TexasCHLforum.com

For me, the question is when did shoot become the first line of defense. Yeah I've never been in their situation but there is a reason, I haven't been through training, spent years on the job, and swore to an oath.

I'm not cop bashing, but I'm not also not turning a blind eye to the people saying there is a problem. There is definitely a problem.

I agree we need to let the justice system sort it out, but we all are still allowed to develop opinions on what we know and are allowed to know.

You cant turn back time on anything, much less taking a life. Terrible situation for all involved.

nightmare69 wrote:I believe she panicked when the male officer discharged his taser. I refuse to believe she killed the man in cold blood.

It is nerve racking staring down the sights at another living person knowing their life rest in your hands.

What really sticks out to me in this case is that one officer chose to draw a non-leathal option where the other chose the deadly force option. To me personally this looks like a breakdown in training or at very least a breakdown of communication between the two officers. In this case it appears the two officers assessed the situation completely differently. The question is: why?

TexasTornado wrote:

nightmare69 wrote:I believe she panicked when the male officer discharged his taser. I refuse to believe she killed the man in cold blood.

It is nerve racking staring down the sights at another living person knowing their life rest in your hands.

What really sticks out to me in this case is that one officer chose to draw a non-leathal option where the other chose the deadly force option. To me personally this looks like a breakdown in training or at very least a breakdown of communication between the two officers. In this case it appears the two officers assessed the situation completely differently. The question is: why?

One officer drawing a firearm and another going non letal is very common. The officers didn't know what the suspect was going to pull out of his vehicle. All LEOs have seen the video of the deputy who was killed by a Vietnam veteran who retrieved a rifle from his truck because the officer hesitated. His death screams are bone chilling.

I would have drawn my firearm also because you have a suspect not following commands and going back to his vehicle. If he pulls a firearm I'm ready to return fire. I don't wanna have a taser in my hand and he was a .45. It only takes a second to reholster and go non lethal.

nightmare69 wrote:

TexasTornado wrote:

nightmare69 wrote:I believe she panicked when the male officer discharged his taser. I refuse to believe she killed the man in cold blood.

It is nerve racking staring down the sights at another living person knowing their life rest in your hands.

What really sticks out to me in this case is that one officer chose to draw a non-leathal option where the other chose the deadly force option. To me personally this looks like a breakdown in training or at very least a breakdown of communication between the two officers. In this case it appears the two officers assessed the situation completely differently. The question is: why?

One officer drawing a firearm and another going non letal is very common. The officers didn't know what the suspect was going to pull out of his vehicle. All LEOs have seen the video of the deputy who was killed by a Vietnam veteran who retrieved a rifle from his truck because the officer hesitated. His death screams are bone chilling.

I would have drawn my firearm also because you have a suspect not following commands and going back to his vehicle. If he pulls a firearm I'm ready to return fire. I don't wanna have a taser in my hand and he was a .45. It only takes a second to reholster and go non lethal.

Thanks for the insight. I can see how have having both options would be advantageous. It's hard to speculate what was in her mind at the time, I would seriously hate to be a juror on this one.

Bothers me that an instantaneous decision can be turned into a criminal charge. It looks to me from the information we have, that she was wrong. She probably shouldn't be a cop anymore but 4 years of prison for a cop is gonna be pretty rough. Its a fine line between Law enforcement and being a felon.
Prayers for her, cause she is probably a good person with a good heart, who screwed up with a twitch of her finger.

nightmare69 wrote:I believe she panicked when the male officer discharged his taser. I refuse to believe she killed the man in cold blood.

It is nerve racking staring down the sights at another living person knowing their life rest in your hands.

I agree that the discharge of the taser may have been the the thing that occasioned her shot, but I think panic is less likely than an unintended discharge due to her years of service. I also agree that this was not a cold blooded killing.

I have a suspicion that her finger may have been on the trigger before a decision to shoot was actually made, and she may have been startled enough by the taser discharge to cause her trigger finger to flex enough to fire the weapon.

If this turns out to be the case, it would be another sad reminder of the importance of Rule 3.

The investigation will hopefully give us more information to learn from this tragic event.

nightmare69 wrote: a suspect not following commands and going back to his vehicle.

This right here is the root of most of these shootings. If people would just follow the instructions and commands of the officers, someone being shot could be avoided. However, people that do not respect any authority feel they are entitled to control the situation and do as they please end up dead and others get all riled up.

Whether or not this particular shooting was justified will be determined via the courts. However, most instances involving OIS could probably be avoided if the suspect would just comply with the officer's commands. When there is an unjustified OIS, I think the officer should be held accountable to the full extent of the law just as a non-officer would.

Liberty wrote:Bothers me that an instantaneous decision can be turned into a criminal charge. It looks to me from the information we have, that she was wrong. She probably shouldn't be a cop anymore but 4 years of prison for a cop is gonna be pretty rough. Its a fine line between Law enforcement and being a felon.
Prayers for her, cause she is probably a good person with a good heart, who screwed up with a twitch of her finger.

Yes, it's sobering to think that a single instantaneous and non-maliciously intended decision can turn into 4 years in prison in the blink of an eye. It's also sobering that the same instantaneous decision ended a life with no 4 year limit on death.

And under slightly different circumstances, a half second hesitation in firing can end up in a dead officer.

This is the real world LEO's live in, call after call, day after day and year after year.

It's also the world an LTC enters when he or she becomes involved in a situation where a firearm is drawn.

carlson1 wrote:Jumping to conclusions places you in the same vehicle as the BLM. Wait until the investigation is complete. As far as the DA thinking they have enough evidence so did the DA in Baltimore.

She freaked out, panicked, and shot him. It was not necessary in my opinion.

Leftist have done such a terrific job that it has left our finest on edge, with all stuff we see against LE. What's occuring in isolated incidents now is that some who perhaps never should have gotten that job have been turned into overreacting nervous nellies.

carlson1 wrote:Jumping to conclusions places you in the same vehicle as the BLM. Wait until the investigation is complete. As far as the DA thinking they have enough evidence so did the DA in Baltimore.

Agreed - why join the BLM, the MSM, politicians, POTUS and Justice Department in rushing to judgement?

This age of instant gratification has morphed from people wanting everything (possessions) now to people wanting everything right now!

Social media has become the scourge of society, in my humble opinion.

TexasTornado wrote:

nightmare69 wrote:One officer drawing a firearm and another going non letal is very common. The officers didn't know what the suspect was going to pull out of his vehicle. All LEOs have seen the video of the deputy who was killed by a Vietnam veteran who retrieved a rifle from his truck because the officer hesitated. His death screams are bone chilling.

I would have drawn my firearm also because you have a suspect not following commands and going back to his vehicle. If he pulls a firearm I'm ready to return fire. I don't wanna have a taser in my hand and he was a .45. It only takes a second to reholster and go non lethal.

Thanks for the insight. I can see how have having both options would be advantageous. It's hard to speculate what was in her mind at the time, I would seriously hate to be a juror on this one.

Another thing to take into context is she was the first officer to respond. This is pure speculation on my part, but her being a woman and the size of the gentleman, I can understand why she drew her firearm.

Prayers for all involved, it's a tough situation all around.

It is obvious BOTH Officers perceived a threat. You don't taser someone just for grins either. At the moment, we have no audio so it is hard to say what happened and when. Did the Female Officer fire first, then the taser was fired, or was the taser fired first, with no visible effect, and then she fired. This was a big guy. They found PCP in his car and he had a history of PCP use. Maybe the taser did nothing and the Female Officer only had that 1/2 second to react. The facts will come out. I hope she can get a non-political trial.

If you look back on the officer involved shootings in the past few years there is usually one common denominator... Non Compliance by the suspect. When I began my career in law enforcement in 1977, that was a rare occurrence on minor infractions unless the suspect was very intoxicated and mentally unable to process the requests of the officer or other extenuating factors. The non compliance did begin to increase slightly over the years but nothing to level it is today. When I retired in 2005, it was still not too bad but the increasingly "militarization" of our LEOs along with the increased media coverage of various "activists" I believe, has increased this non compliance or animosity if you will towards the police. Upon my return to LE in December in 2015 I soon realized that non compliance was the norm, not the exception even for the most minor of infractions. Since I had not been in it for a decade this behavior became quickly apparent to me. Fortunately my current job does not involve answering calls for service and most of my public interactions are in a somewhat control environment of the municipal courthouse. When we do go out on warrant sweeps we usually have additional manpower and the suspect is known to us. I have no magic solution to all this but I can tell you that there is a definite heightened state of awareness among LEOs in this country. The local law enforcement agencies in my area have a pretty good rapport with our citizens and except for the SWAT teams still wear the "conventional style" uniforms that have been abandoned in several of your major metropolitan agencies for more military style uniforms.