Officer shoots, kills armed security guard outside south suburban bar

[disciple Clint]

That sounds like a big what if, of course we wonder about those things. How about the cop orders him to put the gun away, that might have been a way to resolve the situation.

we covered that

 

[disciple Clint]

I must have missed something, how could things go right?

things could have gone right if he had put the gun down when the police arrived, no gun, no threat, no need to use deadly force.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Of course there is an ongoing investigation, I'm basing that statement on the video linked in the OP. I'm not saying any of this is cut and dried but a cop shooting a security guard who has the drop on a bad guy is not good for police business. Clear cut case of shooting first and asking questions later but we will wait and see what the investigation yields. I'm guessing the cop will be cleared of any wrong doing, but that doesn't make what he did right and a good man is dead. We should all take a minute and consider what that means down the road.

Down the road, security guards should incorporate pepper spray to subdue someone. Of course deadly force is the best option if the perp is armed. By the time the cops arrive it will all be over.

 

[Ana the Ist]

I must have missed something, how could things go right?

Lol if the cop showed up at the scene of a shooting and immediately assessed the correct threat wasn't the guy pointing a gun at the other guy. Presumably, all the right people would still be alive and they'd be high fiving each other down at the precinct.

 

[Nithavela]

Lol if the cop showed up at the scene of a shooting and immediately assessed the correct threat wasn't the guy pointing a gun at the other guy.

Apparently a feat that his colleagues managed to achieve.

 

[variant]

I understand how it looks...it's easy to think that he did everything wrong. Everyone is real comfortable with the cop reacting too slowly to a threat and getting himself shot....except for the actual cop.

I don't know who mentioned it earlier, but was this security guard holding the subject down and had a gun pointed at the subject?

That's the most confusing thing about it to me. I can understand why he would use the gun to subdue the subject....but once he's subdued, there's really no reason to keep your gun out and pointed at him. Unless he literally just got control of the guy before he was shot by the cop...you'd think he would holster his gun and use both hands to keep control.

Yeah that's bad technique. Almost as bad as shooting people before you make sure someone understands your orders.

 

[variant]

I can tell that you have a good heart. Maybe you had a bad experience with the police or maybe you are listening to the stories of people who say they had a bad experience. in any case it will never hurt to make it a lifelong habit of getting all the facts and then using your powers of deduction to decide for yourself what your view is going to be on any event.

Don't lecture me.

There is plenty of evidence here to mull over.

It's also funny that you can jump to the conclusion that I must have had a bad experience with the police in the same paragraph as telling me not to jump to conclusions.

Downright ironic actually.

My opinion is based upon the facts as they stand. The police version of events already contradicts the witnesses at the scene, and I judge that the witnesses have no reason to lie. I judge that the witnesses at the scene are correct in that the man was not given adequate time to respond before being shot senselessly by the only police officer to incorrectly decide he was a threat.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Yeah that's bad technique. Almost as bad as shooting people before you make sure someone understands your orders.

When the cops start yelling all at once it's hard to understand them. I think they do it deliberately to confuse the 'suspects'...so they can shoot them.

 

[variant]

When the cops start yelling all at once it's hard to understand them. I think they do it deliberately to confuse the 'suspects'...so they can shoot them.

In this case it was just the one person yelling at him right before he shot him. The other police knew what they were doing.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Yeah that's bad technique. Almost as bad as shooting people before you make sure someone understands your orders.

I get it. You blame the cop.

 

[Nithavela]

I get it. You blame the cop.

We get it, you never blame the cop.

 

[Ana the Ist]

My opinion is based upon the facts as they stand. The police version of events already contradicts the witnesses at the scene, and I judge that the witnesses have no reason to lie. I judge that the witnesses at the scene are correct in that the man was not given adequate time to respond before being shot senselessly by the only police officer to incorrectly decide he was a threat.

You seem hung up on this point...why? You understand that "giving someone adequate time to respond to commands" has no bearing on the legality of the shooting...right?

 

[Ana the Ist]

We get it, you never blame the cop.

Lol I'm not blaming anyone...like another poster stated, I don't really have enough facts to say who's wrong.

Plus there's always the possibility that both the cop and guard acted to the best of their ability, and legally, and someone got killed anyway.

Besides, I've stated in multiple cases that the cop was at fault.

 

[RDKirk]

You seem hung up on this point...why? You understand that "giving someone adequate time to respond to commands" has no bearing on the legality of the shooting...right?

Apparently not, given court precedents.

But given more legally armed citizens in the community, it should.

The only time "giving someone adequate time to respond to commands" should have no bearing is if guns are absolutely illegal for anyone other than the police to have.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Apparently not, given court precedents.

I wasn't aware of legal precedent...you know of a case I could check out?

But given more legally armed citizens in the community, it should.

I'll bite...why?

The only time "giving someone adequate time to respond to commands" should have no bearing is if guns are absolutely illegal for anyone other than the police to have.

Again....why?