Not necessarily but I have seen a few posts in this thread by posters who I believe are looking at this WAY too simplistic. In some cases, police cannot just announce who they are when they arrive on the scene when reason and logic would say entering the crime scene quietly and trying to catch the suspect(s) off guard will most likely result in the fewest loss of life (or none at all). And some cases, when you have milliseconds (just picking on you Guru) to make a decision, an innocent person with a weapon can be confused as the suspect by even the best trained officer and a review might show that while the officer was mistaken in using deadly force, he was justified in doing so.

 

If the man had shot and killed one of the policemen, I wonder what this conversation would be like.

Not necessarily but I have seen a few posts in this thread by posters who I believe are looking at this WAY too simplistic. In some cases, police cannot just announce who they are when they arrive on the scene when reason and logic would say entering the crime scene quietly and trying to catch the suspect(s) off guard will most likely result in the fewest loss of life (or none at all). And some cases, when you have milliseconds (just picking on you Guru) to make a decision, an innocent person with a weapon can be confused as the suspect by even the best trained officer and a review might show that while the officer was mistaken in using deadly force, he was justified in doing so.

 

In this specific case the man was on the opposite side of the street in his own driveway . In other word not the address police were called. I need more info to come to a complete conclusion. But that is a huge red flag to me . What if they entered the home unannounced and shot the armed home owner protecting his house. I just think in a residential area police are safer letting the public know they are present. I may sound naive I don't know . I just find these to be reasonable questions.

If the man had shot and killed one of the policemen, I wonder what this conversation would be like.

 

The man would be arrested regardless and the task of determining if he was justified would fall to a prosecutor and possibly a judge/jury. If the police showed up and were wearing uniforms, his defense attorney would have a difficult task because it would be difficult to argue that he could have reasonably not known they were police officers. If the police showed up and were undercover, I could see a jury coming to a conclusion that the guy just made a tragic mistake but it was just that, a mistake.

No way that I can judge this. First, if you have never been a police officer and been trained appropriately how to respond to as many situations that may arise you don't have a clue. It is easy to second guess, but unfortunately we bury police too many times doing their best to serve the citizens. You have to believe that they acted appropriately. If they didn't it will come out in the investigation. Way too many times people judge others and the jobs they do when they have no clue what it is like to be in that profession. Something certainly not as important job as a police officer, but head coaches in sports get criticized when none of us know the circumstances leading to why they make the decisions they make. A lot of professions, mostly public (educators, politicians, lawyers, etc.) get unfairly criticized when they are really doing the best they can with the circumstances they have and the cards their dealt. Let this play out, I am sure the the facts will lead to where the decision to shoot was appropriate or not. That is not to mislead and say there are persons in all professions that are not competent, but by and large most do their jobs well.

In no way shape or form can a murder of a man on his own property not committing a crime be justified. It is the officers job to show restraint. They will have to live with this the rest of their lives and people should be fired and charges should happen.

 

In this specific case the man was on the opposite side of the street in his own driveway . In other word not the address police were called. I need more info to come to a complete conclusion. But that is a huge red flag to me . What if they entered the home unannounced and shot the armed home owner protecting his house. I just think in a residential area police are safer letting the public know they are present. I may sound naive I don't know . I just find these to be reasonable questions.

 

 

In THIS instance the police may not have been justified. My comments have been more geared to the quote stating that NEVER in no way shape or form can a shooting of a man/woman on their own property not committing a crime be justified because I believe that comment is too all encompassing. I do believe there are cases where someone could not act to smart and innocently make some kind of movement while brandishing a firearm that any reasonable person could mistaken as hostile movements.

 

I also agree that in 95% or more of cases police should announce their presence but there can be exceptions.

This is in response to Habib's comment about who investigates, I messed up the quotes.

 

I just took my concealed carry class at the Jeffersontown Police Department. We had to watch a video about the laws regarding concealed carry, self defense, justified use of lethal force, etc.. The one thing mentioned by the KY laws, and this was highlighted by the attorney on the video, was that KY State Law allows room for bad judgement in use of justified lethal force. The example the instructor gave was if you are carrying and some one pulls a gun on you and makes a threatening comment and you draw your weapon and shoot them. If it turns out that the person was trying to be a prankster and actually had an unloaded gun or a fake but real looking gun, the "room for bad judgement" area of the law would say while you in actually were not in danger, a reasonable person would come to the conclusion that you were reasonable in believing you were in danger and were justified in using deadly force. This same "room for bad judgement" I would have to believe applies to police officers also when using deadly force against someone who turn out not to be a real threat.

 

Both instructors in my course stressed that if any of us ever are forced to use deadly force for self defense, when they police show up, they will confiscate the weapon and take us to the police station for booking because police are only charged with enforcing laws, they are not allowed to interpret laws (ie determine if someone was justified using deadly force or not). That would be put to the prosecutor to determine if he/she wants to take the matter to trial or drop any charges. My guess is something very similar happens when police accidently shoot the wrong person.

 

They told you basically that the police will arrest you if you shoot someone and leave it up to the prosecutor. That sounds very wrong to me.

No one is saying police don't have a tough job. What biased opinion have I shown ? I have no biased torward police . I just think an innocent man deserves a detailed investigation from a 3rd party. An internal investigation won't do when innocent people are shot . People who wear a badge need to be held to highest standard.

 

Being a former cop serious question . Are you telling police don't have to identify themselves in most situations .

 

What am I talking about? Go back and read what YOU posted in post #10 and to a lesser extent in posts #25 and #26.

 

And that is exactly what I am saying. The police drive around in a car we all recognize with big lights on it, they wear a uniform with their name on it, their badge on it, and they wear a huge gun belt. Everyone knows a uniformed police officer when they see them from the time they are in kindergarten.

To be fair, it's possible your experience is causing you to not be objective as well.

 

What am I not being objective about? I am giving general information about police protocol, I am not making a judgment. However, what you quoted was a response to Lipton Bash that said quote:

 

In no way shape or form can a murder of a man on his own property not committing a crime be justified. It is the officers job to show restraint. They will have to live with this the rest of their lives and people should be fired and charges should happen.

 

 

Do I have to know what it's like to be a police officer to look at a situation and be "objective"?

 

No, not at all and generally speaking I think you are a very objective person unless it comes to Lucky or Trinity.

They told you basically that the police will arrest you if you shoot someone and leave it up to the prosecutor. That sounds very wrong to me.

 

I don't know if they will necessarily arrest you and I probably should not have used the term "booking" since that suggests so but basically stated that if you shoot someone, even if everyone around would attest you did it out of self defense, that the police will not be saying good bye to you at the scene, they will take you to the police station and you will have to go through a long ordeal to be cleared in the justice system that were justified using lethal force and that regardless to how determined you are that you were justified, get an attorney.

In this specific case the man was on the opposite side of the street in his own driveway . In other word not the address police were called. I need more info to come to a complete conclusion. But that is a huge red flag to me . What if they entered the home unannounced and shot the armed home owner protecting his house. I just think in a residential area police are safer letting the public know they are present. I may sound naive I don't know . I just find these to be reasonable questions.

 

Completely different circumstance.

 

I also agree that in 95% or more of cases police should announce their presence but there can be exceptions.

 

How about we deal with this case specifically? In the case of Burglary the police would probably more often than not be justified in using a stealth approach.

 

From the Predator:

 

"You're ghosting us (insert real bad word). I don't care who you are back in the world. You give away our position one more time I'll bleed you, real quiet, an' leave you here. Got that?"

^ That was Bill Duke to Apollo Creed by the way...

 

I don't know if they will necessarily arrest you and I probably should not have used the term "booking" since that suggests so but basically stated that if you shoot someone, even if everyone around would attest you did it out of self defense, that the police will not be saying good bye to you at the scene, they will take you to the police station and you will have to go through a long ordeal to be cleared in the justice system that were justified using lethal force and that regardless to how determined you are that you were justified, get an attorney.

 

Okay. It just sounded odd. Obviously the police will investigate and interview you if you shoot someone, regardless of whether or not its obvious self defense.

In this specific case the man was on the opposite side of the street in his own driveway . In other word not the address police were called. I need more info to come to a complete conclusion. But that is a huge red flag to me . What if they entered the home unannounced and shot the armed home owner protecting his house. I just think in a residential area police are safer letting the public know they are present. I may sound naive I don't know . I just find these to be reasonable questions.

In this specific case it sounds as if he should have been able to see their police car(s), if he was across the street. At that point he no longer needs to go check on his neighbor and at the very least should have taken his firearm back inside and allowed the police to do their job without being a distraction.

 

All we know is what we can read on this, none of us over 800 miles away is in a position to assign blame or causation.

 

 

This is a tragedy, no matter how any of us look at it. A tragedy for the life lost and for those that took the life as well.