Concealed Carrier Rushes Into The Fray - Gunned Down After Preventing Further Casualties

[Axxe55]

This is getting silly. It happened. The guys gone. I’d hope all information becomes transparent. As a civilian I agree with cycleguy.

This world is insane. A cop who is always on guard is not a dick. Look at cycleguys history here: he’s not a dick. Pretty good dude has been my observation. As are most cops. Cops are just like any of one us except they are tasked with a real challenge for a job. And most start out just like us at 50-70 a year. I’d want 100-200 a year; no 300 a year with how nuts people are.

I love cops who engage with their community BUT the community is often infested with shit. Right now my community is alright but that’s only because I’m tucked away at a dead end in the country and my first responders are a mp.40 and a 78 sportsman in 30-06 if our lives are in danger. And as far as preventing my kid from being abducted we have Marshall who can keep up with an atv at full throttle and is a dog that will bite a perverts jewels off. This is the society we live in. People hurt others for no reason. They abduct people. list goes on. Society is long past the point that a cop can have his guard down. It was how many years ago that the trend of going up behind old people and knocking them out started? How many traffic stops can we see online that start ok then the cop sees a weapon aimed at him?

I will not argue with, debate, or put down a police officer for how to do his or her job.

Well said.

 

[avvidclif]

Years ago, think 60's-70's a study was done of adrenaline levels in the human body. They compared police officers to the general public. The military was not tested (IIRC) but I can imagine where folks that are or have been in combat was at.

Results were startling to say the least. The resting (off duty) level of adrenline of a police officer was higher than the average citizen would ever see. It seems it's a cumulative effect that peaks after x years(don't remember). After that period of time it then varies from resting to on duty to high stress. The resting is as listed above. You can guess at the other 2. It was interesting to say the least and explained a lot of things to me. Cycle2300 knows what I am talking about. I just can't fathom what it would be like in today's environment.

 

[Glenn B]

There is just so much wrong in that. If you were LE for 32 years you know that what LE does at at crime scene and what others do are 2 very different things. For a non LE to pick up guns at an active crime scene is generally a bad idea unless given no other choice but die.
There is a lot of things that took place that we don't know about. Why either of them did what they did. And may never know except that it ended tragically.
Personally, I think Hurley did the right thing by stopping the shooter. At the same time, I hope the cop was justified in his actions given what he thought the situation was.
And admitting that a cop will be coached to lie to save his ass, well, your credibility just went to crap. Explains what is wrong with NY.
I generally support LE. But not that kind.

Sent by an idjit coffeeholic from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

What if Mr. Hurley had been a an off duty cop. What would have been different had he been holding the gun then? Things are not as different as you say, at least as I see them. The thing is, the officer who shot him was responsible for every shot he fired and was responsible, just like would be anyone, for identifying the target as a threat. I hope he can do so, witout any coaching but I'd bet coaching has already been offered. As I pointed out quite plainly, as you also do, there is not enough info to decide anything yet except for the fact Mr. Hurley killed the bad guy and he was then killed by a police officer.

As for you saying my telling you an officer will be coached is what is wrong with NY - way to go you show your prejudice. I have experience working in several areas of the country, for months and even years at a time throughout my career, where I saw this happen more than once when an officer's/agent's actions were brought into question. The highest amount of corrupt officers I have ever seen in one place, including those who were coached, at one time was when I was on a 3 month detail to - wait for it - LAREDO, TEXAS.

Coaching of an officer, to cover himself, when his actions are questioned, happens everywhere; although, it should not happen anywhere. I have seen it several times first hand and have even been subjected to it. I went with telling my version of the incidents, which meant telling the truth not the coached version. One incident when I was in the Border Patrol that resulted in me being exonerated of any wrong doing and one in NY after I shot a guy, while I was off duty, who tried to mug me. I did not need coaching but the union reps and my supervisors were there to try to coach me. I just told the truth and, when I shot the guy, I was exonerated by a grand Jury investigating the shooting. I have even had Assistant U.S. Attorneys try to coach me on what to testify in a jury trial. I declined to be coached.

So, tell me again, how does me saying coaching takes place destroy my credibility. How dare you resort to personal insults. My credibility and integrity were without question during my entire career. Never one complaint about either in 32 plus years and in fact I turned in rights violating scum more than once and suffered being ostracized for it a few times. So tell me again - how exactly does that destroy my credibility or how it is a NY problem.

 

[justmax]

Well, for starters, calling them "civilians" like police are not.

Even the way you present that narrative illustrates the problem. You're describing everyone as a threat. Not a potential threat. That's the mentality that gets innocent people killed.

First of all, I have known quite a few LEOs that refer to non LEOs as civilians.
Secondly, the word threat has potential in its meaning.
Just saying...

 

[jrbfishn]

What if Mr. Hurley had been a an off duty cop. What would have been different had he been holding the gun then? Things are not as different as you say, at least as I see them. The thing is, the officer who shot him was responsible for every shot he fired and was responsible, just like would be anyone, for identifying the target as a threat. I hope he can do so, witout any coaching but I'd bet coaching has already been offered. As I pointed out quite plainly, as you also do, there is not enough info to decide anything yet except for the fact Mr. Hurley killed the bad guy and he was then killed by a police officer.

As for you saying my telling you an officer will be coached is what is wrong with NY - way to go you show your prejudice. I have experience working in several areas of the country, for months and even years at a time throughout my career, where I saw this happen more than once when an officer's/agent's actions were brought into question. The highest amount of corrupt officers I have ever seen in one place, including those who were coached, at one time was when I was on a 3 month detail to - wait for it - LAREDO, TEXAS.

Coaching of an officer, to cover himself, when his actions are questioned, happens everywhere; although, it should not happen anywhere. I have seen it several times first hand and have even been subjected to it. I went with telling my version of the incidents, which meant telling the truth not the coached version. One incident when I was in the Border Patrol that resulted in me being exonerated of any wrong doing and one in NY after I shot a guy, while I was off duty, who tried to mug me. I did not need coaching but the union reps and my supervisors were there to try to coach me. I just told the truth and, when I shot the guy, I was exonerated by a grand Jury investigating the shooting. I have even had Assistant U.S. Attorneys try to coach me on what to testify in a jury trial. I declined to be coached.

So, tell me again, how does me saying coaching takes place destroy my credibility. How dare you resort to personal insults. My credibility and integrity were without question during my entire career. Never one complaint about either in 32 plus years and in fact I turned in rights violating scum more than once and suffered being ostracized for it a few times. So tell me again - how exactly does that destroy my credibility or how it is a NY problem.

You figure it out yourself.

Sent by an idjit coffeeholic from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

 

[rotor]

We need more info here. We just don't know what happened.
As far as coaching, we have all been coached as to what to do if we are involved in a shooting especially don't talk to the police without your lawyer.

 

[jordanmills]

I think we are splitting hairs here.

Can you shoot an Armed Afghan at an IPSC match? No.

Can you shoot an Armed Afghan on the battlefield? Yes.

Any more is overthinking it.

You can in either case, but sometimes you'll be charged with a crime for it.

 

[jordanmills]

How many reverse gears do you have???

What are you rambling about?

 

[jordanmills]

I was simply using the words you used to describe non-police...

You error is not thinking EVERYONE is a threat. EVERYONE is a threat, its not all a big threat, or a threat that needs to be neutralized, but the threats must still be addressed even if that is just an acknowledgement of it. I think your error is due to lack of training and experience in critical incident management, but please correct me if I am wrong.

You being a threat doesn't mean you are a bad person, but on scene police don't know you from Adam and you showing up to looky-loo or not following commands makes it harder (meaning you are becoming the problem).

Not addressing threats is how people get complacent and complacency gets people hurt and killed.

I am sorry you are so triggered, by their being civilians and first-responders. What other words would you like to use?

Sent from your mom's house using Tapatalk

I was using the words they used to describe non LEOs. Personally I think that expressing that kind of internalizaton of "us versus them" mentality should result in revocation of LEO credentials.

No, not everyone is a threat. You have to do something threatening to be a threat.

You seem to be projecting something about being triggered. I'm just fine, but you are getting pretty riled up. Maybe you should step back and stop looking at it from a perspective that you're so much more important than the people you're supposed to serve and protect.

 

[jordanmills]

First of all, I have known quite a few LEOs that refer to non LEOs as civilians.
Secondly, the word threat has potential in its meaning.
Just saying...

Yes, I do too. It seems to have a high correlation with other problems.

 

[cycleguy2300]

You can in either case, but sometimes you'll be charged with a crime for it.

A combatant need no be in uniform. Armed, and not in your side's uniform pretty much equals good target for war.

Sent from your mom's house using Tapatalk

 

[Nightwatch]

Well, from 71 til now, a great number of the new police hires have been and will be fresh outa Uncle Sam's Armed Forces...it's no big surprise that a lot of cops...at least for all these years that I'm aware of, call civilians civilians. Nothing derogatory...and sometimes even said with envy...depending on what crap the LEOs are wading through for us that particular day.

 

[glock45gap]

Unless he was shot in the back, when the police arrive, drop your gun.

If the shot was deliberate, it was not accidental.

 

[ZX9RCAM]

If the shot was deliberate, it was not accidental.

Welcome to the Forum!

I didn't say anything about any shot being accidental?

My comment was on what to do when the police arrive.

The shot in the back part would imply that he wasn't aware that the police arrived.

 

[Axxe55]

If the shot was deliberate, it was not accidental.

Another welcome to TGT.

Accidental, or deliberate. I think we might be bordering on choices of words here IMO. It could have been deliberate, and still accidental at the same time. If the LE officer that shot him, suspected he was bad guy, and shot the guy, because he was holding the gun when they arrived on scene, it would still be accidental IMO.

Accidental comes after the fact and the details of exactly what happened emerge.

Imagine having to live with that one. You arrive on scene, jacked up with adrenaline because it's officer having been shot and wounded, shoot what you perceive to be another bad guy, with a gun, only to find out after the dust settles, the guy you shot, was good guy helping out the injured cop. That would be very difficult.

 

[Hoji]

Well, from 71 til now, a great number of the new police hires have been and will be fresh outa Uncle Sam's Armed Forces...it's no big surprise that a lot of cops...at least for all these years that I'm aware of, call civilians civilians. Nothing derogatory.

Still does not make it right.

 

[Hoji]

Welcome to the Forum!

Another welcome to TGT.

Account created in 2013. Could have very well lost his previous posts on any number of the system resets/updates.

 

[Nightwatch]

Still does not make it right.

...or wrong...just different.

 

[mongoose]

...or wrong...just different.

It is wrong coming from a civilian Police Force.

 

[Axxe55]

Account created in 2013. Could have very well lost his previous posts on any number of the system resets/updates.

I didn't even notice the year. I just noticed the single post he made.