CCW holder killed reaching for ID.

AdamSK said:
Does that mean you concede that reaching for your ID when the cop says not to move would not be according to CCW training?
Click to expand...

Absolutely! I also concede that pulling out a flame thrower from one's backpack when the cop says not to move would also be against CCW training. But at the moment, I gather we have no documented reason to believe either scenario occurred.

More generally I think that one must also recognize that people do not typically behave with machine-like, completely correct reflexes in split-second life and death situations. If I was asked for ID by a police officer, then suddenly told to stop and not move, it would probably take me one or more seconds to interpret the change in instructions, get through the "um- what's going on here," reprogram my actions, and to actually stop my movement. I am not suggesting this was what happened in this case- I have no idea yet. I am only saying that what is clearly the correct choice when discussing a situation hypothetically on an Internet forum is not that easy to recognize and perform correctly and always in a stressful real life situation, particularly in response to an unexpected sudden change of events. This applies both to the person with the CCW and to the cop. Yes, there is an ideal program for each to follow. But very few people (especially untrained civilians) will follow that program every time even if they are sincere and wish to do so. I do hope better for the police than for the civilian.

In several of the questioned shootings of people by the police, the police have begun already nervous (responding to a report of a person with a gun, for example), shouted out a command such as "Drop it," but then given the person with the suspected weapon very little real opportunity in practice to understand the situation, the command, and decide the right way to respond before the person was shot. Example: John Crawford (killed in a Walmart playing with a BB gun when a SWAT team suddenly came around the corner, told him to drop the gun, then shot him to death literally seconds later, long before I could have been able to process the concept that these are police, they think I have a real gun, and they are going to kill me if I don't drop it within a fraction of a second. Similar situation with Tamir Rice IMHO.

I understand the perspective of the police in these situations- they are in fear of their lives and must make a split second decision as to what to do. But in my view (and in my understanding of their training) the police should try to avoid creating these types of situations in the first place whenever possible. In the case of Crawford, there was no reason for the police to not first remain covered around the corner while instructing him to drop the gun, thus giving him much more time to understand and respond. Probably a similar approach would have helped with Tamir Rice- the police could have challenged him at a slightly greater distance using their police car as cover, for example.
 
Last edited:
Giordano said:
Absolutely! I also concede that pulling out a flame thrower from one's backpack when the cop says not to move would also be against CCW training. But at the moment, I gather we have no documented reason to believe either scenario occurred.

More generally I think that one must also recognize that people do not typically behave with machine-like, completely correct reflexes in split-second life and death situations. If I was asked for ID by a police officer, then suddenly told to stop and not move, it would probably take me one or more seconds to interpret the change in instructions, get through the "um- what's going on here," reprogram my actions, and to actually stop my movement. I am not suggesting this was what happened in this case- I have no idea yet. I am only saying that what is clearly the correct choice when discussing a situation hypothetically on an Internet forum is not that easy to recognize and perform correctly and always in a stressful real life situation, particularly in response to an unexpected sudden change of events. This applies both to the person with the CCW and to the cop. Yes, there is an ideal program for each to follow. But very few people (especially untrained civilians) will follow that program every time even if they are sincere and wish to do so. I do hope better for the police than for the civilian.

In several of the questioned shootings of people by the police, the police have begun already nervous (responding to a report of a person with a gun, for example), shouted out a command such as "Drop it," but then given the person with the suspected weapon very little real opportunity in practice to understand the situation, the command, and decidee the right way to respond before the person was shot. Example: John Crawford (killed in a Walmart playing with a BB gun when a SWAT team suddenly came around the corner, told him to drop the gun, then shot him to death literally seconds later, long before I could have been able to process the concept that these are police, they think I have a real gun, and they are going to kill me if I don't drop it within a fraction of a second. Similar situation with Tamir Rice IMHO.
Click to expand...

And those are considered proper police procedures now so this likely will be too.
 
Upchurch said:
Since you're being hyper-pedantic, are you going to concede that you were actually wrong about this point?
I only ask because you never came back to it after I produced a quote of someone doing just just that.
Click to expand...
In the full context of brainster's post I don't agree that even he was blaming the guy getting shot. But it's at least arguable, so I'll concede the point. Argumemnon also had a somewhat ambiguous post IIRC.
 
Giordano said:
Example: John Crawford (killed in a Walmart playing with a BB gun when a SWAT team suddenly came around the corner, told him to drop the gun, then shot him to death literally seconds later, long before I could have been able to process the concept that these are police, they think I have a real gun, and they are going to kill me if I don't drop it within a fraction of a second.
Click to expand...

There is quite a bit of debate as to how long John Crawford failed to drop the gun before he was shot. The video of the incident doesn't have audio. So this is certainly not an unambiguous example of what you are discussing.
 
Upchurch said:
Since you're being hyper-pedantic,
Click to expand...

ponderingturtle constantly gish gallops in these topics, and never makes any attempt to actually defend a point he's made. I don't think finally pinning him down and getting him to agree to at least one thing he dropped the ball about is that pedantic.
 
AdamSK said:
There is quite a bit of debate as to how long John Crawford failed to drop the gun before he was shot. The video of the incident doesn't have audio. So this is certainly not an unambiguous example of what you are discussing.
Click to expand...

Even at the longest it still represents seconds. What I see in the video is that Crawford first visibly responds to some off-camera event (verbal instructions? being shot?) by dropping the bb gun within one second, never pointing it at the police team. Then the police team fatally shoot him no more than 7 seconds later. It all happened very quickly, and if anything the police team did not themselves adequately interpret the changing situation during that brief time period before the final, fatal shots. Indeed, Crawford either was given virtually no time to response to police instructions (if he was first shot at -31 secs in the video) or was first shot 7 seconds after he had dropped the gun (at -24 seconds in the video). https://www.theguardian.com/world/video/2014/sep/25/ohio-shooting-walmart-video

My main point- there is no way I would have survived in Crawford's situation. Imagine- I am playing with a bb gun, looking at the other merchandise in a store. Suddenly heavy armed men come from around a corner yelling at me something. What the heck is going on??? Who are they? Do they mean me? What exactly are they telling me to do- was it drop the gun? What gun- I have this bb gun- do they mean that? It's not mine- should I just drop it to the floor and break it or lay it down more carefully? They have guns- should I freeze in place, duck around the shelves, do with my hands?

Sure I can sit with the video now and calmly make suggestions by which Crawford might have done better (or not)- but just imagine that you are shopping and suddenly and without warning you are in a life or death situation with mere seconds to do everything absolutely correctly with no chance of thinking it through in advance and no margin for error.
 
Giordano said:
Even at the longest it still represents seconds. What I see in the video is that Crawford first visibly responds to some off-camera event (verbal instructions? being shot?) by dropping the bb gun within one second, never pointing it at the police team. Then the police team fatally shoot him no more than 7 seconds later. It all happened very quickly, and if anything the police team did not themselves adequately interpret the changing situation during that brief time period before the final, fatal shots. Indeed, Crawford either was given virtually no time to response to police instructions (if he was first shot at -31 secs in the video) or was first shot 7 seconds after he had dropped the gun (at -24 seconds in the video). https://www.theguardian.com/world/video/2014/sep/25/ohio-shooting-walmart-video
Click to expand...

Actually, the real problem is that 911 audio has been synced with the video, and you can see it here among other sites. And at around 5:54, you can hear the first shots right as Crawford turns and looks at the two police.
 
Giordano said:
... - there is no way I would have survived in Crawford's situation. Imagine- I am playing with a bb gun, ...
Click to expand...

You have a habit of removing toys from their packaging ... and carrying them around the store (without the barcode attached) ?
 
Yeggster said:
You have a habit of removing toys from their packaging ... and carrying them around the store (without the barcode attached) ?
Click to expand...


And for that he deserved to be shot. Please stop with these painfully retarded rationalizations; you look foolish.
 
Last edited:
Mumbles said:
Actually, the real problem is that 911 audio has been synced with the video, and you can see it here among other sites. And at around 5:54, you can hear the first shots right as Crawford turns and looks at the two police.
Click to expand...

Yes, thanks! Indeed it all happened incredibly fast, and I really can't imagine a way I or anyone could have responded in time to not have been shot to death. "Put down the gun BANG" is not really a warning that one has the option of obeying.

That said I assign the 911 caller 70% of the responsibility. I knew he was one source of the overheated fears of the police when they entered the store, but the synced video made me realize that the caller played an even worse role in setting up the tragedy. He was telling the police totally imaged things, such as seeing the "gunn" being loaded with bullets, and the guy pointing it at children. Also by describing it as waving the gun around, when it really was being idly swung up and (mostly) down in a repetitive arc at nothing in particular, the caller convinced the police that this was an active shooter situation! I understand the caller was never held legally responsible for his actions.

My main point was not the Walmart case itself but to use it as an example of my broader conclusion: many of these disputed killings have been when the police go into a situation with a pre-existing deep fear, and inadvertently set up a situation where both they and the suspect have to make a string of correct decisions in a lightening quick, mistake free manner to avoid some person dying. And indeed, some person does die.
 
Cl1mh4224rd said:
Doesn't matter; what he did is not a capital offense or deserving of a lethal response, whether or not I would or would not do the same.

Again, stop being foolish.
Click to expand...

Play stupid gams win the stupid prize :( .. it's not right ... but the world is not filled with right ...
 
Yeggster said:
You have a habit of removing toys from their packaging ... and carrying them around the store (without the barcode attached) ?
Click to expand...

Do we know that Crawford was the one who did this? I've been at lots of stores with merchandise on the shelves already out of their packaging, either as a sample to examine or removed by another shopper.. The barcode is almost always on the packaging. Crawford certainly didn't behave as someone intending to shoplift the bb gun, just as a very silly guy goofing around. As others have said, even if he had removed the BB gun from it's packaging, he might have morally been required to pay a re packing fee to the store. In contrast I usually think of jaywalking as the minimum crime deserving of death.
 
Yeggster said:
Play stupid gams win the stupid prize :( .. it's not right ... but the world is not filled with right ...
Click to expand...

Well, I am glad that you are much better than I am and never play stupid games anywhere. Certainly I've never thought when I picked up a play sword or a nurf gun in a store that I might be shot in the next few minutes. Just to be certain you may wish to audit all of your own behavior to be clear you are never creating a situation that someone else might misinterpret in a dangerous way. For example, don't ever reach in your pockets except very slowly while explaining to those around you what you are doing. Don't walk within a half block of a stranger at night. Think in advance about your every action. It doesn't sound like an enjoyable life, but welcome to present day USA!
 
AdamSK said:
Nope, nowhere near 100% confident. Hopefully the facts become clearer soon.

I would particularly like confirmation about whether Castile actually had a CCW permit, and whether he really did reach in the direction of the gun on his thigh after the police officer told him not to.
Click to expand...

He did have a permit, that has been confirmed. Also no evidence he had a gun on his thigh.

The police officer also said, "I told him not to reach for it". If he did use those exact words to what does "it" refer to, the gun or the ID?
 
From what I could google, one can legally have a gun displayed openly in a car in Minnesota if one has a CC permit. Although I see zero evidence that the pictures or anything else show a gun on the dead man's lap, I am simply interested that I might have gotten the theory wrong: if the dead guy indeed had a gun on his lap when the police pulled him over, would this alone have been illegal in Minnesota? I am not discussing any other part of this totally fanciful scenario at this point (reaching for it, being a Bonnie and Clyde team, etc); just having a gun visible in his lap. And yes, I believe that this, and yet wider open carry laws, tend to make police more nervous even though they are the law in many states.
 
Last edited:
AdamSK said:
In the full context of brainster's post I don't agree that even he was blaming the guy getting shot. But it's at least arguable, so I'll concede the point. Argumemnon also had a somewhat ambiguous post IIRC.
Click to expand...

The guy like this guy was clearly in the wrong for failing to treat the police as the kind of terrified incredibly violent thugs you need to treat all cops as to expect to survive.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom