View Full Version : Teen dies after shootout with former Greenwood Village Police Officer
From my understanding...former GWVPD Officer was pissed about kids driving fast in his neighborhood, proceeds to get in car and follow said teens. Argument ensues...teen pulls gun, fires first and gets a non-lethal hit. Former officer open fires and kills teen.
Aurora teen dies after exchanging gunfire with former police officer (msn.com) (https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/viral/aurora-teen-dies-after-exchanging-gunfire-with-former-police-officer/vi-AAR9vDM)
100% avoidable situation. There used to be a house down the street from me about a year and a half ago where the occupants would buy cars at the auction, give them a tune up and drive extremely fast down the street. Aurora PD talked to them, which helped for about 6 months, then it started up again. One day my neighbor told me there were a lot of police, fire & EMS activity at their house the night before. I apparently slept through it all. Never saw them again after that. Not sure what happened, but the problem corrected itself. I'd be curious to see where this case goes.
funkymonkey1111
11-28-2021, 10:18
From my understanding...former GWVPD Officer was pissed about kids driving fast in his neighborhood, proceeds to get in car and follow said teens. Argument ensues...teen pulls gun, fires first and gets a non-lethal hit. Former officer open fires and kills teen.
Aurora teen dies after exchanging gunfire with former police officer (msn.com) (https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/viral/aurora-teen-dies-after-exchanging-gunfire-with-former-police-officer/vi-AAR9vDM)
100% avoidable situation. There used to be a house down the street from me about a year and a half ago where the occupants would buy cars at the auction, give them a tune up and drive extremely fast down the street. Aurora PD talked to them, which helped for about 6 months, then it started up again. One day my neighbor told me there were a lot of police, fire & EMS activity at their house the night before. I apparently slept through it all. Never saw them again after that. Not sure what happened, but the problem corrected itself. I'd be curious to see where this case goes.
yes, it was 100% avoidable for the "teen" to not drive like an ass--but surely it was his gig as a meals on wheels driver delivering to non-binary POC's that made him be in a hurry all the time. Sometimes people have had enough with crap in their neighborhoods.
eddiememphis
11-28-2021, 10:19
Saw this on 9news a couple days ago. They said the cop sat in his truck, taunting the kids, then came around his truck gun drawn and the parties exchanged shots. 11 shots.
Another situation better left up to uniformed officers.
https://www.9news.com/article/news/crime/fatal-shooting-aurora-2-shot-each-other/73-4771b274-3ab1-4e97-a2e1-71bcc14117fa
The doorbell cam footage is towards the bottom of the article linked.
Someone shouted "lets go n****" as a guy rounded the truck, but who shouted it, and who rounded the truck, who shot first, obviously it's not 100% clear (eddie noted it likely was the former officer rounding the truck).
Former officer was 36. Leads me to wonder why a 36 year old is not currently still an officer in the first place. Obviously de-escalation would have gone a long way and an officer should be professional enough to do that. If it was the 36yo that got out of the truck and charged, that's wholly unnecessary, and hot-headed unless a number of very-unlikely situations were occurring. So it's appearing like a probable road-rage/homicide, but who knows.
Based on the rough impression, I think the former officer may soon be meeting... "Somebody that [he] used to know". Probably a few of them. But who knows, impression might be off depending on who is doing what.
Saw this on 9news a couple days ago. They said the cop sat in his truck, taunting the kids, then came around his truck gun drawn and the parties exchanged shots. 11 shots.
Another situation better left up to uniformed officers.
https://www.9news.com/article/news/crime/fatal-shooting-aurora-2-shot-each-other/73-4771b274-3ab1-4e97-a2e1-71bcc14117fa
The doorbell cam footage is towards the bottom of the article linked.
My thoughts exactly. The teen committed a misdemeanor, which to my knowledge no jurisdictions are bothering with anyway. I've seen people with 5+ misdemeanor warrants get told to kick rocks by PD because jails won't take them. So what was the "former" officer's plan once he got them stopped? APD is on critical staffing and it would likely take them 1-hour or more just to get there. So the guy in the truck taunts the teen, gets out with gun in hand and in turn provokes a gunfight?
Someone shouted "lets go n****" as a guy rounded the truck, but who shouted it, and who rounded the truck, who shot first, obviously it's not 100% clear (eddie noted it likely was the former officer rounding the truck).
Former officer was 36. Leads me to wonder why a 36 year old is not currently still an officer in the first place. Obviously de-escalation would have gone a long way and an officer should be professional enough to do that. If it was the 36yo that got out of the truck and charged, that's wholly unnecessary, and hot-headed unless a number of very-unlikely situations were occurring. So it's appearing like a probable road-rage/homicide, but who knows.
Based on the rough impression, I think the former officer may soon be meeting... "Somebody that [he] used to know". Probably a few of them. But who knows, impression might be off depending on who is doing what.
From the information I was able to gather, the teen fired first, the subsequent shots were from the "former" officer coming around the back of the truck. You are 100% spot on that the guy should've been more professional and approached the situation differently. A source tells me the guy left GWVPD on his own in lieu of being terminated.
BushMasterBoy
11-28-2021, 13:02
My opinion. Ex cop did us all a favor.
BPTactical
11-28-2021, 13:26
When assholes collide
Little Dutch
11-28-2021, 14:35
I’m just going to say that who shot first doesn’t matter. At least it shouldn’t. Waiting for someone to shoot first is a terrible f’kin idea.
More important would be to figure out who was in the wrong here.
JohnnyEgo
11-28-2021, 14:54
I am personally of the belief that you should always be prepared when trouble finds you, but you shouldn't go looking for it. This former officer decided to look for trouble, and found it. Bad choices all around.
I am personally of the belief that you should always be prepared when trouble finds you, but you shouldn't go looking for it. This former officer decided to look for trouble, and found it. Bad choices all around.
100% [Awesom]
KevDen2005
11-28-2021, 15:21
Hi-jacking thread a little bit. I saw this and I have no doubt the entire situation could have been avoidable. But sometimes things go down roads we didn't think would happen. I would definitely look into some type of self defense insurance and I have just started looking into getting one of those in car camera systems, I know Stu has one and could definitely make a recommendation better than I could at this point. But bad guys friends are usually going to side with bad guy.
eddiememphis
11-28-2021, 15:22
My opinion. Ex cop did us all a favor.
You better hope you are never involved in a shooting. Prosecutors loves to find statements like this.
JohnnyDrama
11-28-2021, 15:23
I am personally of the belief that you should always be prepared when trouble finds you, but you shouldn't go looking for it. This former officer decided to look for trouble, and found it. Bad choices all around.
+1
Gcompact30
11-28-2021, 16:17
Why does a teenager have a gun? Isn’t it illegal to possess a handgun under the age of 21? Just my two cents or did I miss something or did a law change?
.455_Hunter
11-28-2021, 17:09
Why does a teenager have a gun? Isn?t it illegal to possess a handgun under the age of 21? Just my two cents or did I miss something or did a law change?
The state law is 18 for handguns without specific exceptions and permissions that I doubt applied to the 17 year old in this case.
I tend to be pretty strongly opposed to laws based on restricting simple possession versus punishing negative actions of the holder.
Gcompact30
11-28-2021, 17:12
I agree with YA!!!! Can’t wait to see how this is going to go. Should be interesting how he received the gun. You have to be 21 to purchase.
Why does a teenager have a gun? Isn’t it illegal to possess a handgun under the age of 21? Just my two cents or did I miss something or did a law change?
The state law is 18 for handguns without specific exceptions and permissions that I doubt the 17 year old possessed in this case.
Aurora is on a roll. Also 5 shot at a party yesterday as well. Then the highly publicized school stuff.
Vic Tory
11-28-2021, 17:26
Many many unanswered questions.
I note the LEOs still hadn't arrived by the 5, plus minutes after the shooting and the female voice said she called the cops.
The man who shot the kid appears to have tracked him down. That's not wise. (I know. Hindsight....)
"When seconds count the cops are minutes away."
Saw this on 9news a couple days ago. They said the cop sat in his truck, taunting the kids, then came around his truck gun drawn and the parties exchanged shots. 11 shots.
Another situation better left up to uniformed officers.
https://www.9news.com/article/news/crime/fatal-shooting-aurora-2-shot-each-other/73-4771b274-3ab1-4e97-a2e1-71bcc14117fa
The doorbell cam footage is towards the bottom of the article linked.
That video was edited.
BushMasterBoy
11-28-2021, 17:56
You better hope you are never involved in a shooting. Prosecutors loves to find statements like this.
In London?
One more civilian vigilante...
If you are not the victim, stop playing cop. It will do nothing but lead to bad things for yourself.
I hope this civilian vigilante is arrested and convicted and jailed for a long time for murder/man slaughter.
BushMasterBoy
11-28-2021, 18:11
Law enforcement official means a peace officer as described in section 16-2.5-101
.455_Hunter
11-28-2021, 18:55
A concerned citizen observing and reporting low to mid-level criminal conduct is one thing. I do it all the time- suspicious vehicles parked afterhours at trailheads, witnessing of menacing/minor assaults, unsafe drivers, etc. I make a point of trying NOT leave my vehicle (or other relative place of safety), just getting on the phone to LE. A few times, I have declined the request of dispatchers to provide additional information since could expose me to an incident that I don't need to be a participant.
Especially when you are on public property, direct and/or continued confrontation always runs this risk of problematic escalation. Is it warranted for some actions? Yes (see Johnny Hurley, or what happened to Bigelow family), but the vast majority of the time, probably not worth the risk.
THINK BEFORE YOU ACT! Concerned and engaged citizens should remind themselves of this daily.
eddiememphis
11-28-2021, 18:56
Law enforcement official means a peace officer as described in section 16-2.5-101
The guy in the truck is former law enforcement official.
Let's play it could have prevented if......
1. the dumbass 17 year old punk b1tch asses did not speed and trying to do fast-fuck-furious (3F) on the street the first place.
2. the dumbass truck driver just called the cops at the safe distance with video footage to prove that they were driving like crazy.
3. the dumbass 17 year old punk ass did not illegally carry a handgun and brandish (or fire first).
17 yr old chose to engage in a gunfight...he lost. The End.
You missed #4 and #5 Prena:
4. A bastard would've pulled out about 18 years ago.
5. A different bastard would've pulled out about 37 years ago.
Vic Tory
11-28-2021, 20:44
That video was edited.How so? (Serious question. I know nothing about how to spot such editing.)
17 yr old chose to engage in a gunfight...he lost. The End.
Or was self defense against some punk who was trying to detain him.
This FORMER, as in not a cop, LEO had zero authority to do anything to the kid other than report. Zero authority to chase. Zero authority to chase. Zero authority to confront. This civilian killed a kid for no legitimate reason other than he was annoyed by speeding. This vigilante should never be on the free side of a fence again.
The guy in the truck is former law enforcement official.
Former as in no longer has authority to do jack shit about enforcement of any laws.
Play stupid games, win stupid prizes
Everyone loses
You missed #4 and #5 Prena:
4. A bastard would've pulled out about 18 years ago.
5. A different bastard would've pulled out about 37 years ago.
4 and 5 reminds me of a movie �� called,
https://i5.walmartimages.com/asr/ab497563-2f16-4b75-bec2-05d04f14b742_1.35e15ad71c54f04335d74fee17093d78.jp eg?odnHeight=612&odnWidth=612&odnBg=FFFFFF
KevDen2005
11-29-2021, 08:23
Or was self defense against some punk who was trying to detain him.
This FORMER, as in not a cop, LEO had zero authority to do anything to the kid other than report. Zero authority to chase. Zero authority to chase. Zero authority to confront. This civilian killed a kid for no legitimate reason other than he was annoyed by speeding. This vigilante should never be on the free side of a fence again.
Are you saying that you would never go up to a neighbor or person in your neighborhood to ask them to stop driving recklessly, or turn down their music, or any other annoying habit that neighbors have. You would only report it? I know I have gone to a neighbor to complain, while armed. I wasn't planning on getting into a gun fight but I'm always armed. I'm sure many others here are as well. Your post clearly supports the idea of a former cop being charged because you don't like that he was a cop, but what if he wasn't? Don't take this to mean that I support the idea that he becomes aggressive, but anyone has the right to address something they don't like in their neighborhood, and has the right to self defense if the need arises. Is that what happened? I don't know, but I'm not trying to judge too quickly considering the former LEO has probably a legal right to conceal a firearm more-so than the the teen does.
Bailey Guns
11-29-2021, 08:26
^^ Nailed it...
Grant H.
11-29-2021, 08:31
Are you saying that you would never go up to a neighbor or person in your neighborhood to ask them to stop driving recklessly, or turn down their music, or any other annoying habit that neighbors have. You would only report it? I know I have gone to a neighbor to complain, while armed. I wasn't planning on getting into a gun fight but I'm always armed. I'm sure many others here are as well. Your post clearly supports the idea of a former cop being charged because you don't like that he was a cop, but what if he wasn't? Don't take this to mean that I support the idea that he becomes aggressive, but anyone has the right to address something they don't like in their neighborhood, and has the right to self defense if the need arises. Is that what happened? I don't know, but I'm not trying to judge too quickly considering the former LEO has probably a legal right to conceal a firearm more-so than the the teen does.
I can't say this is true of Eric, but I can tell you that there is quite the contingent of society that has no interest in going to their neighbors. They would much rather report their neighbor to the HOA, Cty/State, or Police than talk to them.
Hell, they probably wave and say hi, know a few names, but that's about as deep as that relationship goes for many neighbors anymore.
Are you saying that you would never go up to a neighbor or person in your neighborhood to ask them to stop driving recklessly, or turn down their music, or any other annoying habit that neighbors have. You would only report it? I know I have gone to a neighbor to complain, while armed. I wasn't planning on getting into a gun fight but I'm always armed. I'm sure many others here are as well. Your post clearly supports the idea of a former cop being charged because you don't like that he was a cop, but what if he wasn't? Don't take this to mean that I support the idea that he becomes aggressive, but anyone has the right to address something they don't like in their neighborhood, and has the right to self defense if the need arises. Is that what happened? I don't know, but I'm not trying to judge too quickly considering the former LEO has probably a legal right to conceal a firearm more-so than the the teen does.
I agree with you, as I have talked to my neighbors in the past about annoying behavior and if approached politely it "sometimes" solves the problem. However...given current times, where people as a whole are wound pretty tight, I don't know if I'd be comfortable talking to anyone about annoying behavior regardless of how polite I am.
.455_Hunter
11-29-2021, 09:44
The line between what people would view as reasonable "confrontation" varies greatly depending on the individual and the situation. Flashing somebody for not dimming their brights is very accepted and common, but has initiated homicidal responses in the past. Asking somebody to not play loud base soundtrack video games in the apartment above you at 2:00am would also seem reasonable, but in my case, that dude lost his shit, and I had to get his chain-of-command involved to correct the problem. You never know what is going to happen. This is a constant challenge for me, as my .mil background makes me want to provide "correction and commentary" on other people's conduct all the time.
This happened a few neighborhoods away from me and there’s is a lot of speculation on both sides of the story. I’m going to wait until the investigation is done to form an opinion.
Are you saying that you would never go up to a neighbor or person in your neighborhood to ask them to stop driving recklessly, or turn down their music, or any other annoying habit that neighbors have. You would only report it? I know I have gone to a neighbor to complain, while armed. I wasn't planning on getting into a gun fight but I'm always armed. I'm sure many others here are as well. Your post clearly supports the idea of a former cop being charged because you don't like that he was a cop, but what if he wasn't? Don't take this to mean that I support the idea that he becomes aggressive, but anyone has the right to address something they don't like in their neighborhood, and has the right to self defense if the need arises. Is that what happened? I don't know, but I'm not trying to judge too quickly considering the former LEO has probably a legal right to conceal a firearm more-so than the the teen does.
At the same time, what if the EX-cop brandished / pulled weapon first? Does said teen have a right to use deadly self defense?
eddiememphis
11-29-2021, 11:19
How so? (Serious question. I know nothing about how to spot such editing.)
They froze the video when the shooting occured. The audio played. They said so in the article and the news reader girls stated this as well.
Martinjmpr
11-29-2021, 11:36
My question is: What is the relevance of the fact that the shooter is a "former GV Police officer?" Is there any reason to think his former employment had anything to do with this shooting?
If he once worked as a newspaper carrier, would the headline read "former paperboy involved in shooting?" If he once worked as an exotic dancer would it be "former stripper involved in shooting?"
Serious question. What is the relevance of his FORMER position to the incident he was involved in?
It seems like someone concocted that headline to cause the reader to make assumptions about what happened and why.
BTW, in the bad-old-Jim-Crow days of the Deep South, it was very common for a black person's race to be included in any negative headline or story, as in "Negro motorist arrested for causing fatal accident" where if the driver had been white it would simply have read "motorist arrested for causing fatal accident."
So this seems to be something similar: We put "ex police officer" to make the person reading it assume that there was some kind of connection between this guy being an EX police officer (i.e. someone who had committed some kind of misconduct or resigned under a cloud) and this incident.
What sells ads for 300, Alex
Bailey Guns
11-29-2021, 11:45
This happened a few neighborhoods away from me and there?s is a lot of speculation on both sides of the story. I'm going to wait until the investigation is done to form an opinion.
That's just crazy talk right there...
My question is: What is the relevance of the fact that the shooter is a "former GV Police officer?" Is there any reason to think his former employment had anything to do with this shooting?
If he once worked as a newspaper carrier, would the headline read "former paperboy involved in shooting?" If he once worked as an exotic dancer would it be "former stripper involved in shooting?"
Serious question. What is the relevance of his FORMER position to the incident he was involved in?
It seems like someone concocted that headline to cause the reader to make assumptions about what happened and why.
BTW, in the bad-old-Jim-Crow days of the Deep South, it was very common for a black person's race to be included in any negative headline or story, as in "Negro motorist arrested for causing fatal accident" where if the driver had been white it would simply have read "motorist arrested for causing fatal accident."
So this seems to be something similar: We put "ex police officer" to make the person reading it assume that there was some kind of connection between this guy being an EX police officer (i.e. someone who had committed some kind of misconduct or resigned under a cloud) and this incident.
Many times peoples professions are in news articles especially when they are Police, Teachers, Doctors, Politicians, CEO, etc. Some professions have more "public trust" or "accountability" so news lists their profession.
At the same time if a firefighter or police officer dies it makes the news whereas Joe Schmo dying doesnt.
The "positive" reporting (ie. a Hero died fighting cancer) of a profession also has the inverse that when the also get the negative reporting.
I am curious as to which party said "lets go n******". It's just hard to tell what went down off a crappy doorbell camera. As people have already reiterated, both sides could have avoided it. Even if it ends up being lawful self defense, it's still avoidable. De-escalation is more valuable than being right or preserving ego. And as all married guys can attest, we're never right anyway.
kidicarus13
11-29-2021, 15:51
Serious question. What is the relevance of his FORMER position to the incident he was involved in?
I think that the ex-officer had use of force training is relevant in this situation. Even though he was not acting in an LE capacity.
KevDen2005
11-29-2021, 16:48
At the same time, what if the EX-cop brandished / pulled weapon first? Does said teen have a right to use deadly self defense?
Most likely. He could still potentially be charged for the illegal carrying of a firearm, if that was the case, but may still be entitled to self defense, that's up to a court to decided.
KevDen2005
11-29-2021, 16:50
I can't say this is true of Eric, but I can tell you that there is quite the contingent of society that has no interest in going to their neighbors. They would much rather report their neighbor to the HOA, Cty/State, or Police than talk to them.
Hell, they probably wave and say hi, know a few names, but that's about as deep as that relationship goes for many neighbors anymore.
Honestly, I don't really know my neighbors, but I work nights and I'm a private person. But that hasn't stopped me from talking to my neighbor. I know what the law says I can and cannot do and it still allows me to knock on a neighbors door to ask them to stop. If they get aggressive I'll call the police to handle it after that.
Society wants less police but refuses to try anything themselves first.
KevDen2005
11-29-2021, 16:52
I am curious as to which party said "lets go n******". It's just hard to tell what went down off a crappy doorbell camera. As people have already reiterated, both sides could have avoided it. Even if it ends up being lawful self defense, it's still avoidable. De-escalation is more valuable than being right or preserving ego. And as all married guys can attest, we're never right anyway.
I'm also vey curious. Very much hoping that it was not the former LEO. I know it's not a verbal command I have ever been trained to use. I've been called the N word on numerous occasions by suspects while arresting them, even though I'm white. It's always a little funny when all the white cops look at each other during the arrest to try and figure out which one the suspect is referring to.
From the sounds of the voices, it does not sound like the pickup driver that yelled that.
The most complete video that I have seen
https://youtu.be/ihOiXgvGfqY
The truck driver is lucky that he did not get shot. He is tactically numb and walk towards the illegal weapon carrying minor.
Too much youtube shooting tactics.
I would not even do that if I had a body armor.
The truck driver is lucky that he did not get shot. He is tactically numb and walk towards the illegal weapon carrying minor.
Too much youtube shooting tactics.
I would not even do that if I had a body armor.
He took one to the leg
Vic Tory
11-29-2021, 18:30
They froze the video when the shooting occured. The audio played. They said so in the article and the news reader girls stated this as well.
My question is: What is the relevance of the fact that the shooter is a "former GV Police officer?" Is there any reason to think his former employment had anything to do with this shooting?
<snip>
It seems like someone concocted that headline to cause the reader to make assumptions about what happened and why.IMO, you are "close" with that last.
I see the tactic as journalistic click bait.
This happened a few neighborhoods away from me and there’s is a lot of speculation on both sides of the story. I’m going to wait until the investigation is done to form an opinion.Man! You surely know how to take the air out of a lot of speculation!
(Oh. Never mind....)
I think that the ex-officer had use of force training is relevant in this situation. Even though he was not acting in an LE capacity.
Agreed. It's also likely they will subpoena his personnel file from GVPD which will bring all the skeletons out of the closet. Depending on what's in that file...it may not bode well for him. I mean, he already took a minor incident and turned it into a felony pretty quick. This is something I always try to keep in mind since I have had LE training as well AND I have a stack of certificates on the wall in my armory that speak to the level of my training since I've gotten out of LE.
KevDen2005
11-29-2021, 18:38
Agreed. It's also likely they will subpoena his personnel file from GVPD which will bring all the skeletons out of the closet. Depending on what's in that file...it may not bode well for him. I mean, he already took a minor incident and turned it into a felony pretty quick. This is something I always try to keep in mind since I have had LE training as well AND I have a stack of certificates on the wall in my armory that speak to the level of my training since I've gotten out of LE.
I've told every trainee over the past several years to go to as many de-escalation courses as you can. They aren't sexy or fun, but the more training you have the better. Courts are looking at if there was time to de-escalate and if attempts were made
He took one to the leg
I guess I did not see the updated news. thanks.
https://kdvr.com/news/local/17-year-old-killed-in-aurora-shooting/
.455_Hunter
11-29-2021, 22:41
Interesting.
Peyton Blitstein is the 17 year old. For some reason, I expected a somebody who could pass for mid-20's.
https://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/local-news/sources-confirm-identity-of-teen-killed-by-gunfire-exchange-with-former-officer
https://www.gofundme.com/f/in-memory-of-our-loving-son-nephew-and-grandson
I really would like to know what happened here.
Vic Tory
11-30-2021, 10:45
The more small chunks of information get revealed, the more I suspect we're not going to learn the truth on this one (either).
I don't know what to think at this point.
BushMasterBoy
11-30-2021, 12:08
Posts on the video from people that knew the 17 y/o said he was a drug dealing thug. I'm just glad he didn't shoot any members of this forum.
.455_Hunter
11-30-2021, 12:20
Posts on the video from people that knew the 17 y/o said he was a drug dealing thug. I'm just glad he didn't shoot any members of this forum.
Also very interesting. Like I said, I would really like to know the whole story.
Did we have zero, one, or two thugs?
It's always a little funny when all the white cops look at each other during the arrest to try and figure out which one the suspect is referring to.
"Sir, would you mind clarifying which n***** you're referring to?"
[ROFL2]
kidicarus13
11-30-2021, 12:30
Posts on the video from people that knew the 17 y/o said he was a drug dealing thug. I'm just glad he didn't shoot any members of this forum.The GoFundMe page certainly does not portray him as a "drug dealing thug" [emoji56]
Aloha_Shooter
11-30-2021, 13:22
The GoFundMe page certainly does not portray him as a "drug dealing thug" [emoji56]
They never do. "My baby didn't do nothing."
I would like to point out for the members here who reflexively believe the worst about LEOs and former LEOs that there are many reasons people leave jobs. There are number of people who have left the military or LEO jobs recently because they disagreed with what they were being asked to do. How many of us sympathized with Dirty Harry when he threw his badge into the lake?
BushMasterBoy
11-30-2021, 17:11
Another fine teen. Killed three in school.
https://www.clickondetroit.com/news/local/2021/11/30/oxford-high-school-on-lockdown-due-to-emergency-situation/
Another fine teen. Killed three in school.
https://www.clickondetroit.com/news/local/2021/11/30/oxford-high-school-on-lockdown-due-to-emergency-situation/
Not related to this thread at all, but ok
BushMasterBoy
11-30-2021, 18:40
Not related to this thread at all, but ok
Just seems to be a trend for teens. Columbine seemed to be the most infamous. Then then the Cruz case in Florida.
I admit I have no answer! Is the education system missing something ? Is it the parents ? And this latest shooting the OP posted, it seems to happen all over the US. Maybe field trips to the morgue and prisons are the answer?
You tell me!
^ active and present fathers in the home is a good place to start!
Just seems to be a trend for teens. Columbine seemed to be the most infamous. Then then the Cruz case in Florida.
I admit I have no answer! Is the education system missing something ? Is it the parents ? And this latest shooting the OP posted, it seems to happen all over the US. Maybe field trips to the morgue and prisons are the answer?
You tell me!
Well, they could start with firearms (hunter) safety training class available to everyone in high school. All to include range time with high power rifles so to impress the lethal reality of gunshots. Using guns in real life isn't like fantasy TV.
Just seems to be a trend for teens. Columbine seemed to be the most infamous. Then then the Cruz case in Florida.
I admit I have no answer! Is the education system missing something ? Is it the parents ? And this latest shooting the OP posted, it seems to happen all over the US. Maybe field trips to the morgue and prisons are the answer?
You tell me!
Field trip to prison is a good idea. If that doesn't work, maybe show some footage of Chinese prison. I've heard that place is 1000x worse.
https://youtu.be/6hxeNwThn54
BushMasterBoy
12-01-2021, 16:13
It happened again. Boy had a father. Obviously firearm was unsecured.
https://www.npr.org/2021/12/01/1060542851/a-4th-student-has-died-in-the-michigan-high-school-shooting
You posted that yesterday as well
Vic Tory
12-01-2021, 16:33
Just seems to be a trend for teens. Columbine seemed to be the most infamous. Then then the Cruz case in Florida.
I admit I have no answer! Is the education system missing something ? Is it the parents ? And this latest shooting the OP posted, it seems to happen all over the US. Maybe field trips to the morgue and prisons are the answer?
You tell me!The Columbine murders were the results of an astounding array of bad policies in education administration ... poor parenting ... a severely damaged criminal justice system (which doesn't have rapid consequences for lawbreakers) ... those scum had upper class "parents" but the parents let the scummy teens run their own lives. (Not much different from the absentee parents in inner cities, really.) Et ceterra.
Well, they could start with firearms (hunter) safety training class available to everyone in high school. All to include range time with high power rifles so to impress the lethal reality of gunshots. Using guns in real life isn't like fantasy TV.My Jr. High PE class had a four week section on gun safety and rifle shooting. Some people I've told that to flat-out don't believe me. "Oh well!"
funkymonkey1111
12-22-2021, 18:20
charged with murder today:
https://kdvr.com/news/local/ex-cop-surrenders-on-murder-charge-in-teens-death/
eddiememphis
12-22-2021, 19:27
1 count of prohibited use of a weapon while drunk (Misdemeanor Class 2)- according 9news.
Is there a blood alcohol content limit for use of a weapon?
Why wasn't he also charged with DUI?
1 count of prohibited use of a weapon while drunk (Misdemeanor Class 2)- according 9news.
Is there a blood alcohol content limit for use of a weapon?
Why wasn't he also charged with DUI?
0.00
KevDen2005
12-23-2021, 03:37
1 count of prohibited use of a weapon while drunk (Misdemeanor Class 2)- according 9news.
Is there a blood alcohol content limit for use of a weapon?
Why wasn't he also charged with DUI?
There is no per se limit in Colorado for possessing a firearm while intoxicated. If you are driving a car at 0.01 and do nothing that shows impairment than you're not DUI, DUI laws have two parts, one that is per se, which doesn't address impairment but BAC level, at a certain level you are DWAI or DUI. The first part, before addressing Per Se, is that the person in control of the vehicle is "under the influence" and they are affected, either mentally or physically, or both. However, I would also say that impairment would need to be proven under 18-12-106 as it doesn't say merely consuming an intoxicating substance, it says "under the influence." As there is no limit and one can argue based on the language of being "under the influence" that a person needs to show impairment while taking that "intoxicating substance." So I wouldn't say it's required for a person to be 0.00 to carry a firearm, but a person could be under the influence with a BAC as little as 0.01 depending on a number of factors including tolerances, signs of impairment, and a person's actions, comments, or judgements they made while consuming, but I wouldn't say that's all encompassing, more like contributing factors.
eddiememphis
12-23-2021, 09:30
There is no per se limit in Colorado for possessing a firearm while intoxicated. If you are driving a car at 0.01 and do nothing that shows impairment than you're not DUI, DUI laws have two parts, one that is per se, which doesn't address impairment but BAC level, at a certain level you are DWAI or DUI. The first part, before addressing Per Se, is that the person in control of the vehicle is "under the influence" and they are affected, either mentally or physically, or both. However, I would also say that impairment would need to be proven under 18-12-106 as it doesn't say merely consuming an intoxicating substance, it says "under the influence." As there is no limit and one can argue based on the language of being "under the influence" that a person needs to show impairment while taking that "intoxicating substance." So I wouldn't say it's required for a person to be 0.00 to carry a firearm, but a person could be under the influence with a BAC as little as 0.01 depending on a number of factors including tolerances, signs of impairment, and a person's actions, comments, or judgements they made while consuming, but I wouldn't say that's all encompassing, more like contributing factors.
Does everyone involved in a firearm incident get tested, or only if they are suspected of or showing signs of impairment?
What about pot or other drugs?
One of the many reasons why I don't drink often. ( ~3 years ago ,Last alcoholic drink was when they allow big store to sell beer)
I won't be able to defend myself when I have a can of beer.
KevDen2005
12-23-2021, 14:40
Does everyone involved in a firearm incident get tested, or only if they are suspected of or showing signs of impairment?
What about pot or other drugs?
You said Pot or Drugs, LOL. I'm just kidding.
Seriously though, it would include drugs for impairment as those are intoxicating substances. Nearly every time that I know of this getting charged is when someone is in possession of their firearm while DUI, which makes it an easy case for the prohibited part. Otherwise, it would be a case by case situation, depending on why the police were called, what they observe, and if the person is concealed or otherwise in possession (like in car) if the police have reasonable suspicion for a pat down or PC for a search. But over the years I have contacted hundreds of people open or concealed carrying that were not tested or suspected because they didn't exhibit any signs of impairment and no reports of that were made, including those that may have a had a beer or had clothing that smelled as if they smoked pot at some point, but maybe not recently.
Police departments generally have a policy of zero alcohol whatsoever by not consuming while carrying so as to not worry about the gray area of the law. Essentially an officer could have a drink (hypothetically) and not be in violation of law but he would be in violation of policy.
Presently, I definitely agree that you should avoid any substances whatsoever. I obviously don't know the full circumstances of this case, but this could be an example of why.
Also, some type of self defense insurance is always a good idea.
eddiememphis
12-23-2021, 17:46
9news said the ex cop had a "ghost gun", a 30 round magazine and fired first.
SideShow Bob
12-23-2021, 17:48
So, he should get a tack on charge for the greater than 15 round magazine.
9news said the ex cop had a "ghost gun", a 30 round magazine and fired first.
Looks like an edit was made. I see that teen fired first, hitting dude, then he returned fire. He did produce his gun first. No mention of a 30rd mag.
BAC was .193
https://www.9news.com/article/news/crime/former-officer-fatal-teen-shooting/73-40f99231-cbfd-4e7d-aae3-ff8d8978a82c
[
SideShow Bob
12-23-2021, 18:52
https://www.9news.com/article/news/crime/former-officer-fatal-teen-shooting/73-40f99231-cbfd-4e7d-aae3-ff8d8978a82c
[
Saw that news(?) cast just a little bit ago.
.455_Hunter
12-23-2021, 20:58
Much more detail...
https://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/crime/former-officer-charged-in-aurora-teens-death-was-drunk-at-the-time-of-the-shooting-affidavit-states
Sounds like a drunk armed idiot engaged an armed teen hothead, and this was the result.
If the ex-LEO decided is was necessary to confront the car, he should have broken contact once making the initial complaint instead of escalating the engagement, but who says drunk dudes make good choices?
My sympathies were initially with the teen, but it seems he also has some serious issues.
I refuse to automatically make a negative assumption about a teenager who is armed, but his actions do indicate more nefarious activities beyond simple defensive preparation (showing the gun to his friends while expressing people were "after him", carry with a happy stick in-place).
You better hope you are never involved in a shooting. Prosecutors loves to find statements like this.
Too late for some.
Some remark was so damn stupid that I start ignoring those, and many members have stop posting.
You said Pot or Drugs, LOL. I'm just kidding.
Seriously though, it would include drugs for impairment as those are intoxicating substances. Nearly every time that I know of this getting charged is when someone is in possession of their firearm while DUI, which makes it an easy case for the prohibited part. Otherwise, it would be a case by case situation, depending on why the police were called, what they observe, and if the person is concealed or otherwise in possession (like in car) if the police have reasonable suspicion for a pat down or PC for a search. But over the years I have contacted hundreds of people open or concealed carrying that were not tested or suspected because they didn't exhibit any signs of impairment and no reports of that were made, including those that may have a had a beer or had clothing that smelled as if they smoked pot at some point, but maybe not recently.
Police departments generally have a policy of zero alcohol whatsoever by not consuming while carrying so as to not worry about the gray area of the law. Essentially an officer could have a drink (hypothetically) and not be in violation of law but he would be in violation of policy.
Presently, I definitely agree that you should avoid any substances whatsoever. I obviously don't know the full circumstances of this case, but this could be an example of why.
Also, some type of self defense insurance is always a good idea.
Question on this.
With a firearm there is no ?implied consent?. An officer would have to get a warrant for the chemical test if person didn?t consent?
Question on this.
With a firearm there is no ?implied consent?. An officer would have to get a warrant for the chemical test if person didn?t consent?
Warrants aren't exactly hard to get
It sounds like the reports that the teen drew/fired first are based ONLY on the suspects "allegation", e.g. "I need to stay out of jail" story.
ETA: I had to re-read the story to figure out who had what.
Suspect fired at least 7 rounds and hit the teen at least four times in the chest, another in the arm, all with the suspect having a BAC of .19.
Teen was armed with a homemade glock clone "ghost" and a 30+ round magazine, got a double feed.
Teen fired only once, striking the suspect only once in the hip.
I hate it when articles refer to everyone's names peppered throughout like we're their uncle.
Is there a source for the raw affidavit? I haven't been able to find it.
BPTactical
12-24-2021, 15:25
Assholeus Collidus Maximus
Warrants aren't exactly hard to get
True dat.
But the question is, if the person doesn?t consent, it is warrant, correct?
The only time there ?implied consent? is driving. And even then the person can refuse, it just means license suspension (civil action, not criminal) I believe. I think the civil action instead of Criminal is why DUI lawyers say never consent. (Of course drunk people don?t alway think clearly enough to do what is in their best legal interest)
It sounds like the reports that the teen drew/fired first are based ONLY on the suspects "allegation", e.g. "I need to stay out of jail" story.
ETA: I had to re-read the story to figure out who had what.
Suspect fired at least 7 rounds and hit the teen at least four times in the chest, another in the arm, all with the suspect having a BAC of .19.
Teen was armed with a homemade glock clone "ghost" and a 30+ round magazine, got a double feed.
Teen fired only once, striking the suspect only once in the hip.
I hate it when articles refer to everyone's names peppered throughout like we're their uncle.
Pretty good marksmanship for being drunk.
True dat.
But the question is, if the person doesn?t consent, it is warrant, correct?
The only time there ?implied consent? is driving. And even then the person can refuse, it just means license suspension (civil action, not criminal) I believe. I think the civil action instead of Criminal is why DUI lawyers say never consent. (Of course drunk people don?t alway think clearly enough to do what is in their best legal interest)
Yes, it would require a warrant unless consent is provided
If in such a situation, I would make then get a warrant
KevDen2005
12-24-2021, 22:11
Question on this.
With a firearm there is no ?implied consent?. An officer would have to get a warrant for the chemical test if person didn?t consent?
Correct. If it was a low level case an officer can go off the indicia only, body camera footage would document a lot of comments, actions, slurred words, lack of balance, etc. The officer would use that information to apply for the warrant for the chemical test.
Even with DUI laws there are times where warrants are required. Even when consent is given.
Who knows, maybe the guy gave consent, I wasn't there, but in a case where a teen was killed (not saying he was right or wrong, just acknowledging the response from media), as the DA I'd want the warrant still
KevDen2005
12-24-2021, 22:12
Yes, it would require a warrant unless consent is provided
If in such a situation, I would make then get a warrant
Same.
The sad part is, if they waited for warrant approval, and his BAC was 0.193 as I read earlier, how high was it at the time of the incident? Sometimes warrants take a while.
Same.
The sad part is, if they waited for warrant approval, and his BAC was 0.193 as I read earlier, how high was it at the time of the incident? Sometimes warrants take a while.
The stuff I've read said hours later. Dude was hammered.
I have a Bluetooth breathalyzer here (courtesy of CDOT). It takes effort to get that fucked up.
The question is that MAYBE he went home and downed half a bottle of Jack after the incident, if he left the scene. One of the reasons I want to see the affidavit
KevDen2005
12-24-2021, 22:48
The stuff I've read said hours later. Dude was hammered.
I have a Bluetooth breathalyzer here (courtesy of CDOT).
I have a PBT also courtesy of CDOT. The only thing that it has really come in handy for is letting me know that I'm a serious lightweight.
I have a PBT also courtesy of CDOT. The only thing that it has really come in handy for is letting me know that I'm a serious lightweight.
I've got mine to the point where I don't remember doing so, and it truly amazes me when I see news stories where people are much higher. I got mine during a study a few years back and it really added some perspective to what I hear about in the news.
I kinda want to do one of those events in Adams county where they get you drunk, put you in a driver's ed car (where the passenger can play the drums on their brake pedal) and drive around the track just north of DIA, to train officers.
KevDen2005
12-24-2021, 23:23
I've got mine to the point where I don't remember doing so, and it truly amazes me when I see news stories where people are much higher. I got mine during a study a few years back and it really added some perspective to what I hear about in the news.
I kinda want to do one of those events in Adams county where they get you drunk, put you in a driver's ed car (where the passenger can play the drums on their brake pedal) and drive around the track just north of DIA, to train officers.
After I became a police officer then later a DUI instructor I truly believe that people don't get nearly enough training and exposure to what a DUI is. People don't realize how easy they can get above the legal limit and I think if more knowledge was provided early on that it could help reduce the number of impaired drivers on the road, maybe I'm just naive.
It is an incredibly high BAC. I would think the chances of him getting 57% of shots center mass and the chance of him accidentally shooting his own dick in the circumstance would've been quite similar.
Does this guy regularly get THAT trashed at home? Many regular joes would be starting to feel sick by that point (.2) and it takes a lot of drinks to get there.
KevDen2005
12-25-2021, 10:29
It is an incredibly high BAC. I would think the chances of him getting 57% of shots center mass and the chance of him accidentally shooting his own dick in the circumstance would've been quite similar.
Does this guy regularly get THAT trashed at home? Many regular joes would be starting to feel sick by that point (.2) and it takes a lot of drinks to get there.
Seems like someone here isn't familiar with standard operating procedures of regular infantry units. Operating BAC is a minimum of a .10. If I've said it once I've said it a thousand times. If this is what we do while drunk, imagine what could be accomplished while sober.
I think one thing that accused did that helped him get charged, is that reports say he approached at "low ready"
I think approaching a confrontation at "low ready" very easily can be construed as being the initial aggressor. At that point, one [generally] loses the right to claim self defense.
"Low ready" - as the saying implies, is that your firearm is ready to fire quickly.
Think of it like this. If a person started a verbal confrontation with a police officer, and approached the police officers with a pistol at "low ready" while engaging in verbal confrontation, would a police officer be justified in shooting in self defense? Remember, you dont have to wait to get shot first to claim self defense.
I think Ex-police man was running around thinking he was a still a uniformed officer and he was the boss. He will get to be on bottom in prison instead of being the boss.
This whole thing is an example of what happens when people cross paths in the middle of night at the intersection of Stupid and Idiot.
BPTactical
12-27-2021, 10:58
This whole thing is an example of what happens when people cross paths in the middle of night at the intersection of Stupid and Idiot.
Assholeus Collideus Maximus
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.