Bardstown Police Officer Shoot For Being Good Samaritan

[Mudcat]

Here's to the Second Amendment:

BARDSTOWN, KY — A Bardstown police officer was shot and killed while driving home from work early Saturday.

Kentucky State Police said in a statement that the original call came in early Saturday as a traffic crash on Exit 34 of the Bluegrass Parkway in Nelson County, but when troopers arrived they found that Jason Ellis, 33, had been fatally shot.

Ellis was in uniform and had been driving his cruiser home, according to the statement. State police spokesman Norman Chaffins said the officer was found outside his vehicle. He said he did not know how many times Ellis had been shot.

Bardstown Police Chief Rick McCubbin said at a news conference Saturday morning that Ellis had finished his shift at 2 a.m. Saturday and was driving home in a "pool car" that officers use, the Kentucky Standard reported.

He told the newspaper that there was no video, and Ellis had not radioed central dispatch before the incident. Chaffins also said there was no radio communication between Ellis and dispatchers in the moments before the shooting.

The pool car was parked on the exit ramp with its blue lights flashing, leading McCubbin to surmise that Ellis might have stopped to clear something blocking the road.

He said the shooting was reported after people who live in the area and were driving home saw the car but no officer and got out of their vehicles to investigate.

Read more here.

This link to the story doesn't mention it, but it's believed that the officer was helping someone with a flat tire. A police officer whom appeared to be one of the good guys shoot, while in uniform, all for being a good Samaritan.

Yeah, tell me how we don't have a problem with guns again when things like this happen. Tell me how we don't need to rewrite the Second Amendment, at the very least.

 

[GeeMack]

Yeah, tell me how we don't have a problem with guns again when things like this happen. Tell me how we don't need to rewrite the Second Amendment, at the very least.

We? There are millions upon millions of perfectly decent law abiding citizens who own guns. If those who oppose gun ownership or favor increased restrictions on law abiding gun owners want to count themselves among the violent, the criminals, and the negligent, go ahead. We, as used in the above quote, clearly doesn't include me.

But the hand wringing and moaning was as well done as usual.

 

[Mudcat]

We? There are millions upon millions of perfectly decent law abiding citizens who own guns. If those who oppose gun ownership or favor increased restrictions on law abiding gun owners want to count themselves among the violent, the criminals, and the negligent, go ahead. We, as used in the above quote, clearly doesn't include me.

Actually we does include you as well. Are you willing to have an honest and unbiased discussion on gun control or are you going to just leave it at "I'm a responsible gun owner so this doesn't effect me"?

 

[NWO Sentryman]

The problem is, many people on both sides of this debate feel as though they can't negotiate in good faith. I mean, both sides can point to how the Abortion debate turned out in Mississippi because of "compromise".

 

[BStrong]

Horrible story, but I'm betting there's more to it than random violence.

 

[BStrong]

Actually we does include you as well. Are you willing to have an honest and unbiased discussion on gun control or are you going to just leave it at "I'm a responsible gun owner so this doesn't effect me"?

Collective guilt?

 

[Maestro]

The problem is with people, not guns.

Actually by this chart:

Homicide data by year

The overall homicide rate and use of firearms has gone down from 2007 to 2011 ( the last year data is available). If you can trust the FBI, that is.

 

[Mudcat]

The problem is, many people on both sides of this debate feel as though they can't negotiate in good faith.

That isn't an excuse, in my honest opinion. I'm neither pro- nor anti-gun but the country is really hurting because both sides are unwilling to discus the elephant in the room and do something about it.

In the mean time more people die because of gun fatalities per capita every year than in car related fatalities despite cars being vastly more prevalent in our day-to-day lives and more die in a single month here in the states than in an active war zone for the past 12 years.

Even worse we have politicians refuse to engage in civil policies that could more effectively put a dent in gun fatalities than any gun ban.

Something needs to be changed now before America becomes a third world nation.

I mean, both sides can point to how the Abortion debate turned out in Mississippi because of "compromise".

What do you mean?

 

[NWO Sentryman]

That isn't an excuse, in my honest opinion. I'm neither pro- nor anti-gun but the country is really hurting because both sides are unwilling to discus the elephant in the room and do something about it.

In the mean time more people die because of gun fatalities per capita every year than in car related fatalities despite cars being vastly more prevalent in our day-to-day lives and more die in a single month here in the states than in an active war zone for the past 12 years.

Even worse we have politicians refuse to engage in civil policies that could more effectively put a dent in gun fatalities than any gun ban.

Something needs to be changed now before America becomes a third world nation.



What do you mean?

1. Because they fell that the other side cannot negotiate in good faith. that's my point, and that's why compromise is impossible in the current American political system.

2. False. Violent crime (including gun crime) in the US has gone down DRASTICALLY in the past 20 years.

3. see point #1.

4. Whatever America's troubles, it is nowhere near that bad.

5. In the Abortion issue, the Pro and anti choice lobbies would "compromise", with stricter regulations, and the song and dance would come up again, with the anti-choice being "not a single inch" and demanding more concessions from the pro-choice lobby. By now, abortion has been regulated out of existence by Mississippi and South Dakota

 

[Mudcat]

Horrible story, but I'm betting there's more to it than random violence.

Too early to tell, but that is likely. There was a passenger in the car and they believe the officer was shot by them. Maybe it was a drug related shooting?

Collective guilt?

Works for me. If two sides of a debate are unwilling to engage in honest discussion, shame them.

 

[BStrong]

That isn't an excuse, in my honest opinion. I'm neither pro- nor anti-gun but the country is really hurting because both sides are unwilling to discus the elephant in the room and do something about it.

In the mean time more people die because of gun fatalities per capita every year than in car related fatalities despite cars being vastly more prevalent in our day-to-day lives and more die in a single month here in the states than in an active war zone for the past 12 years.

Even worse we have politicians refuse to engage in civil policies that could more effectively put a dent in gun fatalities than any gun ban.

Something needs to be changed now before America becomes a third world nation.



What do you mean?

Might want to look at how many troops are in those war zones at any given time v the population of the United States.

I'm a little sensitve on that, having been there. When somebody (and they have) tells me a trooper downrange is safer than a man on the street here, I get a little bent out of shape.

 

[NWO Sentryman]

Works for me. If two sides of a debate are unwilling to engage in honest discussion, shame them.

That falls apart when people on either side use this "honest discussion" to further ulterior motives.

 

[BStrong]

Too early to tell, but that is likely. There was a passenger in the car and they believe the officer was shot by them. Maybe it was a drug related shooting?


Works for me. If two sides of a debate are unwilling to engage in honest discussion, shame them.

Could well be - tweaker on the side of the road gets flat, cop stops to help...

The problem with your construct is that for the most part, especially in California, the only question of compromise is between what gun control advocates want to ban today against what they are willing to wait to ban in the future.

After having watched this fight from before the '68 GCA forwards and my time otj, I'm not confident that any gun control measures other than things that are common sense (background checks, all transfers through a licensed dealer) will have any effect on crime, and if you read the actual proposals that were rejected, BG checks and sales are the least of what was proposed,

 

[Bikewer]

Incidents like this happen. Sometimes as a result of an ordinary traffic stop, where the officer intends little more than a minor citation or perhaps even a warning.... And the ding-ding who turns out to have just robbed a bank or who is on probation and has a pistol or a car-full of drugs or just flat looney....
One can never tell.
Experienced officers are disinclined to let their guard down even when approaching harmless-looking people.

I heard some legislator railing against "concealed carry" laws....."Why, officers would have to assume that everyone they stopped was armed!"
If you're not doing that already, you're not doing your job right.

 

[GeeMack]

Actually we does include you as well. Are you willing to have an honest and unbiased discussion on gun control or are you going to just leave it at "I'm a responsible gun owner so this doesn't effect me"?

"We" have gun control. There. Unbiased and honest as hell.

 

[Mudcat]

Could well be - tweaker on the side of the road gets flat, cop stops to help...

Sounds reasonable. I used to live in Bardstown and it's not that far from Louisville, and Bardstown has a real bad drug problem.

After having watched this fight from before the '68 GCA forwards and my time otj, I'm not confident that any gun control measures other than things that are common sense (background checks, all transfers through a licensed dealer) will have any effect on crime, and if you read the actual proposals that were rejected, BG checks and sales are the least of what was proposed,

As I spelled out before, I believe there are significant civil changes we could be making that would make a considerable dent in gun violence and gun related fatalities without any further gun bans. But gun bans are needed.

There are an estimated four-hundred million guns in America, with millions more being introduced into circulation every year. How do you insure that guns don't make it into hands that they shouldn't be in when the proliferation of arms is so vast? There's no way to do it.

 

[GeeMack]

I'm neither pro- nor anti-gun but the country is really hurting because both sides are unwilling to discus the elephant in the room and do something about it.

Then...

As I spelled out before, I believe there are significant civil changes we could be making that would make a considerable dent in gun violence and gun related fatalities without any further gun bans. But gun bans are needed.

​

Seriously. So to answer this...

Are you willing to have an honest and unbiased discussion on gun control [...]

It's not the gun owners who have a problem with honesty. The lack of honesty is with those who would claim to be "neither pro- nor anti-gun" and follow almost in the same breath with "gun bans are needed". It's not the gun owners who are unwilling to have an unbiased discussion. The problem with bias belongs to those who believe compromise means more restrictions, regulations, and bans than are currently in place.

 

[Ryokan]

The problem is with people, not guns.

If people are a problem, they shouldn't have guns...

 

[joesixpack]

I'm still not seeing any evidence that this was a case of someone being shot for being a good Samaritan. Am I missing something?

 

[GeeMack]

I'm still not seeing any evidence that this was a case of someone being shot for being a good Samaritan. Am I missing something?

Nope. Not a thing. Just the straw man you already noticed. Oh, followed by a plea for an honest and unbiased discussion.