Corvallis - Officer runs from man with knife to avoid shooting him

[EPS]

I assume they were mentioned because if officer #3 ran off like a little girl as officer #1 did, his long guns would have been accessible the knife wielding psycho.

That is exactly why they were mentioned

 

[American123]

Maybe you meant this event?

Murder of Kitty Genovese - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Aloha, Mark

PS.....look up/search: Duty To Protect

There is plenty of real case history to read about.

I had the state wrong, but reading through this is a disgusting example of why everyone should plan to self rescue.

Warren v. District of Columbia - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

I'm not sure what you are implying by your P.S. suggesting looking up case law as it seems very straightforward that police have no duty to protect individuals based on any basic internet search done.

 

[ma96782]

I'm not sure what you are implying by your P.S. suggesting looking up case law as it seems very straightforward that police have no duty to protect individuals based on any basic internet search done.

The "PS part"......
Is/Was in an effort to inform people/get people more interested......
In reading.......about the complex subject.

Because, no matter what.......just like suing gun manufacturers.......there are lawsuits AND the outcomes can vary widely.

Note that even a settlement (especially large ones) can be seen as a VICTORY to some people.

Aloha, Mark

PS.....to expand on the case you mentioned. "Special Relationship".

Consider.....

"When do/does the police have (or have created) that SPECIAL relationship?"

Example: Say that a woman frequently calls the police to report abuse. Say sometimes if/whenever.......her sometimes abusive boyfriend (or ex-) has come around? Yet, the police do not follow through with an arrest. Mostly due to the subject having already fled the area or a "lack" of resources or a commitment to see the original complaint through.

 

[bbbass]

That is exactly why they were mentioned

Full disclosure: I went to work at the 2-way radio shop in 1980, worked there til '93, then again from 2004 to 2013. One of my tasks was to install ALL the equip inside cop cars, patrol vehicles, fire, amb, SWAT, etc. It takes about a week for one man to install all that stuff.... light bar, wigwags, spotlight, vehicle cam, remote audio, radio console, siren, computer mount, roll bar, plexiglas/wire divider, sterile bench seat in back, and LONG GUN MOUNT.

Once again, per my earlier post... This is an example of a long gun mount, although they also make a double mount for rifle and shotgun, and many patrol rifles are kept locked (no LE dept is going to leave long guns casually leaning in a rack like you or I would have in our PU) inside the trunk instead of in the vehicle:



These mounts are LOCKED, and retrieval of the long gun is done electrically via a hidden button, or with a key. A criminal being able to find the button would need to steal the car and have it for an extended search, knowing there is a button somewhere.

So, MY question is: who is saying it was to protect the long guns? Was it an ignorant reporter, a LEO, or just members here espousing a THEORY???

 

[2ndtimer]

So, MY question is: who is saying it was to protect the long guns? Was it an ignorant reporter, a LEO, or just members here espousing a THEORY???

That was quoted in the article, as well as LEO comment in the video. I think the department trying to add more justification for the use of deadly force. As if being threatened verbally by an advancing knife wielding miscreant isn't sufficient justification.

 

[bbbass]

That was quoted in the article, as well as LEO comment in the video. I think the department trying to add more justification for the use of deadly force. As if being threatened verbally by an advancing knife wielding miscreant isn't sufficient justification.

Thanx for the info! (I didn't read the accompanying article and never have my sound on because, you know, WIFE!!!)

So the dept is doing CYA, cuz nobody knows any better, and reporter repeats what he hears from them. GOLDEN!!!

 

[EPS]

Thanx for the info! (I didn't read the accompanying article and never have my sound on because, you know, WIFE!!!)

So the dept is doing CYA, cuz nobody knows any better, and reporter repeats what he hears from them. GOLDEN!!!

Well I know they are locked most of the time.
But remember the seattle riots those kids got in a SPD car and got the rifle.
If it wasn't for the security with the news crew they would have got away with it.

 

[EPS]

 

[Member 53328]

That dude is a Marine. Doing more than any of the cops in that city.

 

[EPS]

If you go to YouTube and look at seattle rifle riots.
You will find a few videos and interviews with him .
They are too long to put on here.
But he actually retrieve two police rifle that day.
You can see in the video he had one already when he took the second one.

 

[American123]

The "PS part"......
Is/Was in an effort to inform people/get people more interested......
In reading.......about the complex subject.

Because, no matter what.......just like suing gun manufacturers.......there are lawsuits AND the outcomes can vary widely.

Note that even a settlement (especially large ones) can be seen as a VICTORY to some people.

Aloha, Mark

PS.....to expand on the case you mentioned. "Special Relationship".

Consider.....

"When do/does the police have (or have created) that SPECIAL relationship?"

Example: Say that a woman frequently calls the police to report abuse. Say sometimes if/whenever.......her sometimes abusive boyfriend (or ex-) has come around? Yet, the police do not follow through with an arrest. Mostly due to the subject having already fled the area or a "lack" of resources or a commitment to see the original complaint through.

Gotcha, yeah, I was a bit confused on which direction you were pointing with that.

In terms of looking up case law, it's pretty clear and has been supported through multiple suits being denied that police/agencies are not held responsible if they fail to protect the populace from criminals. Hence my staunch support/vocalization for anyone who doesn't desire to be a victim (especially women) to plan to self rescue.

I've never understood how the physically weaker gender, who are the victims of violence perpetrated most often by the physically stronger gender, do not take their self defense more seriously. Difference of the mind I suppose.

 

[Hawaiian]

In Oregon, the officer is not allowed to defend themselves against an armed attack. If they do, they will be charged for excessive use of force.

 

[EPS]

This is what the first cop should have done.

 

[American123]

This is what the first cop should have done.

Stupid they carry on an empty chamber though.

 

[EPS]

Stupid they carry on an empty chamber though.

Yep I don't know if all of them do .
Or just this guy .
Someone on here with more info on the military over there .

 

[Stomper]

Tickling is what tasers are for.

A new spin on a child's toy.... Tickle me Tazer!!

 

[Alexx1401]

This is what the first cop should have done.

Again some run and leave the wounded guy to fend for himself!!! WTF!!!

 

[EPS]

Again some run and leave the wounded guy to fend for himself!!! WTF!!!

I think they where running away because they knew what was coming.
LOL.
Like a guy with a M4 was going to start mag dumping in a close quarters ally surounded by rock walls.
Hehehe .
You can see the bullets go threw him and hit the wall behind him .
LOl

 

[revjen45]

1) "But it is your sworn duty to "serve and protect" and run toward danger."
Sworn duty and legal obligation are not the same thing.
2) "(no LE dept is going to leave long guns casually leaning in a rack like you or I would have in our PU)"
Just for the record I never casually leave any firearm in a vehicle.
3) "As if being threatened verbally by an advancing knife wielding miscreant isn't sufficient justification."
Unfortunately that's just the way it is. And it's not unintentional.
4) "Someone on here with more info on the military over there."
That was explained in the video. When IDF was started they got guns from everybody they could, and each one had its own manual of arms. As bad as it sucks, Cond.3 was the the only guaranteed safe carry mode for everything.
5) One more reason Cond.3 sucks: it takes both hands to bring the piece into action.

 

[bbbass]

Well I know they are locked most of the time.
But remember the seattle riots those kids got in a SPD car and got the rifle.
If it wasn't for the security with the news crew they would have got away with it.

I don't remember, but that's not unusual nowadays.

I imagine the kids had some time to find the button, or the occifer left the key in the mount or on the keyring in the ignition. Diff being that with officer #3 standing right there at the patrol car, that was not likely to happen unless the perp stabbed him and had some time to get the mount open.

Makes a good sound bite tho. And a corollary excuse for the shoot. I wonder what officer #3 says his reasoning was at the time, and if it included protecting the long guns. Given what you said about the Seattle riots, and how word gets around, I guess I wouldn't be surprised.