Retired cop arrested for shooting

My Dad was a teenager in rural Texas during WW2. One night a neighbor shot a chicken thief dead and the Sheriff gave him (the neighbor) a box of .30-30 ammo (which was in short supply) and told him to keep up the good work.

Times sure have changed.

BTW, I hate thieves but I wouldn't have shot the shoplifter because it's against the rules.
 
Absalom said:
Hm. He is only 61, but he "retired" about 25 years ago?
Click to expand...

I'm 63 and retired in 2000 with more than 21 years of service. A number of folks I worked with joined the military at 17-18 and bought back up to 5 years of military time toward retirement and were retired normally (2-5 years military, 15-18 years police) at ages 38-39.
 
Last edited:
Dude needs a psych work-up and some remedial training at minimum.

I. and I hope I can live up to this, will never shoot somebody over a thing unless that thing, in their possession, might reasonably be used to endanger me or mine.
 
Muss Muggins said:
Why is it important?
Click to expand...

I think the short answer to your question is that our hero (a term used to describe the guy from Mass that stopped a car from running someone over, without shooting) has likely been adopted by the anti CCW crowd as their poster child, to portray us all as irresponsible and dangerous...which is what I think anyone who shoots at a fleeing shoplifter is. In of all places California. This guy couldn't have tarnished responsible gun carriers more if he tried.
 
I agree that the story as we know it is problematic, but this fella' is actually being judged here by his appearance? I doubt any poster in this thread would want an appearance standard applied to him/her when it comes to exercising their 2nd Amendment right. "It's okay to carry, as long as you look like I think you should . . . ":rolleyes:

dockmurgw said:
I think the short answer to your question is that our hero (a term used to describe the guy from Mass that stopped a car from running someone over, without shooting) has likely been adopted by the anti CCW crowd as their poster child, to portray us all as irresponsible and dangerous...which is what I think anyone who shoots at a fleeing shoplifter is. In of all places California. This guy couldn't have tarnished responsible gun carriers more if he tried.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Muss Muggins said:
I agree that the story as we know it is problematic, but this fella' is actually being judged here by his appearance? I doubt any poster in this thread would want an appearance standard applied to him/her when it comes to exercising their 2nd Amendment right. "It's okay to carry, as long as you look like I think you should . . . ":rolleyes:
Click to expand...

I don't think we are judging HIM by his appearance. We are just judging his appearance to be an additional problem for him.

But it is certainly worth remembering that people in general do.

Not just police officers who may encounter you with a gun in your hand, not knowing whether you are a good or bad guy. But also people on a jury who may see that tape. And if I saw a guy looking like the man in that tape showing no badge but waving a gun around and yelling that he was a cop, I'd be more likely to draw mine than to comply with his instructions. That's just human; we respond to external clues.
 
Last edited:
Muss Muggins said:
I agree that the story as we know it is problematic, but this fella' is actually being judged here by his appearance?
Click to expand...
I think we are saying we are going to be judged by those NOT here based on what he is wearing.

People are judged on appearances first, always, even by those that say they aren't. Otherwise, I would go to work in shorts and a wife beater.
 
Last edited:
Muss Muggins said:
I agree that the story as we know it is problematic, but this fella' is actually being judged here by his appearance? I doubt any poster in this thread would want an appearance standard applied to him/her when it comes to exercising their 2nd Amendment right. "It's okay to carry, as long as you look like I think you should . . . ":rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Hey Muss-I agree with you in principal. Read a story last night about 2 NYPD Detectives shot at an armed robbery at a TMobile store. The thief had a toy gun. The plain clothes cops were shooting him when uniform cops showed up and shot them. Detective died and Sergeant is critical. Obviously a communication breakdown. But it points out a couple things. When shots are fired and in the heat of the moment, a good guy with a gun (CCW hero at the scene) stands a chance of being shot by cops responding to man with a gun or armed robbery calls. Based on appearance when communication is absent. Just food for thought.
 
Well, in my opinion, what you point out is a totally different problem entirely. I typed a lot more and deleted it. Peace, out . . .


LPD256 said:
Hey Muss-I agree with you in principal. Read a story last night about 2 NYPD Detectives shot at an armed robbery at a TMobile store. The thief had a toy gun. The plain clothes cops were shooting him when uniform cops showed up and shot them. Detective died and Sergeant is critical. Obviously a communication breakdown. But it points out a couple things. When shots are fired and in the heat of the moment, a good guy with a gun (CCW hero at the scene) stands a chance of being shot by cops responding to man with a gun or armed robbery calls. Based on appearance when communication is absent. Just food for thought.
Click to expand...
 
When I asked my dad why he left the Air Force after only six years, he told me go watch No Time For Sergeants.

[ame]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dLzvQraXw6k[/ame]
 
Muss Muggins said:
Well, in my opinion, what you point out is a totally different problem entirely. I typed a lot more and deleted it. Peace, out . . .
Click to expand...

Muss-I agree it's a different point entirely but for whatever reason your point made me think about the cop shooting. I guess the common denominator is looks can be deceiving.
 
Muss Muggins said:
Why is it important?
Click to expand...

Because you'll be judged by your appearance, continuously, throughout the legal process. Especially with the prevalence of public surveillance and omnipresent smartphones, there's a reasonable probability that a video of your shooting will eventually be shown to a jury. At the very least, you'll be judged, however consciously or subconsciously, fairly or unfairly, by responding police, prosecutors, and even your own attorney.

Anyone that argues otherwise is either hopelessly, naively idealistic, an utter fool, or both.

Note that I don't say you have to look a certain way--just neat. Clean. Non-criminal. Consider shaving more than once a week. Not like this dude.
 
Having interviewed hundreds of jurors after the fact, and lots of judges, in criminal cases, I can say that equal numbers are creeped out by defendants in ties. My advice, dress the way you dress, and let the facts determine the outcome. Peace. Out . . .

Wise_A said:
Because you'll be judged by your appearance, continuously, throughout the legal process. Especially with the prevalence of public surveillance and omnipresent smartphones, there's a reasonable probability that a video of your shooting will eventually be shown to a jury. At the very least, you'll be judged, however consciously or subconsciously, fairly or unfairly, by responding police, prosecutors, and even your own attorney.

Anyone that argues otherwise is either hopelessly, naively idealistic, an utter fool, or both.

Note that I don't say you have to look a certain way--just neat. Clean. Non-criminal. Consider shaving more than once a week. Not like this dude.
Click to expand...
 
Muss Muggins said:
Having interviewed hundreds of jurors after the fact, and lots of judges, in criminal cases, I can say that equal numbers are creeped out by defendants in ties. My advice, dress the way you dress, and let the facts determine the outcome. Peace. Out . . .
Click to expand...

Why do you think they are creeped out by defendants in ties? They always take the gang-banger defendant with long hair and pants down around the knees and clean them up, give them a haircut, and dress them in a nice suit to be presentable for trial. I always thought they should make thier court appearance looking like their mug shot.
 
Human nature is to profile, if your walking down the street in Beverly Hills iit feels safe. If your walking down the street in the Ghetto I'm sure you are not feeling warm and fuzzy. It's so ingrained in our heads you probably don't realize your profiling IMHO....
 
Looking home-town (ball cap brim at 12:00) will take you a lot further than looking home-boy (ball cap brim pointed at any other angle than 12:00 unless on a baseball diamond) round these parts.

I've never understood the shoes barely on and low riding britches. If I was gonna be a thug I'd have my stuff strung high and tight so as to outrun trouble.
 
It's not even a matter of conscious "profiling", it's just the most basic human psychology.

And this isn't about judging after the fact, but in the situation where the wrong call can get someone hurt or killed.

If you've got two people with guns, yes, the nice clean guy in a polo shirt and slacks COULD be a cold-blooded killer, and the scruffy unshaven guy MIGHT be an undercover or retired cop.

And both could be neither and have the same right to carry and draw a gun in self-defense.

But if a cop or another armed citizen is faced with a split-second decision in an unclear dangerous situation, guess who of the two is more likely to be exercising his constitutional rights from inside a coffin in the future?
 
At least twice in my life as a college student I know that my clean cut boyish face kept me out of jail where's another person that didn't look as clean cut as me would have ended up with a record. And it is just by the grace of God that those indiscretions did not follow me the rest of my life and limit the jobs I got, the interest rate I'm charged, the grad school I went to, etc..

There's a reason Clint Eastwood was Mule in the movie--because no one suspects a 90 year old of running drugs. We are conditioned to make snap judgements by nature.
 
Last edited:
He must have bumped his head to try something like that. But we don't really know anything but what the reporter said. The shoplifter might have tried to run him down while driving away. Hope they get his head fixed.
 
Muss Muggins said:
Having interviewed hundreds of jurors after the fact, and lots of judges, in criminal cases, I can say that equal numbers are creeped out by defendants in ties. My advice, dress the way you dress, and let the facts determine the outcome. Peace. Out . . .
Click to expand...

Muss, I believe you are referring to "polished turds".

:D

But yes--ties don't matter, neither do polo shirts or khakis. I really don't think what you're wearing matters particularly much, so long as you stay away from attire normally seen on Cops (oversized Tweety t-shirt, anyone?). Just so long as it's clean, not in tatters, and properly-sized and -worn. It's not about being "well-to-do". Class has nothing to do with it. It doesn't take much to spot garbage, even when you wrap it in a few hundred bucks.

The defendant in question...hmm. I really think it's the unshaven face (either have a beard or don't) and greasy Nick Nolte hair.
 
Last edited:
Selective Memory Loss

What I don't understand is that all law enforcement officers receive intensive training broadly covered under the term "decision, reaction" or "shoot/don't shoot" exercises. These can involve role-playing exercises and interactive video training protocols such as the FATS system. You don't normally forget that stuff although laws have changed a bit and police are now held to a higher standard than was common a few decades ago.

Yes, there could be a mitigating circumstance that the anti-gun media conveniently omitted but being as generous as I can, this is a questionable shooting. Deadly force is generally not permitted to prevent a property crime except for arson of an occupied dwelling.
 
Last edited:
Muss Muggins said:
The level of racist and otherwise "carry a gun but only if you pass my appearance test" **** in this thread sickens me. Grow up, people. There's plenty more opinions in the world besides yours, and most of them are entitled to carry firearms. It's not you can carry but only if you look like me. If you think that, you're just an anti. Get used to it.
Click to expand...

Muss:

Now you are getting unreasonable. Considering that you are getting defensive to the point of absurdity here (racist? sheesh..), there seems to be something else going on. Maybe your own dress code would be perceived as threatening or too casual by more uptight citizens?

Since nobody has questioned the guy's right to carry a gun, you are aggressively having an argument with nobody else.

But if you dress like a wolf, an armed sheep is more likely to shoot you. That's the reality YOU have to grow up to if you seriously don't believe that.
 
We all profile other people. It's a fact of life whether right or wrong. And we're all judgmental to a point. We have our preconceived notions of how WE would do things. Some of us are so closed minded that we think that we're right and everyone else is wrong for not doing things the way we do.

We should never rush to judgement or assume anything. But we do. We're all guilty of it. But if you look back through the course of your life, I'm will to bet that when did assume or rush to judgment, you were wrong.

Not taking sides here.....just saying....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

M
This week in my little town!
Replies
5
Views
441
chief38
chief38
B
Drone ARREST
Replies
3
Views
508
PatriotX
PatriotX
biku324
A Crook is a Crook
2 3 4
Replies
101
Views
5K
Ματθιας
Ματθιας
biku324
That was Fast!
Replies
3
Views
1K
Eric300
Eric300
biku324
  • Locked
Asi­ Es Nuevo Mexico
Replies
11
Views
815
s&wchad
s&wchad

Latest posts

Back
Top