Cane = Gun?

Discussion in 'General Firearm Discussion' started by RicInOR, Feb 27, 2014.

  1. RicInOR

    RicInOR
    Washington County
    Bronze Supporter Bronze Supporter

    Messages:
    4,572
    Likes Received:
    6,692
    SC officer shoots man reaching for cane - The Washington Post

    Based only on the news report, this is a tragedy - I don't think the officer was thinking wrongly.

    Reminders for us all:
    - Unless the police order you out of the vehicle, stay inside
    - If you need to reach for something, tell the officer first
    - If we had shot someone going for a cane, we'd be in jail
    - Yes, there are cane guns.
     
  2. Sgt Nambu

    Sgt Nambu
    Oregon
    Bronze Supporter Bronze Supporter

    Messages:
    8,588
    Likes Received:
    14,211
    STOP!!! DROP THAT (BANG, BANG, BANG) WHATEVER IT IS!!! Really, I can see how this can happen having to shoot several times to put one on the old man, whom, one would assume was at point blank range! The police are terrified because they can't eFFing shoot! They need automatic weapons so they can feel secure.
     
  3. Chee-to

    Chee-to
    Oregon
    Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,307
    Likes Received:
    1,827
    “It does appear, at this time, that Deputy Knox’s actions were an appropriate response to what he reasonably believed to be an imminent threat to his life.”

    Ya right, .................Horse puckey.......
     
    Outdoorxj and (deleted member) like this.
  4. GrpCapMandrake

    GrpCapMandrake
    Vancouver
    Active Member

    Messages:
    234
    Likes Received:
    237
    Appropriate response my butt.
     
    Outdoorxj and (deleted member) like this.
  5. Sstrand

    Sstrand
    La Grande OR
    Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,927
    Likes Received:
    3,214
    Let's hear from some "Good Coppers" on this one . . .
    Are either of you willing to speak up???

    Sheldon
     
    Outdoorxj and (deleted member) like this.
  6. PaulZ

    PaulZ
    Oregon City
    Active Member

    Messages:
    583
    Likes Received:
    191
    Don't make sudden moves, show your hands, smile, be polite. It stands to reason; you don't know what kind of day that cop is having. Make it as comfortable as possible for everyone.
     
  7. wichaka

    wichaka
    Wa State
    Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,353
    Likes Received:
    756
    Contrary to popular belief, an Officer does not have to wait to see a dangerous weapon, or have it pointed at them, or an overt attempt to employ it on them before taking action.

    Action will always beat reaction, there's no arguing that point.

    But can't really comment until the report is released.

    Did the officer ask the man to get out of the vehicle?

    At the time the man was reaching in the bed of the truck, was the man ordered to stop?

    Not enough info., but apparently there's enough for a lynching here.
     
  8. wichaka

    wichaka
    Wa State
    Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,353
    Likes Received:
    756
    Also, one needs to know the rules of engagement for that state.

    Hard to apply the rules of law to an incident, if one doesn't know the rules...law.
     
    hker71 likes this.
  9. Roland

    Roland
    SE Portland
    New Member

    Messages:
    28
    Likes Received:
    19
    I haven't been pulled over in a while, but between the ages of 23and 33 I was pulled over 4 times for speeding or running a red. Each time, I was very polite, admitted my violation, listened to the policeman lecture me, then while not making an excuse I would ask for leniency citing financial difficulties and promising to be a more attentive driver. All 4 times I was let off with a warning. Now I just try and not break the laws of the road. Point is, most police are quite nice and just concerned about the safety of the public, and their own safety too. Be polite and demonstrate that you also respect safety any time you are pulled over.
     
  10. GrpCapMandrake

    GrpCapMandrake
    Vancouver
    Active Member

    Messages:
    234
    Likes Received:
    237
    "Don't make sudden moves, show your hands, smile, be polite. It stands to reason; you don't know what kind of day that cop is having."

    I don't know what kind of day that cop was having?! Who the heck cares what kind of day he/she is having. I have had some horrendous days in my life and I have never pulled a gun let alone shot someone. If a cop can't separate their bad days from their work and they choose to hide behind their badge and take it out on people they deserve to be thrown off the force.

    "Contrary to popular belief, an Officer does not have to wait to see a dangerous weapon, or have it pointed at them, or an overt attempt to employ it on them before taking action."

    So the cops get to just go around shooting people at will because they "might have a weapon"? Something tells me that is not right. Oh that's right it's my basic moral compass. I could also point to RCW 9A.16.040(2)(a) which states "(a) The suspect threatens a peace officer with a weapon or displays a weapon in a manner that could reasonably be construed as threatening"
     
  11. Hook686

    Hook686
    Northern California
    Active Member

    Messages:
    662
    Likes Received:
    226
    Kind of like those that want 'Assault rifles' and thirty round magazines eh ?
     
  12. Fast Eddie

    Fast Eddie
    Vancouver
    Bronze Supporter Bronze Supporter

    Messages:
    690
    Likes Received:
    667
    Agreed, It's not a magic wand, but mom was right, "good manners don't cost you anything".
     
  13. Stomper

    Stomper
    Ungovernable!
    Become Ungovernable! Gold Supporter

    Messages:
    14,241
    Likes Received:
    24,932
    Don't be a hater just cuz the Kahlifohrniastan elites won't let you have one! ;)
     
  14. wichaka

    wichaka
    Wa State
    Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,353
    Likes Received:
    756

    Since ya brought it up...

    Depending on the incident...yes.



    In the case above involving the cane, it doesn't fit. As there was no probable cause to believe that the suspect has committed any crime involving the infliction or threatened infliction of serious physical harm.

    I would hope that most states would mirror Tennessee v. Garner, but some are more restrictive.

    Like the law or not, when applying law to an incident, one's "Basic moral compass" is not allowed into the mix.

    The reasonableness standard started with the court case Graham v Connor 490 U.S. 386 (1989), where 3 issues of 'reasonableness' surfaced about the police use of force;

    1 - What was the severity of the crime that the officer believed the suspect to have committed or be committing?

    2 - Did the suspect present an immediate threat to the safety of officer(s) or the public?

    3 - Was the suspect actively resisting arrest or attempting to escape?


    "The calculus of reasonableness must embody allowance for the fact that police officers are often forced to make split-second judgments in circumstances that are tense, uncertain, and rapidly evolving - about the amount of force that is necessary in a particular situation." -- Graham v. Connor, 490 U.S. 386, 396-397 (1989)

    Supreme Court's insistence in Graham v. Connor is that the relevant facts and circumstances are those confronting the officer(s) at the moment, not a 20/20 hindsight review judgement.

    The U.S. Supreme Court has held that reasonableness under the fourth amendment does not require police officers to choose the least intrusive alternative, only a reasonable one. Following that principle, most courts have rejected arguments that the use of deadly force was not necessary because officers had less intrusive options available or it was made necessary by the actions of the officers themselves.



    Do you find any morality in there? Should some be involved in such decisions? That can be argued. But what I think is more important, is good ol' common sense, which seems to be lacking in many facets of our lives.
     
  15. wichaka

    wichaka
    Wa State
    Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,353
    Likes Received:
    756

    I don't see the need for one in LE work. Its not like we have a need to lay down suppressive fire.
     
    Hook686 and (deleted member) like this.
  16. Nightcrawler

    Nightcrawler
    Snohomish County, WA
    Active Member

    Messages:
    202
    Likes Received:
    113
  17. Outdoorxj

    Outdoorxj
    Wilsonville
    Active Member

    Messages:
    185
    Likes Received:
    57
    or skittles and Arizona teas like some wanna be cops
     
  18. GrpCapMandrake

    GrpCapMandrake
    Vancouver
    Active Member

    Messages:
    234
    Likes Received:
    237
    "The U.S. Supreme Court has held that reasonableness under the fourth amendment does not require police officers to choose the least intrusive alternative, only a reasonable one. Following that principle, most courts have rejected arguments that the use of deadly force was not necessary because officers had less intrusive options available or it was made necessary by the actions of the officers themselves."

    I appreciate your response. It was very detailed. Unfortunately just because the government has licensed the murder of unarmed civilians by a group sworn to "serve and protect" still doesn't make it right, reasonable or justified. However I am pretty sure I am not going to sway your opinion on this matter. We could both go on and on posting precedents, regulations and debating the law, but those rarely turn out well on the internet where communication is hindered severely. So lets simply agree to disagree on the "reasonable use of force" issue.
     
    40calruler and (deleted member) like this.
  19. DeanfromOregon

    DeanfromOregon
    Wilsonville
    Amateur Ascended Master Platinum Supporter

    Messages:
    827
    Likes Received:
    985
  20. Stomper

    Stomper
    Ungovernable!
    Become Ungovernable! Gold Supporter

    Messages:
    14,241
    Likes Received:
    24,932
    Except you KNOW as well as everyone else (because multiple witnesses testified) that the skittle-head-wannabe MMA fighter who fancied himself a street thug attacked the wannabe cop, and got himself shot.

    Clearly Zimmerman is a PUTZ, but there is culpability on Martin's part, too.
     

Share This Page