LEO Question

[27145]

Believe me, if the perp pointed a gun and fired at them and they returned fire it would be an enormous blow. To have to shoot this person when he could have just complied is devastating.

 

[Meeko]

I completely understand the need to stop the suspect if the cop is in the car. What I have a hard time with is why it is OK to put yourself in that situation?

And I also understand that you must apprehend such people. But I don't understand the thought process behind deliberately putting yourself in danger?

Again, I realize that traffic stops can be highly dangerous and they are not all the same. But to put yourself in immediate danger doesn't make sense to me.

Actually it was the "suspect" that escalated the situation. Why did the suspect not comply with the officers directions etc. That is more of the question to me.That in itself does not warrent deadly force. The suspect's behaivor etc got him stopped, then the officers had to make a decision to turn the car off after the suspect didn't then the suspect tried to drive away (basically assualting the officer with the vehicle while the officer was reacting to the first issue etc etc.

Me personally, if I could contain it to a parking lot or anywhere else with minimal civillians being endagered I would. The fact that lethal force was used on the suspect was well from the actions of the suspect.

Officers nationwide if you look at after action reports of all incidents (when suspects are not shot at) there are far more cases where the police were well "within authorization" to use deadly force than suspects are shot so officers use a lot more restraint than they legally could.

 

[MLeake]

An AR15? Until the OP said that, I had thought he was talking Seattle in 2001 timeframe, but I thought the partner had used a handgun on that one. As I recall from articles at the time, SPD threw the officer partially under the bus, saying he had violated policy by reaching into the car.

Frankly, while I understand that it is a bad idea from an officer safety standpoint, that is a training issue, not a criminal one.

The criminal issue was the driver's assault on an officer with a 2.5 ton deadly weapon (Sedan DeVille IIRC).

He had cut off the officers, swung into the road and back into a lot. They had thought he was DUI, so I can even understand the reach for the keys.

The newspaper reporter who covered the case seemed to live in a land of unicorns and pixie dust, though, and the coverage was very anti-cop.

Race card even came into play, though it was three-way. Black driver, white cop draggee, and Asian shooter IIRC.

 

[safearm]

I have reached into a subject's vehicle to put the car in park or turn off the ignition, ONLY when the driver, IMO, is incapable of understanding what I want him/her to do, i.e., drunk, unconsciuous, physically or mentally ill.
If the driver is angry, abusive, uncooperative, etc., I'll do what I must to get them out of the car (their safe zone), where they may have a concealed weapon, or where they may decide to use their vehicle as a weapon, either against me or the public at large.
With just the information in the OP, I can't say if the officer made the right choice or not, but in most cases, the offender makes the choice that causes the officer to react.

 

[JamesArthur60]

I'm not a cop. I don't think like one.

That's the reason you'll never understand answers from street officers. Plain and simple.

 

[M3Stuart]

JMHO; for what they get paid, LE work is an awfully risky and tough deal.

Sure, you might do 30 years and get the gold watch without ever experiencing anything traumatic. But, especially in some big nasty city, it could be that you get traumatized every day. I guess it all depends...

 

[Kanewpadle]

That's the reason you'll never understand answers from street officers. Plain and simple.

So why do you think I asked the question?

What, you couldn't come up with anything more constructive?

 

[Kanewpadle]

In this traffic stop you have at least two marked units, two uniformed officers (one with gun at the ready) and a non-co-op-combative-perp.

He was foolish enough to attack (via-vehicle) these officers; what makes one think he would not hesitate to attack any unarmed civilians?

Maybe he was on his way to "IHOP" when he got stopped...in light of recent evens, think about that.

If an officer intentionally crawls half way into someone's car while moving and knowing his partner will probably shoot the guy, how can it be considered an attack on the officer? He put himself in harms way. Are there not better options that make more sense?

 

[StuperDan]

There is clearly more to this. An AR15? When have you ever been covered by a cop with an assault rifle when you have been pulled over. Is that common? I'd imagine the officers had a reason to be at that level aggression.

 

[CelticSire]

Are there not better options that make more sense?

That, mi amigo, is the 64 dollar question that will be reviewed by the brass, Internal Affairs, Professional Standards, roll call briefings, etc etc ad nauseam. So many times the better options only appear while using the famous 20/20 hindsight. Police officers have to make split-second decisions in life or death situations, and occasionally they don't make the best decision. Does that mean that we should quit trying? Of course not, or the public suffers. However, those lapses in judgement should be thoroughly reviewed to ensure that they only happen once, that they were not willfully negligent, and that given the totality of the circumstances, the decision made was correct both legally and ethically even if it wasn't very smart. If a person elects to elevate an encounter with police to a level that becomes dangerous, steps have to be taken and often very quickly. Law enforcement would be a much easier job if we didn't have to deal with people...

 

[crows]

So, if the cops choose a safe, non-controversial, response, a pursuit ensues, civilians are badly maimed or killed, will you applaud the cops for their decisions? Will you stand by them because they didn't take a risk that could later be questioned? Do you really want cops that won't make the tough decisions in a split second because they might be questioned later?
As a cop, you are told that it is your job to stand between harm and the public. You hear that in the academy, in the oath you take, and from society; if you don't eagerly accept the risk, you're not doing your job. And then there is the other side, the points you make. If you do accept the responsibility, then you will quite possibly be accused of being over zealous, a cowboy, or at the very least guilty of poor decision making. And it isn't just non law enforcement people looking on this with a judgemental eye. Administrators both law enforcement and not will be eager to pass judgement whether an officer acts or not. Basicly put, so many times it is "you're damned if you do, and damned if you don't".
And you know what? Cops know this , accept this, and still willingly do this job.
So, do you want to look at it as cops try do do the best they can with imperfect or insufficent information, without alot of time to think their actions over, consult law books, or ask the opinions others and maybe give them the benifit of the doubt? Or do you want to sit back think about other options, maybe what you've read about, run a senario or two through you mind at your leisure over the course of a few days and hey, ask other law enforcement officers their thoughts then question the correctness of their actions?
If you truly want to understand this, then ask yourself, am I willing to spend 25-30 years doing a job that no matter what I do or don't do, someone will applaud, and someone will eagerly find fault?
Yes, I suppose this sounds a bit melodramatic, but the funny part is, most cops just shrug it off and say hey, that's just part of the job.
Sorry this doesn't give you a good clean, succinct answer, welcome to law enforcement.

 

[J. W.]

I respect our first responders immensely.

I think have answered my own question

Since people are all different and situations are all different, there is a gray area in which you must make a quick decision. Folks that can't think quickly on their feet probably don't last long as cops.

As with life, it's never one extreme or the other. There must be some balance.

A song lyric that stuck me the first time I heard, from Robert Earl Keen's "Shades of Gray"

"Right or wrong, black or white
Cross the line you're gonna pay
In the dawn before the light
Live and die by the shades of gray"

I always thought these lines captured what a police officer faces quite well. Though the pages of a law book are black and white, we live and operate in a world of gray where we are judged by people sitting in the safety of their home and office with time to deliberate on decisions we had a slip second to make on the side of a rainy highway or a dark alley.

I'm not going to tell you we're always right, because we aren't. But by and large we do the best we can. We live and die by those shades of gray between black and white, right and wrong.

I applaud you for asking a question you we'e genuinely interested in and accepting our answers with reasonable logic and understanding. Far too often on other forums, these sort of threads turn into little more than LE bashing.

 

[Kanewpadle]

A song lyric that stuck me the first time I heard, from Robert Earl Keen's "Shades of Gray"

"Right or wrong, black or white
Cross the line you're gonna pay
In the dawn before the light
Live and die by the shades of gray"

I always thought these lines captured what a police officer faces quite well. Though the pages of a law book are black and white, we live and operate in a world of gray where we are judged by people sitting in the safety of their home and office with time to deliberate on decisions we had a slip second to make on the side of a rainy highway or a dark alley.

I'm not going to tell you we're always right, because we aren't. But by and large we do the best we can. We live and die by those shades of gray between black and white, right and wrong.

I applaud you for asking a question you we'e genuinely interested in and accepting our answers with reasonable logic and understanding. Far too often on other forums, these sort of threads turn into little more than LE bashing.

Thanks for that excellent post!

I get sick and tired of the one line posts that basically say "your not one of us so you won't understand".

I know many officers. Most on a first name basis. I interact with them frequently. I also asked them this question and got some of the same replies. Of course those with the "A typical" type personalities basicaly said "too bad, so sad". Part of the problem with some of these officers is that they feel like it's "us against them". They have become so desensitized and cynical that they don't trust anyone. I can't blame them and I feel bad for them.

I came here looking for someone to explain why and got some good answers.

I understand the willingness to do whatever you have to do to protect the public. I guess if you have to make a split second decision under stress, at least you made one and didn't just stand there.

I once aspired to be a cop but let the opportunity slip away. Now that I'm older I realized that I don't have the patience or demeanor. My temper was hard to control when I was younger. So I went into the military and they straightened me right up.

 

[Kanewpadle]

So, if the cops choose a safe, non-controversial, response, a pursuit ensues, civilians are badly maimed or killed, will you applaud the cops for their decisions? Will you stand by them because they didn't take a risk that could later be questioned? Do you really want cops that won't make the tough decisions in a split second because they might be questioned later?
As a cop, you are told that it is your job to stand between harm and the public. You hear that in the academy, in the oath you take, and from society; if you don't eagerly accept the risk, you're not doing your job. And then there is the other side, the points you make. If you do accept the responsibility, then you will quite possibly be accused of being over zealous, a cowboy, or at the very least guilty of poor decision making. And it isn't just non law enforcement people looking on this with a judgemental eye. Administrators both law enforcement and not will be eager to pass judgement whether an officer acts or not. Basicly put, so many times it is "you're damned if you do, and damned if you don't".
And you know what? Cops know this , accept this, and still willingly do this job.
So, do you want to look at it as cops try do do the best they can with imperfect or insufficent information, without alot of time to think their actions over, consult law books, or ask the opinions others and maybe give them the benifit of the doubt? Or do you want to sit back think about other options, maybe what you've read about, run a senario or two through you mind at your leisure over the course of a few days and hey, ask other law enforcement officers their thoughts then question the correctness of their actions?
If you truly want to understand this, then ask yourself, am I willing to spend 25-30 years doing a job that no matter what I do or don't do, someone will applaud, and someone will eagerly find fault?
Yes, I suppose this sounds a bit melodramatic, but the funny part is, most cops just shrug it off and say hey, that's just part of the job.
Sorry this doesn't give you a good clean, succinct answer, welcome to law enforcement.

You poor guys I tell ya. Kinda reminds me of the military. Always someone looking over your shoulder.

Thanks for another great post.

 

[ogilvyspecial]

I know many officers. Most on a first name basis. I interact with them frequently.

Kanewpadle, having 10 canoes out in the barn you & I probably have a few things in common.

First off, thanks for asking such interesting questions.

Secondly, regarding the partial quote above, I have also known many LEO's, some quite well, for more years than I care to admit and have heard their "war stories" over the years. Because of this I thought I had a fairly good understanding, at least as good as a civilian could have, of what they went through on a day to day basis. A few years ago I found out just how clueless I was.

It was then that I started doing ride-alongs with a friend and seen first hand the, well Lee won't let me use the word that would best apply here, "stuff" that they experience day after day, month after month & year after year while dealing with the public.

I still consider myself totally ignorant when it comes to the subject but now think that I at least have a clue, a clue that made me respect & appreciate my LE friends, and LEO's everywhere, far more than I ever imagined possible......

 

[cowart]

I've been driving for 35 years and have been pulled over several times. I always complied. It never occurred to me that if I didn't, I could be shot.

I'm not a LEO.

Any time that a LEO pulls you over and tells you to do something, and you don't do it, there is at least a *possibility* that you might get shot. You don't know why he pulled you over. It could be because you were doing 30 in a 25. Or, it could be because someone just committed a major crime just down the road, fired some shots, and took off in a car the same make/model/color as yours. The officer's reaction to your resistance will be totally different in those two scenarios, and you don't get to pick the scenario.

 

[Seneca]

ANYTIME a LEO has to make a split second, life or death, decision, I will support that decision even if it turns out to be the wrong one. We are all humans, not computers. Processing information in our brain quickly, under duress, will sometimes result in a wrong decision.
I recall an incident in California about 20 years ago. Some kids were playing Laser Tag around an elementary school building at dusk. A neighbor called the police thinking they were vandals. Police respond and start around the building when a kid steps around the corner and levels his Laser Tag gun at an offficer not recognizing him in the near dark conditions. Cop draws and blows the kid away. If I'm on that Grand Jury he is NOT GUILTY! Very tragic for all involved, but NOT the officer's fault in my view.
I'm positive there are some LEOs who are out of control cowboys with itchy trigger fingers. No profession is without it's freaks. But 99.99% do a heck of a job while constantly under the scrutiny of every liberal nut case on the planet.
Thanks to you all.

 

[kennyb]

I completely understand the need to stop the suspect if the cop is in the car. What I have a hard time with is why it is OK to put yourself in that situation?

And I also understand that you must apprehend such people. But I don't understand the thought process behind deliberately putting yourself in danger?

Again, I realize that traffic stops can be highly dangerous and they are not all the same. But to put yourself in immediate danger doesn't make sense to me.

every time a leo searches a dark building that may contain an armed suspect he is placing himself in harms way...should the building go unsearched with the felon escaping with the goods?

 

[CAJUNLAWYER]

One reason I ask is this,

Several years ago in a neighboring city, the police pulled a guy over for a traffic violation. The suspect was non cooperative but still had the sense to pull into a parking lot close by. As one officer conducted the stop, a second stood by with an AR15. The suspect became increasingly verbally abusive and refused to turn off the ignition. The cop reached in and the suspect hit the gas. The cop was half in and out of the vehicle when the second cop shot through the back window and the drivers seat killing the suspect.

I wasn't there but that seemed pretty extreme to me.

There was a much publicized trial and both officers were cleared.

Doesn't seem extreme at all to me...just sayin'....and I'm the bad guy lawyer.

 

[27145]

I'm not a LEO.

Any time that a LEO pulls you over and tells you to do something, and you don't do it, there is at least a *possibility* that you might get shot. You don't know why he pulled you over. It could be because you were doing 30 in a 25. Or, it could be because someone just committed a major crime just down the road, fired some shots, and took off in a car the same make/model/color as yours. The officer's reaction to your resistance will be totally different in those two scenarios, and you don't get to pick the scenario.

You really nailed it with this post.