SWATting turns deadly

[RblDiver]

I knew it was only a matter of time. It's why I fully feel that SWATting someone should be charged as attempted murder. In this case, actual murder (by the person doing the call).

http://www.kansas.com/news/local/crime/article192111974.html

[Gman]

Another case of our society swirling around the toilet bowl.

[hollohas]

Swatting is eff'ed up but so is shooting someone who "came to the door".

[colorider]

Yea. A guy who is supposedly holding hostages doesn't come up,to the door and answer it. Well, unless he's really terrible at holding hostages.

[DavieD55]

There is obviously something seriously wrong when all it takes is a phone call to the gestapo for this to happen.

[Little Dutch]

There is obviously something seriously wrong when all it takes is a phone call to the gestapo for this to happen.
That’s my reaction to this as well. All it takes is an anonymous phone call. No verification required, just send out the door kickers.

[Irving]

That’s my reaction to this as well. All it takes is an anonymous phone call. No verification required, just send out the door kickers.

"SWATTING" is rare, and the opposite would be a worse situation. If you call the police and they sit around debating whether they should go to the call, then what's the point of calling the police?

[KevDen2005]

I feel like a couple years ago we were actually getting several swatting calls a year, now it seems to have dwindled down quite a bit. This is the first I've heard of a swatting case in a while. I hope that some justice gets served to the the swatting idiots.

[Bailey Guns]

Here we go again. My prediction is this thread won't last long.

[Little Dutch]

"SWATTING" is rare, and the opposite would be a worse situation. If you call the police and they sit around debating whether they should go to the call, then what's the point of calling the police?

Worse than seeing a family member gunned down by the cops? I don’t see how, that person is, in fact, dead.

[KevDen2005]

Here we go again. My prediction is this thread won't last long.

Yep.

[O2HeN2]

I knew it was only a matter of time. It's why I fully feel that SWATting someone should be charged as attempted murder. In this case, actual murder (by the person doing the call).
...and the person who gave the bogus address, manslaughter.

O2

[hollohas]

Here's a video of the shooting. They shot him from across the street right after "yelling let's see your hands."

Guy is standing in his doorway, moves after being told to show his hands (can't tell if he's holding anything) and then he is shot.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5222963/Call-Duty-player-25-arrested-fatal-swatting-hoax.html

[Irving]

Worse than seeing a family member gunned down by the cops? I don’t see how, that person is, in fact, dead.

There must be a misunderstanding here. What do you think I meant when I said the opposite would be worse?

[Ramsker]

Sounds like they arrested the jackass who made the call. Also has the same name as a guy who was previously arrested for making false bomb threats--but not confirmed it's the same guy I don't think. Hopefully he gets the full body cavity treatment by the legal system.

http://abc7.com/la-man-arrested-in-connection-to-fatal-kansas-swatting-incident/2840369/

[eyeson247]

So... Time will tell as to how accurate everything being reported by MSM is, but when a call originates in LA (where one douche was reportedly arrested in connection to this incident), but the address provided is in another state, how does that not raise flags? (I admittedly have little knowledge as to how 911 systems + procedures work)

[Ramsker]

So... Time will tell as to how accurate everything being reported by MSM is, but when a call originates in LA (where one douche was reportedly arrested in connection to this incident), but the address provided is in another state, how does that not raise flags? (I admittedly have little knowledge as to how 911 systems + procedures work)

I'm guessing there was some kind of spoofing to make it look like the call wasn't from LA, but I'm not sure either how that works with the system he called into. The other red flag, though, was that the guy told the 911 dispatcher that it was a one-story house (because he was pranking and guessing) . . . and that's a two-story house they responded to. You'd think that disconnect would have been noticed, but maybe that's not a detail that got passed along ot noticed at the time?

[Irving]

The one story vs two story thing wouldn't have been noticed by anyone, especially in light of the alleged circumstances.

[BushMasterBoy]

Some people are goddamn evil.

[Double00]

In before the lock just in case

[Jer]

People still answer their doors to unknown visitors in 2017?

I've got a smartphone and if you know me well enough to ring my doorbell you can text me your intent to do so before showing up. If you don't, then I don't want to talk to you anyway.

[wctriumph]

I had a late knock on the door. It was after 11:00 PM, I was in bed watching Leno when someone pounded on the front door. I got up, put om my pants and went into the front room, stood back from the door as they pounded again. I yelled, who is it. The person responded Santa Ana Police. This was odd as I lived in Garden Grove (found out later that we were only 50 yards from the Santa Ana, Garden Grove, Westminster city borders.

Anyway, I yelled back, what do you want. The guy just said to open the door, he wanted to talk to me. I picked up the phone and called the operator and asked to be connected to the Santa Ana police department. While waiting, the guy pounded on the door again and yelled for me to open the door RIGHT NOW! I said that I was calling the police department and I asked for his name and badge number. I was connected to the police and told them what was going on, gave them my name and address, they said there was no dispatch or call to my address. The officer told me not to open the door and notified the Garden Grove police department and they showed up within 5 minutes. Whoever was pounding on my door was gone and the police kept additional patrols on my street that night.

To this day, I don't know who or why they were at my door but it was not the Santa Ana police.

I never open my door to anyone at odd hours if I can't verify the identity of the person knocking on mt door.

It is sad that this happened and I think that the guy that called in the report should be prosecuted as far as the law will allow. Prayers up for the victim and his family.

[TFOGGER]

Our front door has a big tempered glass pane, so I know exactly who is on the other side when someone is on the porch. I don't always have a gun on my hip at home, but there is always one available en route to the front door. We've had the police show up a few times, usually asking about a disturbance in the neighborhood. I'll either talk to them through the (locked) storm door (also large tempered glass pane), or step out on to the porch and close the door behind me. It's amazing how polite they are when you're not a dick.

When I lived alone over on Green Mountain many years ago, the Lakewood cops pounded on my door at about 0230 one morning. I looked through the peep hole to confirm they were actually cops, then opened the door. Much to the embarrassment of the two police women who were there, as I slept in the nude, and hadn't bothered to dress, as they sounded quite urgent. The 2 male cops seemed to be mostly amused at their coworker's discomfort. It turns out they were looking for the manager's dipshit son, who lived 3 doors down.

[KevDen2005]

People still answer their doors to unknown visitors in 2017?

I've got a smartphone and if you know me well enough to ring my doorbell you can text me your intent to do so before showing up. If you don't, then I don't want to talk to you anyway.

Not to make light of the situation, but your comment reminded me of this

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Swzvm-gXHg

[Jer]

Not to make light of the situation, but your comment reminded me of this

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Swzvm-gXHg

ROFL Exactly!

[Great-Kazoo]

So... Time will tell as to how accurate everything being reported by MSM is, but when a call originates in LA (where one douche was reportedly arrested in connection to this incident), but the address provided is in another state, how does that not raise flags? (I admittedly have little knowledge as to how 911 systems + procedures work)

Thank cell phones for that, anyone with any area code could be living down the block, or next door. Not speculating what happened or why it did regarding the actual shooting. I doubt when there is a 911 hostages call, the local LE would be hanging around waiting for confirmation that call was legit or not.

Respond balls to the wall or sit back till something was confirmed? Either way they're condemned for their actions.

[CS1983]

Or the 3rd option: Positive confirmation/ID of both situation suspect before escalation.

[Bailey Guns]

Yeah...because when the police arrive on scene of a reported homicide/hostage situation and a guy opens the door and appears to be reaching for something in/near his waistband, after the police have told him to keep his hands visible and in the air, the police have all the time in the world to ask for his ID and confirm whether or not he killed someone and was still holding hostages or is something else going on. Everyone knows that.

Or maybe in future situations where it's not clear what's going on the police on scene could just jump online to their favorite forum where everyone's an expert and start a thread about what they should do to handle the situation? That might work.

Or how about this? If the cops suddenly show up at your house, with guns pointed at you, maybe it's a really good time to just listen closely and do EXACTLY what they tell you to do. I'm just throwin' that out there. But I know the drill...a bunch of people want to be all riled up about the Gestapo and trigger happy cops. But sometimes being stupid around the po-po has some pretty negative consequences.

Do what you're told to do when cops are pointing guns at you and live to sort it out later. Then you can be alive to be outraged about the Gestapo.

[GilpinGuy]

I feel like a couple years ago we were actually getting several swatting calls a year, now it seems to have dwindled down quite a bit. This is the first I've heard of a swatting case in a while. I hope that some justice gets served to the the swatting idiots.

From the article in the OP:

Around 400 swatting cases happen each year

More than 1 a day? Damn. Not insignificant, but there's not a big rash of this going on either I guess. It's a testament to the police that tragedies like this one don't happen more often IMHO.

Edit before I get gored:
The cops have to assume that the threat that was called in is real. I imagine they show up in full gear, weapons ready, expecting the worst, but I don't know that. Innocent person opens the door or it gets kicked in and sees guns pointed at them. WTF are lots of people going to do? Freak the f out, that's what. People freaking out in front of cops with guns isn't a good situation.

I'm not a cop, so maybe I'm way off here.

[eyeson247]

Thank cell phones for that, anyone with any area code could be living down the block, or next door. Not speculating what happened or why it did regarding the actual shooting. I doubt when there is a 911 hostages call, the local LE would be hanging around waiting for confirmation that call was legit or not.

Respond balls to the wall or sit back till something was confirmed? Either way they're condemned for their actions.

I was really only thinking of geo location associated with whatever phone was used - area codes are practically useless given cell phones and how far some of us live from where we bought our first cell. Maybe it’s not automatic, but a geoloc even if just based on towers and not gps would be one more thing that could help departments avoid situations like this.

[hollohas]

Yeah...because when the police arrive on scene of a reported homicide/hostage situation and a guy opens the door and appears to be reaching for something in/near his waistband, after the police have told him to keep his hands visible and in the air, the police have all the time in the world to ask for his ID and confirm whether or not he killed someone and was still holding hostages or is something else going on. Everyone knows that.



Bailey, in this case, the police were across the street taking cover behind vehicles. The distance most certainly affords a bit of time to confirm what he was doing with his hands before being shot. No, they won't be confirming ID's but they can certainly take 1 second to get a visual of a weapon before shooting in this particular case.

I know your experience leads your opinion on these things. And I don't question that. I don't have that experience. But I watched this video with my Dad who spent decades as a State LEO, SWAT marksman and LEO firearms instructor. He is a similar generation as you and he swears this generation of police are being trained to handle these sorts of situations differently than his was. In all his years, he was taught to confirm before taking deadly force. SEE a weapon before firing. Simple hand movement was not a reason to kill someone (unless of course a weapon was visible in the waistpants for example.)

People do strange things when contacted by police. Why they move their hands down when guns are pointed at them may seem dumb, but I suspect it's mostly involuntary. I'm sure you pulled someone over in your career for a simple moving violation who was shaking and/or crying when you approached the window. Why would their body respond that way for nothing more than a quick discussion with an officer? I'm sure if they could control it they would, but it happens. Now take that very simple police contact, but instead of someone who was driving 10 over, it's a person awakened from sleep, still a bit confused, who opens a door to spotlights shining in his face, bullhorns yelling commands and threats of being killed if he did something wrong? Is it unreasonable to believe that person may have an uncontrolled, stress induced physiological response where he does something he shouldn't? Absolutely! Most people wouldn't think clearly during something like this.

People deserve to be given the benefit of the doubt by police. I will always believe that. I was raised to believe that the police protect and serve, that they are willing to risk their lives to help people. That them going home at the end of the day wasn't the most important thing but instead making sure they treated people right, did their job right and helped the people they meet was.

Man in a truck on fire? Nope, going home tonight is not most important, going into a burning truck to help give that that guy a chance to live is. Confused man who may be a bad guy standing on his front porch moves his hands in a downwards motion? Nope. Going home tonight is not the most important, making sure you don't kill an innocent man is. This is not fairytale. It's the way many police officers live their lives and do their jobs. It's not unreasonable to hold them to that standard.

On that note, breaking news is multiple officers down in Littleton. Don't know the details. Let's pray for them.

[fitz19d]

I was really only thinking of geo location associated with whatever phone was used - area codes are practically useless given cell phones and how far some of us live from where we bought our first cell. Maybe it’s not automatic, but a geoloc even if just based on towers and not gps would be one more thing that could help departments avoid situations like this.

My intrepretation is they can bypass most means of knowing where the call really came from. Or in the other case, they can CSI GEO blah blah blah it, I imagine that takes calls to the telecoms and time which if you don't react promptly to these things and it is real...... bad outcome that way too.

[Bailey Guns]

I can respect a well thought out and reasoned response like yours, hollohas. Thank you for that. I'll offer up some differing perspective in bold.


Bailey, in this case, the police were across the street taking cover behind vehicles. The distance most certainly affords a bit of time to confirm what he was doing with his hands before being shot. No, they won't be confirming ID's but they can certainly take 1 second to get a visual of a weapon before shooting in this particular case.

It is entirely possible it wasn't themselves they were worried about when thinking the guy might be producing a gun or other weapon. It could be that the officer that fired saw something the others didn't that made him fire. It's entirely possible he was worried about the safety of others.

I know your experience leads your opinion on these things. And I don't question that. I don't have that experience. But I watched this video with my Dad who spent decades as a State LEO, SWAT marksman and LEO firearms instructor. He is a similar generation as you and he swears this generation of police are being trained to handle these sorts of situations differently than his was. In all his years, he was taught to confirm before taking deadly force. SEE a weapon before firing. Simple hand movement was not a reason to kill someone (unless of course a weapon was visible in the waistpants for example.)

Well, we must've come from differing times then. Because making "furtive" movements, especially towards the waistband area, especially in a high-risk type situation where a person is thought to be armed, is certainly a recipe for getting shot. And I was trained to do just that. On the other hand, I never shot anyone for doing that - though I can think of a few times when I probably should've - and fortunately for me and others on scene it worked out.

People do strange things when contacted by police. Why they move their hands down when guns are pointed at them may seem dumb, but I suspect it's mostly involuntary. I'm sure you pulled someone over in your career for a simple moving violation who was shaking and/or crying when you approached the window. Why would their body respond that way for nothing more than a quick discussion with an officer? I'm sure if they could control it they would, but it happens. Now take that very simple police contact, but instead of someone who was driving 10 over, it's a person awakened from sleep, still a bit confused, who opens a door to spotlights shining in his face, bullhorns yelling commands and threats of being killed if he did something wrong? Is it unreasonable to believe that person may have an uncontrolled, stress induced physiological response where he does something he shouldn't? Absolutely! Most people wouldn't think clearly during something like this.

I don't disagree with most of this. On the other hand, it's oftentimes a chance an officer can't take. It works both ways. Not to mention with the poor attitude many people have about the police they think that having guns pointed at them while police are screaming at them is a good time to argue and get their cell phones outta their pockets to post shit on Twitter or FB "cuz they knows they rights".

People deserve to be given the benefit of the doubt by police. I will always believe that. I was raised to believe that the police protect and serve, that they are willing to risk their lives to help people. That them going home at the end of the day wasn't the most important thing but instead making sure they treated people right, did their job right and helped the people they meet was.

Man in a truck on fire? Nope, going home tonight is not most important, going into a burning truck to help give that that guy a chance to live is. Confused man who may be a bad guy standing on his front porch moves his hands in a downwards motion? Nope. Going home tonight is not the most important, making sure you don't kill an innocent man is. This is not fairytale. It's the way many police officers live their lives and do their jobs. It's not unreasonable to hold them to that standard.

To a certain point, I agree with this, too. I've done stupid shit like go into a burning building to get some idiot out who thinks it's a great time to look for his cigarettes and car keys. And along the same lines, a dead cop or firefighter trying to be a hero doesn't do anyone any good, and can't continue to help others. So I disagree and will tell you that going home at the end of a shift is probably everyone's highest priority as well it should be. Now, taking a risk to help someone is always a calculated measure and most do it without thinking of the potentially deadly consequences. But anyone who intentionally places themselves in a deadly situation just because they want to "protect and serve" probably needs to rethink their priorities.

On that note, breaking news is multiple officers down in Littleton. Don't know the details. Let's pray for them.

[RblDiver]

Regarding the phone spoofing thing, per https://hotair.com/archives/2017/12/31/call-duty-swatting-demonstrates-phone-records-transparent/ , spoofing is actually legal unless you have "intent to defraud, cause harm, or wrongly obtain anything of value." So, in this case it's illegal, but frequently it's permitted. Apparently, so is the requirement that cross-state calls must be allowed to have "blocked" numbers. Pretty stupid if you ask me. All numbers should be readily identifiable.

[Gman]

All numbers should be readily identifiable verifiable.
FIFY

[hollohas]

Bailey, you make great points that I can't argue with. I appreciate you responding to my comments because it creates a learning opportunity for everyone.

I especially agree with this..

"But anyone who intentionally places themselves in a deadly situation just because they want to "protect and serve" probably needs to rethink their priorities."

...and want to make sure it's clear I don't expect police officers to do that. A hero complex is not a healthy characteristic for a police officer.

I respect LEO's a great deal. I was raised to not even call them "cops" but to actually use the term "police" instead. I just ran into a few officers at the Littleton Hospital and had a quick chat. I didn't shed a tear when my baby boy was born this week, but my eyes were sure watery after a quick chat with those guys.

My respect for LE is the reason I hold them to high standards. Maybe fair, maybe not, but that's where it comes from.

[BushMasterBoy]

Good reason to make sure you have a home phone registered for reverse 911. That way the local agency can call to talk to anybody in the residence.

[Ridge]

Yeah...because when the police arrive on scene of a reported homicide/hostage situation and a guy opens the door and appears to be reaching for something in/near his waistband, after the police have told him to keep his hands visible and in the air, the police have all the time in the world to ask for his ID and confirm whether or not he killed someone and was still holding hostages or is something else going on. Everyone knows that.

Or maybe in future situations where it's not clear what's going on the police on scene could just jump online to their favorite forum where everyone's an expert and start a thread about what they should do to handle the situation? That might work.

Or how about this? If the cops suddenly show up at your house, with guns pointed at you, maybe it's a really good time to just listen closely and do EXACTLY what they tell you to do. I'm just throwin' that out there. But I know the drill...a bunch of people want to be all riled up about the Gestapo and trigger happy cops. But sometimes being stupid around the po-po has some pretty negative consequences.

Do what you're told to do when cops are pointing guns at you and live to sort it out later. Then you can be alive to be outraged about the Gestapo.

https://www.kansas.com/news/local/crime/article192244734.html

You can see in the second video he's on his front porch, one of the officers puts a light on his face, and he raises his arm to cover his eyes. He is then shot.

[Bailey Guns]

Well your eyes are a lot better than mine. Between the poor quality video and the post on the porch I couldn't see what you claim with any amount of certainty.

[theGinsue]

The videos may, in the eyes of some here, seem damning of the officers reaction, but lets not Monday morning quarterback this event as we often want to do.

None of us were there and experienced what was considered at the moment to be a high risk/high emotion event.

Let's all instead, try to see if we can't form a solution that can render future SWAT'ing attempts ineffective without reducing the safety of the public during real world events.



ETA: Since some here have suggested that LEO's handle calls of this nature with more reserve, consider this possibility. I'd like to note that I find this unlikely, but possible.

What if, thanks to all of the nationwide condemnation of officers actions to this SWAT'ing event, the DCSO deputies involved in todays event went in with a lowered readiness alert? What if they considered that this might be another false flag event and they weren't as fully prepared for a real world shooter as they should have been?

Again, I'm sure this SWAT'ing event in no way effected todays DCSO manner of responding to the DV call which left 7 shot and one officer deceased. I'm simply pointing out that officers can't assume their requested presence to be for anything less than a real world possibly very hazardous situation. Officers tend to have fractions of seconds to scan the situation, identify potential risks based off of the information they have, plan their actions, decide what actions need to be taken and then to execute those actions. Mistakes will occur, sometimes with dire consequences and should not reflect poorly on the officers involved as they performed their best with the training and experience they have.

So again I ask that we don't Monday morning quarterback this event and let the investigation and healing take place.

[TheGrey]

I was really only thinking of geo location associated with whatever phone was used - area codes are practically useless given cell phones and how far some of us live from where we bought our first cell. Maybe it’s not automatic, but a geoloc even if just based on towers and not gps would be one more thing that could help departments avoid situations like this.

Are you speaing of cell pings? I'm not sure, but I think that takes time. I have my geolocation turned off on my cell phone.

[Zundfolge]

This is a difficult one because the first time a family held hostage is murdered by their kidnapper because the cops stood around and waited outside, people will come down on them like a ton of bricks for that too.

I guess one problem I see is the mindset with which police tactics are devised and police are trained. It used to be that police had the mindset that their job was to "preserve the peace" (maybe even "protect and serve") whereas today they seem to have the mindset that their job is to "dominate the situation" (which makes them see the populace as adversaries not innocent citizens). And just maybe pulling GIs fresh off a tour of kicking in doors and burning Hajis in some third world hell hole on the streets of America with full battle dress and an AR, winding them up and pointing them at people's doors with this "go and dominate soldier!" mindset isn't helping either.

Either way the police are in a tough position ... I don't envy them one bit.

I do think that SWATting should be a classified as attempted first degree homicide (if nobody dies) and outright first degree homicide (if someone does).

[Bailey Guns]

That's right. It's difficult to come up with an answer, even after reading all the reports and watching the YT videos and discussing it ad nauseam on internet forums. Now imagine how hard it is when you're the one behind the trigger making the split second decision without the benefit of internet experts to guide you. Sometimes bad decisions are made. Most of the time, thank God, these men and women make the correct decision under the most difficult of circumstances...again without the guidance of internet experts.

What just irritates me to no end is this rarely happens with any other profession. A doctor screws up and someone dies non-medical "experts" don't get on the internet and spout off about how the procedure that killed the patient should've been performed. They don't say the doctor wasn't using the right tactic or procedure for what s/he was doing. A pilot screws up and crashes an airplane and people die non-pilot "experts" don't get on internet forums and say "he should've used a little right rudder and adjusted the thrust" or some shit. But when a cop screws up, or even appears to screw up from the perspective of a 10 second video clip, everybody's suddenly a fucking expert on police tactics, procedures and training. And I'd venture to say that most of the "internet experts" are complete non-hackers who wouldn't last a shift in a busy city.

Yeah. It pushes my buttons. Always has, always will.

[Zundfolge]

One common factor with every SWATTING call is they will be missing or have crazy-off geolocate information so it helps sort the potentials from the definitely -nots.

Here's an idea, add a third piece of information to the Caller ID that only dispatch can see, something like an MD5 hash used as a checksum to verify file integrity. When you spoof a Caller ID tag you manually enter in the name and number you want to display, but if the phone company added a third number that would only show up for 911 dispatchers you couldn't fool them with the Caller ID spoof ... then dispatch could tell the officers on the scene that the call looks fake so proceed with requisite caution. I'm sure some serious hackers could figure a way around this, but 99.999% of SWATting is done by script kiddes using a spoofing app they downloaded off the net, not serious hackers.

[theGinsue]

Now that is a fantastic idea and would help solve this problem. Awesome thinking there brother.

[spqrzilla]

Since a friend of mine was SWAT'd a few years ago - and there is reason to believe it was done by the associates of an infamous violent criminal - I find this situation very infuriating. I've seen too often that dispatch centers pay little or no attention to the red flags of a SWATing.

[Ronin13]

That's right. It's difficult to come up with an answer, even after reading all the reports and watching the YT videos and discussing it ad nauseam on internet forums. Now imagine how hard it is when you're the one behind the trigger making the split second decision without the benefit of internet experts to guide you. Sometimes bad decisions are made. Most of the time, thank God, these men and women make the correct decision under the most difficult of circumstances...again without the guidance of internet experts.

What just irritates me to no end is this rarely happens with any other profession. A doctor screws up and someone dies non-medical "experts" don't get on the internet and spout off about how the procedure that killed the patient should've been performed. They don't say the doctor wasn't using the right tactic or procedure for what s/he was doing. A pilot screws up and crashes an airplane and people die non-pilot "experts" don't get on internet forums and say "he should've used a little right rudder and adjusted the thrust" or some shit. But when a cop screws up, or even appears to screw up from the perspective of a 10 second video clip, everybody's suddenly a fucking expert on police tactics, procedures and training. And I'd venture to say that most of the "internet experts" are complete non-hackers who wouldn't last a shift in a busy city.

Yeah. It pushes my buttons. Always has, always will.

I'm right there with you. I've worked several jobs/professions in my life, but never one where people who have ZERO experience constantly try to tell me and my partners how to "better do our jobs" until I got into the Law Enforcement game. It not only grinds my gears, it really disappoints me that thanks to the internet everyone is an expert on LE procedure.

[Irving]

I'm right there with you. I've worked several jobs/professions in my life, but never one where people who have ZERO experience constantly try to tell me and my partners how to "better do our jobs" until I got into the Law Enforcement game. It not only grinds my gears, it really disappoints me that thanks to the internet everyone is an expert on LE procedure.

Part of keeping the peace is de-escalation and conflict resolution with direct interaction with the public, which nearly every single person does nearly every single day. It doesn't take knowledge of a super secret "LE procedure" to understand how to interact with people or be able to tell when someone has screwed up in doing so. In addition, the general public is the very target of "LE procedure," so they have a highly vested interest in how well things are working. If a specialized doctor screws up some procedure and a patient with a rare medical condition dies as a result, most people won't have that condition so they won't care. However, the police deal with "the public" which includes every single person in the country, including the LE community. The quicker you can get over the idea that the most basic part of your job some how makes you above reproach from the public, the better your quality of life will be.\

EDIT: I'm not sure how to word my post so it doesn't sound like I'm harassing you, but that isn't my intent.

[brutal]

I'm right there with you. I've worked several jobs/professions in my life, but never one where people who have ZERO experience constantly try to tell me and my partners how to "better do our jobs" until I got into the Law Enforcement game. It not only grinds my gears, it really disappoints me that thanks to the internet everyone is an expert on LE procedure.

Close second is IT.

However, I do enjoy second guessing my doctors.

[Gman]

Close second is IT.

However, I do enjoy second guessing my doctors.
Agreed on both counts. "Why are our computers so expensive? I see them for $400 at Best Buy."

I keep my doctors on their toes by being informed and asking solid questions.

[Jer]

Close second is IT.

Move!


However, I do enjoy second guessing my doctors.

They're just trying to make money while they can because WebMD is going to put them all out of business soon enough.

"Man, my shoulder is a bit sore today"

*checks symptoms on WebMD*

Oh dear gawd I'm dying!"

[hollohas]

We second guess and Monday morning quarterback everything. Everyday, here or in real life, there is something that all of us will question was done right or not without having much experience in it. It's not just LE, but LE seems to be the only one's who get so upset when people second guess them.

We question literally everything our elected officials do yet most of us have little legislative experience and none of us are in on the backroom negotiations that go into forming bills. Yet, we still feel the need to say they do it wrong. We question political campaigns without having ever been involved in one. Nobody ever gets accused of "Monday morning quarterbacking" legislative decisions or elections we know nothing about.

We second guess legal rulings with zero legal experience and no law degree.

People second guess doctors ALL THE TIME. Google has made it worse.

We second guess our mechanics, our co-workers, IT (as previously mentioned). We second guess the coaches of our favorite sports team with nothing but a 2nd string middle school team worth of experience. Same for the GM's of those teams. Non-parents second guess parents. Parents second guess other parents without having any experience with the issues the other faces. Shooters with little experience with one expertise questions those who are experts. Everyday firearms trainers are told they are wrong by people who shoot less than a box a year. Rarely does that get one the Monday morning label.

People questioning things is natural and common. LE are NOT special in that regard. It may upset you guys, but I promise, you aren't the only special ones under a microscope being constantly evaluated by the internet commandos.

[Bailey Guns]

Part of keeping the peace is de-escalation and conflict resolution with direct interaction with the public, which nearly every single person does nearly every single day. It doesn't take knowledge of a super secret "LE procedure" to understand how to interact with people or be able to tell when someone has screwed up in doing so. In addition, the general public is the very target of "LE procedure," so they have a highly vested interest in how well things are working. If a specialized doctor screws up some procedure and a patient with a rare medical condition dies as a result, most people won't have that condition so they won't care. However, the police deal with "the public" which includes every single person in the country, including the LE community. The quicker you can get over the idea that the most basic part of your job some how makes you above reproach from the public, the better your quality of life will be.\

EDIT: I'm not sure how to word my post so it doesn't sound like I'm harassing you, but that isn't my intent.

Well, sometimes deescalating the situation requires somebody gets shot. Especially some moron that can't follow simple instructions like "DROP THE KNIFE" or "LEMME SEE YOUR HANDS". I'm not talking necessarily about this incident. Just like a I wasn't necessarily talking about this incident with my last post.

I don't think it really has anything to do with (or very little) people having a vested interest in police procedures because they're the "very target" of those procedures. I think police work can be very ugly. People want it done but they oftentimes don't want to see it or the outcome. Especially in this day and age when so many are more "enlightened". Most people can't imagine fighting with someone in the middle of the night on the side of the road, after you've been stabbed in the face with a screwdriver, until you almost pass out from fatigue, because that's a very ugly thing to think about, much less to do. And then, when they actually see it on YouTube, they just can't believe the cop didn't do this or didn't do that or didn't shoot the guy in the leg. And they say shit like that because they don't have the experience of having done that and they most likely never will. They haven't received the training from people who've been there and done that and recommend it be handled a certain way because that's what works best within the framework of the law.

Yes, officers practice deescalation all the time, day in and day out, and it usually works. Sometimes it doesn't though, and it's tragic. Officers don't have an unlimited amount of time to deescalate. Not to mention that whole "deescalation" thing is a two way street. People are obligated to follow lawful orders issued by the Gestapo police. If you don't think a lawful order applies to you don't be surprised when the officer deescalates the situation by tasing you or throwing you on the ground or maybe even shooting you.

Like many other things in life, people are often their own worst enemy...especially when they deal with the police.

[Irving]

I was going to mention the "shoot him in the leg," thing because that is an actual thing that people say, and is always total bullshit. Of course police work is more complex than just my post, but I wasn't trying to steer the thread into the discussion of what the public thinks about the police.

[Ronin13]

We second guess and Monday morning quarterback everything. Everyday, here or in real life, there is something that all of us will question was done right or not without having much experience in it. It's not just LE, but LE seems to be the only one's who get so upset when people second guess them.

We question literally everything our elected officials do yet most of us have little legislative experience and none of us are in on the backroom negotiations that go into forming bills. Yet, we still feel the need to say they do it wrong. We question political campaigns without having ever been involved in one. Nobody ever gets accused of "Monday morning quarterbacking" legislative decisions or elections we know nothing about.

We second guess legal rulings with zero legal experience and no law degree.

People second guess doctors ALL THE TIME. Google has made it worse.

We second guess our mechanics, our co-workers, IT (as previously mentioned). We second guess the coaches of our favorite sports team with nothing but a 2nd string middle school team worth of experience. Same for the GM's of those teams. Non-parents second guess parents. Parents second guess other parents without having any experience with the issues the other faces. Shooters with little experience with one expertise questions those who are experts. Everyday firearms trainers are told they are wrong by people who shoot less than a box a year. Rarely does that get one the Monday morning label.

People questioning things is natural and common. LE are NOT special in that regard. It may upset you guys, but I promise, you aren't the only special ones under a microscope being constantly evaluated by the internet commandos.

I'll just say we do second guess and Monday morning quarterback all the time. But, just because we do it, doesn't mean it's right, and doesn't make it right, especially coming from a position of inexperience or ignorance. I liken it to the people at hockey games when the forwards are trying to organize a scoring opportunity and fans start shouting "SHOOT!" I always have to shake my head and think "Yes, because they're the pros and don't know when a good time to shoot is." :rolleyes:

And to your last part- we may not be the only ones under a microscope, but last time I checked people didn't riot when Vance Joseph makes a bad call and puts the wrong quarterback in.

[crays]

And to your last part- we may not be the only ones under a microscope, but last time I checked people didn't riot when Vance Joseph makes a bad call and puts the wrong quarterback in.

Damn near, though... Good thing the season isn't a few weeks longer. [shithitsfan]

[hollohas]

...we may not be the only ones under a microscope, but last time I checked people didn't riot when Vance Joseph makes a bad call and puts the wrong quarterback in.

Oh, there have been plenty of riots after sporting events. But I see your point anyway.

Bottom line. Monday morning quarterbacking may not be cool, but this forum would have like 75% fewer posts if we weren't always trying to solve the world's problems with our keyboards. It's what we do. It's what people do everywhere. Here, around the water cooler, at the bar and at home.

[BladesNBarrels]

.......... last time I checked people didn't riot when Vance Joseph makes a bad call and puts the wrong quarterback in.

Dumb question. Which quarterback was the wrong one? They all seemed to be the wrong one this year

[dig]

[Ronin13]

Dumb question. Which quarterback was the wrong one? They all seemed to be the wrong one this year

[dig]

LOL
Beats me, I haven't watched a single game... Just going off what I heard from the news reports on 630.

[Bailey Guns]

You're making this jump to "beyond reproach" and I don't recall anyone saying that.

[vectorsc]

Last time I checked Vance Josephs crappy quarterback call didn't leave a pile of the corpses of innocent people behind it.

I'm just amazed the ROE for civilian police in the USA is much more permissive than the ROE for troops on deployment. If you shot a dude 5 times because he moved in a way that made you uncomfortable, you would probably get an appointment with the chair at the farm in Leavenworth.

I would have said a simple change to the ROE would mostly handle all of these issues: DO YOU SEE A LETHAL WEAPON? NO? NO SHOOT. Solved. Officer risk grows by .000000167%...respect for the police and their work goes up 10x.




And to your last part- we may not be the only ones under a microscope, but last time I checked people didn't riot when Vance Joseph makes a bad call and puts the wrong quarterback in.

[Jer]

Last time I checked Vance Josephs crappy quarterback call didn't leave a pile of the corpses of innocent people behind it.

I'm just amazed the ROE for civilian police in the USA is much more permissive than the ROE for troops on deployment. If you shot a dude 5 times because he moved in a way that made you uncomfortable, you would probably get an appointment with the chair at the farm in Leavenworth.

I would have said a simple change to the ROE would mostly handle all of these issues: DO YOU SEE A LETHAL WEAPON? NO? NO SHOOT. Solved. Officer risk grows by .000000167%...respect for the police and their work goes up 10x.

This.

While it may not be a popular position with some I cringe when I see people in LE say "my first job is to come home safe" ...No, your first job is to serve. Your second job is to protect. Your third job is to come home safe. Those first two come with a relative degree of risk (that I am all for minimizing as much as possible) you understood when you voluntarily took the job... so long as it doesn't come at the expense of the first two. Otherwise, what's the point?

I don't hate LEOs. Quite the contrary in fact. It just gets really difficult to try to defend them during some instances that IMHO makes them all look bad.

[vectorsc]

You're making this jump to "beyond reproach" and I don't recall anyone saying that.

So just beyond reproach by anyone who isn't on the inside of the machine?

Quote Originally Posted by Bailey Guns View Post
That's right. It's difficult to come up with an answer, even after reading all the reports and watching the YT videos and discussing it ad nauseam on internet forums. Now imagine how hard it is when you're the one behind the trigger making the split second decision without the benefit of internet experts to guide you. Sometimes bad decisions are made. Most of the time, thank God, these men and women make the correct decision under the most difficult of circumstances...again without the guidance of internet experts.

What just irritates me to no end is this rarely happens with any other profession. A doctor screws up and someone dies non-medical "experts" don't get on the internet and spout off about how the procedure that killed the patient should've been performed. They don't say the doctor wasn't using the right tactic or procedure for what s/he was doing. A pilot screws up and crashes an airplane and people die non-pilot "experts" don't get on internet forums and say "he should've used a little right rudder and adjusted the thrust" or some shit. But when a cop screws up, or even appears to screw up from the perspective of a 10 second video clip, everybody's suddenly a fucking expert on police tactics, procedures and training. And I'd venture to say that most of the "internet experts" are complete non-hackers who wouldn't last a shift in a busy city.

Yeah. It pushes my buttons. Always has, always will.
I'm right there with you. I've worked several jobs/professions in my life, but never one where people who have ZERO experience constantly try to tell me and my partners how to "better do our jobs" until I got into the Law Enforcement game. It not only grinds my gears, it really disappoints me that thanks to the internet everyone is an expert on LE procedure.

[Aloha_Shooter]

A lot of blame to go around. Why did an officer (not talking about THE officer in any specific case) make what appears to be a hasty or rash decision? I would guess a lot of times it's because s/he wasn't experienced enough, hadn't had enough training, perhaps was under "staffing pressures", etc. These kinds of things happen because the politicians -- who are all too happy to jump on the back of the PD and/or LEO in question -- would rather spend money on SJW projects or projects that will earn them graft instead of increasing manning in the police department and increasing their training budget to give them more range time, simulator time, etc. The general public -- which is also all too happy to jump on the back of the LEO in question -- will often refuse increases in taxes necessary to fund these things because they don't see a problem (until it happens), don't want to pay the taxes, or don't trust the politicians to actually use the money for what it was intended.

I don't know enough about LE procedures in general or this case in particular to have a relevant opinion but I've watched this forum long enough to form an opinion about when someone is being overly protective of LE or reflexively anti-LE and I see a LOT more of the latter behavior.

[Ronin13]

Last time I checked Vance Josephs crappy quarterback call didn't leave a pile of the corpses of innocent people behind it.

I'm just amazed the ROE for civilian police in the USA is much more permissive than the ROE for troops on deployment. If you shot a dude 5 times because he moved in a way that made you uncomfortable, you would probably get an appointment with the chair at the farm in Leavenworth.

I would have said a simple change to the ROE would mostly handle all of these issues: DO YOU SEE A LETHAL WEAPON? NO? NO SHOOT. Solved. Officer risk grows by .000000167%...respect for the police and their work goes up 10x.

When LEO deaths surpass combat fatalities we have a bit of a problem here. Considering the population differences between combat zones and here at home (10-20,000 troops in locales with 30M people vs close to 1M police for 300M supposedly "peaceful" citizens), that's a pretty terrible proposition. While Jer is right, serving our community should be priority #1, I'm not going to do my community any good if I'm not alive to serve. I agree that ROE is very different, I've been under both. In Afghanistan, however, we had force multipliers, such as armored vehicles, better body armor, carried rifles 24/7, air support, and never left with less than 12 guys backing us up. Here on the streets of the US, most of the time there are 4-20 officers on duty at a given time (depending upon jurisdiction), rifles rarely come out of the vehicle with you on a call, backup is minutes or more away (instead of right there with you), and any situation can turn ugly without warning (as we saw in Douglas County last weekend). You don't want police on a hair trigger ready to engage in deadly force, but troops sure as hell are.

From the outside looking in, it may appear that police have a looser ROE than military, but you should recognize that we have much more harsh scrutiny when we use our weapon in the line of duty. I've seen one questionable ROE issue downrange and there was absolutely zero chance of the NCO facing any kind of prison time. Meanwhile here, if there is even the slightest hint that the shoot was not on the up and up, that officer is looking at hard time, not to mention his job being gone in a second. One such case happened with a guy I worked with- he didn't use his firearm- and he lost his job and faced charges. Rightfully so, there should be intense scrutiny whenever a LEO uses any kind of force. It just frustrates me that people who don't see what goes on in the background (between IA, DAs, shoot teams- all the things the media doesn't report) say that LEO has "loose" ROE. I pray every day I put on my duty belt that I never have to use my gun. Beyond the obvious (taking a life, and my life being at risk), I worry about the other consequences- even if it's justified, how will the media/public view my actions? Will I end up in the right, like Officer Darren Wilson, but spark national outrage because the suspect was the wrong race? I agree, training needs to be in place so officers make the correct decisions, at the correct times. But there should also be some benefit of the doubt given, and reservation of opinion until all the facts can be discovered. We as a society entrust law enforcement with great responsibility, and with that comes intense scrutiny. But I take severe issue with the notion that police "leave a pile of the corpses of innocent people behind it." Of the many OISs that happen, I've seen a majority be deemed justified. Let's tone down the BLM rhetoric that is patently false and have the conversation like adults.
[rant-off]

[vectorsc]

I still don’t feel that No Weapon No Shoot is some lofty and unrealistic goal for our LE to aspire to. Even with your well laid out discussion points, every single one of them I will concede.

The problem is analyzing what would happen beforehand - if it has been done then I would be interested in seeing the analysis, but chances are there isn’t anything to look at. Anything greater than a 1to1 trade for reduction in deaths of civilians vs officers would be clearly beneficial. And seeing as how the very definition of duty and sacrifice indicates that an officer should lay down their lives such that an innocent can live would indicate even a direct trade is advisable, it would be very interesting to see some numbers.

[hollohas]

ETA 2:
6,937 military casualties in operation Iraqi freedom and afganistan since 2001; not counting any other combat and non-combat fatalities at home and abroad. I'm not sure how to get those figures, but it would definately add several hundred if not a couple thousand.
2,687 total LEO casualties in that same period.

If we do a broad scope, total LEO casualties since our founding: Approximately 20,000
Total Military casualties since our founding: Over 1,300,000

LEO fatalities are tragic; I just don't want to diminish that of the soldier...

Thanks for posting this. Wonder what percentage of LE casualties are gunshots, hit by car, etc.

[Ronin13]

It depends on the situation imho.

If multiple officers have rifles up and on target, ready to fire (such as the case of the guy in the hotel hallway) it needs to be a policy of not firing until a weapon is visible. In that situation, officers have more than enough reaction time available to unload on a suspect if they start to present e.g. a firearm before there is any statistically significant risk.

On the other hand, if an officer has a weapon holstered and a suspect appears to be reaching for a weapon, then it is far more justified for the officer to draw and fire, as there would be far too much risk upon the officers life if he waited for actual presentation of a firearm.

Once a gun is already pointed at another by a trained individual (either LEO pointing at suspect or suspect pointing at LEO) as long as they are more than four feet apart, there's pretty much zero tactical chance of the other suddenly pulling a weapon from concealment and successfully getting it up to (successfully) shoot before having at least a couple holes punched inside them.

TLDR: If officers (especially multiple officers) already have guns drawn and ready, then it needs to be a "only if you see a weapon, or they try to otherwise physically attack, then you can use deadly physical force".
If officers have not already drawn their weapon, then it needs to be a "if they appear to be going for a weapon, you can use deadly physical force" policy.

I'll ETA: There are 14 "civilian" career professions that are more deadly than career law enforcement, the 15th deadliest profession. Even things like roofers are 4x more deadly, pilots 5x more deadly, even your taxi driver and groundskeeper have a statistically far riskier career. There are certainly risks involved, but I do tire over the myth/perception that it's an incredibly dangerous job such as that "normal" people cannot comprehend the risks.

ETA 2:
6,937 military casualties in operation Iraqi freedom and afganistan since 2001; not counting any other combat and non-combat fatalities at home and abroad. I'm not sure how to get those figures, but it would definately add several hundred if not a couple thousand.
2,687 total LEO casualties in that same period.

If we do a broad scope, total LEO casualties since our founding: Approximately 20,000
Total Military casualties since our founding: Over 1,300,000

LEO fatalities are tragic; I just don't want to diminish that of the soldier...

Use of force policy is a lot more complicated than just boilerplate "Gun visible shoot, no gun, no shoot." But I understand your meaning, and don't disagree. I don't write policy or procedures, I just follow, and I like to think coupled with a sturdy base of common sense, I have received adequate training to conduct myself appropriately in a use of force situation- but we won't know until that day comes- which I hope never does.

As far as "More deadly" professions, yes, LE is not very high on the list. That being said, the likelihood of a roofer or groundskeeper being assaulted, stabbed, or shot, is excessively low. Outside of LE/Security, can you name another civilian job that either requires or highly recommends employees wear body armor? That factor alone adds a level of danger, perhaps not deadliness.

I wasn't referring to overall totals, not even since 2001. You misunderstood my meaning, and perhaps I should have been more precise, the last two years have seen more LE deaths (each year, not in total) than combat related. That in no way diminishes the tragedy of those killed in service to our country overseas, I lost a couple good friends downrange. I was just pointing out that in recent times the pendulum is swinging away from combat to the warzone some of our cities are turning into at times. Don't mistake my words, it's far safer here than in places beyond our borders (Mexico for one), but you also have to factor there are a lot of people who reside within our borders who hold a very low opinion, teetering on homicidal, towards LE. Until attitudes change, the "us vs them" mentality (which I vehemently disagree with) isn't likely to end.

[Irving]

As far as "More deadly" professions, yes, LE is not very high on the list. That being said, the likelihood of a roofer or groundskeeper being assaulted, stabbed, or shot, is excessively low. Outside of LE/Security, can you name another civilian job that either requires or highly recommends employees wear body armor? That factor alone adds a level of danger, perhaps not deadliness.


So injury or death only counts if you're assaulted, stabbed, or shot, got it. Someone should let all the first responders know so they can start changing over to their new 1 on, 30 off shift schedules.

[Ronin13]

So injury or death only counts if you're assaulted, stabbed, or shot, got it. Someone should let all the first responders know so they can start changing over to their new 1 on, 30 off shift schedules.

You misinterpreted my meaning.

[Irving]

I don't think I am. A job can be endlessly dangerous, but it doesn't register on your radar unless it involves person on person violence.

I get it man. If you were to admit that other people face danger that is just as dangerous as you face, then you'd lose your self-appointed position of Ultimate Authority on Danger.

[Irving]

No problem.

[Ronin13]

Prior to foxtrot's admonishment:
I see your raise and I fold.

[Irving]

Prior to foxtrot's admonishment:
I see your raise and I fold.

At the risk of sneaking a last kick at a dead horse, I want to make it crystal clear that I'm taking issue with your attitude in certain discussions, and not you as a person. My opinion on how I perceive what you're trying to say means absolutely nothing, so I won't take offense when you think I'm equally full of shit and choose to ignore me. Beer icon.

[Ronin13]

At the risk of sneaking a last kick at a dead horse, I want to make it crystal clear that I'm taking issue with your attitude in certain discussions, and not you as a person. My opinion on how I perceive what you're trying to say means absolutely nothing, so I won't take offense when you think I'm equally full of shit and choose to ignore me. Beer icon.

No, that's not it at all, I don't think you're full of shit or anything. I think you're misinterpreting my "attitude in certain discussions"- I do not intend to come off the way you perceived- at least in this particular instance. If I do, mea culpa- that might be mostly because I didn't articulate that properly. I was just presenting a counter-point to someone else's post (yours I have taken no issue with as I believe you may have misunderstood my meaning). My issue was with vectorsc and his comment about cops leaving a trail of innocent bodies, and then things spiraled from there. What I think you originally took issue was with misconstrued as me taking a "cops take more risk than anyone else" stance and that was not what I was trying to convey. I was simply stating that not many other professions are the major risks of injury due to the violent actions of others. I recognize the dangers in my profession- and respect that I face much less danger than a lot of other professions (never would I expect to have my limbs turned into ribbons, or be pulverized, or even face exposure to fracking material bursting through a pipe at 500psi). Sorry if I didn't articulate that better. [Beer]

[Irving]

When I was a kid, I went to a funeral for a guy that died in an oil field explosion. My dad told me that there was nothing left of his body. That's the way I remember it anyway.

[crays]

snip

Question for Ronin13:

Are you on patrol now, or still assigned to courts?

(Which is a shit show of its own.)

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

[Duman]

For those non-LE, a good book is 'After the Echo'.

It's one officer's account of what happened after he took the shot. It was a good shoot, based on the facts presented.

Between the official internal investigation, and the legal nightmare, I'm thankful people are still willing to become LE.

[Irving]

Between the official internal investigation, and the legal nightmare, I'm thankful people are still willing to become LE.

Agreed. There are much better paying jobs, requiring less formal education, and often safer as well. It's a unique person who wants to do good in the world enough to be a police officer, and even more so after finding out that all the corporate bullshit they thought they left behind is still present, but now comes with jail time or death if you screw up.

[RblDiver]

*Sigh* So the guy who made the call is now charged with involuntary manslaughter. Should have been murder imo.

[Ronin13]

Question for Ronin13:

Are you on patrol now, or still assigned to courts?

(Which is a shit show of its own.)

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
Currently on TRD (desk duty) due to injury, but yes, still assigned to the courts. Apparently my injury came at the perfect time as they've been inundated the last week or so with taking reports on jury scams (ACSO Facebook has been posting about it a lot lately).

*Sigh* So the guy who made the call is now charged with involuntary manslaughter. Should have been murder imo.
I heard he admitted to doing it on YouTube.

[Irving]

Last night a Papa John's agent knocked at my door with a paid for pizza. It wasn't ours and the telephone number was one that wasn't in my phone (from California), so we turned her away. Oh well.

[StagLefty]

Last night a Papa John's agent knocked at my door with a paid for pizza. It wasn't ours and the telephone number was one that wasn't in my phone (from California), so we turned her away. Oh well.

Papa John's has a spy ring ? [ROFL2]

[Ramsker]

Last night a Papa John's agent knocked at my door with a paid for pizza. It wasn't ours and the telephone number was one that wasn't in my phone (from California), so we turned her away. Oh well.


Papa John's has a spy ring ? [ROFL2]

It's like the "Phone Cops" from WKRP.

[Irving]

Papa John's has a spy ring ? [ROFL2]

I think so. When I walked outside to see if my neighbors ordered (they had out of town guests over), I saw another person in the delivery vehicle. Clearly some sort of Field Training Agent.