Officer kills armed civilian

[HoughMade]

So let's suppose he calls for backup...

"This is Officer Doe- I need backup"
- "What's the situation?"
"There's a guy working on a broken down car beside the road."
- "And"
"He's wearing a gun."
- "And is he pointing it or waving it around?"
"No, it's in a holster and he's leaning over under the hood."
-"OK, backup's on the way."

......I'm no police officer, but is it common to call for backup in a situation like this? I see being wary because he has a gun, but is that an automatic call for backup and to set up a perimeter? Now, when he gives instructions that aren't followed and then at least appears to be reaching for the gun, things change and the warimess turn to alarm...and I could see this, but chances are nothing is going to happen....but then again, the percentages don't always play out.

I imagine that there is a sizable number of situation when you make a judgment call to not call for backup when you, maybe, could. This is not incredible to me.

 

[Jaybird1980]

Why is he there, giving commands if no laws have been violated? If he was there to help then he wouldn't be giving commands would he?

 

[AlVine]

Hadn’t seen that. It’s depressing how law enforcement demonizes the victim, as if that somehow justifies killing him.

 

[Beowulf]

So let's suppose he calls for backup...

"This is Officer Doe- I need backup"
- "What's the situation?"
"There's a guy working on a broken down car beside the road."
- "And"
"He's wearing a gun."
- "And is he pointing it or waving it around?"
"No, it's in a holster and he's leaning over under the hood."
-"OK, backup's on the way."

......I'm no police officer, but is it common to call for backup in a situation like this? I see being wary because he has a gun, but is that an automatic call for backup and to set up a perimeter? Now, when he gives instructions that aren't followed and then at least appears to be reaching for the gun, things change and the warimess turn to alarm...and I could see this, but chances are nothing is going to happen....but then again, the percentages don't always play out.

I imagine that there is a sizable number of situation when you make a judgment call to not call for backup when you, maybe, could. This is not incredible to me.

If that isn't an automatic call for back up (and I don't see why it should be, if there is no sign of the person doing anything other than having a holstered or slung open carry weapon), then that begs the question of why the trooper's gun was drawn (as that's the only likely way Rightsell's gun was still in it's holster if the shooting went down as ISP said, unless the trooper is a quick draw artist).

That was my point. If the situation was considered dangerous enough that the trooper had to draw their weapon basically immediately, then there should have been a backup call before the encounter even started. Or is ISP claiming that the interaction started peaceably, but then Rightsell indicated that he was going to draw his gun and shoot the trooper for some reason, but didn't try to actually do it until after the trooper drew and aimed their gun? Because that's the only other way the scenario plays out like they said.

For example:

Officer Twitchy: Hello citizen, my name is Trooper Friendly and I'm just here to see if you need some help

Rightsell: Damn you and your friendly attitude. I'm going to draw this pistol right here and shoot you for being helpful.

Officer Twitchy: Now slow down their friend. Let's not escalate the situation at all.

Rightsell: Nope, I'm going to pull this pistol, that I'm not touching in any way currently, and shoot you.

Officer Twitchy: <draws his gun> Freeze, citizen. Don't make any sudden moves. I clearly am not agitated and definitely not on some crazy power trip. So, let's all calm down and de-escalate the situation.

Rightsell: That does. I'm going to shoot you dead <slowly reaches for his gun>

Officer Twitchy: <bang>. Now I'm going to take cover behind my car and call for backup, which I clearly had no reason to do before hand.

Rightsell: I'll just stand here bleeding. I will not touch my gun or try to get away. Your bullet of justice has changed my clearly criminal mind.

<end scene>

 

[Route 45]

This kind of thing is why I don't choose to insert a gun into every social interaction throughout my day by open carrying. The world is as it is, not as you want it to be. Officer Twitchy is out there. Discretion is the better part of valor.

 

[Jaybird1980]

This kind of thing is why I don't choose to insert a gun into every social interaction throughout my day by open carrying. The world is as it is, not as you want it to be. Officer Twitchy is out there. Discretion is the better part of valor.

Agree

 

[lonehoosier]

This kind of thing is why I don't choose to insert a gun into every social interaction throughout my day by open carrying. The world is as it is, not as you want it to be. Officer Twitchy is out there. Discretion is the better part of valor.

Yeah, because no one has ever been shot reaching for a concealed gun that was never there. What a big pile of steaming

 

[churchmouse]

Lets all take a deep breath.......again.

 

[Sigblitz]

Me, three days ago, looking at this brand new thread: Hmm, that could be interesting. I'll check it a bit later to see how it progresses and what sort of conversations are coming out of it.

Me, today, seeing this at 48 pages:

It's not that bad. You bought pizza.

 

[Route 45]

Yeah, because no one has ever been shot reaching for a concealed gun that was never there. What a big pile of steaming

So...he did reach for the gun? Because you can't have it both ways.

Either the Troop saw the gun, and that changed the dynamics of the situation, or it's irrelevant how the gun was carried because our victim, St. OpenDeCarry, did actually reach for the gun.

Which is it? Or is your comment just a big pile of steaming butthurt at any suggestion that maybe open carry isn't all puppy dogs and rainbows?

 

[churchmouse]

Last time fellas. Seriously.

 

[churchmouse]

New conversation over here......https://www.indianagunowners.com/fo...shooting-identified-but-questions-remain.html