The deceased is a third party that overstepped his bounds (with the best of intentions).

 

 

Seriously? And you've claimed others aren't objective?

 

One last point, regardless of whether he overstepped his bounds or not, he did nothing that deserved to be murdered. The officer has to pay for his error in judgment. Just because you're a police officer doesn't mean you can go around shooting people who are obeying the law.

You've already stated he was murdered. Murder is against the law in all cases, if you're a cop what other option do you have?

 

When someone is killed in cold-blood, what else do you call it? That doesn't mean he should be charged with murder, because convicting someone of murder means proving intent, and I don't think anyone thinks it was the officer's intent.

Seriously? And you've claimed others aren't objective?

 

One last point, regardless of whether he overstepped his bounds or not, he did nothing that deserved to be murdered. The officer has to pay for his error in judgment. Just because you're a police officer doesn't mean you can go around shooting people who are obeying the law.

 

 

From the article:

 

Hanlon’s voice is heard on an audio recording taken moments after the shooting to report the shooting, “I don’t know who the guy is. The guy came out with a gun. He wouldn’t put the gun down. He pointed it a Hoeppner. Hoeppner fired.”

 

UKMF, you're either saying you do not believe the officer or you are saying an officer should not ever fire until he's fired upon. I can live with you not believing the officer ie you're cynical but no way in hell can I imagine you would truly believe an officer should not fire until fired upon.

I'm saying it was a burglary alarm. If the police found a thief holding a tv they aren't shooting. I think you have to assess the situation before firing. As far as I know or read there was never a report of shots fired by dispatch. Nobody should die if its a petty thief.

I agree no one should die for petty theft.

 

Are you saying that the officers should not have had their guns out due to the nature of the call? That seems to be what you are inferring in a couple of post. How should they respond to a burglary call in the middle of the night?

From the article:

 

Hanlon’s voice is heard on an audio recording taken moments after the shooting to report the shooting, “I don’t know who the guy is. The guy came out with a gun. He wouldn’t put the gun down. He pointed it a Hoeppner. Hoeppner fired.”

UKMF, you're either saying you do not believe the officer or you are saying an officer should not ever fire until he's fired upon. I can live with you not believing the officer ie you're cynical but no way in hell can I imagine you would truly believe an officer should not fire until fired upon.

 

Absolutely, I don't believe the officer, because of course he's going to stick up for his fellow officer (I'm assuming his partner).

 

Also, the other article also mentions that he put the gun down. The officer says he never did.

Seriously? And you've claimed others aren't objective?

 

One last point, regardless of whether he overstepped his bounds or not, he did nothing that deserved to be murdered. The officer has to pay for his error in judgment. Just because you're a police officer doesn't mean you can go around shooting people who are obeying the law.

Is pointing a gun at police officer not justification for the police officer to fire his weapon? If not how long should he wait to fire at someone pointing a gun at him?

Is pointing a gun at police officer not justification for the police officer to fire his weapon? If not how long should he wait to fire at someone pointing a gun at him?

 

That comes down to whether or not the officers identified themselves. Guru has already said in these situations, most times they do not do so.

 

Think about what you guys are saying, who believe he knew they were police, and pointed his gun at them. You guys are basically saying he decided, "ho hum let's go kill me some police". You guys really see that as the most likely scenario?

Absolutely, I don't believe the officer, because of course he's going to stick up for his fellow officer (I'm assuming his partner).

 

Also, the other article also mentions that he put the gun down. The officer says he never did.

Officer also didn't describe what the man was wearing what type of gun it was or any other facts, he just described the events immediately before the shooting over the radio as he called it in. He would not go off on a diatribe describing every aspect of the call on the radio, that is for his report. But since it was reported that he put the gun down and picked it back up, that must have came from the officers as no other witnesses have been cited in any report that I have read.

I agree no one should die for petty theft.

 

Are you saying that the officers should not have had their guns out due to the nature of the call? That seems to be what you are inferring in a couple of post. How should they respond to a burglary call in the middle of the night?

 

Very gray area, I know guys in the military.. Infantry who aren't always allowed to chamber a round. I tend to be on the side to not fire unless fired upon, or shots fired before my arrival. You really can't take the fall in that case.

That comes down to whether or not the officers identified themselves. Guru has already said in these situations, most times they do not do so.

 

Think about what you guys are saying, who believe he knew they were police, and pointed his gun at them. You guys are basically saying he decided, "ho hum let's go kill me some police". You guys really see that as the most likely scenario?

I don't think so at all. I just also don't think the police rolled up with the thought that "Hey let's kill someone tonight". I think this is truly a horrific accident.

Very gray area, I know guys in the military.. Infantry who aren't always allowed to chamber a round. I tend to be on the side to not fire unless fired upon, or shots fired before my arrival. You really can't take the fall in that case.

Military has ridiculous rules of engagement that have more to do with politics than soldier safety. That rule also has more to due with where they are located and what they are engaged in.

I don't think so at all. I just also don't think the police rolled up with the thought that "Hey let's kill someone tonight". I think this is truly a horrific accident.

 

Right. I agree. Most likely scenario is a young cop was a little overzealous or paniced and now they're trying to sweep it away like it was necessary.

 

Speaking to everyone here, we may all disagree on what is right and what is wrong in this case, but never ever ever approach a police officer with a gun in your hand.

 

What if you don't know it's a police officer?

What if you don't know it's a police officer?

 

That's impossible. Even though it was dark, and in these situations officers typically don't park in sight or announce themselves.

Just for some perspective...

 

Over 2200 soldiers have died and of that 1700 soldiers have been killed by hostile action in operation Enduring Freedom from 2001 til now.

Over 1980 police officers have died in the line of duty from 2001 til now, 674 were shot and killed in the line of duty including Officer Ellis of Bardstown Kentucky.