posted
I don't know where the title comes from, no one was ordered to shoot soldiers. The video looks a little disturbing but we can't see a lot, as the report says there was a high speed chase and the person appeared to be following what the officer said. But he could of also been reaching into his coat with that video it's impossible to tell.
-------------------- All the world's a face, And all the men and women merely acne. Posts: 673 | From: Glasgow, Scotland | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
What I fail to see in this story is why it matters that he was a soldier on leave from Iraq. I can't see any connection to the shooting or why the events went the way they did.
Having served in Iraq is not a "Get out of jail"-card and should not entail special treatment. If the shots were fired without due cause, the officer should recieve some kind of reprimand, but that should be the same regardless if it was a soldier or a civilian.
Edit: Besides, with a name like Carrion, what could one reasonably expect?
-------------------- /Troberg Posts: 4360 | From: Borlänge, Sweden | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Troberg: What I fail to see in this story is why it matters that he was a soldier on leave from Iraq. I can't see any connection to the shooting or why the events went the way they did.
Having served in Iraq is not a "Get out of jail"-card and should not entail special treatment...
I didn't see where anyone claimed he should get special treatment for being home from Iraq. It was just something to identify him, such as "high school teacher on her way home from graduation ceremony" or "man displaced by hurricane Katrina". People are interested in people. It doesn't mean Iraq vets are venerated or anything.
Posts: 4922 | From: Kyoto, Japan | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Perhaps I was to quick to judge, but I got a feeling that whoever writing the article was trying to stir up indignation over "A police shot a soldier!". It was mentioned a little too often and with a little too much details to feel completely innocent.
-------------------- /Troberg Posts: 4360 | From: Borlänge, Sweden | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
The Today show a couple days ago had the video with enhanced audio. On the version I saw, it appeared that they told him to stand up, then shot him.
Note the emphasis on "appeared." I don't know for sure that's what happened. But it certainly looked like he was handcuffed when they shot him.
-------------------- How homophobic do you have to be to have penguin gaydar? - Lewis Black Posts: 8322 | From: Columbus, OH | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
As a fellow airman, this really upsets me. He was doing what he was told to by the police officer. The officer told him to get him, the airman (who is a cop himself) then told the cop that he was getting up (I remeber being taught this by SPs on base to help reduce confusion and hopefully avoid this situation). Of course we don't know the whole situation. Do people in CA walk around with video cameras waiting for the police there do something?
Even if the police officer felt threatend for whatever reason, was 3 shots at that close of range really necessary? I don't think so. We just have to wait for more information and we shall see what the Air Force and the court has to say.
The above is of my opinion alone, and does not represent the opinion of the Department of Defense of the Department of the United States Air Force.
Posts: 19 | From: Whiteman AFB, MO | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Why "what the airforce"? It is purely a court matter. I feel worried at the suggestion that the military may lean on the justice system for a judgement which is not wholey secure.
-------------------- All the world's a face, And all the men and women merely acne. Posts: 673 | From: Glasgow, Scotland | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Lainie: The Today show a couple days ago had the video with enhanced audio. On the version I saw, it appeared that they told him to stand up, then shot him.
Note the emphasis on "appeared." I don't know for sure that's what happened. But it certainly looked like he was handcuffed when they shot him.
That's what I saw & heard
Posts: 1932 | From: Toronto | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Lainie: The Today show a couple days ago had the video with enhanced audio. On the version I saw, it appeared that they told him to stand up, then shot him.
Note the emphasis on "appeared." I don't know for sure that's what happened. But it certainly looked like he was handcuffed when they shot him.
That's what I saw & heard
Not handcuffed, according to the coverage this morning on local talk radio. The opinion is near unanimous that the sheriff should not have opened fire, but no one has yet heard his side of the story yet.
Silas
Posts: 16801 | From: San Diego, CA | Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by lazerus the duck: I don't know where the title comes from, no one was ordered to shoot soldiers....
I think the point was that the soldier was, as far as the video shows, obeying the police officer's commands. In other words, since the airman was obeying the policeman, there's no clear reason for the policeman to open fire.
Or did you mean the THREAD title? That is a little unclear, isn't it.
-------------------- "No hard feelin's and HOPpy New Year!"--Walt Kelly Hear what you're missing: ARTC podcasts! http://artcpodcast.org/ Posts: 7581 | From: Gainesville, Georgia | Registered: Jun 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by lazerus the duck: I don't know where the title comes from, no one was ordered to shoot soldiers....
I think the point was that the soldier was, as far as the video shows, obeying the police officer's commands.
But there were no soldiers involved at all in this case. Soldiers are members of the Army, Airmen are members of the Airforce, Sailors are members of the Navy, and Marines are Marines. The news story was even worse, referring to a Senior Airman as an "Air Force officer," when they're junior enlisted.
pinqy
-------------------- Don't Forget! Winter Solstice Hanukkah Christmas Kwanzaa & Gurnenthar's Ascendance Are Coming! Posts: 8671 | From: Washington, DC | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by lazerus the duck: I don't know where the title comes from, no one was ordered to shoot soldiers....
I think the point was that the soldier was, as far as the video shows, obeying the police officer's commands.
But there were no soldiers involved at all in this case. Soldiers are members of the Army, Airmen are members of the Airforce, Sailors are members of the Navy, and Marines are Marines. The news story was even worse, referring to a Senior Airman as an "Air Force officer," when they're junior enlisted.
pinqy
The name is a matter of semantics I was refering to the thread title. 'Orders to shoot soldier from Iraq at home' which makes no sense.
-------------------- All the world's a face, And all the men and women merely acne. Posts: 673 | From: Glasgow, Scotland | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by lazerus the duck: I don't know where the title comes from, no one was ordered to shoot soldiers....
I think the point was that the soldier was, as far as the video shows, obeying the police officer's commands.
But there were no soldiers involved at all in this case. Soldiers are members of the Army, Airmen are members of the Airforce, Sailors are members of the Navy, and Marines are Marines. The news story was even worse, referring to a Senior Airman as an "Air Force officer," when they're junior enlisted.
pinqy
You're right, of course, but I suspect the title is using "soldier" in the loosest sense. I just checked my Random House, and under "solider", definition 1 is "a person engaged in any military service." Not precise, but it is, broadly, acceptable linguistically to call even a sailor a soldier, though I wouldn't want to do it in San Diego on a Saturday night.
-------------------- "No hard feelin's and HOPpy New Year!"--Walt Kelly Hear what you're missing: ARTC podcasts! http://artcpodcast.org/ Posts: 7581 | From: Gainesville, Georgia | Registered: Jun 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by lazerus the duck: Why "what the airforce"? It is purely a court matter. I feel worried at the suggestion that the military may lean on the justice system for a judgement which is not wholey secure.
I doubt that will happen. The civilian cop will say he told the airman to stand so he could cuff him and at that point he will say that it looked like the airman was going for a gun, so he fired. If I am not mistaken the "I thought he had a gun..." defense usually works pretty well for them.
How I see it, if you don't see the gun in the persons hand you shouldn't fire.
quote: You're right, of course, but I suspect the title is using "soldier" in the loosest sense. I just checked my Random House, and under "solider", definition 1 is "a person engaged in any military service." Not precise, but it is, broadly, acceptable linguistically to call even a sailor a soldier, though I wouldn't want to do it in San Diego on a Saturday night.
If you have a death wish call a Marine a solider. lol
Posts: 19 | From: Whiteman AFB, MO | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by lazerus the duck: Why "what the airforce"? It is purely a court matter. I feel worried at the suggestion that the military may lean on the justice system for a judgement which is not wholey secure.
I doubt that will happen. The civilian cop will say he told the airman to stand so he could cuff him and at that point he will say that it looked like the airman was going for a gun, so he fired. If I am not mistaken the "I thought he had a gun..." defense usually works pretty well for them.
How I see it, if you don't see the gun in the persons hand you shouldn't fire.
quote: You're right, of course, but I suspect the title is using "soldier" in the loosest sense. I just checked my Random House, and under "solider", definition 1 is "a person engaged in any military service." Not precise, but it is, broadly, acceptable linguistically to call even a sailor a soldier, though I wouldn't want to do it in San Diego on a Saturday night.
If you have a death wish call a Marine a solider. lol
So anybody can kill a police officer as long as they keep the gun in their pocket? Doesn't make a lot of sense. It also depends why they were chasing him, it is possible he was running from what was already an incident involving a weapon.
-------------------- All the world's a face, And all the men and women merely acne. Posts: 673 | From: Glasgow, Scotland | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by lazerus the duck: So anybody can kill a police officer as long as they keep the gun in their pocket? Doesn't make a lot of sense. It also depends why they were chasing him, it is possible he was running from what was already an incident involving a weapon. [/QB]
Very difficult to aim and kill someone with a weapon from you pocket even as being close to cop as they were, let alone while sitting down on the ground and was in the process of standing up. They found no weapon on the airman (of course the cop had no way of knowing this, that is why he will go for the "I thought he had a gun" and get off). The cops were chasing them because the person driving was speeding, excessivly, and was running from the cops.
The cop had no reason to fire. He told the airman to stand up for whatever reason, the airman replied ok I am getting up, and as he was following the cops orders the cop fired 3 rounds in to him. I think 3 rounds was a little much, hell 1 round is too much espically since the airman was following his orders.
If the cop was afraid that he had a weapon he should have hand cuffed him WHILE THE AIRMAN WAS ON THE GROUND! Not only that after that the cop kept yelling at the airman to "shut the Fu-- up after he shot him and the airman was screaming in pain. That cop needs to be punished. Will it happen no, because he will play the cop defense card, that he thought the guy had a gun.
Posts: 19 | From: Whiteman AFB, MO | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by curtta: Do people in CA walk around with video cameras waiting for the police there do something?
Yeah, of course we do. After all, how else are we going to make sure that we sue the everloving crap out of every police department for violating our civil rights?
Wild 'I'm from Cali, but I don't know if I'm proud of it' Otaku
-------------------- Tom, we're flying a giant robot into space! "Safe" isn't the first word that springs to mind! - Colleen, Last Hope, Vol.2 Posts: 2710 | From: Meet me in St. Louis | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by curtta: Do people in CA walk around with video cameras waiting for the police there do something?
Yeah, of course we do. After all, how else are we going to make sure that we sue the everloving crap out of every police department for violating our civil rights?
Wild 'I'm from Cali, but I don't know if I'm proud of it' Otaku
Ah. Cool, makes since now. Thanks for clearing that up lol
Posts: 19 | From: Whiteman AFB, MO | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:That cop needs to be punished. Will it happen no, because he will play the cop defense card, that he thought the guy had a gun.
Could be. It was dark. Certainly the police officer made several mistakes. Oops, caveat: I'm no epert, I'm simply going to state what I suspect would be procedure...I openly welcome corrections...
1. If the officer felt threatened, he should have held the suspects at gunpoint on the ground and waited for back-up (admitidly, I don't know how long this might take) 2. I'm wondering if a high speed chase did or should have involved a call for back-up during the pursuit.
There is a often-discussed phenomenon (for lack of a better word) that occurs during high speed chases or evasions. The oficer gets a sense of "how dare you try and evade me". Perhaps this was largely at play in what appears to be a officer reacting unjustly.
-------------------- As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly. Posts: 1679 | From: Illinois | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by curtta: Of course we don't know the whole situation. Do people in CA walk around with video cameras waiting for the police there do something?
actually, there is a class here at UC Berkeley where you do just that. Its part of a local organization, http://www.berkeleycopwatch.org/ should have more info.
Posts: 336 | From: Currently: Jakarta Indonesia Australia Belgium Berkeley CA > Lima Peru< | Registered: May 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Obviously the police officer wouldn't know for certain whether or not the detainee had a weapon. But the chase was not related to a shooting or other weapons charge. The man who was shot was not the driver, and was not voluntarily evading the police. He obeyed every order given to him, and did not make any sudden or unexpected moves in front of the police officer.
I fail to see any level of justification for this shooting.
-------------------- "The true soldier fights not because he hates what is in front of him, but because he loves what is behind him." - G.K. Chesterton Posts: 1514 | From: Wisconsin | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Lainie: The Today show a couple days ago had the video with enhanced audio. On the version I saw, it appeared that they told him to stand up, then shot him.
Note the emphasis on "appeared." I don't know for sure that's what happened. But it certainly looked like he was handcuffed when they shot him.
That's what I saw & heard
Not handcuffed, according to the coverage this morning on local talk radio. The opinion is near unanimous that the sheriff should not have opened fire, but no one has yet heard his side of the story yet.
Silas
Ok I'll go with unhandcuffed
Posts: 1932 | From: Toronto | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged |
I doubt that will happen. The civilian cop will say he told the airman to stand so he could cuff him and at that point he will say that it looked like the airman was going for a gun, so he fired. If I am not mistaken the "I thought he had a gun..." defense usually works pretty well for them.
How I see it, if you don't see the gun in the persons hand you shouldn't fire.
[/QB][/QUOTE]
I agree
Posts: 1932 | From: Toronto | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
First off I have not seen the video since the link doesn't bring it up. but as i Policeman i can say 3 shots is what I was trained to do, 3 shots stop if there is still a threat 3 more until the threat is removed. Here we have to wait to see a gun (or other possible leteal weapon) to even draw your weapon and it sucks since you have to worry about the chances that the perp will pull one when you try to handcuff him/her. backup is great but I have worked nights where the nearest backup is 15 minutes away and in no postion to catch up in a high speed pursuit and therefore get to the place of the arrest in time to be help. Lastly i have no idea why he asked him to get up since he should have been trained to handcuff him while the perp was on the floor, palms up and his face looking away from the cop (that is the standerd arresting postion when you manage to get the perp on the ground) this way even if he had a weapon he would have no idea when to pull it, since the deputy had to holster his in order to do the handcufing.
-------------------- Excuses satisfy only those who offer them. Your enemies won't believe them and your friends don't need them. Posts: 211 | From: Ponce, Puerto Rico | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Looking at the video, I don't know what compelled the deputy to fire at the airmen. It looks pretty bad to me. Regardless though, in the even there had been a threat, I don't find 3 shots excessive at all, you fire and don't stop until the threat is no longer there, you don't stop after each shot to see if that quite did it. In most of my FATS training I shoot 3-4 shots on a senario. It happens just that fast. I don't agree about waiting until you see a gun before shooting, although most times that will be the situation. I have no idea why he would have the airmen get up off the ground, it sounds like poor tactics no matter what you're trying to accomplish.
-------------------- I'm a sheepdog. I live to protect the flock and confront the wolf. -- On Sheep, Wolves and Sheepdogs by LTC. Dave Grossman, USA (Ret) Posts: 675 | From: Arizona | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
