Other State Opinions On This Police Shooting.

[JohnnyMac]

The advantage with a camera over a peephole is evidence. The peep hole leaves you with a memory you can tell people who may or may not believe you. The camera gives you a video you can show to anyone.

Peepholes are traps! I have watched way too many movies where the Russian agent looks through the peephole to see who's knocking and is looking down the barrel of a British agent's Walther...... Nope, not me. I too have a smattering of WYZE cams about the house to prevent having to do that, because there is just no way in hell I'd open the door at night, unless I knew who was out there.......plain and simple. Of course, I wouldn't be beating my wife/girlfriend either. I also wouldn't be wearing those atrocious shorts. Those are soooo 2015.

 

[Ridge Walker]

So if someone knocks on your door in the middle of the night, and you are unaware of who it is you would just blindly open the door without any way to protect yourself? Nope, not me.

And cameras shouldn't be required for any reason.

If someone knocks on the door in the middle of the night, and I don't know who it is?

I ain't opening the door period. Nope, not me.

I am calling 911 and updating the calvary. They can tell the cops who the hell they are.

Last winter we had a poaching situation. Investigating it originally, I took my 40 CZ P-9 and a 12ga pump. Found a truck, returned to the house and called 911 and gave them the location. Then I went back and watched from a good distance to see the cops found it. When back up arrived, I was still unobserved and went back to the house and put up the guns. Then met the cops unarmed at the door to file the report when they were done.

Everybody came to the party dressed appropriately, and it worked out.

Cameras? Yes. Everywhere around the house here.

 

[bbbass]

The advantage with a camera over a peephole is evidence. The peep hole leaves you with a memory you can tell people who may or may not believe you. The camera gives you a video you can show to anyone.

Well, it would only be evidence if somebody stole a package off my porch, or if somebody busted the door in... in which case there would be a busted door and a body. Pretty self evident, no?

Ask Erin Andrews about cameras and peepholes!

Had to google that

LOL, those were great pics when they were still available! Just outstanding!! (poor gal, I don't want to seem unsympathetic. But I did find those pics once upon a time, only out of curiuosity so I guess I'm pathetic?). Looking at them now is a crime...

 

[American123]

Well, it would only be evidence if somebody stole a package off my porch, or if somebody busted the door in... in which case there would be a busted door and a body. Pretty self evident, no?





LOL, those were great pics when they were still available! Just outstanding!! (poor gal, I don't want to seem unsympathetic. But I did find those pics once upon a time, only out of curiuosity so I guess I'm pathetic?). Looking at them now is a crime...

Hell, for 55 million, someone can video me walking nude around my house! I'm sure I already give the neighbors that show for free lol

 

[No_Regerts]

Hell, for 55 million, someone can video me walking nude around my house! I'm sure I already give the neighbors that show for free lol

Thats hot chick privilege! She does it, she gets paid! We do it, we register as sex offenders!

 

[po18guy]

Since I was not there, do not know the individuals involved, or the totality of the circumstances, I dare not render an opinion. Watching the video gives a portion of the verbiage and physical actions, but not the mental processes. Was this a career criminal? A menatal health patient? A simple hot-head? Prior history of threats to the officer? In all such incidents, justifying aspects are what was in the officer's mind at the time he or she shot. Period. If the officer reasonably feared for their life, then deadly force was justified. THe argument over the content and meaning of "reasonably" can go on forever.

It is a dangerous age that we are entering into: trial by video cam. It shows the what (and only part of it at that), but not the why. Indeed, once the decision has been made to shoot, it is irrevocable. A chain reaction of decision to nerve signal to muscle contraction has occurred. A mini-nuclear reaction which cannot be stopped. Ever notice when you are typing you may reach the end of the word but still type another character and have to erase it? Same thing. There is an amount of time between decision and action, and in that space of time, the opponent may have decided to comply, but it came too late.

Training and experience enter in. A local officer was just charged with murder for shooting a supposedly knife-wielding druggie/mental casse who was resisting what had been a routine arrest. Was the decision made in part to appease BLM? You can bet on that. Justice falling prey to politics once again. In any event, it is not our job to decide in any given case - unless we sit on a jury.

 

[bbbass]

In any event, it is not our job to decide in any given case - unless we sit on a jury.

 

[pathfinder]

He was putting gun down with and with left hand up ,,,,,,unjustified shooting !!!!!!

 

[Hueco]

The guy was shot, in the back, at a downward angle. Do you guys even know about slo-mo or reduced playback speed?

We don't have access to the full, unedited video. Why?

How many of you have had a gun in hand on your own property? What is your normal reaction when you get a knock at night and see no one through the peep hole? I don't know what Whitaker saw, but both officers took up defensive positions that appear out of view.

Once he was shot, the officers FORBID his girlfriend from even being near him. They refused to give medical aid.

They didn't even give him the opportunity to utter one more goddamn phrase on this earth. That might not mean sh!t to you, but what would it have meant to his girlfriend or daughter?

The people that we are employed to be the arbiters of state power are, more and more, showing themselves unfit for duty. This guy did absolutely nothing wrong but he was killed because an officer felt "scared" and was too jumpy. I expect officers to be courageous, not shoot-first-justify-it-later-cause-they've-got-qualified-immunity people.

So...in your opinion, the state is allowed to play judge, jury, and executioner whenever a cop feels scared? Oh, then they're allowed to forbid humanity at point of death? Oh, and then they're allowed to not attempt medical aid? Christopher R. Browning was right, and if you don't know what I'm talking about, read Ordinary Men.

 

[cookie]

Hard to say - vid is not clear to me.

But it looks like the guy answering the door has the pistol behind his back with his hand on it?

How else would you answer the door?

 

[The Heretic]

How else would you answer the door?

Did it work for him?

Apparently not.

Had he not had his hand on the gun (if that is what he did) then he probably would not have been shot. Also, it appears to me he stepped out of the door and towards the officer. That I would not do, whether an officer or not, I don't think that was wise.

 

[HA556]

Also, it appears to me he stepped out of the door and towards the officer. That I would not do, whether an officer or not, I don't think that was wise.

It did appear to me also, that he came out toward them. Almost like he was expecting someone else. Hence the gun?

 

[No_Regerts]

How else would you answer the door?

"Who's There!"

 

[oldcorpgunny]

(Uses small brain) I had a knock on my door about 4 months ago. Around 11:30 at night. I grabbed my EDC and went to the door. I looked through the peephole first and realized it was indeed local LE. I put my gun away THEN answered the door. Apparently I had my soundbar up a little too high and the neighbor called. No harm no foul. First time I've EVER had LE knock on my door.

I had to call the cops on you 'cause I could here your Mexican music clear over here in Vancouver!

 

[Kruel J]

I had to call the cops on you 'cause I could here your Mexican music clear over here in Vancouver!

You don't know how close you actually are there, amigo.

 

[No_Regerts]

The guy was shot, in the back, at a downward angle. Do you guys even know about slo-mo or reduced playback speed?

We don't have access to the full, unedited video. Why?

How many of you have had a gun in hand on your own property? What is your normal reaction when you get a knock at night and see no one through the peep hole? I don't know what Whitaker saw, but both officers took up defensive positions that appear out of view.

Once he was shot, the officers FORBID his girlfriend from even being near him. They refused to give medical aid.

They didn't even give him the opportunity to utter one more goddamn phrase on this earth. That might not mean sh!t to you, but what would it have meant to his girlfriend or daughter?

The people that we are employed to be the arbiters of state power are, more and more, showing themselves unfit for duty. This guy did absolutely nothing wrong but he was killed because an officer felt "scared" and was too jumpy. I expect officers to be courageous, not shoot-first-justify-it-later-cause-they've-got-qualified-immunity people.

So...in your opinion, the state is allowed to play judge, jury, and executioner whenever a cop feels scared? Oh, then they're allowed to forbid humanity at point of death? Oh, and then they're allowed to not attempt medical aid? Christopher R. Browning was right, and if you don't know what I'm talking about, read Ordinary Men.

Before getting too fired up about what I'm about to say, read my previous posts on this where I said I didn't think the guy went out trying to get into a gunfight with a cop.

He was shot by the officer to his 7 o'clock, but he was facing the officer at his 12 o'clock. The shooter can engage to protect others.

I honestly think he was trying to put the gun down, and I know it may not be intuitive to drop it and get it all scratched up, but you gotta show both empty hands. Keeping the gun in your hand continues the threat.

I'm not sure about the slo-mo thing, but the use of slo-mo would be borderline sketchy in a shooting investigation because the courts have ruled that a use of force must be judged based on what a reasonable officer of similar training and experience would do, given the totality of circumstances. Hindsight can't be considered.

He was dispatched to a DV call, a knock and announcement occurred, and someone responded by coming out with a gun in their hand. what reasonable officer would believe the intentions would be anything but bad if you already told them who you were?

Lets say he didn't hear the cops identity themselves. He came out into public domain with gun in hand, not knowing what he was going into. That won't be seen as reasonable.

If you think a guy just came out trying to kill you, you're not allowing anything near that person until that gun is secured. You're fear of your life led you to shoot someone. Their last words don't matter at that point.

DV cases are strange because the victim will often become the assailant. It sucks, but no one is going to let her get to the gun and use it on you or move it.

As much as I feel the guy was trying to comply, he put himself in a position that had no margin for error.

 

[No_Regerts]

You don't know how close you actually are there, amigo.

True dat!

 

[oldcorpgunny]

Peepholes are traps! I have watched way too many movies where the Russian agent looks through the peephole to see who's knocking and is looking down the barrel of a British agent's Walther...... Nope, not me. I too have a smattering of WYZE cams about the house to prevent having to do that, because there is just no way in hell I'd open the door at night, unless I knew who was out there.......plain and simple. Of course, I wouldn't be beating my wife/girlfriend either. I also wouldn't be wearing those atrocious shorts. Those are soooo 2015.

My WYZE cameras are the model that you can rotate or move up and down via the phone app. I could even point one of them at our single neighbor lady that wears a bikini when she washes her boat, if I wanted to, but I don't 'cause that would be wrong and upset my wife who I love totally and sometimes reads my posts.

 

[Hueco]

Before getting too fired up about what I'm about to say, read my previous posts on this where I said I didn't think the guy went out trying to get into a gunfight with a cop.

He was shot by the officer to his 7 o'clock, but he was facing the officer at his 12 o'clock. The shooter can engage to protect others.

I honestly think he was trying to put the gun down, and I know it may not be intuitive to drop it and get it all scratched up, but you gotta show both empty hands. Keeping the gun in your hand continues the threat.

I'm not sure about the slo-mo thing, but the use of slo-mo would be borderline sketchy in a shooting investigation because the courts have ruled that a use of force must be judged based on what a reasonable officer of similar training and experience would do, given the totality of circumstances. Hindsight can't be considered.

He was dispatched to a DV call, a knock and announcement occurred, and someone responded by coming out with a gun in their hand. what reasonable officer would believe the intentions would be anything but bad if you already told them who you were?

Lets say he didn't hear the cops identity themselves. He came out into public domain with gun in hand, not knowing what he was going into. That won't be seen as reasonable.

If you think a guy just came out trying to kill you, you're not allowing anything near that person until that gun is secured. You're fear of your life led you to shoot someone. Their last words don't matter at that point.

DV cases are strange because the victim will often become the assailant. It sucks, but no one is going to let her get to the gun and use it on you or move it.

As much as I feel the guy was trying to comply, he put himself in a position that had no margin for error.

This is what a man looks like who is about to die.



Here's just before the first shot.



The time between these two is less than 1.5 seconds, probably closer to less than 1 second (but I lack the tools to determine)

Whitaker is allowed to live in a crap neighborhood.
He's allowed to carry a gun.
He's allowed to defend himself, his family, and his property.

The officers are clearly out of peephole sight. They shine a bright light in his face the moment he opens the door. These are not defensive maneuvers.

And yet, in the mere moment that it took to get within sight of the officer, Whitaker begins going to the ground.

He was shot for *having* a gun in police presence. Not for aiming it at anyone. No-one's life was in immediate danger just by a guy having a gun.

God help us all if we ever have to use our concealed carry piece and the cops show up right as we're back in low ready, attempting to re-holster, or in sul.

 

[oldcorpgunny]

This is what a man looks like who is about to die.

View attachment 739117

Here's just before the first shot.

View attachment 739118

The time between these two is less than 1.5 seconds, probably closer to less than 1 second (but I lack the tools to determine)

Whitaker is allowed to live in a crap neighborhood.
He's allowed to carry a gun.
He's allowed to defend himself, his family, and his property.

The officers are clearly out of peephole sight. They shine a bright light in his face the moment he opens the door. These are not defensive maneuvers.

And yet, in the mere moment that it took to get within sight of the officer, Whitaker begins going to the ground.

He was shot for *having* a gun in police presence. Not for aiming it at anyone. No-one's life was in immediate danger just by a guy having a gun.

God help us all if we ever have to use our concealed carry piece and the cops show up right as we're back in low ready, attempting to re-holster, or in sul.

Our culture and current events have precipitated these kinds of tragic outcomes.