Another Police Shooting.

[Rageaholic]

This time in South Jersey.

I'm a little torn on this. I mean, I definitely think the cops over reacted by the pulling the gun on him (unless there are laws against carrying guns in glove compartments that I'm not aware of). Odds are, he was put in an awkward situation where he had to get his ID, but couldn't do so without it looking like he was going for a gun. And when they pulled their guns on him, well... I don't think many people are prepared to act rationally when that happens.

But I can also see why they would shoot him once he got out of the car. I still think it was over kill and the guy didn't deserve to lose his life for being rightfully anxious, but it looks like a case of "Poor Communication Kills".

But ultimately, I don't want to live in a world where a traffic stop can turn lethal so quickly.

[s_stabeler]

Actually, I'd say this was a justified shot. Normally it wouldn't be entirely justified, but the cop knew the guy- and knew the guy had previosuly shot at cops. then, from the looks of it, the guy had a gun close to him- and may or may not have been reaching for it. ( I didn't watch the video, though, I'm going by the article- if the video contradicts this, then obviouslyt it changes if the shot was justified or not) In short, the guy tripped most of the warning signs for being about to shoot at the cops.
l
It's certianly uncear what went down.

[BlaqueKatt]

unless there are laws against carrying guns in glove compartments that I'm not aware of

In new Jersey it IS illegal.

Firearms shall be carried unloaded and contained in a closed and fastened case, gunbox, securely tied package, or locked in the trunk of the automobile in which it is being transported.

Ammunition must be transported in a separate container and locked in the trunk of the automobile in which it is being transported.If the vehicle does not have a compartment separate from the passenger compartment, the firearm must be in a locked container other than the vehicle's glove compartment or console.

[Andara Bledin]

This one is very sticky and likely will never be reasonably disentagled with merely the information we have available to us.

The fact that the victim was known to police in general, and one of the officers that shot him specifically makes things even murkier.

It doesn't help that the officer in question doesn't have a particularly clean record either.

This is an ugly event that will only serve to make both sides even more embattled for little in the way of anything positive.

[Greenday]

They were definitely breaking the law. Storing a gun in the glove compartment like that counts as concealed carry. It's next to impossible to get a concealed carry permit so I'd bet the house they didn't have one (Hell, the armed security guards at work have trouble getting CCPs and they are retired cops AND work for the federal government AND they totally need guns to do their jobs). New Jersey is one of the strictest states when it comes to gun laws.

So given that, the cop just found a guy known for shooting at cops with an illegally carried gun. That right there is grounds to draw on him. Then he tells him to put his hands up and not move. The cop finally gets the door opened and the guy gets out of the car without being instructed to.

No court in America will convict a cop for that.

[Panacea]

I'm a little torn on this. I mean, I definitely think the cops over reacted by the pulling the gun on him (unless there are laws against carrying guns in glove compartments that I'm not aware of).

It's illegal everywhere, unless you have a concealed carry permit.

The guy who got shot is well known to law enforcement and has a history of shooting police officers.

[Rageaholic]

The guy who got shot is well known to law enforcement and has a history of shooting police officers.

Didn't catch that part. Maybe pulling the guns on him wasn't such an overreaction...

[Andara Bledin]

The guy who got shot is well known to law enforcement and has a history of shooting police officers.

This is not true. He'd never actually shot an officer. He had, however, once shot at officers and spent 13 years in prison for that. He'd been out of prison for several years since then and apparently not had a weapons offense since.

Then again, Days, the officer who first opened fire on him, had been caught on video macing a cuffed detainee and is not well-liked in the community, who accuse him of using his badge to be a bully. He's received seven municipal court complaints in the two years he's been with the force tho all were dismissed, and his partner has also received two complaints in that same time and received disciplinary action at least once.

It's worth noting that Reid was arrested for several charges last year, including for drug possession and resisting arrest, but none of the reports state whether he was convicted or the charges dropped in that incident. One of the officers involved was Days.

As I said before, it's not a clean case at all, but I don't believe it is one that can be definitively said to be another murder by a cop like some of the other recent incidents. Then again, I also don't think Days is really cut out to be patrolling that area, if he's cut out to be patrolling any area at all.

[s_stabeler]

Even if the guy didn't actually hit, remember the #1 rule of gun safety? don't point a gun at anything you are not willing to destroy. Not to mention, what's important is the risk of the officer getting shot. Say the guy again shot AT Days, and the bullet actually hit this time?

Is Days a good officer? I don't know. Is he a murderer in this case? I don't think so. ( oh, and Reid was apparently shot by both officers, wich makes me slightly more inclined to ignore Days' past in judging this case.

edit- oh, and from the article, it sounds like he at least made a ghab for the gun. Considering that he had something in front of his chest ( presumed to be his hands?) then I'd think there's a fair chance it appeared he was trying to attack Days. In which case, it's a reasonable presumption for the cops to make that he had got his gun back and was attempting to shoot them.

[Panacea]

This is not true. He'd never actually shot an officer. He had, however, once shot at officers and spent 13 years in prison for that. He'd been out of prison for several years since then and apparently not had a weapons offense since.

I stand corrected.

Still, I would be cautious in dealing with someone known to shoot AT cops as one known to have actually succeeded, no matter how long ago the original incident happened.

[Andara Bledin]

I don't disagree the it's right to be cautious about the guy, just that he's never shot or killed anyone that anybody knows about.

It's worth noting that it appears that the other officer appeared to have shot only once, while Days nearly emptied his weapon into Reid, who had one hand up at chest level and the other on the car door, and both were otherwise empty.

I don't have the time right now, but when I get back home, I'll find the article that I got most of my references from and link it. It's got a ton more detail on everybody and the video itself than pretty much every other article I've read, half of which are inconsistent when cross-referenced to one another.

That's a huge problem with 'breaking' stories; the news people are in such a rush to get any information out there that they don't really take the time to make sure the information is entirely accurate. I generally won't trust anything that doesn't hold up three days later, and even then, it's worth noting that the press tends to have a notably pro-cops bias (as witnessed with one headline going from "large white thug" to "plain clothes officer" and changing from aggressive to passive tense for the same event).

[Panacea]

Thanks; I'd like to see the article. It's likely not the one I read.

However, I would point out the number of shots fired by itself means nothing. Police officers are trained to shoot until the threat is neutralized, and often UNDER estimate the actual number of shots they fire.

[Greenday]

http://edition.cnn.com/2015/01/23/us...hooting-video/

Pretty graphic.

A whole different shooting. Amazing what a bodycam can do to end arguments. Every cop should have one. They can be used as evidence to help convict criminals and they should have nothing to fear if they aren't doing anything wrong.

[Panacea]

Thanks for the link Greenday.

I wish the local police would take their cue from Oklahoma. We've had a shooting that was probably justified (mentally ill woman attacked the officer with a knife, forcing him to shoot her--family does not dispute what happened), but the local cops refuse to release the video, calling it a "personnel record."

I think they're afraid of what will happen if there is a habit of releasing video, if an UNjustified shooting happens. They'd then have no excuse to withold it.

[Gravekeeper]

This is a messy one. According to the officer's record he has more than a few incidents in the community and he also arrested this guy once before at this exact same intersection. He knows him by first name. The suspect should not have gotten out of the vehicle ( but he did so with his hands up ), but the officer really seems to be freaking the fuck out to be blunt. It feels like the officer escalates this situation to a complete panic.