He has a toy truck! Shoot him! FTP!

[Cum Dumpster]

Why do you think cops should be allowed to break the laws they encforce upon others?

Please show me where I have ever said cops should be allowed to break laws of any kind. In fact, I have said the opposite many times.

[kingjason]

Actually.....no.

Officer Smiley has no duty to run into gun fire, bad situations, etc. Officer Smiley can retreat and go to his safe place. LE have no duty to protect or run into a crap storm. The only difference is, police are granted use of force and protections that citizens are not. Aside from some special protections and paychecks, there isn't a difference between obligations from Joe Q and Officer Smiley.

Even though the courts may have said that, it is not a fact. Dereliction of duty will get you fired faster than anything.

[Forever_frost]

Even though the courts may have said that, it is not a fact. Dereliction of duty will get you fired faster than anything.

Then officers should petition the court to rule differently. Until that happens, police can hide and let citizens die (as has happened) and then claim "I didn't have to do anything" which has happened. Until there's another court case from the Supreme Court, police have zero obligation to help anyone or do anything more than file paperwork which puts them at a slightly higher obligation than meter maid. Do some officers do it out of moral obligation? Yep. Same reason citizens act. They are compelled to.

Difference between a cop that acts and fucks up and a citizen who does? The cop has hundreds of laws and unions that protects him and now Texas is trying to make a cop a protected class of citizen.

[Cum Dumpster]

How sure are you about that? And civilian criminal charges or UCMJ charges?

Here's the event you're talking about. Looks like there was a full investigation.

The US Air Force conducted an investigation into the incident in 2003, but the results of that investigation were not publicly released, and did not result in a court-martial.[6] Subsequent reporting of the US Air Force investigation states that the investigation found fault with both pilots' actions in the incident, including, "findings of cognitive and physical task overload, ineffective communication and failure to recognise identification panels by the two pilots." The investigation report recommended administrative or disciplinary action against both pilots. Higher United States Department of Defense officials, however, cleared both pilots of any wrongdoing.[7]
A British Army Board of Inquiry (BoI) was held in 2004, the findings of which, among others, stated that the major authorised the lieutenant colonel to attack, but no authorisation was given by controllers on the ground.[1][8] The report was released to the family of Lance Corporal Hull and later to the public. It has been alleged that certain classified material available to the BoI was withheld from the family.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/190th_Fighter_Squadron,_Blues_and_Royals_friendly_fire_incident

But this is interesting. You're saying an officer on the ground, hiding behind a car door with a rifle with an unarmed guy at 50 meters is the same as an A10 pilot during the fog of war at combat speeds. Is that what you're going for?

The Blues and Royals were serving as an armoured reconnaissance element for 16th Air Assault Brigade. Four vehicles from D Squadron, two FV107 Scimitars and two FV103 Spartans, were moving north of the main force, patrolling the Forward Edge of Battle Area. The area of the patrol had been declared as a no engagement zone to the allied forces and the vehicles were marked with the agreed coalition Combat Identification markings including orange overhead canvas panels, thermal reflectors and Union Flags.
Two A-10 Thunderbolt II aircraft of the Idaho Air National Guard, 190th Fighter Squadron were completing a two-hour mission; engaging artillery and rocket launchers of Iraq's 6th Armoured Division, dug in 25 miles (40 km) north of Basra. The aircraft were guided to their targets by US Marine Corps forward air controllers, embedded with British ground units, and flown by a major and lieutenant colonel on their first operational flight of the invasion. According to media reporting of the subsequent investigation, the flight was commanded by the major.[1]
From an altitude of 12,000 ft (3,700 m), the aircraft spotted Iraqi vehicles 800 yards north, and the British patrol less than three miles (5 km) west. Following dialogue with the FAC and between the aircrew, the British convoy was engaged by the A-10s in a gun and rocket attack which left the vehicles disabled. The British soldiers exited the vehicles, taking cover underneath the hulls. The aircraft conducted a second attack, resulting in the death of L/CoH Hull, still within his Scimitar.[2]

You just posted evidence to prove my point. I advocate for full investigations in police shootings. The A-10 pilot got a full investigation. The A-10 pilot made a mistake. The officer made a mistake. Neither should get prosecuted for CRIMINAL charges.

BTW, in case I haven't clearly stated it before, thank you for your service and your sacrifice. You have done what many talk about doing, sacrificing for something bigger than themselves, but few do. You are a true patriot, hero, and honorable man. I man that sincerely.

Now, your views on what is a violation of the constitution and all are extreme in my opinion, but that is another discussion. I defend and honor the constitution every day. I will never get your view that sending in the drone with an explosive was a violation of due process. If they had run up to the area where he was barricaded and the officer had blindly shot a few round from a gun into him he would be just as dead. He deserved to die and he got all the due process he deserved, no matter from some C4 on a drone or from a bullet fired from a person.

And to answer your question about the pilot and officer being the same, for my point they are. They both made mistakes. The A-10 pilot (and I may be confusing this with an attack helicopter pilot) shot the first vehicle and then took a few seconds before shooting the 2nd. Please don't get mired in the minutiae of the comparison and lose sight of the point. People were injured and/or died because of a human error. There was no criminal intent on their part, nor on the bus driver or the electrician I mentioned before. They made a mistake!

[Cum Dumpster]

Even though the courts may have said that, it is not a fact. Dereliction of duty will get you fired faster than anything.

They will not believe this, but it is so true.

[Cum Dumpster]

Soldiers and Civilian Employees may be liable for lost, damaged, or destroyed property:

Soldiers and Department of the Army civilian employees may have to pay for Army property they lose or damage. Under Army Regulation (AR) 735-5, financial liability ordinarily will not exceed one month's base pay. In certain cases, however, such as the loss of personal arms or equipment, or damage to Government housing, liability may equal the full amount of the loss. The Financial Liability Investigation of Property Loss is the administrative tool used by the Army to establish liability.

http://www.armystudyguide.com/conten...ty-inves.shtml

Dude, seriously. We were talking about taxpayers paying people for officers mistakes or misconduct, not losing or damaging things. Cops have to pay when they lose or damage issued equipment. Come on now!

[Forever_frost]

You just posted evidence to prove my point. I advocate for full investigations in police shootings. The A-10 pilot got a full investigation. The A-10 pilot made a mistake. The officer made a mistake. Neither should get prosecuted for CRIMINAL charges.

BTW, in case I haven't clearly stated it before, thank you for your service and your sacrifice. You have done what many talk about doing, sacrificing for something bigger than themselves, but few do. You are a true patriot, hero, and honorable man. I man that sincerely.

Now, your views on what is a violation of the constitution and all are extreme in my opinion, but that is another discussion. I defend and honor the constitution every day. I will never get your view that sending in the drone with an explosive was a violation of due process. If they had run up to the area where he was barricaded and the officer had blindly shot a few round from a gun into him he would be just as dead. He deserved to die and he got all the due process he deserved, no matter from some C4 on a drone or from a bullet fired from a person.

And to answer your question about the pilot and officer being the same, for my point they are. They both made mistakes. The A-10 pilot (and I may be confusing this with an attack helicopter pilot) shot the first vehicle and then took a few seconds before shooting the 2nd. Please don't get mired in the minutiae of the comparison and lose sight of the point. People were injured and/or died because of a human error. There was no criminal intent on their part, nor on the bus driver or the electrician I mentioned before. They made a mistake!

I'm no hero. Heroes don't make it back. I buried a few of them and stood by their graveside while they were put in the ground. I'm an idiot that still hasn't figured out how to duck.

As to the drone, it is unconstitutional to kill an American citizen without due process. To make police executioners is to violate that on a state and federal level. If SWAT, in attempting to subdue him (not kill him, stop him to arrest him), killed him, that's different than deploying a drone with the express intent to kill him. It'd be like me walking into what I believe to be a fight and drawing a weapon and putting a bullet into someone's face because I may get hurt.

I mean, they could hurt me, ultimately it could result in me having to shoot them so the end result is the same right? Obama deploying drones to kill American citizens without due process is fine because he thinks they're bad guys so that counts right? Tell me, if you have to be on the other side of the board, do you want due process or summary judgement?

I'm going to bet you're going to want due process if you ever wind up on the other side of a court proceeding.

Where the A-10 pilot and the cop behind a car door differ is the pilot made a split second decision, the cop behind the door had all of the time in the world. He had easy lines of sight and could easily move where he could see better if he didn't. He was within 50 meters. A pilot is moving at speed and depending on what ground control is telling him, that officer had all of the info right there in front of him with a rifle capable of pinpoint accuracy at that range.

He CHOSE to take that shot. Three times. If I CHOOSE to shoot and that results in someone other than who I am aiming at, as a citizen, I would be held legally responsible not only for medical bills but also criminally. Question also is, where did those other 2 rounds go?

[Forever_frost]

Dude, seriously. We were talking about taxpayers paying people for officers mistakes or misconduct, not losing or damaging things. Cops have to pay when they lose or damage issued equipment. Come on now!

You said if you lose your radio on a call you don't. Which is it?

Police officers and the police department SHOULD pay for their own misconduct and mistakes.

[LANTIRN]

Please show me where I have ever said cops should be allowed to break laws of any kind. In fact, I have said the opposite many times.

You keep defending police whose mistakes cost lives. If I shoot someone by accident I can be held criminally liable. Same if I run a red light or speed and cause an accident. Cops do it, cost lives, injuries, or property damage, and there is usually no consequencs. This is what we have a problem with. We just want cops help responsible when thy fuck up. The thin blue line protection is bullshit. That and civil asset forfeiture allows them to steal whatevever they want and bypass constitutional protections. Both are criminal and cops smile and do it or defend those who do. You want respect back from citizens that you lost? You have to earn it. Hold cops accountable and stop stealing shit.

[Forever_frost]

You keep defending police whose mistakes cost lives. If I shoot someone by accident I can be held criminally liable. Same if I run a red light or speed and cause an accident. Cops do it, cost lives, injuries, or property damage, and there is usually no consequencs. This is what we have a problem with. We just want cops help responsible when thy fuck up. The thin blue line protection is bullshit. That and civil asset forfeiture allows them to steal whatevever they want and bypass constitutional protections. Both are criminal and cops smile and do it or defend those who do. You want respect back from citizens that you lost? You have to earn it. Hold cops accountable and stop stealing shit.

This, all of this. If police wrote other cops speeding tickets, illegal lane usage tickets, failure to yield, failure to signal, failure to buckle up tickets, distracted driving tickets, etc and started treating each other like civilians instead of a higher class, then we may start getting somewhere.

[Cum Dumpster]

Would I be arrested if I saw two people sitting in the street and I discharged my weapon 3 times and struck one of them by accident?

You may be arrested for this. You were so negligent to fire off a single round it may be a criminal offense. Your scenario does not have you having any right to fire off a single round, though. The officer in this scenario has the right to fire a round (or more if necessary) if they feel justified. In the case we are discussing, the officer made a mistake. He was wrong.

You may not like it, but officers can do things you as a private civilian cannot. I can fire at someone I think is a criminal and as long as I have a reasonable argument that I was justified to fire (at the time I pulled the trigger) then I am not criminally liable. I may be civilly liable if I was wrong. I may get fired if I was wrong.

You cannot go to a future time and enter facts into evidence, like the fact that the man who got shot was a social worker, or was doing nothing wrong, or was trying to help the cop (all things that are true now that we know the facts), or anything else and make the incident a criminal act. It is solely based upon the facts known to the officer at the time he fired his weapon. This is why all normal and decent people want to hear all the facts before we pass judgment. Please refer to the running joke for a few people about "we didn't hear the officers side of the story!"

Imagine a cop shooting someone who had a warrant and a "violent past criminal history" but he had no knowledge of that until a few hours after he shot the guy? Can we then justify the shooting based on those facts the officer did not know? Of course not! So you can't base your opinion of the shooting on things you have learned since the shooting and that the cop didn't know.

I will reiterate. I think this cop screwed up. I think he should not have fired his weapon. I do NOT think he should be charged with a crime. Very simple.

[Cum Dumpster]

You keep defending police whose mistakes cost lives. If I shoot someone by accident I can be held criminally liable. Same if I run a red light or speed and cause an accident. Cops do it, cost lives, injuries, or property damage, and there is usually no consequencs. This is what we have a problem with. We just want cops help responsible when thy fuck up. The thin blue line protection is bullshit. That and civil asset forfeiture allows them to steal whatevever they want and bypass constitutional protections. Both are criminal and cops smile and do it or defend those who do. You want respect back from citizens that you lost? You have to earn it. Hold cops accountable and stop stealing shit.

I have never said cops should not be held accountable. Please show me where I have ever said that?

You gonna answer my questions and posts responding to you above or not?

[Cum Dumpster]

This, all of this. If police wrote other cops speeding tickets, illegal lane usage tickets, failure to yield, failure to signal, failure to buckle up tickets, distracted driving tickets, etc and started treating each other like civilians instead of a higher class, then we may start getting somewhere.

If I showed you my DL record where I have a speeding ticket on my record, will you meet for lunch? I am paying. I got it in 2013. I had been a cop for 26 years at the time.

And if I do show you, will you stop acting like it doesn't happen?

Hell, a police captain got arrested for DWI not too long ago by other cops! How crazy! The thin blue line is alive and well, uh, wait, maybe not so much anymore! Ahhhhhh!

[Forever_frost]

You may be arrested for this. You were so negligent to fire off a single round it may be a criminal offense. Your scenario does not have you having any right to fire off a single round, though. The officer in this scenario has the right to fire a round (or more if necessary) if they feel justified. In the case we are discussing, the officer made a mistake. He was wrong.

You may not like it, but officers can do things you as a private civilian cannot. I can fire at someone I think is a criminal and as long as I have a reasonable argument that I was justified to fire (at the time I pulled the trigger) then I am not criminally liable. I may be civilly liable if I was wrong. I may get fired if I was wrong.

You cannot go to a future time and enter facts into evidence, like the fact that the man who got shot was a social worker, or was doing nothing wrong, or was trying to help the cop (all things that are true now that we know the facts), or anything else and make the incident a criminal act. It is solely based upon the facts known to the officer at the time he fired his weapon. This is why all normal and decent people want to hear all the facts before we pass judgment. Please refer to the running joke for a few people about "we didn't hear the officers side of the story!"

Imagine a cop shooting someone who had a warrant and a "violent past criminal history" but he had no knowledge of that until a few hours after he shot the guy? Can we then justify the shooting based on those facts the officer did not know? Of course not! So you can't base your opinion of the shooting on things you have learned since the shooting and that the cop didn't know.

I will reiterate. I think this cop screwed up. I think he should not have fired his weapon. I do NOT think he should be charged with a crime. Very simple.

False:

All of these things were true at the time. At time time he was doing nothing wrong, was a social worker and was trying to help the cop while yelling no one had a weapon.

And you're right. He won't be charged with a crime, cops are a protected class. He won't be fired, will not lose his ability to carry a firearm and will suffer no penalty but the taxpayer will pay out. He learns nothing, the taxpayer is on the hook and the band goes marching along.

[Forever_frost]

If I showed you my DL record where I have a speeding ticket on my record, will you meet for lunch? I am paying. I got it in 2013. I had been a cop for 26 years at the time.

And if I do show you, will you stop acting like it doesn't happen?

Hell, a police captain got arrested for DWI not too long ago by other cops! How crazy! The thin blue line is alive and well, uh, wait, maybe not so much anymore! Ahhhhhh!

Did you get it while in uniform in your vehicle?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2016/02/01/woman-stops-florida-cop-for-speeding-the-reason-i-pulled-you-over-today/?utm_term=.f9467b4626a4

A few years ago, the Sun-Sentinel, a newspaper in South Florida, won a Pulitzer Prize for its investigation into off-duty officers speeding on the roadways.

The investigation, which analyzed toll data, determined that nearly 800 officers from several departments and agencies were reaching excessive speeds, sometimes hitting 130 mph.