patrick.net

That man wouldn't be dead if he didn't decide on the 3rd day of his "responsible gun ownership" that he must pull a gun on anyone approaching his broken vehicle on the side of the road. Brandishing a gun in absence of a credible threat is illegal, btw, so we don't need more regulation on this, Dan.

Yeah, an unmarked white van with tinted windows stopping next to you, exited by a dude in a t-shirt, jeans and a baseball cap at 3AM in the morning is always going to be a polite social call. And being a cop the t-shirt guy probably swaggered and sneered.

thunderlips11 says

Yeah, an unmarked white van with tinted windows stopping next to you, exited by a dude in a t-shirt, jeans and a baseball cap at 3AM in the morning is always going to be a polite social call. And being a cop the t-shirt guy probably swaggered and sneered.

To persuade a judge and a jury that you feared death or grave bodily injury you'll need more than "he stopped next to me, exited his car and sneered".

Wow, Straw Man, read the Article?

It was the cop who shot the guy, not vice-versa.

I know your bias is to defend overpaid armed government bureaucrats first.

thunderlips11 says

Wow, Straw Man, read the Article?

It was the cop who shot the guy, not vice-versa.

I read the article. I can even copy&paste for you: "As the officer exited his vehicle, he was suddenly confronted by an armed subject"

thunderlips11 says

I know your bias is to defend overpaid armed government bureaucrats first.

Bullshit.

Too bad the victim wasn't a cop. That's the only way justice would be had. If the victim were a cop, then the shooter would be prosecuted.

Laws have to be passed before they are enforced you dumb fuck. Go back to your house and let your goat fuck you. It's the only thing you're good at.

This ones hard.

I've actually encountered two separate incidents of plain clothes officers failing to identify themselves...and both time they were stupid aggressive in doing so.

The first time a gold ford sedan going south on the main Bl in front of me made a wild left hand turn onto my street and nearly hit me head on. He was completely on the wrong side of the street. I put it in reverse, floored it, backed up about half a block. When the guy got out of the car and ran into a building I realized he wasn't attacking me and I started recording the incident. He came down with a person in handcuffs and I realized it was an undercover cop. He never once identified himself, nor were there any lights at all in the car. If I had a cc permit, honestly I would have drawn. The cop was a complete fucking moron and entirely in violation of his departments policy which REQUIRES him to identify himself, as in "stop, police" and also if he had a truly UC car, which he did, he's supposed to call in the black and white accompanying him.

The second time was in a nightlife area were there used to be a lot of street prostitution as well as low level crime(theft, vandalism, etc). So waiting to make a left onto the major street in front of me, there was a 4 door with 4 men in the car. All of a sudden they burst out of the car and one of them yells at a girl...probably a prostitute. I freak out and again throw it in reverse not knowing what's going on. They chase the girl who seems to be super scared. Then they catch her, she is screaming, and then they reveal the handcuffs and identify themselves. Again violate department policy, literally leave the car running in the middle of the street. It LOOKED like four guys attacking her and I had already had 911 pressed into my phone.

Having TWO separate experiences where cops violated their own Departments policy and appeared to be random dudes behaving recklessly and assaulting a stranger....I can certainly see the point of view of Corey Jones. The cop was terribly in the wrong here. This is why the law should allow jury's in civil cases to levy judgement and damages against not only the govt entity involved but also the officers responsible as well as their entire chain of command. In my experience supervisors and police chiefs not only allow their officers to act like assholes, but actively encourage it. And it leads to people being placed in compromised situations.

I think cops should follow laws rules and policies they are governed by.

If armed citizens were more prevalent I highly doubt we'd encounter out of control cops on a regular basis.

In the first encounter, if I were armed I would have drawn. If he had also pulled a gun without identifying himself I would have killed him before he could kill me and no I would not be nervous nor would I miss.

Straw Man says

I read the article. I can even copy&paste for you: "As the officer exited his vehicle, he was suddenly confronted by an armed subject"

he SAID he was confronted by an armed suspect.

Did you read this part:

Among them was that Jones did have a gun that night. He had it legally, including a concealed carry permit, but didn't fire it once, according to Crump. Jones' gun was not next to him when he died about 80 to 100 feet from his car, having at some point tried to run away, according to the Jones family's lawyers.

Of course the cop will claim he was suddenly confronted by an armed guy. Betcha the relative/tow company showed up before the cops could doctor the scene.

Now this is PR talk. Does 80 to 100 feet mean the gun wasn't even outside the car? It's worded strangely. Wonder if the van had a dashboard cam.

There are some gun loving idiot asses that think that The 2nd Amendment will prevent their loved ones from being shot by another gun nut or LEO.
It's OK if they are wounded or die,The 2nd Amendment needs to be watered by blood. I'm just glad no innocent blood is spilled by bullets ripping through loved one's flesh.

FUCKING RETARDS!
Don't think that this couldn't happen to your ilk. It happens in public,now.

Straw Man says

That man wouldn't be dead if he didn't decide on the 3rd day of his "responsible gun ownership" that he must pull a gun on anyone approaching his broken vehicle on the side of the road.

I think you are completely off base in blaming him here. He cannot be considered culpable because his actions involved the use of a gun, and are therefore conservative and founding.

The fault lies with liberals, who are solely responsible for any and all bad conservative acts. It is the job of liberals, and liberals alone, to police conservatives. I blame liberals for the death of that man.

What's funny is that this hypothetical scenario is EXACTLY the kind used by conservatives for gun ownership...

"Imagine you broke down on the side of the road, and an unmarked white van with tinted windows pulls up behind you..."

I also don't understand why it took 2 days to inform the family of the death. That doesn't make any sense at all. Esp since the victim apparently spoke with his brother that night. The cops had the phone number for next of kin within an hour of the incident. In my mind that instantly means something fishy is going on with that police department.

thunderlips11 says

Straw Man says

I read the article. I can even copy&paste for you: "As the officer exited his vehicle, he was suddenly confronted by an armed subject"

he SAID he was confronted by an armed suspect.

This is all information we have for now. And, frankly, "confronted by paranoid guy who bought a gun 3 days ago and who fucked up due to inexperience" sounds much more plausible than "Nazi PO went out in the middle of the night to kill somebody, anybody, found that guy on the side of the road, shot him and was lucky enough to find a gun on him so he could make it look justifiable" you're trying to push here. So I'm going to stick with more plausible version for now.

It's more plausible that officer failed to articulate who he was, victim pulled gun but got nervous, cop pulled gun and shot victim who staggered away and died.

dodgerfanjohn says

It's more plausible that officer failed to articulate who he was, victim pulled gun but got nervous, cop pulled gun and shot victim who staggered away and died

So? Cop or no cop pulling a gun absent a credible threat is illegal. This is not self-defense until you have something to defend against. A stranger simply coming up to you is not that.

Call it KKKrazy says

And in the second scenario? If you turtle, then what good is your weapon? Just askin'. In situations of self defense, guns aren't useful unless they're drawn. So you could just drive away and not need one. BUT, if you feel the need to defend the ill-treated hooker/damsel then you're up against four guys and you better get out of the rig with the piece in your hand. That would have been a dicey deal. Maybe YOU would have complied when ordered to by an IDed cop, but maybe some Shiteater wouldn't have. Sometimes more guns is not the answer.

I'm sorry I must not have made myself clear. In the first instance I felt like I was being attacked by some psycho due to his aggressive movement towards me.

In the second situation I was not at all under attack nor did I perceive that to be the situation. In both cases I withdrew, in the second instance since there were four dudes, I would have done exactly as I did....withdraw to a safe distance and call 911.

Hate to burst that left wing wet dream yourre having, but drawing a gun is absolute last resort and only if myself or a friend/family member is in imminent threat of harm.

Back to how this all ties in to OP, I believe it's very likely the victim felt he was in imminent danger and also very likely the UC failed to properly identify himself as an officer. Furthermore based on circumstantial evidence, it seems likely that the officer and perhaps his department, made efforts to cover or "sanitize" important parts of the investigation into the shooting.

dodgerfanjohn says

The first time a gold ford sedan going south on the main Bl in front of me made a wild left hand turn onto my street and nearly hit me head on. He was completely on the wrong side of the street. I put it in reverse, floored it, backed up about half a block. When the guy got out of the car and ran into a building I realized he wasn't attacking me and I started recording the incident. He came down with a person in handcuffs and I realized it was an undercover cop. He never once identified himself, nor were there any lights at all in the car. If I had a cc permit, honestly I would have drawn. The cop was a complete fucking moron and entirely in violation of his departments policy which REQUIRES him to identify himself, as in "stop, police" and also if he had a truly UC car, which he did, he's supposed to call in the black and white accompanying him.

Huh? You have a near-miss with other car, decide to follow it to confront the driver* and say that you would've drawn your weapon** if had one? How is this a self-defense situation?

*) road rage
**) brandishing

Straw man, he nearly hit me head on, stopping within 3ft of the front of my car pointing straight towards me....I had already stopped completely due to already traveling under 25, and seeing how erratic the turn was.

dodgerfanjohn says

Straw man, he nearly hit me head on, stopping within 3ft of the front of my car pointing straight towards me....I had already stopped completely due to already traveling under 25, and seeing how erratic the turn was.

Gotcha: you throw your car in reverse not to follow him but to get away from him. The road rage charge is dismissed then. ;)

thunderlips11 says

What's funny is that this hypothetical scenario is EXACTLY the kind used by conservatives for gun ownership...

"Imagine you broke down on the side of the road, and an unmarked white van with tinted windows pulls up behind you..."

Same as "it's 3 am and there is a loud knock on your door". Doesn't mean that you get a blank check to do stupid things.

Another incompetent cop.

Walking up to strangers at 3AM if it's not obvious you're a cop is dangerous. Dumb fuck. Sure you know you're a cop, and how powerful you are, and what a bad ass you are, and how desperate you are to prove to yourself and the world what a bad ass powerful fucker you are.

Congratulations asshole.

You know what the solution to this is ? We need to cut back on the pay and benefits of government workers, and lower the bar for entry into the law enforcement. Because then and only then can we get more intelligent and competent individuals to choose the glamorous and envied job of being a cop as a career.

Straw Man says

"Imagine you broke down on the side of the road, and an unmarked white van with tinted windows pulls up behind you..."

"...you probably won't have to engage in gunplay, many times merely DISPLAYING it will be enough!"

Back in my hardcore RKBA days I used this argument. That you should be ready to shoot
of course but just the visible presence of a firearm would make criminals back off. Usually follow
up with the zinger "you don't see criminals shooting up police stations often, do you?"

How I envision it playing out, is Officer sees a gun and
shouts DROP IT! Citizen still thinking he is facing a criminal he can drive off, doesn't drop it
and a second later he is stunned to find he is bleeding. He was just worried he would lose his
car, he needed to get to church in the morning, and now he's dead. Oh I'm sorry....

The Officer is always right, especially if there is no dashcam and all witnesses are dead.

Amazing how many patnetters know exactly what transpired. Do we have some psychics on patnet? All anyone knows is what the cop says happened. History is written by the winners.

Why isn't anyone asking why the dumb fuck cop didn't call a radio car. The van was parked at 3:00 am. What would have a couple minutes mattered?

dodgerfanjohn says

If armed citizens were more prevalent I highly doubt we'd encounter out of control cops on a regular basis.

That's just dumb. The more the police believe they are likely to confront guns the more likely they are to shoot first. Where have you been the last 30 years or so?

bob2356 says

dodgerfanjohn says

If armed citizens were more prevalent I highly doubt we'd encounter out of control cops on a regular basis.

That's just dumb. The more the police believe they are likely to confront guns the more likely they are to shoot first. Where have you been the last 30 years or so?

Hmmm, then why hasn't that been the case in states/counties where open carry is the law?

Vicente says

Straw Man says

"Imagine you broke down on the side of the road, and an unmarked white van w

Except I didn't say that.

Vicente says

"...you probably won't have to engage in gunplay, many times merely DISPLAYING it will be enough!"

Back in my hardcore RKBA days I used this argument. That you should be ready to shoot

of course but just the visible presence of a firearm would make criminals back off.

I've never seen recommendations to "merely display to deter" in NRA training materials. Or to "go out on the balcony and fire two blasts in the air" for that matter. There are plenty of that kind of stuff in internet/media drivel though.

Straw Man says

I've never seen recommendations to "merely display to deter" in NRA training materials.

NRA training? I didn't bring up the NRA,

However since you mention it, they back open carry. Open carry is publicly
reminding everyone around you "I can shoot you if you bother me".

They like to publish stories where firearms presence deterred a crime:

https://www.nranews.com/series/defending-our-america/video/defending-our-america-you-can-only-rely-on-yourself/episode/defending-our-america-season-2-episode-2-you-can-only-rely-on-yourself

This sort of saying runs through and through RKBA world.
"An armed society is a polite society".
"Most often, the mere presence of a firearm..."

As a former NRA member and RKBA advocate, it's firmly embedded in the mythos.

Vicente says

NRA training? I didn't bring up the NRA,

However since you mention it, they back open carry. Open carry is publicly

reminding everyone around you "I can shoot you if you bother me".

They like to publish stories where firearms presence deterred a crime:

I did bring up the NRA training materials.

Open carry is not the same as "drawing to deter" or "fire two blasts". They do recommend verbal warnings (in their self-defense at home course), but that's all.

And "the stories" fall firmly into the "media drivel" category I've mentioned above.

dodgerfanjohn says

bob2356 says

dodgerfanjohn says

If armed citizens were more prevalent I highly doubt we'd encounter out of control cops on a regular basis.

That's just dumb. The more the police believe they are likely to confront guns the more likely they are to shoot first. Where have you been the last 30 years or so?

Hmmm, then why hasn't that been the case in states/counties where open carry is the law?

There are more people carrying guns in open carry states vs concealed carry states? How does that work? or did you mean to say prominent rather than prevalent?

Are there people here still taking the position that if we all had guns we would be safer ?

Here is what's inevitable. There will soon be cameras and technology everywhere, making crime more and more difficult. People aren't going to be getting away with anything (not including the way that the powerful fuck over the weak, in supposedly legal ways - that is legal crime).

My point being that getting rid of our guns, except for sport (target or hunting) is inevitable.

Soon nobody will be able to argue that guns make sense for self defense. Unless I'm wrong and we go in to some kind of dystopian post apocolyptic canabal anarchy. In that case, all bets are off, and you definitely want a gun, for the slight and false sense of security it would give you.

Ironman says

Majority Say More Concealed Weapons Would Make U.S. Safer

The same majority that mistakenly believe they actually can hit the broad side of a barn at 15 yards?

DieBankOfAmericaPhukkingDie says

America needs every American to be packing elephant guns

Guns that fire elephants? I'm in. I'd pay to see a 6-ton elephant land ass-first on Donald Trump.