Denver PD commit mass shooting

[L84Cabo]

The article says six were injured and in the article it confirms that three were shot. Do we know if the other three were actually shot or were they "injured" because they fell down or something?

 

[SavageGerbil]

Ugh, that's not the kind of headline I wanted to see again. You guys remember that incident in New York some years back? Day one news, mass shooting, 10 or 11 people shot! Day two, well...the police might've accidentally hit a person. Final unraveling, a guy shot a guy, and the police shot everyone else. These guys need to be training under a Massad Ayoob, not a Yosemite Sam.

I agree with some of the previous posts, a lot of cops aren't enthusiasts, and the training done is likely more bullseye than anything. I'm no fan of a militarized police force, but lethal force encounters happen. You need to train the people that you've hired to potentially be in those kinds of situations well. It's necessary to protect both their own life, and the innocent people around them. This is insane, and should have been something present in the minds of the people involved.

Even going beyond marksmanship. I'm certain I'm not the only person in this thread that's explained the importance of expanding defensive ammo as being it's limiting effect on bullet pass-through, more than the additional stopping power.

 

[Yarome]

There certainly seems to be a real concern about what type of training LE is actually getting, or not.

I've seen several bodycam LE involved shooings lately and one common theme in nearly all of them has been the grossly poor muzzle discipline.

Flat out crossfiring each other, mag dumping, and one showed a cops bodycam while he held muzzle on target for several minutes while several of his buddies where securing the victim. I mean... the perp is down, you got 4 buddies on top of the guy securing him... and you're standing there maintaining muzzle on??

I understand that no amount of training can fully prepare you for pulling down on a live target for the first, but the routine level of incompetence is downright scary.

 

[Member 3687]

So just how many felony arrests have you made? How many bad actors have you caused to become incarcerated? How many family members and gang associates of the criminals you deal with on a daily basis would light you up on sight? Do you work a job where you have to have total focus and your head on a swivel for ten to sixteen hours a shift, not only because of the asshats that want to do you harm, but the asshats driving on the roads you patrol? Are you subject to mandatory overtime up to another eight hours every single shift you work? Trust me, if anyone needs to be exempted from some of the more stupid new gun laws in our states, it's the serving LEOs. Doesn't make any of this crap right, but let's even the playing field just a little in favor of the good guys, eh?

I am sorry to sound cold but if you cant do the job nobody is forcing you to stay in it.
You applied for it knowing what it was going to be like and if not, you still have chosen to stay.

I have never been in law enforcement but have delt with a lot of folks who are in the past and I will not play pissing match as to what I have done vs what you have done and who had more stress or who saved the most lives or put the most lives in danger.

We are all citizens of the US and unless I missed something we are all supposed to be equal under the law, so unless you are telling me something different and feel your above the rest of us because of your job then in my mind your a part of the problem along with all the politicians who feel the same.

I mean no disrespect as I do not know you and will admit you do a tough job but nobody is any more or less important than any other person no matter what job they have.

Time will tell if these officers were justified and I will wait for the report or the jury decision to tell us the findings not the news media.

But I still feel the same way as before, if a law is passed and exempts agencies or off duty officers from said law its wrong and it is more proof that its becoming a police state by treating its folks as second class citizens.

Just my opinion

 

[GWS]

Wasn't there some shooting in NYC 20-30 years ago with all sorts of cops shooting and dodging bullets and in the investigation later they determined that those bullets the police were dodging were from each other and the perp was unarmed?

 

[Member 3687]

Employees that work for government agencies don't have extra rights - they are performing a work function when they use or carry weapons as an extension of what that agency does.

There's a big difference between when an LEO pulls the trigger and when we do.

Where do you come up with this?

This is where I got it from and is there a big difference between when an LEO pulls the trigger and when we do?

Maybe I read more into it than you do and that's fine we are all different and have different ways of looking at things.

 

[Yarome]

Wasn't there some shooting in NYC 20-30 years ago with all sorts of cops shooting and dodging bullets and in the investigation later they determined that those bullets the police were dodging were from each other and the perp was unarmed?

I dunno about that particular incident, but it's certainly within the realm of believable. Now that bodycam footage is such a big thing, I'm often amazed at the sheer blind dumb luck that there are not more friendly fire incidents. It also makes you wonder how many might occur but never make it into public view... don't it(?)

Officer involved mass shootings is sure becoming a thing though lately.

I respect the job they are faced with, but that doesn't necessarily excuse the utter incompetence of the few making it all that much more difficult for the ones that are actually out there doing it right. We can't blanket condemn them all any more than law abiding gun owners being blamed for the wacked out yahoo's out there shooting up schools.

I agree though. It shouldn't absolve any individual from accountability... the same as any other citizen.

 

[American123]

It's always interesting to see the statists come out. "They are part of the government so they need additional opportunities/rights/protections that the rest if the citizenry doesn't. "

This type of thinking is why every gun control law in the history if this nation exists. Oh, would you look at that, government personnel are exempt from most of them. Obviously if government entities have the foresight to exempt themselves from laws, they understand them to be infringements on their ability/right to keep and bear arms.

Because you don't bother exempting yourself from something that doesn't have a negative impact on you.

Logic…

 

[RX-79G]

It's always interesting to see the statists come out. "They are part of the government so they need additional opportunities/rights/protections that the rest if the citizenry doesn't. "

This type of thinking is why every gun control law in the history if this nation exists. Oh, would you look at that, government personnel are exempt from most of them. Obviously if government entities have the foresight to exempt themselves from laws, they understand them to be infringements on their ability/right to keep and bear arms.

Because you don't bother exempting yourself from something that doesn't have a negative impact on you.

Logic…

The problem with this statement is that the police don't exempt themselves. Lawmakers create the exemptions, the exemptions apply to the role of LE (not individuals), and the exemptions don't apply to the people who created them.

Being given a larger magazine for work is not some sort of right. Having protections because the criteria for your use of lethal force are totally different than private citizens' is not a protection that shields an individual officer as much as it prevents police forces from being decimated by activism.

 

[Yarome]

The problem with this statement is that the police don't exempt themselves. Lawmakers create the exemptions...

The problem with this statement is that there are no laws that I am aware of (maybe there is?) that state a LE officer has immunity if they shoot an innocent bystander that poses no threat to an officer or others.

They simply choose not to charge or prosecute them. With enough public outrage they sometimes will... if it's blatant enough... but I very highly doubt, in this case, there was a single officer disarming and arresting any of the other officers that shot and injured any of the bystander victims.

It begs the question... why not?

I could be wrong though and there is in fact an "Oops, My Bad Clause".

 

[RX-79G]

The problem with this statement is that there are no laws that I am aware of (maybe there is?) that state a LE officer has immunity if they shoot an innocent bystander that poses no threat to an officer or others.

Then you are unaware of qualified immunity.

They simply choose not to charge or prosecute them.

Who is "they"? The members of a grand jury, who are private citizens like yourself? The lawmakers, who have nothing to do with this process?


Police officers are held to a different standard for work shootings because they have a different duty than private citizens. You can use your gun to protect yourself and others. Cops have to use guns to not only stop a threat but take that person into custody, and it is recognized that this can be a messy process because the perp is shooting back or taking hostages.

However, any departure from normal procedure egregious enough could put a cop on the wrong side of a grand jury, which is why we sometimes see police found guilty of murder.



(It is so interesting to see gun forums migrate from banning anyone who criticizes LE to essentially repeating the rhetoric of BLM. But conservatives are constantly reinventing themselves.)

 

[Yarome]

Then you are unaware of qualified immunity

If you understood the law of what qualified immunity's intent and letter of law, then you would be aware of how it has been abused by those entrusted with enforcing law to provide umbrella protections that it did not intend. Rather, chosing to turn a blind eye instead and claiming qualified immunity.

Most importantly, qualifed immunity only applies to civil lawsuits and does NOT protect against criminal prosecution.

If you knew how a grand jury works, then you would also know it's not up to the people on that grand jury to choses the cases put before them for consideration. Derrrrrrrrrr..........

(It is so interesting to see gun forums migrate from banning anyone who criticizes LE to essentially repeating the rhetoric of BLM. But conservatives are constantly reinventing themselves.)

You just can't help yourself can you. Gotta get those "digs" in....

 

[RX-79G]

Most importantly, qualifed immunity only applies to civil lawsuits and does NOT protect against criminal prosecution.

You didnt say criminal immunity, did you?

If you knew how a grand jury works, then you would also know it's not up to the people on that grand jury to choses the cases put before them for consideration.

And even when it does end up before the Grand Jury, citizens usually find officers were acting in line with the law and Department guidelines.


Why don't you go back and change what you meant to say (but didn't) again?
Derrrrrrr.

 

[Yarome]

Why don't you go back and change what you meant to say (but didn't) again?
Derrrrrrr.

Sorry. You got one reply from me and that's my troll feeding limit for the day. (I'm learning )

Move on and Enjoy the nice weather!

 

[Certaindeaf]

This is why I always wear my B-27 silhouette shirt.

 

[Member 3687]

(It is so interesting to see gun forums migrate from banning anyone who criticizes LE to essentially repeating the rhetoric of BLM. But conservatives are constantly reinventing themselves.)

I guess the conversation changes when you watch officers not doing much at Sandy Hook, Uvalde and see several videos like the one this thread is about, and then are reminded that they do not have to help you and many, not all, we have seen won't or are ordered not to, an order they chose to follow. So, one wonders what other orders are they willing to follow.

It may not sound like it but I do support my local law enforcement and I know a number of them personally and I have shot competition with others and feel they are doing a good job for our community.

I also understand many departments are under staffed and under funded thanks to our politicians but where does that leave me and my family, un protected and having to defend myself as there is no one else I can count on.

I know crime is up, even where I live and if your busy stopping a bad crime, you're not there to help me, that's just a fact.

My beef is not with the street cops its with the politicians and leadership who feel I should not have the tools to protect my self, yet feel it important for the city or state to have the tools to protect itself. Who are they protecting itself from, Me, my family the town folk they say they are protecting.

I am lucky as I currently live in a state that does not limit my ability to have what my local law enforcement has. I wish to keep it this way and am willing to speak up every chance I have to protect all our rights.

So, if this makes me think like BLM then so be it, because until things change many states are becoming police states whether you like it or not.

 

[RX-79G]

I guess the conversation changes when you watch officers not doing much at Sandy Hook, Uvalde and see several videos like the one this thread is about, and then are reminded that they do not have to help you and many, not all, we have seen won't or are ordered not to, an order they chose to follow. So, one wonders what other orders are they willing to follow.

It may not sound like it but I do support my local law enforcement and I know a number of them personally and I have shot competition with others and feel they are doing a good job for our community.

I also understand many departments are under staffed and under funded thanks to our politicians but where does that leave me and my family, un protected and having to defend myself as there is no one else I can count on.

I know crime is up, even where I live and if your busy stopping a bad crime, you're not there to help me, that's just a fact.

My beef is not with the street cops its with the politicians and leadership who feel I should not have the tools to protect my self, yet feel it important for the city or state to have the tools to protect itself. Who are they protecting itself from, Me, my family the town folk they say they are protecting.

I am lucky as I currently live in a state that does not limit my ability to have what my local law enforcement has. I wish to keep it this way and am willing to speak up every chance I have to protect all our rights.

So, if this makes me think like BLM then so be it, because until things change many states are becoming police states whether you like it or not.

But this thread is definitely calling for the punishment of specific officers for what amounts incompetence or simple error. Not policy or the policy makers.

 

[Member 3687]

But this thread is definitely calling for the punishment of specific officers for what amounts incompetence or simple error. Not policy or the policy makers.

I cannot speak for anyone else just my self and like I said in another post I will wait for the jury or the report to see if it was justified and hope it was all done correctly.

I just know that if I did something wrong or made a mistake that hurt 6 folks, you don't think I would be fried and drug through the mud. Even if I am found innocent I would get sued into oblivion with civil suits.

So, yes folks want people to be held accountable and many vent their frustration on forums, I know I do and sometimes at the heat of the moment it does not come out the way they wanted it to and some times it does, but its better to release stress hear than on the streets.

 

[American123]

The problem with this statement is that the police don't exempt themselves. Lawmakers create the exemptions, the exemptions apply to the role of LE (not individuals), and the exemptions don't apply to the people who created them.

Being given a larger magazine for work is not some sort of right. Having protections because the criteria for your use of lethal force are totally different than private citizens' is not a protection that shields an individual officer as much as it prevents police forces from being decimated by activism.

Still advocating for different rules simply by the distinction of working for the state or not. Still statist in belief, regardless.

Politicians who pass these laws often have armed security by the very people they are giving exemptions too. It is still the government saying, "we need this right, you don't." And that insinuation also simultaneously projects their belief that they are more important than other Americans.

Trying to argue otherwise doesn't really prove anything other than how well statism has deceived people that it isn't statism.

Police carry guns to protect themselves while they enforce the law. People don't have any less "right" to protect themselves, and saying the police need "more firepower" than civilians to protect themselves simply because they are the police and acting for the state is again, statist…

 

[RX-79G]

Still advocating for different rules simply by the distinction of working for the state or not. Still statist in belief, regardless.

Politicians who pass these laws often have armed security by the very people they are giving exemptions too. It is still the government saying, "we need this right, you don't." And that insinuation also simultaneously projects their belief that they are more important than other Americans.

Trying to argue otherwise doesn't really prove anything other than how well statism has deceived people that it isn't statism.

Police carry guns to protect themselves while they enforce the law. People don't have any less "right" to protect themselves, and saying the police need "more firepower" than civilians to protect themselves simply because they are the police and acting for the state is again, statist…

Police don't "just protect themselves". They force compliance in a way we don't.

Very few politicians have LE security

Now please use the word 'statist' eight times to dismiss my post while failing to address my points.