It's good to be the police...
http://www.latimes.com/news/la-officer-shoots-motorcycle-thief-m,0,3848703.story?track=rss&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+latimes%2Fnews+%28L.A.+Times+-+Top+News%29&utm_content=My+Yahoo (http://www.latimes.com/news/la-officer-shoots-motorcycle-thief-m,0,3848703.story?track=rss&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+latimes%2Fnews+%28L.A.+Times+-+Top+News%29&utm_content=My+Yahoo)
[leo]
The article's title could be better tho, it sounds slightly misleading at first; as if the cop had no better thing to do than just pull out his gun and shoot. Reminded me about the MD cop who pulled his gun on a speeding biker without identifying himself first.
Then I read the whole article and it sounds like an entirely legitimate action. We'll see how the story goes.
Dammit! He still lost his bike!! Bastards!! He stopped shooting too soon. The only reason to stop is when the slide locks back. ;D Then you reload.
I make the beast with two backsing HATE thieves!! >:(
PERSONALLY....I think the shot is totally justified...legally though, I want to see how this plays out...
Bastards must have already had the bike loaded up by the time he got there. I would have been doing some Dirty Harry type interrogation before the other cops & ambulance got there. Things would go bad for Eduardo's buddy.
Not to mess with the thread content but I would think if your property is being stolen right before your eyes and you have been physically attacked by the person stealing your stuff and then they make a furtive move that you know is one that could mean the person is now arming themselves then I think damn near anyone should be OK with ventilating the asshole. Whether you're a cop or not. Please check local laws in your area. ;D
Quote from: zooom on December 23, 2010, 08:31:39 AM
PERSONALLY....I think the shot is totally justified...legally though, I want to see how this plays out...
legally? I think it's fine. No LEO is ever 100% off duty - he caught two guys in the commission of a crime. He ID'd himself as an LEO, one of the villains made a move that easily could have been take (and was) as him going for a weapon and the LEO fired. The fact that the bike being stolen belonged to the officer is circumstantial. Seems pretty clear to me.
Non-life threatening wound. That's too bad.
Until there are consequences for criminals they will keep being criminals. Good for the cop. Hope he gets his bike back.
Quote from: Spidey on December 23, 2010, 09:10:50 AM
Non-life threatening wound. That's too bad.
Yeah, poor shot placement.
Quote from: Spidey on December 23, 2010, 09:10:50 AM
Non-life threatening wound. That's too bad.
Nah. The guy can talk. The cop can get his bike back or at least find the other douchebag.
Quote from: oldfastwin on December 23, 2010, 08:30:34 AM
Dammit! He still lost his bike!! Bastards!! He stopped shooting too soon. The only reason to stop is when the slide locks back. ;D Then you reload.
I make the beast with two backsing HATE thieves!! >:(
He could only shoot at the guy he thought was intending to kill him. He couldn't shoot at the other guy likely due to his department policy. While we can legally shoot at a fleeing felon (and this crime was a felony) most if not all police agencies limit the circumstances that will qualify for that to be a "good" shoot. Usually says something such as "the fleeing felon has shown no regard for the lives of others and letting that person flee would create a substantial risk to the community. ie: future loss of life or great bodily injury."
[thumbsup]
too bad his bike is gone. I hope someone else shoots his accomplice [evil]
Dax, if you're looking for volunteers the line starts here and goes out the door! [evil]
OK I know this is a serious issue ... but 'three year veteran' (from the article) [laugh]
sounds like he should have shot sooner and more. [leo]
Quote from: Betty on December 23, 2010, 03:17:03 PM
OK I know this is a serious issue ... but 'three year veteran' (from the article) [laugh]
how many years of experience does one need to have before they can be called a veteran?
Quote from: derby on December 23, 2010, 04:13:48 PM
how many years of experience does one need to have before they can be called a veteran?
I guess technically a day.
Quote from: derby on December 23, 2010, 04:13:48 PM
how many years of experience does one need to have before they can be called a veteran?
Closer to 40 than 0 I would suggest.
Veteran normally indicates long service. Considering a typical working life three years is far from long.
Quote from: Scotzman on December 23, 2010, 05:12:07 PM
I guess technically a day.
Nope. We call them boots or rookies. 3 years is still a rookie. At about 5 years they quit calling you rookie.
Quote from: Betty on December 23, 2010, 05:14:18 PM
Closer to 40 than 0 I would suggest.
Veteran normally indicates long service. Considering a typical working life three years is far from long.
the us military would disagree... eligible for benefits after 180 days (a lot closer to 0 than 40).
in this context, i don't think there's any confusion that the author meant "an officer with 3-years of experience".
Quote from: derby on December 23, 2010, 05:34:59 PM
in this context, i don't think there's any confusion that the author meant "an officer with 3-years of experience".
Since we have already moved off topic ... why the hell isn't that what the author wrote then. They get paid for doing it ... so why use words that may change the context.
Before we know it the use has entered colloquialism and people start to think 1 day's experience bestows veteran status ;) ... and using excuses like 'but wiki said'. This leads wankers like me to get frustrated at the most minor things and carry on like a dickhead on internet forums.
... and I am not going anywhere near your military comment ...
The MPs shot and killed a motorcycle thief right outside my balcony one night. I'd like to find out where they buried him so I can piss on his grave once a year.
Quote from: derby on December 23, 2010, 05:34:59 PM
the us military would disagree... eligible for benefits after 180 days (a lot closer to 0 than 40).
in this context, i don't think there's any confusion that the author meant "an officer with 3-years of experience".
That's what I was going off of. We deploy people who are 18 and they are "veterans".
Quote from: Betty on December 23, 2010, 05:58:49 PM
Since we have already moved off topic ... why the hell isn't that what the author wrote then. They get paid for doing it ... so why use words that may change the context.
Before we know it the use has entered colloquialism and people start to think 1 day's experience bestows veteran status ;) ... and using excuses like 'but wiki said'. This leads wankers like me to get frustrated at the most minor things and carry on like a dickhead on internet forums.
... and I am not going anywhere near your military comment ...
the military probably did more to, uh, blur the meaning of the word than anybody else.
it means old, experienced, or anybody that has ever served (including active duty).
Quote from: derby on December 23, 2010, 06:21:37 PM
the military probably did more to, uh, blur the meaning of the word than anybody else.
it means old, experienced, or anybody that has ever served (including active duty).
I can agree with that along with just about every dictionary.
What was this cop thinking?? Headshots only for bike thieves!!
Quote from: Veloce-Fino on December 23, 2010, 09:04:52 PM
What was this cop thinking?? Headshots only for bike thieves!!
my guess is that they're trained to shoot center mass...
I agree that hanging is too good for him, and a head shot would be preferable.
But with no other witnesses, I rather enjoy the fact that the description of what transpired sounds like it was taken from a police manual. There is no mention of the thief actually having a gun. We have only the word of the "three year veteran".
No head shots on thieves. Only .22 cal gut shots. Then you get to watch them squeal, puddle up and do the snow angel thing. Damn... did I just say that? On Christmas Eve for goodness sake?
Oh well, I'm over it, back to shooting thieves! [thumbsup]
But you Incorporated snow angels, so I think it's okay.
problem with you all is that you all want the easy way out.
"head shots , he should have shot him more, he should have used a 22, etc".
that is the wrong route, and i'm surprised and dissapointed in all of you.
don't you know that you aren't supposed to "shoot" the bike theif, situations like these are best handled without guns and usually with a combination of bare knuckles fighting techniques and a severe beat down.
won't you guys ever learn? [laugh]
I'm lazy, old and wear out quickly. I'm all about the easy way out! [thumbsup] And Scotzman's right, I do feel better about the snow angel reference. [cheeky]
Quote from: zenjim on December 24, 2010, 08:35:39 AM
I agree that hanging is too good for him, and a head shot would be preferable.
But with no other witnesses, I rather enjoy the fact that the description of what transpired sounds like it was taken from a police manual. There is no mention of the thief actually having a gun. We have only the word of the "three year veteran".
There is no legal requirement that says you have to wait until they produce the handgun. Just like we don't have to wait until they shoot us to shoot back.
Quote from: zenjim on December 24, 2010, 08:35:39 AM
But with no other witnesses, I rather enjoy the fact that the description of what transpired sounds like it was taken from a police manual. There is no mention of the thief actually having a gun. We have only the word of the "three year veteran".
Exactly.
Of course he identified himself as a police officer.
Of course the alleged* thief struggled with him.
Of course the alleged* thief appeared to be arming himself.
Of course he was only protecting himself.
What else was he going to say?
* This is the way you we see it reported down here. He is not a thief until it has been proven in court ... but then you won't be able to refer to him as a thief because that might cause discrimination. If you discriminate against someone you could be taken to court.Merry Christmas everybody.
What's the old saying? Dead guys make terrible witnesses. Seriously, you can't believe a word they say. ;D
Quote from: oldfastwin on December 24, 2010, 12:10:56 PM
What's the old saying? Dead guys make terrible witnesses. Seriously, you can't believe a word they say. ;D
The old saying is, "I'd rather be judged by 12 then carried by six."
Your old saying is what you say after mine. [laugh]
I just want to know if someday the officer ever gets his bike back. Post it up if anyone ever finds out. [thumbsup]
Quote from: oldfastwin on December 24, 2010, 12:57:49 PM
Your old saying is what you say after mine. [laugh]
I just want to know if someday the officer ever gets his bike back. Post it up if anyone ever finds out. [thumbsup]
I for one hope he doesn't get his Yamaha back.
What I DO hope is that he gets a nice insurance settlement so that he can use the money to purchase some kind of Ducati, which would make all the hassle of dealing with these two dopes worth while.
[laugh] [thumbsup] [moto]
another reason to love san diego :D
I say the cop is telling the truth. Cause if it was me I would have shot both of the mo fos and gotten my bike back before I even said a word. But maybe that is the difference between a Duc owner and a Yamaha rider. Or a trained professional and 2nd amendment - moto riding - badass - touch my bike and your dead - mo fo.
Actually it might go more like this if I caught them, I'd say, "excuse me sir, excuse me. That is my motorcycle that your loading there. Oh, there has been a recall from Ducati and you've come to pick it up. But the bike is 6 year old. Oh, I see. Ducati, knows that I'm one of their greatest fans and is extending this service beyond the warranty. Well, that is so thoughtful of them. Do you need any help loading my bike?"
Quote from: derby on December 23, 2010, 04:13:48 PM
how many years of experience does one need to have before they can be called a veteran?
... I have 20 and still dont think of myself as a veteran...
but I certainly aint no rookie ;D