportunity to take you down. Not necessarily with lethal force. But because he's got to release some of the anxiety that goes along with the job (the bureaucracy, the pecking order, the dirt bags, the machismo, the ambivalence from the public, the constant need to prove oneself, the desire to move up only to be pushed back down, and on and on ad nauseam). You can compare it to the constant training a firefighter goes through, but there's never a fire. Or a combat trained infantryman, but there's no war. Or a baseball pitcher who only knows the bench.
In the words of John Foggerty. A fine Irishman and a musician to boot:
"Oh, put me in, Coach - I'm ready to play today;
Put me in, Coach - I'm ready to play today;
Look at me, I can be Centerfield."
Boys and girls, you just re-elected a law and order wrecking crew. And what's more, you told them, hey, great job, keep up the good work! Keep taking out the trash with any means necessary! Then you want to get up on this board and start lodging complaints. This must be the Las Vegas they'd talked about in that study of smartest to dumbest metro areas.
You people are unbelievable. The police tried their best this time. Tazed twice, bean bag shot once b4 he was shot. According to a witness he pulled the prongs out and kept coming at police while yelling "bring it on" and "go ahead and shoot me." From what I have heard this guy was hopped up on drugs and acting crazy. Why does someone have to get injured first (citizen or police officer) b4 it's ok to shoot? I understand it was a stick but should the police have waited for him to stab the women with the pointed end to shoot? It all comes down to the same thing. If the cops have guns pointed at you, lay down your stick, gun, knife, whatever and don't charge the police or anyone else for that matter and you won't end up dead.
What I find really amazing is that the same people who say the police are out of control are the same ones saying that those malcontents who killed the teacher should have been shot by the police.
Maybe the police should make a list of who you all think it's ok to shoot.
1. Teenagers who killed a teacher, ok to shoot.
2. Man with sharp stick beating up his wife, not ok.
3. Man holding a gun, high on drugs, acting erratically, not ok.
Police Officers are NOT supposed to use lethal force (i.e., killing someone), unless all other training and actions have first been tried. This is supposed to be Standard Procedure among ALL police and law enforcement agencies - according to a ruling by the U.S. SUPREME COURT.
THE FOLLOWING describes what is being taught to POLICE OFFICERS - as presented by an expert, and teacher, IN USE OF LETHAL FORCE. This guidance is in accordance with a ruling by the U.S. SUPREME COURT on the use of such force by police officers.
"Police Use of Lethal Force"
"To prepare for dangerous and life-threatening situations, police are trained in a "continuum of force." The continuum starts with an officer's presence, the lowest form of force, and rises through options such as verbal commands and less-lethal options until reaching its peak, "deadly force."
"Officers are trained to use deadly force when they have probable cause to believe a suspect poses a significant threat of DEATH to the police or others, as decided by the U.S. Supreme Court in Tennessee v. Garner in 1985."
SOURCE:
http://www.ehow.com/about_5339658_lethal...
In this LV Sun story, there seems to have been more than one officer present, and if the person who got shot was only carrying a "stick" - then I cannot understand why they could not rush him, and use their physical-force training to get him to the ground, where he would no longer be any kind of threat.
Of course, one would have to have been there to know the exact situation, but it makes sense to me that the man who was shot - should have been WOUNDED; NOT killed. Further, it seems the man's argument with the woman was not at a point of harm to the woman - so if the man was just ignoring the police - and not swinging his "stick" - it was the police officer's MINDSET that fostered THEIR NEED to shoot to kill; not the victim's actions, or because the man did not do what the police told him to do.
In a similar vien, in the Scott (COSTCO) shooting, the officer (Yant, I believe) said he took aim at "center-mass" (Scotts chest) and fired. WHY WAS THAT NECESSASRY? Scott ws not waving a gun around. Since there were 3 officers at THAT incident, one would wonder why they didn't RUSH Scott either - since they were all very close to him.
Some day,someone is going to sue the LVPD, and win. THEN, the State of Nevada may pay more attention to the cascade of citizens who seem to have been in circumstances that might not have warranted being KILLED. And if these killings continue, the US Attorney General may become interested in seeing what is wrong in Las Vegas. I can see that day coming.
@ reydogirl "If the cops have guns pointed at you, lay down your stick, gun, knife, whatever and don't charge the police or anyone else for that matter and you won't end up dead."
Ummm, isn't that what Erik Scott was doing, laying down his gun, according to about 40 witnesses. After all, it was still in its holster as it was laying on the ground next to his dead body. How did your advice work out for him?
Just like in the wild wild west- if one do not follow the Sheriffs orders one will get shot!!!
@BullMoose,
Mr. Scott pulled his gun out and was then told to put it down and he did not. As to your 40 witnesses...some say he had the gun in his hand and was starting to raise it and other have said he pulled it out to drop it. Not sure how in that moment the officer's can tell if Mr. Scott was going to drop it or raise it to shoot. Maybe they should have waited until he shot. Some people have said Mr. Scott could have shot with the holster on and other have said you couldn't. Easy to have the debate after the fact. Not easy to ascertain the "facts" when a person is in the moment.
The only case that I think was murder was Trevor Cole. So many issues with that one. But Trevor was black and poor so most of you don't care. The rich, white, WestPoint graduate couldn't have possible done anything wrong.
BullMoose,
Erik Scott shouldn't have reached for the weapon to begin with, as he was not directed to by the police, who were looking out for the lives of those witnesses. He should have put his hands up and let them take it, as has been in practice for years. Also, it doesn't take long to unholster a gun, especially for somebody who knows how to use one.
@ reydogirl,
Fact: Erik Scott was exiting Costco with the rest of the herd at the behest of Metro and was not a threat at the time Metro stopped him with guns drawn at the exit with dozens of people around him.
Fact: reasonable witnesses said they heard Metro officers say "Drop it!" repeatedly, therefore, a reasonable inference is that Scott may have also heard "Drop it!" This, goes to reydogirl's advice to "lay down your stick, gun, knife, whatever" which in the case of Erik Scott got him killed. He did not have his gun in his hand when he was commanded to "Drop it!"
Conclusion: don't follow reydogirl's advice. Don't follow what you reasonably believe you hear Metro commanding you to do ("Drop it!").
Instead, put your hands on your head, interlock your fingers, kneel on the ground, and pray to the gods of donut-devouring cops that anything you do won't be seen as a "furtive movement." (R.I.P. Trevon Cole; it's all related as much as you would like to compartmentalize it).
This problem is going to continue to spiral out of control unless Sheriff Gillespie gets in front of it and starts training officers better and changing the culture of the department.
Ok i have supported Metro for the past year in all twenty-four shootings. Part of this is because i have known a lot of cops in my lifetime, but come on metro a walking stick. You have tasers, you have pepper spray, man i have more guts and would take the man down in a bear hug. This time i think this was cold blooded murder.
I just want to explain myself. I grew with cops, i was a firefighter for years, and i have a lot of respect for police officers. I watched them at work today and they treated three guys who were accused of drugs, car theft, and purse snatching with respect. Yes they had them at gun point for a while and yes they they stormed the unit, and yes we had tons of cops in the complex for about two hours. But the officers were respectful and did their job. Except for the fact that they did not leave us with information on what was going on.
And every time i come in contact with the police i always tell them to have a safe day and to stay safe, but i cannot see shooting to kill for a walking stick pointed or not. And it was a running joke at work since i had my screw gun in a holster on my back that i should not make any sudden moves or i might get shot. So yes i really do think that this was a bad shooting even thought they tried non leather force and for once i agree that metro should be called on the carpet for this one plain and simple.
I heard he had a second illegally concealed walking stick hidden in his pocket that the police found on the way to the hospital that he had no permit for.
Can't wait for the inquest on this from the officer......
I ordered the suspect who was acting erratic to drop his walking stick, and he aimed the pointy end at me.... Fearing for the lives of little children and fellow officers I fired my weapon, then went to make sure I looked good on the stores surveilance cameras.
Inkwell: Thanks for the good information. I'm not sure what is going on in Las Vegas but it seems like Metro will shoot you for blinking wrong. I think it all goes to the training of us vs them. The "we want to go home" mantra. You hear a lot of writers say if you don't get on the ground, spread your arms and legs then Metro has a right to shoot you. Maybe all of this comes from too much TV and all of these reality shows that somehow hop up the cops and makes the public so scared. I for one hope I never encounter an officer on a bad day.
I'm getting NERVOUS. I am a West Point grad, who used shop at the Summerlin Costco, and have to use a cane at times because of a medical condition. Does anybody know the name of a good insurance agent?
@BullMoose,
I like how you twist the facts. Some witnesses said Mr. Scott had the gun in his hand when told to drop it others said he did not. Who are you referring to as reasonable witnesses. I heard many reasonable witnesses and several of them contradicted each other. Witnesses are notoriously flawed. They see what they perceived not what actually happened. If the gun was in his hand then yes he should have dropped it. If the gun was not in his hand he should have never reached for it. His CCW training taught him that. The police come across CCW holders each and every day but amazingly we don't have citizen's shot every day, because most of them can follow directions and follow their training.
Of course there is nothing anyone can say or do for you to say that a shooting is justified. No matter what happens you will always think the cops are killers. Mr. Scott may have looked like the nice middle class, WestPoint Grad but he was far from it. I don't know about you but I have shopped at Costco, Walmart, Target and a hundred other stores and have never had the cops called on me. As a matter of fact I have never had an issue with the cops EVER. Neither have any of my family members and we have all lived here for more than 40 years.
Here I have new advice for you. Obey the law and the cops won't have a reason to ask you to lay down your weapon!!!
@JakeC. When I heard the 911 tape played at the Scott inquest, the first command issued by Mosher was drop it, followed rapidly by put your hands up, get on the ground, get on the ground. This occured in less than 7 seconds. The time was measured by the presiding officer and is in the record. Mosher testified at the Inquest that he didn't remember saying drop it and had to hear it on the tape. Less than 2 seconds after the last command, you can hear the shots. It appears that Scott was trying to comply with the first command from Mosher that he heard. Only problem was, Mosher didn't remember saying it and expected Scott to get on the ground. That failure to communicate apparently cost Erik Scott his life.
Tanker1975, exactly. Of all the witnesses who lacked credibility, Mosher was top. As you point out he didn't recall saying "Drop it!" although clearly heard as the first command on the 911 tape. He also didn't recall tapping Scott on the shoulder as he exited although he told investigators in his statement the day of the shooting he did tap him on the shoulder.
redogirl, a reasonable witness is one who has a reasonable interpretation of events. Witnesses who said he had a gun in his hand, a holster in his hand, and a cell phone in his hand are all reasonable. Many of those witnesses heard officers yell "Drop it!" before he reached for the item (later proven to be a gun inside a holster). Some said "Drop it!" came after.
And, don't lecture me on eyewitness reliability until you've studied the subject academically. You can start with Elizabeth Loftus (a name you'll likely have to google). You realize in discounting witnesses that gave contradicting inquest testimony, you can throw out Officer Mosher as well. You would rather believe a witness that impeached his own credibility at the inquest and who has a built-in motive to make himself look justified in his testimony over disinterested witnesses who said he yelled "Drop it!" first who were supported by the 911 tape.
You, apparently, are not reasonable.
Our cops are trained at the academy. I am 71 years old and could certainly get away from or stop a guy with a walking stick or cane. If this cop was so afraid for his life, then I think that this thin skinned dude should look for a safer office type job. I don't think that the cops should shoot unless the "bad guy" is SHOOTING at them. Last I knew, most walking sticks or canes or clubs don't have gun barrels built on to them.
I spoke to the girl at the speede mart and she laughed about it when I told her I left my cane at home. I told her that I was glad that it wasn't her husband or father or grandfather or uncle or brother that was laying dead in the parking lot for three hours. She laughed again and started telling me I wasn't there how did I know. Little she knows before spouting off!!!
The cops had NO right in killing this guy. Then they (the cops) came up with the deal about his past. That is exactly right....his PAST!!! If he had mental problems...they should have attended to that at the time. NOT kill the guy. WHAT GOES AROUND COMES AROUND. I HOPE THAT THIS COP CAN LIVE WITH HIMSELF. HE PROBABLY CAN BECAUSE HE IS A COP AND HE CAN INTERPRET THE LAW HOWEVER HE WANTS CAUSE HIS DEPARTMENT WILL BACK HIM UP. OH, YEAH, THE DEPARTMENT WASN'T AT THE SCENE EITHER!!!!!
BullMoose,
I actually have studied eyewitness accounts academically. I have several Master's degrees. I have also conducted an independent study asking 100 people of several different races, age range from 5 to 89, and both male and female to "drop it" when nothing was in their hands and every single person did the same thing. They showed their hands and stated that they did not have anything. A reasonable person would not grab something to drop. The 911 tape and the witnesses said "Drop it" not drop the gun. So why didn't Mr. Scott reach for his cell phone or his wallet? Why did he reach for his gun to "drop it." It makes no sense to me.
Also only one person said that Officer Mosher tapped Mr. Scott on the shoulder and that was the Loss Prevention Officer.
As for the witnesses, I believe all of them and none of them. All of them have some truth. They all saw what they think they saw, even the Officer's. It doesn't make them right or wrong.
As for being a reasonable person...it seems as though the majority of the law abiding citizens of Las Vegas agree with me as to the justification of the shooting of Mr. Scott.
If the police are so out of control and the inquest process so flawed how come none of you are showing up to the meetings? I know I have and find myself one of the few citizens in the room.
To WillisDicfitcha
What race do you believe me to be? What racist comment did I make? Please enlighten me.
Can't wait to hear the spin on this apparent police-protected homicide. What is going on? The guy had a cane and the cops had to shoot him? Give me a break! It appears that cops can shoot anyone they please in Las Vegas with impunity.
Wow reydo girl you wrote an essay on witness testimony and took a survey of your girl scouts class on what they would do if someone said drop it?
And you have how many degrees?
Did you poll those same 100 people to see who agrees with you about the Scott case?
They should have had your brilliant mind on the witness stand at the inquest so you could explain the only reason we were there is because he was white and not a poor black man. Then you could explain to the jury the results of your science experiment about dropping it.
Racist. Race baiter. Whatever you, all your degrees, and your 100 person circus wanna call it...it fits you.
They turn their heads to so much on the Strip corridor but sure take it out on the locals! I need to go get some protection from them! If an event says its for cops here...I stay away...someones going to get hurt!
"Just like in the wild wild west- if one do not follow the Sheriffs orders one will get shot!!!"
It's actually quite trivial and it already has been said many times, but there is a direct correlation between the level of violence in a society and their subconscious attitude towards sexuality.
The must suppressive one, the US (seeing a bare breast is here considered pure evil) is the most violent one, western Europe is far more relaxed (a picture of a naked body isn't causing an outcry) and therefore far more peaceful and in Japan (which almost has an anything goes attitude), violent crime is a rarity.
The problem behind it is, that the priest types in the pseudo Christians religions who had the things in charge are for an eternity were (and still are) usually heavily messed up people with an innate hatred towards sensual thriving and especially the sexual core of it (the reason why it is considered a "sin") and as a result produced cultures, that were dirty and depraved to the bone like the middle ages in Europe or the current version of Islam.
What the catholic church got wrong by the way is the idea, that life begins before the fertilization - so the prohibition of the use of condoms is pure nonsense.
And it has to be taken seriously, because an abortion after the conception - life starts with it -(even with a pill a la RU-486) is considered a murder by karma (though the kind of punishment heavily depends on the circumstances), so the US christian right doesn't need to be the executor of it, because it's up to the individual person to live with the consequences.
I am walking down the street. A guy threatens me with a 3ft walking stick. I fear for my safety. I pull out my .40 and send him to meet his maker.
I am in prison for murder.
Willis-
You never answered my question. What race do you believe me to be?
But I will answer yours. Yes I did question those same 100 people and had many varied answers. 82% believed the police were justified. However, since none of them were there, neither was I and neither were you we cannot make a fair judgment. We can only speculate from what we have learned from the media and if you happened to watch the coroners inquest.
Back to this case. The man was not some feeble older gentleman with a cane. He was a 6', roughly 250 lb man threatening a women. He was tazed twice and bean bag shot once and was still charging at police. I feel the police tried ever means necessary before they shot.
I don't think most of you cop haters will ever think the police are justified. So I am done arguing with brick walls.
reydogirl, I'll reiterate one thing, against my better judgment, but because I feel like gloating:
Mosher's own statement to Metro investigators stated he tapped Scott on the shoulder when he was pointed out. That is what Mosher himself said the day of the shooting! His testimony in the inquest contradicted his own earlier statement, but the DA wouldn't dare point that out. Head fake = you lose.
Lastly, how many Master's degrees (have you googled Loftus yet)? And your "independent study" you present as some sort of authority has an age range of 5 (as in kindergarten?!) to 89? Statistics = you lose.
You do realize that I didn't ask you if you studied eyewitness accounts academically, right? I asked about academic studies of eyewitness reliability (Context = you lose). Since you're not familiar with it, much of the current research indicates that in a police-related shooting, the shooting officers have the worst recall of details. Bottom line: Officers Mosher, Stark, and Mendiola were the least credible witnesses in the inquest, and yet their testimony was given the most weight by "reasonable" citizens like you.
@reydogirl,
regarding this case. you said the suspect was charging at police? how do you know this? Is this because you have accepted their account of what happened at face value? Do you believe that they are going to say anything other than the guy was threatening them after they just shot him? Please, don't be that naive. We have irrefutable evidence that that Metro has not been fully forthcoming or truthful with regard to certain reports/events in the past. Thus one would have to impart some skepticism when the person in question was shot because he allegedly pointed a walking stick at the police. One would have to entertain the idea that the man probably had some kind disability...thus the walking stick. Also that the man was holding no one hostage, so what was the hurry. Also, that the police did not exhaust all resources before putting the guy down.
Two things come to mind here. 1) I am going to bet that the guy suffered from some kind of mental illness, probably schizophrenia and 2) Just because an individual does not follow commands, which may be for a variety of reasons, does not definitively warrant deadly force.
Let me arm chair quarterback here for a moment. These officers could have called for additional back up. What was the hurry? They could have contained him enough police presence that he most likely would have submitted eventually. Or he would have stood no chance of doing anything other than submit. Prison guards do this all of the time. They pretty much just smother the guy with bodies, essentially just dog pile the guy. Furthermore, additional time might have helped to de-escalate the situation. I have also seen first hand, officers pepper spray an individual, who's eyes began to burn so bad, he could not figure out which way was up...the officer then simply walked over and cuffed the guy because he was too busy spitting and rubbing his eyes. I've seen police close off a perimeter, fire concussion grenades and send in K9s to apprehend a mentally ill man who was resisting arrest. The point being, I think it has become all too easy these days to simply gun someone down. There is no accountability for it. All of this does not reveal the advances of modern law enforcement interventions and tactics.
James Reza believes the RATES of death would be the same with or without guns but proper controlled studies have long refuted such short sighted thinking. Not that James would understand the difference between a good study and those funded by gun industry apologists.
"Two things come to mind here ..."
It's actually only one thing: The irony here is, that the so called "family values", are the main driving force behind the violence.
Whitelight,
Actually it's not Metro account that I am giving weight too it's several eyewitness accounts I have heard on talk radio and channel 8 news. I like to listen to all sides of a situation before I reach a conclusion unlike many here who immediately jump to the conclusion that Metro is guilty.
BullMoose,
What you stated was "And, don't lecture me on eyewitness reliability until you've studied the subject academically." So my response was I have studied academically. And I don't need to google Loftus because I have read the study. And one study does not make fact. It doesn't matter what I know, how many degrees I have or the fact I am currently working on my PHD in Criminal Psychology because no matter what FACTS are presented Metro will always be wrong in your eyes. If you distrust the police here so much then instead of making ad hoc agruments why don't you attend the meetings on the inquest process or give some kind of suggestions on how to "fix" the problem.
I don't believe Metro 100% of the time I am able to listen to all sides and draw my own conclusions on a case by case basis. It's too bad many of you cannot do the same. As soon as Metro shoots a suspect you are all calling Murder without any of the facts. A reasonable person would wait and listen and weigh the facts, then come to a conclusion. Try it.
@reydogirl:
"And I don't need to google Loftus because I have [just googled it.]" There, I fixed it.
You really mean to tell me that you're working on a PHD [sic] in psychology and you believe that Prof. Loftus' 40 year career has 1 study ("the study" and "one study," your words) on the subject of eyewitness recall. Her extensive studies have been replicated and validated repeatedly, cited in numerous books and yet, you discount it?
Just so you know, correspondence degrees from online schools aren't worth the paper they are printed on. Hopefully it's not too late for you to get a refund.
Again, you fail to meet even your own definition of a reasonable person, i.e. wait and listen to all available evidence. Given the incredible power we lend to police officer to make decisions on citizens' lives and freedom, it is only healthy for a person to hold the police to a higher standard and question his decision-making, even from the beginning, especially when the officer is justifying taking another's life.
reydo girl
Why would it matter what race you are? Your race has nothing to do with anything. Stop trying to bring race into it. Your survey sounds ridiculous. Did you graduate from craigslist university?
BullMoose -
I never discounted it. Just because the officer's "memory" is faulty doesn't mean they are guilty. I listen to all the witnesses. I didn't give the officer's statements any more or less weight then any of the other witnesses.
How do I fail my definition of a reasonable person. When have YOU listen to all the evidence before rushing to judement? All the facts are not out on THIS case or the PT's Pub one but yet you have already made the conclusion that Metro is guilty of murder.
I will let UC Berkeley know that you disapprove of their program. I might as well burn my degrees now.
I do hold the police to a higher standard, however, they are still human beings not super heros with special abilities. They are not able to apprehend every suspect they come in contact with in a non violent manner. Metro responds to thousands of calls each and every day. We have had 25 Office Involved Shootings this year. So roughly 5% of the time Metro has shot at a suspect this year.
IT APPEARS THAT A COUPLE OF POSTERS HEREIN HAVE NOT READ THE ENTRY I MADE REGARDING THE LEGAL USE OF "LETHAL FORCE." If you want to read all of my prior post, see it at Nov 16, at 12:58.
My post discusses the "LAW OF THE LAND" (see QUOTE below) and is true, no matter what anyone might think otherwise. It is the Law. - -
Police Officers are NOT supposed to use lethal force (i.e., killing someone), unless all other training and actions have first been tried. This is supposed to be Standard Procedure among ALL police and law enforcement agencies - according to a ruling by the U.S. SUPREME COURT.
THE FOLLOWING describes what is being taught to POLICE OFFICERS - as presented by an expert, and teacher, IN USE OF LETHAL FORCE. This guidance is in accordance with a ruling by the U.S. SUPREME COURT on the use of such force by police officers.
QUOTE:
"Police Use of Lethal Force"
"To prepare for dangerous and life-threatening situations, police are trained in a "continuum of force." The continuum starts with an officer's presence, the lowest form of force, and rises through options such as verbal commands and less-lethal options until reaching its peak, "deadly force."
"Officers are trained to use deadly force when they have probable cause to believe a suspect poses a significant threat of DEATH to the police or others, as decided by the U.S. Supreme Court in Tennessee v. Garner in 1985."
UNUOTE.
SOURCE:
http://www.ehow.com/about_5339658_lethal......
All else is speculation for a jury to consider - but according to the law.
For you Sun comment junkies and Firefox users (may work with Chrome or IE but untested). Greasemonkey script to easily switch between story and allcomments page via the A key , Z to switch back to main story page. http://www.bit.ly/9ROziU . Requires greasemonkey addon installed in firefox.
Channel 8 Investigative reporters are running a story at 11pm on how much has been paid by Metro to settle lawsuits. Could be very interesting.
Family "values" in action:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/11/17...
"Yeah right, adults are buying their kids these products. I like the fact that a 14 or 15 year old can use the products and not be exposed to this kind of garbage. I hope they stay this way."
And the result:
"Yet you are perfectly fine with them buying apps where you can maim and slaughter thousands of virtual people?
Nice priorities there. God forbid 14 or 15 year olds see an actual human body."
One leads to the other.