Police Kill Man Who Answered Door With Gun In Hand

[buckwacker]

This is a b.s. shoot.

Guy did not "fling door open". He stepped outside quickly with gun in hand. GF said someone knocking and running after dark happened days ago, guy was likely annoyed, trying to catch whoever was knocking and running. That's what his body language tells me, with the additional info provided by GF.
Upon seeing officers he appeared to try to put the gun out of view and immediately starts to his knees. This is an obvious act of compliance. Again body language says he recognizes that officers are at his door and is trying to mitigate any appearances of a threat to officers. Officer shoots anyway, I to his back/side.
This is HIS home. He is within his rights to protect it. In my view the onus is on an officer, not the relatively untrained citizen, to show the most restraint. The citizen did, the officer didn't.
Officers seemed annoyed/in a hurry on the call. Is this how they were trained to handle domestic calls? Walk up, rap door while quickly yelling "Phoenix police". Seems very sloppy and haphazard.
Not a good shoot. Officer needs to find a different line of work if he isn't able to make these sorts of split second decisions.

 

[john110]

I say a bad shoot. Looks like he is going to his knees and lowering his weapon. But oh well he’ll be cleared by his friends.

 

[jedi]

[video=youtube_share;kJycEIZCFDY]https://youtu.be/kJycEIZCFDY[/video]
Summary neighbor called in a fake domestic cause they were playing video games too loud. Guy answers for with gun cuase they had been robbed before and its 10pm.

 

[Jaybird1980]

[video=youtube_share;kJycEIZCFDY]https://youtu.be/kJycEIZCFDY[/video]
Summary neighbor called in a fake domestic cause they were playing video games too loud. Guy answers for with gun cuase they had been robbed before and its 10pm.

So what happens to caller?

 

[jedi]

Jedis guess DA will not press charges on caller.
Guys family should sue him.

 

[KLB]

From my experience in situations like this on INGO there are a few opinions given.
1) Officer shot too soon and should be prosecuted
2) Officer shot too late and put his partner at risk.
3) Officer did a great job!
Not sure I remember many of option 3

When did I say anything about an officer shooting an innocent person doing a great job?

1. Situations like this (Innocent person shot by police)
2. Choice 3, Officer did a great job!
3. You don't remember many choosing option 3

So, if the man shot in this situation was innocent, why would anyone choose option 3(which you don't remember many people choosing)?

 

[FishersCPA]

Neighbor "Yea, I can say that there is physical assaults, if that will get you to respond sooner..." REALLY? Why not just report a murder to get them there the fastest?

I am a blue supporter and their job is one of the most difficult with dire consequences if they get it wrong (either way) but there is NO WAY that this is a legit shoot or even a legal one. Cop behind the victim is WAY too quick to pull the trigger. Yes, the cops announced themselves and took protective positions on either side of the doorway but realistically, who would hear the announcement unless you were standing on the other side of the door. Right now, imagine the same thing happening to your front door, could you realistically hear and understand who was banging on your door. The victim IMMEDIATELY responded to the officer in front of him by dropping the weapon down and dropping to his knees in response the officer. The 2nd officer was way too jumpy and pulled the trigger without understanding or even registering the fact that the victim was going down.

It was obviously an accidental homicide and in no way a justifiable shoot.

 

[Gluemanz28]

1. Situations like this (Innocent person shot by police)
2. Choice 3, Officer did a great job!
3. You don't remember many choosing option 3

So, if the man shot in this situation was innocent, why would anyone choose option 3(which you don't remember many people choosing)?

I guess I need to clarify a bit more. My statement about situations like this was a general statement made by the internet investigators making judgement calls from their recliners. So no I don’t think shooting an innocent person is ok. Who in their right mind would think otherwise.

 

[ajeandy]

I wouldn’t have even opened the door...I never do.

 

[Biggredchev]

+1. There's a strong cognitive dissonance with opening a door while armed. If you don't think there's a potential danger, then why do you have a gun in your hand? And if you think there's a potential danger, then wtf would you open the door, or go anywhere near it?

I wonder how people with that kind of logic even go outside. If someone is knocking on your door these days its either the police, salesmen, or someone in serious distress. A criminal isnt going to knock.

 

[ajeandy]

Jedis guess DA will not press charges on caller.
Guys family should sue him.

100% Making a fake call into 911 should be automatic jail time.

 

[Route 45]

I wonder how people with that kind of logic even go outside. If someone is knocking on your door these days its either the police, salesmen, or someone in serious distress. A criminal isnt going to knock.

Burglars often knock to see if someone is home before breaking into a house. If someone answers, they put on an act. ("Have you seen my dog, I need directions," etc.) If not, they break in.

Sometimes, the knocking on the door is just to gain easy entry.

[video=youtube;Qcw1o3mI080]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qcw1o3mI080[/video]

 

[Hatin Since 87]

100% Making a fake call into 911 should be automatic jail time.

Agree 100%

Only issue is proving it was done with the intent of being false. In the world today they condone “if you see something say something”, it encourages people to call the police based on no evidence. If they heard a movie that had a husband and wife fighting it could easily be mistaken for domestic disputes, and potentially ruin a family.

 

[dudley0]

Burglars often knock to see if someone is home before breaking into a house. If someone answers, they put on an act. ("Have you seen my dog, I need directions," etc.) If not, they break in.

Sometimes, the knocking on the door is just to gain easy entry.

That is some scary crap right there. Sad that we shouldn't even try to help people any longer.

 

[LP1]

That is some scary crap right there. Sad that we shouldn't even try to help people any longer.

Yeah, it's scary, but it's nothing new - pretending to need help is a very old ruse. The false narrative of demonizing others is being spread by the people who want to sell fear and division - don't buy into it. People today are, well, people - some good, some not.

 

[ajeandy]

Very hard to watch....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R49P9TuFLOQ

This perspective also shows the shooting officer's perspective:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gnA17NkTOww&t=1s

 

[ajeandy]

Burglars often knock to see if someone is home before breaking into a house. If someone answers, they put on an act. ("Have you seen my dog, I need directions," etc.) If not, they break in.

Sometimes, the knocking on the door is just to gain easy entry.

[video=youtube;Qcw1o3mI080]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qcw1o3mI080[/video]

Also, nope x100. You are not coming in my house under any circumstances unless I know you and you're invited in. Good luck trying to force your way through the doors as well.

 

[RetiredSergeant10]

We can look at the footage all day long. Since we were not there, our opinions are not relevant. No police officer goes to work thinking that he/she will have to kill someone. One must prepare one's self for the possibility, but no one goes out with a "hunting license." The silliness generated from these incidents usually revolves around the "felony lottery", where a criminal's family looks to cash in after a criminal is provided with their just desserts. Of course, pandering politicians go along for this ride too as they want everybody to vote for them. Chicago, Seattle, Portland, LA, and some other cities are reaping the benefits of that stupidity. In most police agencies, after an officer discharges their firearm in a lethal force encounter, there is a microscopic internal investigation, followed by a prosecutor's review, and in some cases, a criminal investigation. No one here wants to go through that. As valuable as videos are from a learning standpoint, they fail on the opinion standpoint. And, for those that just cannot help it and throw their two cents in, bravo. Now put your money where your mouth is and apply at your local PD. They are always looking for great recruits.

 

[ajeandy]

We can look at the footage all day long. Since we were not there, our opinions are not relevant. No police officer goes to work thinking that he/she will have to kill someone. One must prepare one's self for the possibility, but no one goes out with a "hunting license." The silliness generated from these incidents usually revolves around the "felony lottery", where a criminal's family looks to cash in after a criminal is provided with their just desserts. Of course, pandering politicians go along for this ride too as they want everybody to vote for them. Chicago, Seattle, Portland, LA, and some other cities are reaping the benefits of that stupidity. In most police agencies, after an officer discharges their firearm in a lethal force encounter, there is a microscopic internal investigation, followed by a prosecutor's review, and in some cases, a criminal investigation. No one here wants to go through that. As valuable as videos are from a learning standpoint, they fail on the opinion standpoint. And, for those that just cannot help it and throw their two cents in, bravo. Now put your money where your mouth is and apply at your local PD. They are always looking for great recruits.

That's fine, but at the end of the day someone is dead. The officer who shot and killed him never had a gun raised at him, he perhaps didn't even see the gun, he just heard gun and lit the guy up. At the end of the day, if it was a bad shot, someone is held liable. I understand that it's a tremendously difficult job but that doesn't justify it being "ok" if someone gets killed and it's not justified.

 

[KLB]

We can look at the footage all day long. Since we were not there, our opinions are not relevant. No police officer goes to work thinking that he/she will have to kill someone. One must prepare one's self for the possibility, but no one goes out with a "hunting license." The silliness generated from these incidents usually revolves around the "felony lottery", where a criminal's family looks to cash in after a criminal is provided with their just desserts. Of course, pandering politicians go along for this ride too as they want everybody to vote for them. Chicago, Seattle, Portland, LA, and some other cities are reaping the benefits of that stupidity. In most police agencies, after an officer discharges their firearm in a lethal force encounter, there is a microscopic internal investigation, followed by a prosecutor's review, and in some cases, a criminal investigation. No one here wants to go through that. As valuable as videos are from a learning standpoint, they fail on the opinion standpoint. And, for those that just cannot help it and throw their two cents in, bravo. Now put your money where your mouth is and apply at your local PD. They are always looking for great recruits.

I disagree with you on whether "our" opinions are relevant. The public that officers are supposed to serve have every right to have opinions when those officers take a life in the performance of that duty.