- May 13, 2005
- 2,776
According to the article 4-5 hits out of 33 rounds...so 28-29 are in the quarry.
Assuming that was the direction of discharge and no ricochets
According to the article 4-5 hits out of 33 rounds...so 28-29 are in the quarry.
Just imagine if not one but two of the "ordinary people" had been "defending themselves" and fired that many rounds at a "threat" that did not fire back........ hmmmmm
Assuming that was the direction of discharge and no ricochets
Ok- I have some knowledge of the situation, albeit second hand. The range was 40-60 yards, the park and ride is very well lit at night. What the papers neglect to say is that some of the rounds ended up in another deputies cruiser! A lot of the other rounds hit low into the asphalt.
Kind of sad to think that the guy thought he had no other way out of his problems.
He got charged as he rightfully should. But suicide by getting others involved really SUCKS.
Think about how the LEO have to deal with his, yet another, stupid action.
My theory on the 33rds: The LEOs probably did try to get that guy to drop his weapon by indirect fire...then decided it wasn't going to work so dropped the guy. But wow, he was hit by .223 at that range and still survived? must have been taking aim at his limbs or something.
There is NO excuse for that many misses by LEOs.
Suppressive fire? I seriously hope no one is advocating the use of that in a situation like this. Rounds can travel in unexpected ways.
I'm glad the LEOs are safe and made it home. BUT that is not their job. Public safety comes before officer safety.
The end result does not justify the means.
And screw the ass that caused the situation. He should jump off a cliff.
......really? where did you hear that? I go home at the end of the shift. Bottom line. Who will take care of my family if I don't go home? You? Sorry I ain't buying it.
......really? where did you hear that? I go home at the end of the shift. Bottom line. Who will take care of my family if I don't go home? You? Sorry I ain't buying it.
….. Police are the professionals, they work hard with little pay and go through great personal effort and sacrifice to choose this noble and dangerous profession, but it is a profession that they choose willingly. I am all for officers to adopt policies, procedures, and equipment that keep them safe in the line of duty, but not at the expense of civil liberties, constitutionally protected rights, or the health and safety of innocent citizens. Police know the job is dangerous and sign up for it anyways, that makes them heroes, the cost of this heroism is that when a matter comes down to officer "safety" vs civil rights vs safety of innocent people, then officer safety is the one of the 3 that is most expendable, civil/constitutional rights are the one that is not expendable at all……..
Quote from another recent thread sums a lot up very eloquently and tactfully:
I however don't have that level of eloquence, or tact. Having said that, I, and most members of this board know most LEOs are there for us if we call you. I think you have made it clear you might not be one of those LEOs.
The people you should be protecting as your priority #1, created a job for you and pay you to do it - to protect people's daily lives from being disastrously interrupted by dickheads of many natures.
IMO If in your mind, at any point officer safety outweighs public safety you should not be wearing a badge. Let me try to put it as simple as I can: If you think your well being is a higher priority than those who you are supposed to be protecting, and you wold prioritize your safety above the bystanders around you then I think your azimuth isn't working correctly and you should fix it before you get someone killed. But at least you would go home and that's the bottom line, right?
My kids and I include our LEOs close friends in our prayers frequently. As far as a LEO dying in the line of duty and a family losing a father, nobody wants that and we hope you go home at the end of the shift. But, unfortunately LEOs do get killed with disgusting frequency. Hopefully in your line of work you have realized your job has inherent regular and deadly risks that you have signed up for and have already taken extraordinary steps to assure your family will be taken carer of if something happens to you. If my line of work had the risks a LEO takes I sure as shit would.
You have stated your bottom line, Here is mine:
If I don't think you are going to act in the best interest of my safety and the safety of my family, and you would put your life above ours in while acting in the capacity of a LEO, then you are a liability to the safety of my family. Conversely, if I know you are there to protect my family first and foremost, which is how I view the majority of LEOs attitudes, then you are a hero to my family which we can trust.
I never stated I wouldn't act in the best interest of you or your family. I also never took an oath saying I will die for anyone. I don't know any other LEO that has as a matter of fact. My oath say I will uphold and defend the constitutions of the United States of America and Maryland. A police officer who goes to work not having his own safety the number one priority has too much of a hero complex and is quite frankly, a fool. Do I understand that my career is an inherently dangerous profession? Yes. Do I understand that at any time during my career I may lose my life in the performance of my duties? Yes. But I will not willingly put myself into a position that will keep me from ending my shift on my own two feet. One thing we are taught throughout all of our training from day one is that if it doesn't feel right then wait for backup. There are times where that isn't an option but hey, shitty day to be a cop.
Am I willing to die for you and your family? You betcha. You call and I will be there as fast as I can safely make it to the scene. But don't for one second tell me that your safety is more important than mine, as I would never expect you to say the same thing to me. I am going to do everything I can to go home at the end of the night.
If the guy was using cover (this was in a parking lot, right?) 4 or 5 hits out of 33 isn't bad... A lot of those shots were probably suppressive fire. I won't try and second-guess the hit % of someone who had a bad guy actively shooting at them.