WTF? (**NSFW**)

[Lawman]

Stupid fat fingers, didn't mean to thumbs down your post.

Corrected for offset

[Toro]

I don't know what's more amazing

- The cop asks for his license, dude goes to get it, and the cop starts shooting

- The cop shot four times at virtually point blank range and only grazed him once

- The victim is still being extremely civil (calling the cop "Sir") after being shot for complying with the cop's orders.

This guy is the reason people hate cops. Fortunately, he is no longer a cop.

[HeloDude]

This guy is the reason people hate cops. Fortunately, he is no longer a cop.

Yeah, this one is pretty damn bad. The good news is that he'll most likely never be a cop again, and even better news is that the man who got shot is recovering.

This all being said, there's still a lesson to be learned: If you're going to comply with a LE's directive (if you don't feel you need to then that's a totally different discussion, depending on the situation), it's a good idea to announce any of your movements...just like flying a crew aircraft, communication is key. So if you need to get into your glove box to pull out your registration, tell them that first. I am by no means giving this cop a pass (I hope he serves a nice sentence), but at the same time just because I'm not being aggressive towards an officer while making sudden movements, doesn't mean I want to get shot. Just my $.02

Here are a couple examples of people not being so innocent when being pulled over.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ililCtp0Bk

[M2]

Correct.

Since when has Mr Obama ever been ignorant about the perceptions he gives out? He has always been very astute and calculating when it comes to his public actions.

He simply doesn't care.

I was talking about his image with the military. He cares about how he looks to the ignorant masses that support him, not those in uniform...

[addict]

...So if you need to get into your glove box to pull out your registration, tell them that first.

If you are insinuating in the slightest that the civilian who was shot did something wrong, say it.

And those two police video shoot outs try to justify a shoot-first police force. Is this up for debate?

Edited September 27, 2014 by addict

[Fuzz]

I don't think he was insinuating that the guy did anything wrong, especially since the cop never even had a chance to see if the guy had a weapon before firing his already drawn gun. That being said there is a smarter way to go about reaching back into your car where a cop can't see what you are doing or reaching for something.

[10percenttruth]

Was that guy wearing ACUs? Edited September 27, 2014 by 10percenttruth

[guineapigfury]

I don't know what's more amazing

- The cop asks for his license, dude goes to get it, and the cop starts shooting

- The cop shot four times at virtually point blank range and only grazed him once

- The victim is still being extremely civil (calling the cop "Sir") after being shot for complying with the cop's orders.

This guy is the reason people hate cops. Fortunately, he is no longer a cop.

Twenty years ago this story would be about a cop bravely defending himself society by killing some guy who lunged at his weapon. Thank God for dashboard cams, now let's get body-worn cameras on the police at all times.

[addict]

...That being said there is a smarter way to go about reaching back into your car where a cop can't see what you are doing or reaching for something.

He could have just put both hands up in the air immediately. It's a cop from the South.

It is just stupefying that there still exists a defense for this kind of behavior. Fuzz.

Edited September 27, 2014 by addict

[HeloDude]

If you are insinuating in the slightest that the civilian who was shot did something wrong, say it.

And those two police video shoot outs try to justify a shoot-first police force. Is this up for debate?

Not at all--hence why I said that this pretty bad, that I hope the cop never gets to be a cop again, that it's good the man is recovering, and that the cop deserves a nice prison sentence. Forgot to add that I hope the man gets a monetary reward for his suffering.

I was very clearly insinuating that when a cop is asking you for something, it's smart to not make any sudden movements, especially without letting them know what you are doing first. It's kind of like saying 'but I had the right of way' when driving...and then you get hit by a car and put in the hospital. Yes, you were correct, but you still got hit and are now in the hospital when you could have just let the other car in front of you. The cop was very much in the wrong, however, if the man had shown his hands and asked if he could get it the car for his ID then I have a feeling none of this would have happened. So there's being 'right' and then there's also understanding the situation. The best is to be both at the same time.

[M2]

It is just stupefying that there still exists a defense for this kind of behavior. Fuzz.

Spend some time on patrol with a police officer and you might understand the situation better. There is no other profession, even being in the military, that puts people at personal risk as much as law enforcement. It's an everyday thing.

Not saying that the shooting was justified, but I do understand both sides of the equation. I help train police officers, from cadets to personal protection details, and have learned a lot about police tactics. It's been a real eye-opener, and I realize that while such a response may seem excessive to most civilians; the reaction was one of personal survival more than anything. Hesitation will get you killed in that line of work faster than anything, and there is a mantra in law enforcement that goes "action before reaction."

I am also not saying the civilian's move to his vehicle should have been cause for the shooting, but it was sudden and just exactly how was the officer suppose to know he was going for his license and not a weapon? Trust me, there have been numerous examples of the latter, as some of the videos posted have shown.

Cops are people too, people who want to go home to their families and children at the end of their shifts the same way we in the military want to go home after a deployment. They also make honest mistakes, like many in the military have done; but not for nefarious reasons. I think that is the case here, and as sad as it is; such incidents occur and will continue to occur on a regular basis.

I strongly advise everyone to think about their actions during a police stop, I doubt the civilian who was shot every considered that such a drastic move could be interpreted as a threat but from the officer's perspective it was. It is like one aspect of having a concealed carry license, the law in Texas states that CHL holders have to inform a police officer that they are carrying if asked for ID; but one thing several officers have suggested to me was never to use the word "gun" because that is what officers are trained to yell when they discover a firearm. If a second officer is present, and hears that word; he/she may not realize who said it and react as if it was a warning. I was actually pulled over for speeding in the Jeep (as ridiculous of a concept that is!) a few weeks ago and I simply told the constable I was carrying when I handed him my CHL. I also had my hands on the steering wheel and made no sudden moves during the stop (I did find it odd in the above video that the officer allowed the individual to exit his vehicle, that is not normal procedure). If it had been at night, I would have turned on the dome light as well. These are small things that make a bit difference, as an officer never knows what situation they are walking in to during a traffic stop; and if you honestly put yourselves in their shoes you might understand why they are so defensive to such sudden actions by people!

[addict]

"but it was sudden and just exactly how was the officer suppose to know he was going for his license and not a weapon?"

"Can I see your license please..."-reaches for wallet, oops not in pocket, turns around to center console

"GET OUT OF THE CAR!" -gets out of car

shoot -gets shot

He actually PUT HIS HANDS INTO THE AIR to avoid taking any more bullets, but the cop fired one more time. WTF.

Edited September 27, 2014 by addict

[Fuzz]

He could have just put both hands up in the air immediately. It's a cop from the South.

It is just stupefying that there still exists a defense for this kind of behavior. Fuzz.

In no way am I defending this guy, he fired shots from his already drawn weapon before there was ever a chance to visually ID a weapon (kinda like this guy: https://www.policestateusa.com/2014/michael-davidson/). I don't believe he should ever be allowed to wear a badge again. I'm saying when there are multiple people involved in a situation (especially people with weapons), being "right" is still right but being "smart and right" may keep you alive.

ETA: I also don't know how this guy was allowed to carry a weapon, the guy he shot is incredibly lucky that out four shots from pretty much point blank range and he only hits the guy in the hip.

Edited September 28, 2014 by Fuzz

[Majestik Møøse]

To wrap up, that cop was stupid and should be fired. To make sure YOU don't get shot by a subpar cop, follow the above tips.

[addict]

"I agree with what you're saying, but..."

Discuss the context of the situation. Don't grab the mic and say: "I'm gonna let you finish, but..." and show a black guy in Oregon shoot at a trooper. In the context of SC, you've come to the aid of a trigger happy black-fearing trooper.

Times are changing. Yesterday, this action would have been administrative leave. Today, it is unpaid jail time with an uncertain future. That's the point.

To make sure I don't get shot by sub-par cops... is your point, because you'd like to downplay what is happening in the USA right now.

[HeloDude]

"I agree with what you're saying, but..."

Discuss the context of the situation. Don't grab the mic and say: "I'm gonna let you finish, but..." and show a black guy in Oregon shoot at a trooper. In the context of SC, you've come to the aid of a trigger happy black-fearing trooper.

Times are changing. Yesterday, this action would have been administrative leave. Today, it is unpaid jail time with an uncertain future. That's the point.

To make sure I don't get shot by sub-par cops... is your point, because you'd like to downplay what is happening in the USA right now.

Dude, are you drunk? I even posted a video of a white guy (since you seem to be stuck on race, but you must have failed to notice that video) getting out of his car and unloading an AK-47 on cops--all showing that cops have no clue what you are doing when you make sudden movements, and sometimes those sudden movements turn out to be white, black, purple, pokadot (again, since you're so stuck on race) guys shooting at cops. As me, M2, and others have said--it's important to learn to not make any sudden movements when police are interacting with you. So unless you have some awesome and realistic plan to get rid of all the 'sub-par' cops, I recommend that you, me, and others don't do things to give police a bad reason to quickly react in an incorrect manner and shoot you. But since I asked, what is your recommendation to keep this from happening? Different training? Better screening of potential LE officials, and if so, how exactly? I'm a big fan of each State requiring their LE officials wear body cameras when interacting with the public, though I don't think that would have changed much here since it was caught on his own dash cam.

Not one person on here said the cop didn't make a horrible mistake/use bad judgement (which is at the criminal level IMO), that he should get to be part of LE ever again, and that he shouldn't be found guilty and sent to prison. Are you suggesting that 99.9% of cops want to shoot people? Because 99.9% of the time people dont get shot when interacting with LE. I am all for not blindly following a cop's directive if you think your Rights are being violated, but even this has to be done in a smart way. You can always argue the details later with a lawyer if need be--below is a great video of a guy not doing what the police ask him, but also not making sudden movements while doing so. But hey, if you think you are above doing things smartly, even if you're in the right, then I wish you luck. They can put on your tomb stone 'But he was right...'

[Buddy Spike]

(I did find it odd in the above video that the officer allowed the individual to exit his vehicle, that is not normal procedure).

That is not really accurate. Whether or not an officer asks a person to exit the vehicle is based on a number of factors and is entirely officer discretion. Some do it every stop. Some prefer never to do it. There is no real normal procedure WRT to exiting the vehicle.

[M2]

That is not really accurate. Whether or not an officer asks a person to exit the vehicle is based on a number of factors and is entirely officer discretion. Some do it every stop. Some prefer never to do it. There is no real normal procedure WRT to exiting the vehicle.

It is accurate, most departments train officers to keep individuals in their vehicle. Traffic stops are one of the most statistically dangerous activities known to law enforcers, no two are the same and they are never “routine.” Keeping people in the vehicle allows the officer to check out the interior of the car, all occupants inside, and most importantly their hands ("always watch the hands!"). As a matter of fact, most trainers advocate approaching the passenger-side of the vehicle to get a better look inside. That is what the Force Science Institute recommends.

[Fuzz]

"I agree with what you're saying, but..."

Discuss the context of the situation. Don't grab the mic and say: "I'm gonna let you finish, but..." and show a black guy in Oregon shoot at a trooper. In the context of SC, you've come to the aid of a trigger happy black-fearing trooper.

Times are changing. Yesterday, this action would have been administrative leave. Today, it is unpaid jail time with an uncertain future. That's the point.

To make sure I don't get shot by sub-par cops... is your point, because you'd like to downplay what is happening in the USA right now.

ETA: posting buffoonery.

Edited September 29, 2014 by Fuzz

[addict]

2) The SC cop will likely get a few months time served + some bad publicity. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-watch/wp/2014/09/26/a-sort-of-defense-of-south-carolina-state-trooper-sean-groubert/

3) Waiting on this one https://www.news-journal.com/panola/news/opelika-police-refuse-to-release-video-of-officer-shooting-beckville/article_a7bb23ed-f29e-5ec5-8135-6f6c7bf7ab3f.html

--"policestateusa.com" ? c'mon.

4) Context. Be relevant. Oregon open carry is not a counter-example to the SC shooting. Also, do not contradict yourself with the "but..." or "that being said" or "all I'm saying is". Communicate a single direct point. Sometimes, there is no definite line in the sand and both sides can be presented. This shooting isn't one of those cases. A reasonable act was met with unreasonable force.

Edited September 29, 2014 by addict

[Fuzz]

1) Fuzz, you're being juvenile.

2) The SC cop will likely get a few months time served + some bad publicity. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-watch/wp/2014/09/26/a-sort-of-defense-of-south-carolina-state-trooper-sean-groubert/

3) Waiting on this one https://www.news-journal.com/panola/news/opelika-police-refuse-to-release-video-of-officer-shooting-beckville/article_a7bb23ed-f29e-5ec5-8135-6f6c7bf7ab3f.html

I already posted your second story in my earlier response. What exactly are you trying to convey? I can't for the life of me figure out what your issue is with the conglomeration of fragmented sentences that comprise your posts.

Edited September 29, 2014 by Fuzz

[Mark1]

I went to post this a couple days ago but couldn't find the original 'Liberty,Rights and the Constitution' thread where we were discussing similar egregious police actions, and gave up on it. But I think the 'WTF' thread is an appropriate place for it. At the same time I know the response I'm going to get to this and don't really want to rehash my background that was laid out in the old thread, so I don't know why I'm spending the time, but:

The cop needs to do serious jail time. Whatever a citizen would get for 'attempted negligent homicide' (yeah, I know, not a real charge) It's unfortunate because this is a direct result of the training that he and hundreds of thousands of other cops have and plenty of others would find themselves in the same position for acting similarly (unjustifiably). Sadly, nobody will call into question the mentality that all cops are taught to have while they're on the street as a cause for this disastrous excuse for police work. It'll just be chalked up to a failure of this particular individual cop and the status quo will remain.

M2 is right, cops face more risk on a daily basis than almost any other profession. And guess what? They knew it when they signed up and still agreed to serve and protect (the citizens, not themselves). It should be a selfless endeavor and yet as a result of what the academy teaches they treat everybody from law abiding citizens to hardcore felons as if they are just waiting for an opportunity to kill them. 'Action before reaction', 'don't expose your gun to anybody you're in contact with', 'approach in their blind spot' and on and on and on and on. Always on the defensive because something is bound to go down. And it affects their response to the 99.999% of cases where something doesn't go down.

A cop ends up dead in the .001% of cases where it goes down because he didn't approach the wheelchair-bound grandfather with the assumption that he'd shoot him between the eyes? Sorry, that sucks, but it's the nature of the business. Can't accept that? Fine, don't take the job.

Does that sound callous? Too bad. This guy shot an innocent human being in a benign circumstance (where the guy was actually complying too well) and got lucky to have not killed him because he assumed that this, along with every other citizen encounter he's had since he graduated from the academy, was the .001% as he was taught to do. And the frequency with which this happens (usually with a dead person on the other end instead of just wounded) as M2 indicated, is frighteningly often.

Do you get more dead innocent civilians in the cases where cops assume the worst under benign circumstances, or dead cops in the cases where officers approached the .001% while not assuming it was the .001%? Bogus question. The cops voluntarily signed on for the risk. The guy pulling up to the gas station to buy some Funyuns did not. If changing the mindset of cops in the country to one of actually protecting and serving results in more officer deaths, then it's unfortunate, but still the correct decision.

The training fosters a toxic mentality among the police force that permeates all of their interactions with citizens, to include the routine ones, and it's disgusting. Day 1 of the academy should run down all the ways that you may die in the line of duty, require that you re-affirm your desire to take on the selfless service, and then move on to how to be a decent cop. Instead, it's all about how to keep your thumb on your contacts so that they never get the chance to kill you.

I hate to say it because sentencing this cop to serious time doesn't really serve a purpose if you're going to remove his right to practice law enforcement regardless, but nothing will change if nothing changes.

Of course we all know he'll get a slap on the wrist, the academy will continue to teach a mentality that results in egregious over-application of force, and more innocent people will be killed and not be able to go home to their families in order to ensure that the public servant who accepted the risk of death can go home to his.

Disgusting.

[addict]

Edited September 29, 2014 by addict

[Buddy Spike]

It is accurate, most departments train officers to keep individuals in their vehicle. Traffic stops are one of the most statistically dangerous activities known to law enforcers, no two are the same and they are never “routine.” Keeping people in the vehicle allows the officer to check out the interior of the car, all occupants inside, and most importantly their hands ("always watch the hands!"). As a matter of fact, most trainers advocate approaching the passenger-side of the vehicle to get a better look inside. That is what the Force Science Institute recommends.

That is not what my department's training center teaches or LA POST. The decision of whether or not to leave the driver in the vehicle is officer discretion. There is no set standard as the decision depends on several variables.

I know some instructors that prefer to have the driver meet you at his vehicle, and then follow the occupant back to the vehicle to retrieve documents. It's part of a multi-step test of compliance. Did they understand instructions and exit the vehicle? How did they proceed toward the rear of the vehicle? Did they retrieve the insurance? And when the occupant goes to the vehicle, the officer can have him open the passenger side to retrieve the required documents, thus opening up plain view further.

There are advantages and disadvantages to each method.

[Fuzz]

2) The SC cop will likely get a few months time served + some bad publicity. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-watch/wp/2014/09/26/a-sort-of-defense-of-south-carolina-state-trooper-sean-groubert/

3) Waiting on this one https://www.news-journal.com/panola/news/opelika-police-refuse-to-release-video-of-officer-shooting-beckville/article_a7bb23ed-f29e-5ec5-8135-6f6c7bf7ab3f.html

--"policestateusa.com" ? c'mon.

4) Context. Be relevant. Oregon open carry is not a counter-example to the SC shooting. Also, do not contradict yourself with the "but..." or "that being said" or "all I'm saying is". Communicate a single direct point. Sometimes, there is no definite line in the sand and both sides can be presented. This shooting isn't one of those cases. A reasonable act was met with unreasonable force.

What did "police state USA" say different than your article?

And no one is defending this cops actions, we pointed out ways to mitigate his asshatery and keep yourself alive. I agree there are issues with the police mentality and training, that's not going to fix itself overnight and in the mean time being cautious might keep you alive.