Austin Police Shoot Homeowner

[Kar98]

WSJ has no idea what they are talking about.

It was a justified shooting. Sad someone with in an apparent MH episode died, but the officer made the right choice.

Надіслано з дому вашої мами за допомогою Tapatalk

How do you reckon that? "Drop the *BLAM BLAM BLAM BLAM* gun!" is a good shoot? And people in the US and in Texas ARE allowed to have guns, even to take them out of the safe every now and then.

 

[cycleguy2300]

Your link to WSJ was dead too on my computer. It appears that the cop shot the homeowner almost instantly with the drop your gun command. That is from the badge cam. In my opinion from what I have seen this was a bad shoot. Your opinion may be different. I predict huge legal payout from Austin. We shall see.

Payouts are far from an admission of guilt.

Cities are faced with years of litigation and the massive costs associated with it or just paying someone to shut up for far less than the cost of extended lawsuits.

Надіслано з дому вашої мами за допомогою Tapatalk

 

[cycleguy2300]

Yes I did. Two people can watch the same thing and come up with different conclusions. This guy was a successful business person and this doesn’t fit the pattern of a nut job. I think he believed there was a burglar in his house. The only absolute is that the cop gave a command and instantly fired his gun killing the homeowner.

The homeowners belief isn't the issue, it has really zero legal bearing on this incident.

The question is whether the officer's belief that the MWAG was a immediate threat of serious bodily injury to himself or another. Firing into a house, then turning to the officer with gun in hand sure would seem to be a threat to me.

No warning is required when there is a deadly force threat. The appropriate action is to respond with accurate fire.

The the warning is evidence to me of the officer's training and grasp on the situation where he was in the game to recognize a threat and instead of going code-black or being unable to do anything but shoot, was able to still give a verbal command.

Надіслано з дому вашої мами за допомогою Tapatalk

 

[cycleguy2300]

How do you reckon that? "Drop the *BLAM BLAM BLAM BLAM* gun!" is a good shoot? And people in the US and in Texas ARE allowed to have guns, even to take them out of the safe every now and then.

Sure, we can all own, use and even carry them around in public, but taking a gun out of the safe isn't the issue here neither is simply walking around with a gun...

The guy put in the street pointing the rifle and was actively shooting into a residential structure, in a municipality of over 100,000. Both are serious crimes in Texas (deadly conduct and unlawful discharge)

The guys looks and sounds to be in a psychotic episode, quote possibly his first major one.

If you are going to set up straw man arguments at least know the facts of the argument.

Надіслано з дому вашої мами за допомогою Tapatalk

 

[O.S.O.K. 1961]

I watched the vid. My initial impression was the same as many here.. the cop shot just a little too quick - didn't give the guy a chance to drop the gun - but then he might have thought the guy was moving to shoot too... so hard to call. Very hard one for the cop. The guy was messed up if there wasn't anyone else there... like hallucinating or something...

 

[deemus]

The guy was messed up if there wasn't anyone else there... like hallucinating or something...

Seemed that way to me too. Having dealt with a mentally ill person for 20 years, this seems on point.

 

[toddnjoyce]

I’ve tried to stay out of this because I can see it going either way. In my eyes, it reinforces my belief that LEO tactical employment needs to evolve.

I have some broader thoughts but honestly, not the time or energy here.

 

[cycleguy2300]

I’ve tried to stay out of this because I can see it going either way. In my eyes, it reinforces my belief that LEO tactical employment needs to evolve.

I have some broader thoughts but honestly, not the time or energy here.

Can't really send fire or EMS for the MH aspect of a call like this not sure what the evolution of "LEO tactical employment" would be.

Надіслано з дому вашої мами за допомогою Tapatalk

 

[toddnjoyce]

…not sure what the evolution of "LEO tactical employment" would be.

You make my point perfectly.

 

[cycleguy2300]

You make my point perfectly.

This isn't directed at you Todd,, or anyone.. just a general statement

I don't see any over arching problems with the LE reaction to this so no major evolution needed IMO. Changes for the better can always be made, but there is always a cost. If the officers had waited here, innocent people could very well have died as they have in the past when police hesitate to act. Its a sad situation, but not one that deserves a knee jerk reaction.

Надіслано з дому вашої мами за допомогою Tapatalk

 

[seeker_two]

Will be curious to see if he had drugs in his system (legal or otherwise) that might have effected his behavior.

The police officer? Likely adrenaline and bad training...

 

[oldag]

This is a tough situation.

Given where the officer chose to position himself and the situation (had already heard gunshots, someone pointing a gun into a home), I don't really blame him. What if the person had been a perp and the officer waited longer? Perp could have brought the rifle up and killed the officer. Then what would we be saying?

On the other hand, could the officer have taken cover (true cover as opposed to concealment) and called out from there to provide more time?

Tough.

 

[candcallen]

This is a tough situation.

Given where the officer chose to position himself and the situation (had already heard gunshots, someone pointing a gun into a home), I don't really blame him. What if the person had been a perp and the officer waited longer? Perp could have brought the rifle up and killed the officer. Then what would we be saying?

On the other hand, could the officer have taken cover (true cover as opposed to concealment) and called out from there to provide more time?

Tough.

Like I said. There was no cover available for that to even be an option. The officer approached an actively shooting person from a position of concealment and just as he turned the corner the shooter/homeowner came off the porch with a rifle at the low ready.

Having dealt with people with psychotic breaks and watching and listening to the home owner on his video I can say that guy was having some sort of mental health crisis. Weather chemically induced or enhanced or natural. The look on his face was also not one of a reasonable scared homeowner, it was vacant and detached. If you have seen people in that state you know.

Nothing he did was logical or normal or reasonable for someone with an intruder in the home. He had been alerted police were coming, he was not trapped inside and was relatively safe outside yet he was talking to these intruders mumbling to himself and shooting into his home and endangering everyone down range. Knowing neighbors called the police a reasonable person would be waiting in a position of safety preparing to not have a rifle in their hands at the point of police contact.

We all know the dangers of holding weapons when police arrive to such incidents.

One can make a case the officer shot quickly or even a violation of some policy or training.... if you can show said policy or training.... but just as easily show how doing so wasn't unreasonable under the totality of circumstances and also show he was trained to do so. It certainly wasn't illegal.

You can also have a reasonable discussion about police training. That's legitimate today as I think they are taught too much fear and not enough mitigation tactics. Mix that in with my opinion they hire too many pussies or borderline mental detectives who think a badge elevates their ego or think guns are magical talismans that ward off evil and solve all problems and not the last tool to be used and you can have problems. That said critical thinking requires each incident to be judged on its own merits and I don't think any of that came into play here. But I'm open to more information.

However,

The narrative the guy was an innocent unassuming homeowner just standing in his yard and was executed by the police officer on sight is total bullshit and anyone saying so is bias and disingenuous at least. The the racism bullshit being tossed around is disgusting and makes proponents of such feces irrelevant in my opinion. Useless to even talk to.

Again before I decide I wanna know things like MH status, toxicology and exactly what the officers were told by dispatch. Right now, I wouldn't discipline or fire or charge this guy.

Police doctrine of responding to active shooters is for the first officers to engage and stop the shooting instantly upon arrival. We don't want tgem setting perimeter and calling swat while people die. We see how that ends up in columbine and in the recent school shooting. Asking them to do this, which is absolutely the correct thing to do, means we can't then hold them to impossible standards of after the fact slow mo video judgement. They will absolutely act quickly and decisively and at some point even make mistakes. I can live with that more than I can live with all those dead kids.

That said, I can't find fault here for all the reasons I've mentioned.

 

[oldag]

Like I said. There was no cover available for that to even be an option. The officer approached an actively shooting person from a position of concealment and just as he turned the corner the shooter/homeowner came off the porch with a rifle at the low ready.

Having dealt with people with psychotic breaks and watching and listening to the home owner on his video I can say that guy was having some sort of mental health crisis. Weather chemically induced or enhanced or natural. The look on his face was also not one of a reasonable scared homeowner, it was vacant and detached. If you have seen people in that state you know.

Nothing he did was logical or normal or reasonable for someone with an intruder in the home. He had been alerted police were coming, he was not trapped inside and was relatively safe outside yet he was talking to these intruders mumbling to himself and shooting into his home and endangering everyone down range. Knowing neighbors called the police a reasonable person would be waiting in a position of safety preparing to not have a rifle in their hands at the point of police contact.

We all know the dangers of holding weapons when police arrive to such incidents.

One can make a case the officer shot quickly or even a violation of some policy or training.... if you can show said policy or training.... but just as easily show how doing so wasn't unreasonable under the totality of circumstances and also show he was trained to do so. It certainly wasn't illegal.

You can also have a reasonable discussion about police training. That's legitimate today as I think they are taught too much fear and not enough mitigation tactics. Mix that in with my opinion they hire too many pussies or borderline mental detectives who think a badge elevates their ego or think guns are magical talismans that ward off evil and solve all problems and not the last tool to be used and you can have problems. That said critical thinking requires each incident to be judged on its own merits and I don't think any of that came into play here. But I'm open to more information.

However,

The narrative the guy was an innocent unassuming homeowner just standing in his yard and was executed by the police officer on sight is total bullshit and anyone saying so is bias and disingenuous at least. The the racism bullshit being tossed around is disgusting and makes proponents of such feces irrelevant in my opinion. Useless to even talk to.

Again before I decide I wanna know things like MH status, toxicology and exactly what the officers were told by dispatch. Right now, I wouldn't discipline or fire or charge this guy.

Police doctrine of responding to active shooters is for the first officers to engage and stop the shooting instantly upon arrival. We don't want tgem setting perimeter and calling swat while people die. We see how that ends up in columbine and in the recent school shooting. Asking them to do this, which is absolutely the correct thing to do, means we can't then hold them to impossible standards of after the fact slow mo video judgement. They will absolutely act quickly and decisively and at some point even make mistakes. I can live with that more than I can live with all those dead kids.

That said, I can't find fault here for all the reasons I've mentioned.

Some good points.

I agree he was acting strangely.

 

[cycleguy2300]

The police officer? Likely adrenaline and bad training...

What is your level of training that you can judge his actions by?

Надіслано з дому вашої мами за допомогою Tapatalk

 

[toddnjoyce]

This isn't directed at you Todd,, or anyone.. just a general statement

I don't see any over arching problems with the LE reaction to this so no major evolution needed IMO. Changes for the better can always be made, but there is always a cost. If the officers had waited here, innocent people could very well have died as they have in the past when police hesitate to act. Its a sad situation, but not one that deserves a knee jerk reaction.

Надіслано з дому вашої мами за допомогою Tapatalk

I understand your position. Evolution and revolution are two different things. The opportunity I see is the S/A gap that exists when arriving on-scene. From the moment the call is dispatched, the responding officer is building a mental model of what that scene will look like and running through how to respond, while navigating to the scene and all that entails, because there’s an assumption the worst could be happening.

We got a lot of SOF experience and some neutrals killed doing raids that were very well planned and exceptionally well executed because we forgot that it takes a second to build your SA in real time.

Improved ways might include everything from how the call is dispatched, to who responds, to improved use of cover/concealment or standoff techniques to build SA.

Doesn’t mean any of those changes would result in a different outcome, but everything from how a department is manned, tenure/experience mixes, resources and capability, and more should drive how a department responds operationally and tactically for some types of calls.

Might be as simply as developing a high risk response qualification, unless every MWAG is going to be treated as an Active Shooter. And when all you have is a hammer and you’re prepared to see a nail, nobody should be surprised when somebody asks what happened to the loose screw.

 

[cycleguy2300]

I understand your position. Evolution and revolution are two different things. The opportunity I see is the S/A gap that exists when arriving on-scene. From the moment the call is dispatched, the responding officer is building a mental model of what that scene will look like and running through how to respond, while navigating to the scene and all that entails, because there’s an assumption the worst could be happening.

We got a lot of SOF experience and some neutrals killed doing raids that were very well planned and exceptionally well executed because we forgot that it takes a second to build your SA in real time.

Improved ways might include everything from how the call is dispatched, to who responds, to improved use of cover/concealment or standoff techniques to build SA.

Doesn’t mean any of those changes would result in a different outcome, but everything from how a department is manned, tenure/experience mixes, resources and capability, and more should drive how a department responds operationally and tactically for some types of calls.

Might be as simply as developing a high risk response qualification, unless every MWAG is going to be treated as an Active Shooter. And when all you have is a hammer and you’re prepared to see a nail, nobody should be surprised when somebody asks what happened to the loose screw.

Not every MWAG call is treated like a Active Attack call. In fact I tend to see a bit overly relaxed response due to the frequency of "I saw a guy with a gun" calls and the low frequency of anything coming of it.

As an instructor for an LE Active Attack Response class, I can assure you properly ID-ing armed civilians and off-duty LEO is definitely taught and trained. Hands, whole body and situation. All three need to be evaluated. Just because you see a gun != shoot, do they have a uniform or badge, are people acting scared of him? Police NEVER have the whole story and certainly do mis-ID threats, positively and negatively both on the macro and individual level, getting people hurt. Mistakes will happen, imperfect humans doing things WILL make mistakes, and while lessons should be learned not all mistakes require a rewriting of the rules. Usually what is needed is a reminder of what the rules are.

Надіслано з дому вашої мами за допомогою Tapatalk