Evolving, apparenly officer involved shooting

[Norsesmithy]

I'm outraged, and frankly you all need to be too. One of our own killed

And those racebaiters at BLM are going to make hay because they've finally got a victim who wasn't a scumbag. .

He was one of your own?

http://freedomdaily.com/black-hates-whi ... n-heights/

If you can't understand why lawful carriers in this state are your brothers and allies, you've already lost.

So he romanticized the Black Panther Party, so he didn't trust or love cops. Do you trust and love cops? Do you agree with the tactics and positions of the people who fought to marginalize the Black Panther Party?

Have you ever romanticized the men of the Battle of Athens? How about the the Irish Republicans, the men of Matewan and Blair Mountain, the Confederacy, John Brown's Militia, or Conotocaurious?

You don't have to agree with someone on every particular to understand the difference between a man with a Permit to Carry getting shot for trying to produce it and his ID, and the **** cop who got so nervous around a darkie that he gave the man conflicting instructions and then killed him for making the wrong choice. Are you so cold blooded when you've got a man prepared to kill you for making a misstep that you're certain that you'll be able to figure out which of the things he's telling you to do will lead to death and which will lead to safety?

Or do you see yourself in Jon's shoes, swearing a blue streak and panicking about your own personal consequences instead of trying to stop the bleeding on man you just shot because you got nervous when he said he was a lawful carrier?

While the evidence we have seen doesn't look good for the decision made by the officer, we don't have all the facts. The video is very compelling and very emotional, so it's natural that it will have a powerful effect on people's opinions, but it's knee jerk without all the facts. I agree that offering the information that you are carrying is a bad idea. We really don't know what happened before the phones camera was turned on.

Tragic and in the world of 20/20 hindsight this will.be fuel for a fire that is already burning.

Even in some of the cases where we could pretty well guess that "all the facts" were going to lead to a no-bill (especially Eric Garner and Tamir Rice), it's hard to say that being criminally negligent and killing people unnecessarily are not the same thing. Jon may keep his job, he may not face a jury, he may be exonerated. That's not the same thing as his being right in doing what he did.

Even in cases where we can say that the killings were justified, we can hardly say they were necessary to protect the public interest, other means and methods would have brought superior results for officers, defendants, and the public.

... Based on a few things...

His family & child were in the car.
He had no criminal record.
He had been employed at the same place for the past 14 years.
He was a lawful permit holder.

Given the above, do you really believe that the deceased was reaching for his gun to shoot the cop? ...

his family... The couple were not married, and I don't believe he was the father of the infant.

Of the next 3 factors, which would be known to a police officer seeing him for the first time.

The marital status and paternity of the child aren't visually plain at first inspection either. The problem seems to be one of philosophy of justice. Do we assume that people are good until proven bad, or bad until proven good? If a cop goes through his day assuming that everyone he sees (perhaps limited to a single demographic, and not the general public, even) is a threat and a criminal until proven otherwise, it's only a matter of time before he kills someone for no good reason. Such men do not deserve the trust vested in them as officers of the peace or law.

[TabulaRasa]

his family... The couple were not married, and I don't believe he was the father of the infant.

Of the next 3 factors, which would be known to a police officer seeing him for the first time.

The question is not of what the police officer knows or doesn't know. As has already been so eloquently stated, nobody could reasonably assume the police officer was "Carnac(sic) the magician".

Instead, I am questioning the intent of the deceased. Had the police officer hesitated to pull the trigger, would the deceased be holding his wallet in his hand or his PTC carry piece?

Do you believe the deceased intended to draw a weapon and shoot the police officer?

[Nat]

lots of stuff

[Nat]

Seriously guys - this is about as much of a 'Put up or shut up' moment as the carry movement is going to have. Either stand against the shooting of permit holders, and the normalization of capable and lawfully armed civilians - or admit you aren't up for the task, and the movement either isn't that important... or you have other motivations which supersede your belief in the second amendment

[yukonjasper]

I am disturbed that possession of a firearm by anyone is automatically interpreted as a threat by police. We won't know for a while how much of a factor the race of the deceased is in this case. Unfortunately, the psychology and thought process of that particular officer is yet unknown.

What factors are in play here? Racism isn't the only reason things like this happen. There can be a lot of factors that go into decision making, good or bad.

[xd ED]

his family... The couple were not married, and I don't believe he was the father of the infant.

Of the next 3 factors, which would be known to a police officer seeing him for the first time.

The question is not of what the police officer knows or doesn't know. As has already been so eloquently stated, nobody could reasonably assume the police officer was "Carnac(sic) the magician".

Instead, I am questioning the intent of the deceased. Had the police officer hesitated to pull the trigger, would the deceased be holding his wallet in his hand or his PTC carry piece?

Do you believe the deceased intended to draw a weapon and shoot the police officer?

What either I - or you believe is irrelevant. What IS relevant is whether the cop drew a reasonable conclusion about his(the victims) actions(none of which do we know), and did he act according to policy on those conclusions.

[xd ED]

Seriously guys - this is about as much of a 'Put up or shut up' moment as the carry movement is going to have. Either stand against the shooting of permit holders, and the normalization of capable and lawfully armed civilians - or admit you aren't up for the task, and the movement either isn't that important... or you have other motivations which supersede your belief in the second amendment

Or, we could wait until some facts are actually established before drawing conclusions

[Norsesmithy]

Policy and what his training taught him to accept as reasonableness must also be on trial, even, or especially, if the officer does not see the defendant's chair in a court room over this.

[Nat]

Seriously guys - this is about as much of a 'Put up or shut up' moment as the carry movement is going to have. Either stand against the shooting of permit holders, and the normalization of capable and lawfully armed civilians - or admit you aren't up for the task, and the movement either isn't that important... or you have other motivations which supersede your belief in the second amendment

Or, we could wait until some facts are actually established before drawing conclusions

By which, I assume you mean 'wait for the police department to not comment, hand the case to a prosecutor, either see the case not prosecuted or wait a year for the officer's lawyers to release sterilized comments that place as little guilt as possible on the officer, and maybe, MAYBE in 2018 we see the case dismissed, or the officer alone is punished which absolves the department and the entire system of policing of any guilt'

Look - let me be upfront; I don't know that punishing this officer does anything to give us better police, and secure our rights. I don't necessarily think this should be a 'him vs the people' argument, and I rather see this guy given a 10 year sentence of training other officers how not to make the same mistakes than throwing him in to a prison in some childish and facile parody of justice - but the fact of the matter is, unless other video exists, and unless we can learn what the officer said and when he said it - a more honest account of events simply does not exist.

[mrp]

http://reason.com/blog/2016/07/07/secon ... lls-for-in

Second Amendment Foundation Calls for Independent Investigation of Philando Castile's Death

[atomic41]

I'm outraged, and frankly you all need to be too. One of our own killed for making the mistake of informing police he was carrying and choosing the wrong set of conflicting instructions to follow.

And those racebaiters at BLM are going to make hay because they've finally got a victim who wasn't a scumbag. If we don't make our mark on this, if we don't help push for higher standards of training, if we don't push to remind cops that they ARE civilians, just like the rest of us, we've done a great disservice to the cause of liberty in general, and firearms freedoms specifically.

The dead guy does not represent me and I will not self identify with him. The cop does not represent all other officers and the dead guy is definitely not the ambassador to permit carriers. These are two individuals that made their decisions and decided their own fate that day.

Why would you rush to identify with a stranger in a situation that you have NO FACTS about? I promise you that if I were in that situation, I would not be ventilated by the officer so why in the hell would I want to identify with someone who **** up and paid the ultimate price? I've been pulled over twice while carrying and I did not get shot.

I did a ride along near there recently with SPD. We pulled a car over and one of the guys in the car put his hands up and started saying "I have a gun! I have a permit but I have a gun!" I watched the officer look at him, laugh and say "well then you are obviously law abiding so why in the world would I care that you have a gun?" The officer then ignored him the rest of the time. Didn't ask for his ID, didn't ask for his permit, but according to you...he should have just shot him right there right? You're saying they are poorly trained so why didn't the officer just start blasting away? This was even a white cop, black guy.

The cop that made the split second decision to defend his life represented himself that day and neither you or I are in a position to condemn his actions, especially when you don't even know what happened! The numbers show that most officers never fire their weapon in their careers in fact this was the first officer involved shooting in STAnthony in 30 years. Yet they have probably been confronted with thousands of guns in that 30 years so the one time an officer makes the split second decision to defend his life we are supposed to act like it's some kind of epidemic cops gone wild and be outraged? get a grip dude.

So no, the dead guy does not represent all permit carry holders and the cop does not represent all cops just like the guy that shot and killed his son at the range on accident last week does not represent all gun owners...or the recent terror attackers don't represent all AR15 owners, and on and on. I won't be joining your emotionally charged campaign to crucify an officer who had to make a decision about his safety, especially when I don't even know what actually happened.

[Nat]

Why would you rush to identify with a stranger in a situation that you have NO FACTS about? I promise you that if I were in that situation, I would not be ventilated by the officer so why in the hell would I want to identify with someone who **** up and paid the ultimate price?

Did you just admonish Norsesmithy for rushing to judgement with a lack of information and then, yourself, rush to judgement with a lack of information?

[atomic41]

Why would you rush to identify with a stranger in a situation that you have NO FACTS about? I promise you that if I were in that situation, I would not be ventilated by the officer so why in the hell would I want to identify with someone who **** up and paid the ultimate price?

Did you just admonish Norsesmithy for rushing to judgement with a lack of information and then, yourself, rush to judgement with a lack of information?

Yup, guess so! Guess I should have said, "someone who might have **** up". And I made that mistake while calm and my life wasn't on the line

[TabulaRasa]

Or, we could wait until some facts are actually established before drawing conclusions

OK:

Late Thursday night, the authorities said Mr. Castile, a 32-year-old cafeteria supervisor at a St. Paul school, had been killed by multiple gunshot wounds, and the medical examiner ruled his death a homicide. State investigators identified the officer who shot him as Jeronimo Yanez, a four-year veteran of the St. Anthony Police Department.

[xd ED]

Or, we could wait until some facts are actually established before drawing conclusions

OK:

Late Thursday night, the authorities said Mr. Castile, a 32-year-old cafeteria supervisor at a St. Paul school, had been killed by multiple gunshot wounds, and the medical examiner ruled his death a homicide. State investigators identified the officer who shot him as Jeronimo Yanez, a four-year veteran of the St. Anthony Police Department.

OK...