Cop mistakes cane for gun

[Bitter Clinger]

And acts accordingly imho....

http://foxnewsinsider.com/2014/03/13/watch-dash-cam-video-shows-sc-deputy-sobbing-after-shooting-70-year-old-veteran-who-was

Hope this is not a repost. I am on the officers side on this one, but let this be a reminder to us all, KNOW YOUR TARGET, but that cane DID look like a long gun of some sort, I know the older generation were taught to greet the officer standing at their car door, this is not the case anymore. I have firsthand experience in this....stay in your car.

[stenz]

Damn... I agree he did the right thing but what a shitty situation to be in.

[HoneyBadger]

Wow, I feel terrible for everyone involved in this... :(

[Hound]

Um... No. The man did what anybody with a cane would do. He never raised the cain like a gun and clearly had no idea why the cop was acting the way he did. If simply having something that might be a gun freaks out a cop THAT much ...... Really? What happened to verifying your target? The cop clearly had every reason to draw his weapon... No issue there, but crossed the line when he fired and he knew it. If the man had raised the cane like a gun, some noise had happened, etc maybe.... But he did not. I am sure the cop will get off but he overeacted. The guy was a vet and showed no real signs of agression. Cops have a dangerous job and have every right ot protect themselves but should also be trained in restraint. A 70 year old man with a cain should not have evoked that response. Believe it or not cops are human and do make mistakes. This was one of them.

Let the "he is just cop bashing" BS start 3...2...

Actually I think Honeybadger is spot on.

[Bitter Clinger]

He had no idea that the guy was 70.

When he pulled out the cane it did look like a long gun.

When one is in a potentially deadly situation, if you see a "weapon" you protect your self. period.

Any one of us in a similar situation would have fired.

This "may" be a symptom of the cop culture where everyone is a potential threat, but really.....it's dark. Guy GETS OUT OF THE CAR, and reaches for a long black object. If it was a gun and the officer did not end the threat, he would be dead.rifle/shotty beats a pistol 100% of the time.

[Mick-Boy]

He had no idea that the guy was 70.

When he pulled out the cane it did look like a long gun.

When one is in a potentially deadly situation, if you see a "weapon" you protect your self. period.

Any one of us in a similar situation would have fired.

This "may" be a symptom of the cop culture where everyone is a potential threat, but really.....it's dark. Guy GETS OUT OF THE CAR, and reaches for a long black object. If it was a gun and the officer did not end the threat, he would be dead.rifle/shotty beats a pistol 100% of the time.


Remind me never to go to the range with you.

[Rooskibar03]

Remind me never to go to the range with you.

Plus 1

[cstone]

Another tragedy for everyone involved. Sadly these types of things happen daily and most don't end up on national TV.

Another take away from this, six shots fired presumably 9mm, .40 S&W, or .45 ACP, one hit, looked like the upper torso of a 70 year old male. The shooting victim did not go down, did not drop the cane right away, and was able to speak to the deputy shortly afterwards and is apparently going to make a full recovery.

I have no idea what the deputy's firearms qualifications records show, but even the best shooters don't shoot as well when they believe their life is in danger. Handguns do not possess knock down power. Most handgun shootings are very survivable. The only opinions that really matter are those of the people who are present, prosecutors, judges and juries. Most cops feel badly after they shoot someone regardless of whether they are justified or not.

Just some of my quick take aways from watching the video once.

Be safe.

[Dave_L]

Some basic rules to follow when getting pulled over:

1. Stay in the vehicle.

2. Keep your hands visible.

Do those things and your chance of accidentally getting shot drop dramatically. The guy didn't acknowledge the officer, got out of his car and grabbed something out of the bed of his truck. What was the officer supposed to do? The cop attempted to make contact and thought he was about to be met with force. Next time, he hesitates and he gets shot.

Unfortunate situation all the way around but cops want to go home to their family too.

[earplug]

I didn't see any aggressive movements, the cane did not look like a weapon, the victims actions did not look aggressive. The shooter had plenty of distance. I'm curious what the traffic stop was for? That might be a reason for the shooting.

[asmo]

Remind me never to go to the range with you.

Chew winz da Intarnetz

[asmo]

The deputy then opens fire, shooting six times and striking 70-year-old Canipe once in the stomach.

*sigh*

[rbeau30]

Moral of the story is...

Don't get out of your car when a cop has pulled you over.
Don't reach for anything when a cop has pulled you over.
You ain't the cop's friend and they ain't yours. They are doing a job.
They don't know you from Adam. And they will always act like they are walking into a threat.
This cop needs more range time to tighten his groups a little bit.

[StagLefty]

I didn't see any aggressive movements, the cane did not look like a weapon, the victims actions did not look aggressive. The shooter had plenty of distance. I'm curious what the traffic stop was for? That might be a reason for the shooting.

Expired license plate.

[KS63]

Sad situation all around. One round hit the cab. Wife was lucky the shot wasn't a few more inches to the right. Glad the Vet will recover. He did take the hit like a Boss, though.

[MrPrena]

This video taught me an important lesson.

On my worst days with arthritis, I do use walking cane. I will do my best to not to walk out of the vehicle. Accident or not, I do not want to get shot.
Glad that no one died, but both (officer and vet) will have to deal with this tragic incident forever.

[Snowman78]

I didn't see any aggressive movements, the cane did not look like a weapon, the victims actions did not look aggressive. The shooter had plenty of distance. I'm curious what the traffic stop was for? That might be a reason for the shooting.

Before we watched the video we knew it was a cane, the officer did not. I do believe it looked like a weapon.

[Irving]

Haven't seen the video, but a cane IS a weapon.

[Bailey Guns]

Thankfully, being an armchair QB after the fact is easy...and safe...yet a few of you still suck at it. The whole situation sucks for the old man and the deputy.

[mcjhr]

Sad story for all. Only been pulled over once. But even then I knew: stay in vehicle, hands on steering wheel. Don't even reach in glovebox for documents.

[Bitter Clinger]

Remind me never to go to the range with you.

Lol...oops. You know what I meant. If you believed your being threatened with a weapon. You protect yourself. At least everyone lives on to learn from this situation.

[Hound]

The way he swung the cane ended up quickly flinging it and pointing it directly at the officer.

And no, you can't tell within a 1/2 second if it is a gun or not.
Studies have shown that giving people 5 seconds exposure to scenes in optimal conditions, approximately 98% of college students will mis-identify a screw driver as a firearm, despite the two appearing radically different.

Know it all Armchairs: If 98% of college students incorrectly identify a cordless screwdriver as a gun in ideal circumstances with 5 seconds...

Please explain how a LEO is going to identify something as a weapon/nonweapon in only .05 seconds. That's all he has...

Got it, shoot first ask later. Don't take up defensive positions. Don't take the.5 second to think. Don't wear a vest to greatly increase survivability. Don't understand the cop signed up knowing it was a dangerous job to begin with and part of the job. Don't take into consideration the old man might be OLD and need a cain. Don't take in to consideration it was an expired license plate not an identified felon. If so worried don't wait for backup or even run the plates to see if a dangerous person may be involved. Just shoot the innocent old man grabbing a cain becuase the cop MAY be in danger. [Sarcasm2]

Cops have a dangerous job which is ALL volunteer. If it comes down to them being in danger or an innocent the cop should ALWAYS go first.
It is the basic tenant of the job. If not they are adrenaline junkies that have no business being a cop to begin with. This is the same premise I had when I was in the Navy. I should die (if need be) before those at home. Not be the danger of the job. Does this mean all cops should die, not protect themselves or not take measures to be safer... Of course not. It also does not mean all cops are bad people. Does it mean they have every responsibility to take that extra .5 second before they ever put one down range....... Yes... Yes it does. They are supposed to be trained to have the ability to identify the good from the bad in that .5 seconds, which is not the same as 98% of all college students who are not.

As for armchair QB.... Everyday they also know that they will be judged for their actions, dash cams are a bitch/or savior. This sucked on all sides but the constant "Cops can do no wrong!" and the rest of us are just little people attitude brings on the BS "cop bashing" statements when anybody disagrees with a cops actions. This cop made a bad judgement. That does not mean he is a bad person or any other BS. He just screwed up (and he knew it.... it is obvious he is a good man by how that video ended). That is evident by the fact that he shot an unarmed, 70 year old vet that simply got out of his truck, got his cain and failed to read the cops manual (btw where is there any law that states we have to read about cop procedures? The cop never gave any instructions over his loudspeaker I could see that the man disobeyed, he just got out of his truck to deal with a cop he had no reason to fear)

[hurley842002]

Got it, shoot first ask later. Don't take up defensive positions. Don't take the.5 second to think. Don't wear a vest to greatly increase survivability. Don't understand the cop signed up knowing it was a dangerous job to begin with and part of the job. Don't take into consideration the old man might be OLD and need a cain. Don't take in to consideration it was an expired license plate not an identified felon. If so worried don't wait for backup or even run the plates to see if a dangerous person may be involved. Just shoot the innocent old man grabbing a cain becuase the cop MAY be in danger. [Sarcasm2]

Cops have a dangerous job which is ALL volunteer. If it comes down to them being in danger or an innocent the cop should ALWAYS go first.
It is the basic tenant of the job. If not they are adrenaline junkies that have no business being a cop to begin with. This is the same premise I had when I was in the Navy. I should die (if need be) before those at home. Not be the danger of the job. Does this mean all cops should die, not protect themselves or not take measures to be safer... Of course not. It also does not mean all cops are bad people. Does it mean they have every responsibility to take that extra .5 second before they ever put one down range....... Yes... Yes it does. They are supposed to be trained to have the ability to identify the good from the bad in that .5 seconds, which is not the same as 98% of all college students who are not.

As for armchair QB.... Everyday they also know that they will be judged for their actions, dash cams are a bitch/or savior. This sucked on all sides but the constant "Cops can do no wrong!" and the rest of us are just little people attitude brings on the BS "cop bashing" statements when anybody disagrees with a cops actions. This cop made a bad judgement. That does not mean he is a bad person or any other BS. He just screwed up (and he knew it.... it is obvious he is a good man by how that video ended). That is evident by the fact that he shot an unarmed, 70 year old vet that simply got out of his truck, got his cain and failed to read the cops manual (btw where is there any law that states we have to read about cop procedures? The cop never gave any instructions over his loudspeaker I could see that the man disobeyed, he just got out of his truck to deal with a cop he had no reason to fear)

There is so much fail in your post, I don't even know where to begin, so I won't. Good job armchair Peyton Manning.

[stenz]

There is so much fail in your post, I don't even know where to begin, so I won't. Good job armchair Peyton Manning.


x2

[BushMasterBoy]

There is so much fail in your post, I don't even know where to begin, so I won't. Good job armchair Peyton Manning.

I fail to see the fail, you sorta sound like Piers Morgan or Obama...
The cop screwed up and almost killed somebody! Standing by for flaming in 3...2...1 GO!

[cofi]

Thankfully this leo seems to have skipped the extra range days

[RonMexico]

That Vet a one BAMF, I am buying a drink in his honor tonight. If I get shot( hopefully I don't), I hope I can walk it off like this salty dog.

[hurley842002]

I fail to see the fail

Then you fail....

No comment on the Piers Morgan or Obama statement, I prefer not to be banned.

[mindfold]

Good thing he didn't have a service dog.

[scratchy]

Ultimately, Police Officers are civilians like the rest of us and used to be held to the same standard. If the shoot
is justified, it is justified whether or not a law enforcement officer fired it. What would have been the outcome
if a normal, non uniformed citizen had fired the shot?

[FortyTwo]

Got it, shoot first ask later. Don't take up defensive positions. Don't take the.5 second to think. Don't wear a vest to greatly increase survivability. Don't understand the cop signed up knowing it was a dangerous job to begin with and part of the job. Don't take into consideration the old man might be OLD and need a cain. Don't take in to consideration it was an expired license plate not an identified felon. If so worried don't wait for backup or even run the plates to see if a dangerous person may be involved. Just shoot the innocent old man grabbing a cain becuase the cop MAY be in danger. [Sarcasm2]

Cops have a dangerous job which is ALL volunteer. If it comes down to them being in danger or an innocent the cop should ALWAYS go first.
It is the basic tenant of the job. If not they are adrenaline junkies that have no business being a cop to begin with. This is the same premise I had when I was in the Navy. I should die (if need be) before those at home. Not be the danger of the job. Does this mean all cops should die, not protect themselves or not take measures to be safer... Of course not. It also does not mean all cops are bad people. Does it mean they have every responsibility to take that extra .5 second before they ever put one down range....... Yes... Yes it does. They are supposed to be trained to have the ability to identify the good from the bad in that .5 seconds, which is not the same as 98% of all college students who are not.

As for armchair QB.... Everyday they also know that they will be judged for their actions, dash cams are a bitch/or savior. This sucked on all sides but the constant "Cops can do no wrong!" and the rest of us are just little people attitude brings on the BS "cop bashing" statements when anybody disagrees with a cops actions. This cop made a bad judgement. That does not mean he is a bad person or any other BS. He just screwed up (and he knew it.... it is obvious he is a good man by how that video ended). That is evident by the fact that he shot an unarmed, 70 year old vet that simply got out of his truck, got his cain and failed to read the cops manual (btw where is there any law that states we have to read about cop procedures? The cop never gave any instructions over his loudspeaker I could see that the man disobeyed, he just got out of his truck to deal with a cop he had no reason to fear)

To surmise in brevity: "Officer safety has become a higher priority than to protect and serve"

[Great-Kazoo]

Ultimately, Police Officers are civilians like the rest of us and used to be held to the same standard. If the shoot
is justified, it is justified whether or not a law enforcement officer fired it. What would have been the outcome
if a normal, non uniformed citizen had fired the shot?


He would be charged with a few felonies. 1 being road rage. However to debate the what ifs of a civilian engaging another civilian , should be done in another thread.

[Hound]

He would be charged with a few felonies. 1 being road rage. However to debate the what ifs of a civilian engaging another civilian , should be done in another thread.

That is not what he said. It is not about pulling him over. It is about the shooting and that is pertinent to this thread.

[Great-Kazoo]

He would be charged with a few felonies. 1 being road rage. However to debate the what ifs of a civilian engaging another civilian , should be done in another thread.


Ultimately, Police Officers are civilians like the rest of us and used to be held to the same standard. If the shoot
is justified, it is justified whether or not a law enforcement officer fired it. What would have been the outcome
if a normal, non uniformed citizen had fired the shot?


That is not what he said. It is not about pulling him over. It is about the shooting and that is pertinent to this thread.

Well since you want to continue

IF a civilian was to do that he'd be arrested

Because the shooter or driver #1 has / had an opportunity to FLIGHT / leave the area instead of engage. You / your attorney explain to the investigators, then at trial why you pulled over in the middle of an altercation to engage the other party instead of LEAVING THE SCENE and contacting LE.

How was said shooting justified as a civilian?? It was not. NOW if you were pulled over changing a flat tire, looking at a map, walking your dog, Then attacked by someone. That would be different.

Oddly enough something similar was being discussed on Boyles show thurs morn. One of the instructors from BluCore? was on talking about the chase, where 3 car jackings happened. He was asked if once out of the car and the attacker was speeding away, Could the owner use deadly force to stop the car (once it was leaving). He said no, as the threat was moving away, no longer a threat (at that moment) to the former owner of the vehicle.

[RMAC757]

Thankfully, being an armchair QB after the fact is easy...and safe...yet a few of you still suck at it. The whole situation sucks for the old man and the deputy.

I'd say it sucked worse for the older gent. Bailey, every other thread here is an armchair on one thing or another. Whether it be weapon choice or law passed. Damn your sensitive.

[Bailey Guns]

I'm not sensitive at all. You think it was a fuckin' party for the deputy?

I'm just amazed at the number of experts on this forum in the field of law enforcement training and tactics who've never actually had any training or experience in the field of law enforcement training and tactics.

[scratchy]

Yes, I was not commenting on the validity of the stop, I don't think that can be or should be in question. I was trying to spark a bit of thought, not necessarily debate, of the situation where a civilian perceived (wrongly) that a deadly weapon was being drawn.

[TFOGGER]

Oddly enough something similar was being discussed on Boyles show thurs morn. One of the instructors from BluCore? was on talking about the chase, where 3 car jackings happened. He was asked if once out of the car and the attacker was speeding away, Could the owner use deadly force to stop the car (once it was leaving). He said no, as the threat was moving away, no longer a threat (at that moment) to the former owner of the vehicle.

Kind of. CRS 18-1-704 allows :

(1) Except as provided in subsections (2) and (3) of this section, a person is justified in using physical force upon another person in order to defend himself or a third person from what he reasonably believes to be the use or imminent use of unlawful physical force by that other person, and he may use a degree of force which he reasonably believes to be necessary for that purpose.

(2) Deadly physical force may be used only if a person reasonably believes a lesser degree of force is inadequate and:

(a) The actor has reasonable ground to believe, and does believe, that he or another person is in imminent danger of being killed or of receiving great bodily injury; or

(b) The other person is using or reasonably appears about to use physical force against an occupant of a dwelling or business establishment while committing or attempting to commit burglary as defined in sections 18-4-202 (http://web.lexisnexis.com/research/buttonTFLink?_m=a7f5449fda08244659908a5c7bec8d12&_xfercite=%3ccite%20cc%3d%22USA%22%3e%3c%21%5bCDAT A%5bC.R.S.%2018-1-704%5d%5d%3e%3c%2fcite%3e&_butType=4&_butStat=0&_butNum=2&_butInline=1&_butinfo=COCODE%2018-4-202&_fmtstr=FULL&docnum=1&_startdoc=1&wchp=dGLzVzB-zSkAW&_md5=0e22e527a8ae85bbb284693d8e8a2e2b) to 18-4-204 (http://web.lexisnexis.com/research/buttonTFLink?_m=a7f5449fda08244659908a5c7bec8d12&_xfercite=%3ccite%20cc%3d%22USA%22%3e%3c%21%5bCDAT A%5bC.R.S.%2018-1-704%5d%5d%3e%3c%2fcite%3e&_butType=4&_butStat=0&_butNum=3&_butInline=1&_butinfo=COCODE%2018-4-204&_fmtstr=FULL&docnum=1&_startdoc=1&wchp=dGLzVzB-zSkAW&_md5=ba6d3b91e80403eb2ccbad93b0851e8d); or

(c) The other person is committing or reasonably appears about to commit kidnapping as defined in section 18-3-301 (http://web.lexisnexis.com/research/buttonTFLink?_m=a7f5449fda08244659908a5c7bec8d12&_xfercite=%3ccite%20cc%3d%22USA%22%3e%3c%21%5bCDAT A%5bC.R.S.%2018-1-704%5d%5d%3e%3c%2fcite%3e&_butType=4&_butStat=0&_butNum=4&_butInline=1&_butinfo=COCODE%2018-3-301&_fmtstr=FULL&docnum=1&_startdoc=1&wchp=dGLzVzB-zSkAW&_md5=34ca3d5c6cc6db0450505a9fffdc84e3) or 18-3-302 (http://web.lexisnexis.com/research/buttonTFLink?_m=a7f5449fda08244659908a5c7bec8d12&_xfercite=%3ccite%20cc%3d%22USA%22%3e%3c%21%5bCDAT A%5bC.R.S.%2018-1-704%5d%5d%3e%3c%2fcite%3e&_butType=4&_butStat=0&_butNum=5&_butInline=1&_butinfo=COCODE%2018-3-302&_fmtstr=FULL&docnum=1&_startdoc=1&wchp=dGLzVzB-zSkAW&_md5=d82f220e3ed2ff8fad7252bab4e8d5cd), robbery as defined in section 18-4-301 (http://web.lexisnexis.com/research/buttonTFLink?_m=a7f5449fda08244659908a5c7bec8d12&_xfercite=%3ccite%20cc%3d%22USA%22%3e%3c%21%5bCDAT A%5bC.R.S.%2018-1-704%5d%5d%3e%3c%2fcite%3e&_butType=4&_butStat=0&_butNum=6&_butInline=1&_butinfo=COCODE%2018-4-301&_fmtstr=FULL&docnum=1&_startdoc=1&wchp=dGLzVzB-zSkAW&_md5=fa523410024ddd0f28fc255150e4d85f) or 18-4-302 (http://web.lexisnexis.com/research/buttonTFLink?_m=a7f5449fda08244659908a5c7bec8d12&_xfercite=%3ccite%20cc%3d%22USA%22%3e%3c%21%5bCDAT A%5bC.R.S.%2018-1-704%5d%5d%3e%3c%2fcite%3e&_butType=4&_butStat=0&_butNum=7&_butInline=1&_butinfo=COCODE%2018-4-302&_fmtstr=FULL&docnum=1&_startdoc=1&wchp=dGLzVzB-zSkAW&_md5=503681bc6f10aae40cba9447420990a5), sexual assault as set forth in section 18-3-402 (http://web.lexisnexis.com/research/buttonTFLink?_m=a7f5449fda08244659908a5c7bec8d12&_xfercite=%3ccite%20cc%3d%22USA%22%3e%3c%21%5bCDAT A%5bC.R.S.%2018-1-704%5d%5d%3e%3c%2fcite%3e&_butType=4&_butStat=0&_butNum=8&_butInline=1&_butinfo=COCODE%2018-3-402&_fmtstr=FULL&docnum=1&_startdoc=1&wchp=dGLzVzB-zSkAW&_md5=e6204860f60bf808ed3aa957998183d1), or in section 18-3-403 (http://web.lexisnexis.com/research/buttonTFLink?_m=a7f5449fda08244659908a5c7bec8d12&_xfercite=%3ccite%20cc%3d%22USA%22%3e%3c%21%5bCDAT A%5bC.R.S.%2018-1-704%5d%5d%3e%3c%2fcite%3e&_butType=4&_butStat=0&_butNum=9&_butInline=1&_butinfo=COCODE%2018-3-403&_fmtstr=FULL&docnum=1&_startdoc=1&wchp=dGLzVzB-zSkAW&_md5=c9c6fc0d15a0f0266c52ef67a29f06a1) as it existed prior to July 1, 2000, or assault as defined in sections 18-3-202 (http://web.lexisnexis.com/research/buttonTFLink?_m=a7f5449fda08244659908a5c7bec8d12&_xfercite=%3ccite%20cc%3d%22USA%22%3e%3c%21%5bCDAT A%5bC.R.S.%2018-1-704%5d%5d%3e%3c%2fcite%3e&_butType=4&_butStat=0&_butNum=10&_butInline=1&_butinfo=COCODE%2018-3-202&_fmtstr=FULL&docnum=1&_startdoc=1&wchp=dGLzVzB-zSkAW&_md5=70e5687e4fd5309342d32f0645ba7506) and 18-3-203 (http://web.lexisnexis.com/research/buttonTFLink?_m=a7f5449fda08244659908a5c7bec8d12&_xfercite=%3ccite%20cc%3d%22USA%22%3e%3c%21%5bCDAT A%5bC.R.S.%2018-1-704%5d%5d%3e%3c%2fcite%3e&_butType=4&_butStat=0&_butNum=11&_butInline=1&_butinfo=COCODE%2018-3-203&_fmtstr=FULL&docnum=1&_startdoc=1&wchp=dGLzVzB-zSkAW&_md5=356b1096e303c2dabc125f27c6e57a59).

It would suck to have to use this as a defense in a criminal proceeding, and it would provide next to zero protection in civil court if one of the carjacking victims had shot him while he was driving away. Not to mention the possible consequences of an errant round in a crowded urban environment.

[Irving]

That was my thought TFOGGER, but it'd be pretty tough to argue it.