Law THE POLICE SHOOTING/USE OF FORCE MEGATHREAD: discussions to determine if justified or not

[Joshuaace]

Looks like @nhbbear has officially abandoned his own thread. Pretty sad bro.

Expected. He called the El Centro PD shooting of Vargas a good shoot. It clearly was not. He can't defend his position, so he will hide from it and hope it goes away instead of admitting his take is like the shoot and the PD Briefing that was released, SHIT.

 

[Poon Goon]

Expected. He called the El Centro PD shooting of Vargas a good shoot. It clearly was not. He can't defend his position, so he will hide from it and hope it goes away instead of admitting his take is like the shoot and the PD Briefing that was released, SHIT.

I guess on this I would need to get clarification on "good shoot". Doesn't seem like any of us thinks it was good as @nhbbear did point out the tactical errors made. "Legal shoot" would be the question imo and I am not 100% convinced in either direction.

On one hand the guy has a brick (deadly weapon) and is actively looking to use it to hurt the cop. On the other hand the cop was able to easily avoid any harm from the attempt and then lit the guy up in the process.

If I had to bet money I would go with no charges for the cop and I wouldn't be outraged by that decision.

 

[Joshuaace]

I guess on this I would need to get clarification on "good shoot". Doesn't seem like any of us thinks it was good as @nhbbear did point out the tactical errors made. "Legal shoot" would be the question imo and I am not 100% convinced in either direction.

I've seen your semantics game already, it's shit tier. Good shoot = 2 shots is reasonable = justifiable. Same shit.

Him excusing a death resulting from "tactical" errors is shit. But that's exactly what he does right here.

Bottom line, bricks absolutely are deadly weapons that can be met with lethal force, but not using cover and distance are tactical mistakes. The brain perceiving the threat and then telling the body to fire takes probably longer than the time the guy chose to throw the brick. If there would have been a large volley of shots, it would have been bad, but two shots is reasonable imo

You do both realize that at least 2 leo's abandoned cover to engage. That itself indicates the level of threat they perceived the brick to be when held at waist level. Have either of you actually read the list of factors the Leo's should consider before using deadly force according to their policy?

These factors include but are not limited to: My words in red here
(a) The apparent immediacy and severity of the threat to officers or others (Penal Code§ 835a).El Centro Police DepartmentEl Centro PD Policy Manual. Minimal prior to leo breaching brick range and displaying deadly weapon, no other civilians in sight
(b) The conduct of the individual being confronted, as reasonably perceived by the officer at the time (Penal Code § 835a). Walking with a beer in one hand and a brick in the other, casual as could be
(c) Officer/subject factors (age, size, relative strength, skill level, injuries sustained, levelof exhaustion or fatigue, the number of officers available vs. subjects). Big guy armed with single use launchable vs 4 armed officers.
(d) The conduct of the involved officer leading up to the use of force (Penal Code § 835a). unknown
(e) The effects of suspected drugs or alcohol. Yes
(f) The individual's apparent mental state or capacity (Penal Code § 835a). Possible mental health issues. Unclear why he is non responsive, alcohol, language barrier, mental health issues, hearing issues are all possible, so is willfull non compliance
(g) The individual’s apparent ability to understand and comply with officer commands(Penal Code § 835a). Unclear, see above
(h) Proximity of weapons or dangerous improvised devices. 1 heavy brick no one is throwing at a high rate of speed, or a great distance
(i) The degree to which the subject has been effectively restrained and his/her ability to resist despite being restrained. N/A
(j) The availability of other reasonable and feasible options and their possible effectiveness (Penal Code § 835a). a variety of non lethal could have been employed effectively. based on proximity to PD, many were available if not on scene already.
(k) Seriousness of the suspected offense or reason for contact with the individual prior to and at the time force is used. Petty theft and potentially threatening the 911 caller.
(l) Training and experience of the officer. Still unspecified by ECPD afik after 3 months. not exactly promoting trust through transparency.
(m) Potential for injury to officers, suspects, bystanders, and others. Yes, single family residence as a backdrop for the gun shots
(n) Whether the person appears to be resisting, attempting to evade arrest by flight, or is attacking the officer. The suspect was trying to walk away from the encounter at a casual pace for about 5 minutes
(o) The risk and reasonably foreseeable consequences of escape. MexiBro was gonna go home and sleep off the alcohol, the Cop was going to go home and beat his wife with his bruised ego
(p) The apparent need for immediate control of the subject or a prompt resolution of the situation. Yes, Shift changeover dammit. No obviously apparent reason to prioritze prompt resolution over peaceful one.
(q) Whether the conduct of the individual being confronted no longer reasonably appears to pose an imminent threat to the officer or others. The only time the suspect was an imminent threat to anyone was that brief moment he was in the act of throwing the brick which was a reaction to having his life threatened by unreasonable escalation of force
(r) Prior contacts with the subject or awareness of any propensity for violence. None noted, and they would have been by now
(s) Any other exigent circumstances. None I see, but I will entertain em if you got em

So how are they justifying this shoot again? By a single brief instant the police provoked?

300.4.2 DISPLAYING OF FIREARMS
Given that individuals might perceive the display of a firearm as a potential application of force,officers should carefully evaluate each tactical situation and use sound discretion when drawing a firearm in public by considering the following guidelines (Government Code § 7286(b)):
(a) If the officer does not initially perceive a threat but reasonably believes that the potential for such threat exists, firearms should generally be kept in the low-ready or other position not directed toward an individual.

You understand this right. Let me connect the dots for you. Per policy, drawing a firearm is recognized as an application of force, with pointing a firearm at someone an even higher application of force. This application of force is what escalated the situation. Vargas holds brick at waist, Thug points deadly weapon at him. That's more than 1 level of escalaltion.

You also understand the LEO's #1priority, correct?

SB-230 SECTION 1.​

The Legislature finds and declares:

(a) The highest priority of California law enforcement is safeguarding the life, dignity, and liberty of all persons, without prejudice to anyone.

That includes safeguarding the life of Vargas. Who is dead, because the Cops escalated a petty crime in to a fatal shooting.

@nhbbear did point out the tactical errors made.

The tactical errors he mentions are about cover. He is seemingly oblivious to the fact that it was the cops that escalated this. He actually credits them with using death threats as a de-escalation tactic<Lmaoo>

On one hand the guy has a brick (deadly weapon) and is actively looking to use it to hurt the cop.

Show me where you see any signs of this PRIOR to having a gun pointed at him?


Shit shoot = bad shoot = unreasonable shoot = unjustifiable shoot. Same Shit Sherbro.

@nhbbear , stay coward, just don't @ me again since you didn't show up in your own thread.

 

[Poon Goon]

(a) The apparent immediacy and severity of the threat to officers or others (Penal Code§ 835a).El Centro Police DepartmentEl Centro PD Policy Manual. Minimal prior to leo breaching brick range and displaying deadly weapon, no other civilians in sight
(b) The conduct of the individual being confronted, as reasonably perceived by the officer at the time (Penal Code § 835a). Walking with a beer in one hand and a brick in the other, casual as could be

Here and in other areas you are just ignoring the fact that the guy had the brick because he used it to threaten an innocent bystander. When you do mention in later you minimize it.

(h) Proximity of weapons or dangerous improvised devices. 1 heavy brick no one is throwing at a high rate of speed, or a great distance

So the guy is indeed armed with the weapon.

(m) Potential for injury to officers, suspects, bystanders, and others. Yes, single family residence as a backdrop for the gun shots

If this prevents police from using their guns then it seems like nearly all police shootings in a public space wouldn't be justified. Also, lol at completely ignoring the risk the suspect posed to the public as he is armed and has already threatened someone.

(n) Whether the person appears to be resisting, attempting to evade arrest by flight, or is attacking the officer. The suspect was trying to walk away from the encounter at a casual pace for about 5 minutes

So the suspect is actively evading arrest.

(o) The risk and reasonably foreseeable consequences of escape. MexiBro was gonna go home and sleep off the alcohol, the Cop was going to go home and beat his wife with his bruised ego

lol

(p) The apparent need for immediate control of the subject or a prompt resolution of the situation. Yes, Shift changeover dammit. No obviously apparent reason to prioritze prompt resolution over peaceful one.

You said that he walked away from police for five minutes. I'd count those five minutes as attempts at a peaceful resolution.

(q) Whether the conduct of the individual being confronted no longer reasonably appears to pose an imminent threat to the officer or others. The only time the suspect was an imminent threat to anyone was that brief moment he was in the act of throwing the brick which was a reaction to having his life threatened by unreasonable escalation of force

This is what it really boils down to and even you admit that the cop's safety was at risk. The cops had the right to confront the guy and they had the right to arm themselves while doing so. I think many cops wouldn't have pulled the trigger due to the distance between them and the ability to dodge the brick. However, I also don't believe that this cop won't get charged because the suspect was attempting to use a deadly weapon against him.

It seems like you may keep an eye out for what happens with the investigation on this one. If you find out what the outcome is I'd appreciate it if you shared that here.

@nhbbear , stay coward, just don't @ me again since you didn't show up in your own thread.

Can't argue with this at all. Really pitiful move on the part of @nhbbear

 

[Joshuaace]

Here and in other areas you are just ignoring the fact that the guy had the brick because he used it to threaten an innocent bystander. When you do mention in later you minimize it.

Does that 911 caller sound like she is in imminent danger during the 2nd call? She was 2 blocks from her store at that point. If this was a Dude set on violence, she fucked around plenty enough to find out. But no, his pattern was already established, he was just walking away.

So the guy is indeed armed with the weapon.

No one denying that. My words to it being a lethal weapon post #268

As a club, Sure. As a thrown object? At a very limited range only,

The Officers know the weapon he has, and should consider it's effective range in their "totality of the circumstances" assessment.

If this prevents police from using their guns then it seems like nearly all police shootings in a public space wouldn't be justified. Also, lol at completely ignoring the risk the suspect posed to the public as he is armed and has already threatened someone.

It's a list of things to CONSIDER if time and circumstances permit. And Yes, the Cops did have time to consider that shots could be fired in a residential area; and per policy were supposed to put a plan in place to reduce the possibility of that happening.

So the suspect is actively evading arrest.

As passively and peacefully as that can be done. Walking away. I don't see him make a single move that could be mistaken as a threat of deploying his weapon, until AFTER his life was threatened.

You said that he walked away from police for five minutes. I'd count those five minutes as attempts at a peaceful resolution.

Did you hear or see any genuine de-escalation attempts in the critical incident briefing video that ECPD released? Did you hear a single word spoken to Vargas in Spanish? The 911 caller and Operator were fluent, but I didn't hear any patrol speak a word of Spanish to Vargas. 10 miles from the border, the possibility Vargas doesn't speak English should be obvious to everyone, from Experts to Sherbro's.

This is what it really boils down to and even you admit that the cop's safety was at risk. The cops had the right to confront the guy and they had the right to arm themselves while doing so. I think many cops wouldn't have pulled the trigger due to the distance between them and the ability to dodge the brick. However, I also don't believe that this cop won't get charged because the suspect was attempting to use a deadly weapon against him.

I'm of the opinion the Shithead put himself within brick range in violation of ECPD policy. He then escalated the situation with the threat of deadly force, which he then used. In the video I don't see Vargas advancing towards ANYONE. With half a brain a plan could have been formulated to control the situation with minimal risk to the safety of the Leo's, the community at large, or Vargas. ECPD policy requires they formulate that plan.

His #1 priority is safeguarding human lives. The Shitheads disregard for policy endangered Officers, Civilians, and cost Vargas his life. Personally, I can't wait to hear what that plan was because the City of El Centro has multiple competing interests and don't seem all that interested in transparency at this time, and they have not released any info regarding the tactics employed in executing that plan.

It seems like you may keep an eye out for what happens with the investigation on this one. If you find out what the outcome is I'd appreciate it if you shared that here.

No chance. An excessive use of force case 2000 miles from me has already occopied more of my time than it should have.

Can't argue with this at all. Really pitiful move on the part of @nhbbear

I view Officer #1 as having a similar mind set to what nhbbear has expressed here ad nauseum. That said, I hope bear is in a safe mental place.

 

[Poon Goon]

Does that 911 caller sound like she is in imminent danger during the 2nd call? She was 2 blocks from her store at that point. If this was a Dude set on violence, she fucked around plenty enough to find out. But no, his pattern was already established, he was just walking away.

So you consider someone reporting a crime to the police as a "fuck around, find out" situation? Seems like intense victim blaming.

The Officers know the weapon he has, and should consider it's effective range in their "totality of the circumstances" assessment.

I basically agree with this, but with him continuously walking away at some point they have to stop him.

As passively and peacefully as that can be done. Walking away. I don't see him make a single move that could be mistaken as a threat of deploying his weapon, until AFTER his life was threatened.

It's not like the cop randomly ran up on the guy for no reason to threaten him. He committed a crime and was armed. People aren't allowed to just keep on truckin around town afterwards.

Did you hear or see any genuine de-escalation attempts in the critical incident briefing video that ECPD released? Did you hear a single word spoken to Vargas in Spanish? The 911 caller and Operator were fluent, but I didn't hear any patrol speak a word of Spanish to Vargas. 10 miles from the border, the possibility Vargas doesn't speak English should be obvious to everyone, from Experts to Sherbro's.

I can agree about the language barrier thing, but at the same time having cops following and yelling at you after you committed a crime seems like a universal language for "stop"

I'm of the opinion the Shithead put himself within brick range in violation of ECPD policy. He then escalated the situation with the threat of deadly force, which he then used. In the video I don't see Vargas advancing towards ANYONE. With half a brain a plan could have been formulated to control the situation with minimal risk to the safety of the Leo's, the community at large, or Vargas. ECPD policy requires they formulate that plan.

His #1 priority is safeguarding human lives. The Shitheads disregard for policy endangered Officers, Civilians, and cost Vargas his life. Personally, I can't wait to hear what that plan was because the City of El Centro has multiple competing interests and don't seem all that interested in transparency at this time, and they have not released any info regarding the tactics employed in executing that plan.

You see the cop as a "shithead" and the lady who reported the crime after being threatened as "fucking around, finding out". It's as if the guy who committed a crime and threatened a lady with a weapon is completely blameless in this whole incident.

No chance. An excessive use of force case 2000 miles from me has already occopied more of my time than it should have.

I view Officer #1 as having a similar mind set to what nhbbear has expressed here ad nauseum. That said, I hope bear is in a safe mental place.

He seems fine, I see him posting in plenty of other threads. Just really weird that he abandoned this thread. The entire point in making the thread was to discuss situations like this. Most of the shit didn't gain any traction, but this incident got at least a couple of us talking and then he splits. Mods should go ahead and merge this one with the "what did police do wrong" thread now.

 

[Joshuaace]

So you consider someone reporting a crime to the police as a "fuck around, find out" situation? Seems like intense victim blaming.

911 is for Emergencies. A petty theft stopped being a recognizable emergency a long time ago. Pure speculation here; the 1st 911 call likely includes her being advised not to pursue thief, prior to the call being transferred to a non emergency line. I have no issues with that Woman reporting a crime though, even though she wasn't reporting it through the proper channels. Since the ECPD can post part of that 911 call in their briefing, they could've posted the entirety of both calls. They didn't, ask yourself why?

I basically agree with this, but with him continuously walking away at some point they have to stop him.

Yep! With a plan in place to control the situation exposing themselves and the community to as little danger as possible. It's literally in their handbook. If the Thugs would have had half a brain, they would have gotten ahead of him, so at least then he would have been advancing toward them.

It's not like the cop randomly ran up on the guy for no reason to threaten him. He committed a crime and was armed. People aren't allowed to just keep on truckin around town afterwards.

It's also not like it's a fleeing felon with with a wake of confirmed violence behind him. Again, I'm all for apprehending the suspect according to policy and California Code. That did not happen. They escalated a misdemeanor investigative stop to a fatal shooting.

I can agree about the language barrier thing, but at the same time having cops following and yelling at you after you committed a crime seems like a universal language for "stop"

And continuing to walk away is the universal peaceful language for "no". Penal Code is crystal clear that an Officer can only employ lethal force for 2 reasons, and walking away from a misdemeanor investigation isn't one of those. But I'm guessing it really pisses a Cop off.

(A) To defend against an imminent threat of death or serious bodily injury to the officer or another person.
(B) To apprehend a fleeing person for any felony that threatened or resulted in death or serious bodily injury, if the officer reasonably believes that the person will cause death or serious bodily injury to another unless immediately apprehended.”

You see the cop as a "shithead" and the lady who reported the crime after being threatened as "fucking around, finding out". It's as if the guy who committed a crime and threatened a lady with a weapon is completely blameless in this whole incident.

No. I see that Lady as the Business Owner most likely . She has every right to report a crime against her Business. I know the FAFO stuff triggers you and you want to twist it around like I'm insensitive. I'm not. I'm a Businees Owner myself. I'm just saying it's not a good idea to pursue and antagonize every shoplifter and put yourself at risk for $10.

Yes, Ofc #1 is a shithead. #2, #3, #4 are inconclusive based on what's been released to this point.

I don't at all see Vargas as blameless. It looks like he in fact left that store with 2 items he didn't pay for. Also looks like he took someones brick without permission. He also possibly made a threatening gesture, or said something threatening to the 911 caller.

"what did police do wrong" thread now.

That is 100% where this one belongs.

 

[Poon Goon]

911 is for Emergencies. A petty theft stopped being a recognizable emergency a long time ago. Pure speculation here; the 1st 911 call likely includes her being advised not to pursue thief, prior to the call being transferred to a non emergency line. I have no issues with that Woman reporting a crime though, even though she wasn't reporting it through the proper channels. Since the ECPD can post part of that 911 call in their briefing, they could've posted the entirety of both calls. They didn't, ask yourself why?

We agree that it was okay for her to call police, got it.

Yep! With a plan in place to control the situation exposing themselves and the community to as little danger as possible. It's literally in their handbook. If the Thugs would have had half a brain, they would have gotten ahead of him, so at least then he would have been advancing toward them.

We agree that they used poor tactics.

It's also not like it's a fleeing felon with with a wake of confirmed violence behind him. Again, I'm all for apprehending the suspect according to policy and California Code. That did not happen. They escalated a misdemeanor investigative stop to a fatal shooting.

Seems to me that he is the one that escalated the situation. Cops have the right to have their guns drawn when confronting an armed suspect. The escalation occurred when the guy chose to throw the brick.

And continuing to walk away is the universal peaceful language for "no". Penal Code is crystal clear that an Officer can only employ lethal force for 2 reasons, and walking away from a misdemeanor investigation isn't one of those. But I'm guessing it really pisses a Cop off.

(A) To defend against an imminent threat of death or serious bodily injury to the officer or another person.
(B) To apprehend a fleeing person for any felony that threatened or resulted in death or serious bodily injury, if the officer reasonably believes that the person will cause death or serious bodily injury to another unless immediately apprehended.”

He wasn't walking away when he got shot, he was throwing the brick. Part A of what you mention is why I posted this shooting in the first place. Once the brick leaves his hand he doesn't appear to be an imminent threat anymore. Kinda like a greyer version of the San Antonio shooting where the lady inside her apartment threw a knife at the cops and got blasted even though she was no longer armed and they weren't at risk.

No. I see that Lady as the Business Owner most likely . She has every right to report a crime against her Business. I know the FAFO stuff triggers you and you want to twist it around like I'm insensitive. I'm not. I'm a Businees Owner myself. I'm just saying it's not a good idea to pursue and antagonize every shoplifter and put yourself at risk for $10.

I agree that it's not the best idea for her to follow the guy, but she is within her rights to do so. The FAFO comment doesn't work here because it implies that she deserves to be threatened or hurt in this situation. Also, saying that I am "triggered" is rude.

Yes, Ofc #1 is a shithead. #2, #3, #4 are inconclusive based on what's been released to this point.

Officer 2 had his gun drawn so by your standards he is indeed a piece of shit scumbag.

I don't at all see Vargas as blameless. It looks like he in fact left that store with 2 items he didn't pay for. Also looks like he took someones brick without permission. He also possibly made a threatening gesture, or said something threatening to the 911 caller.

You are clearly minimizing his actions here. "He took someone's brick without permission"? He picked up the brick specifically to threaten the lady that he just stole from.

That is 100% where this one belongs.

I said that to break the chops of @nhbbear but apparently he does not enjoy some chops bustin. With all of this being said, I am not here defending the shooting itself. I think I good cop would have recognized that he wasn't going to die from the thrown brick and shots wouldn't have been fired. So if this cop gets charged I wouldn't be upset in the least. However, I wouldn't bet on it happening because technically the guy was attempting to harm him with a deadly weapon.

 

[nhbbear]

Expected. He called the El Centro PD shooting of Vargas a good shoot. It clearly was not. He can't defend his position, so he will hide from it and hope it goes away instead of admitting his take is like the shoot and the PD Briefing that was released, SHIT.

I have barely been on here in days. Just a few minutes, so I haven’t been keeping up on this thread, but I never abandoned it. Hide? lol. Who the fuck am I gonna hide from, you? I have already defended my position just fine. A brick is a deadly weapon. That dude chose to try and smash a cop with it and got shot.

 

[Via Heeto]

I have barely been on here in days. Just a few minutes, so I haven’t been keeping up on this thread, but I never abandoned it. Hide? lol. Who the fuck am I gonna hide from, you? I have already defended my position just fine. A brick is a deadly weapon. That dude chose to try and smash a cop with it and got shot.

to be fair, just giving a cop some attitude is reason enough to get shot and completely justifiable. am i right?

 

[nhbbear]

I've seen your semantics game already, it's shit tier. Good shoot = 2 shots is reasonable = justifiable. Same shit.

Him excusing a death resulting from "tactical" errors is shit. But that's exactly what he does right here.



You do both realize that at least 2 leo's abandoned cover to engage. That itself indicates the level of threat they perceived the brick to be when held at waist level. Have either of you actually read the list of factors the Leo's should consider before using deadly force according to their policy?

These factors include but are not limited to: My words in red here
(a) The apparent immediacy and severity of the threat to officers or others (Penal Code§ 835a).El Centro Police DepartmentEl Centro PD Policy Manual. Minimal prior to leo breaching brick range and displaying deadly weapon, no other civilians in sight
(b) The conduct of the individual being confronted, as reasonably perceived by the officer at the time (Penal Code § 835a). Walking with a beer in one hand and a brick in the other, casual as could be
(c) Officer/subject factors (age, size, relative strength, skill level, injuries sustained, levelof exhaustion or fatigue, the number of officers available vs. subjects). Big guy armed with single use launchable vs 4 armed officers.
(d) The conduct of the involved officer leading up to the use of force (Penal Code § 835a). unknown
(e) The effects of suspected drugs or alcohol. Yes
(f) The individual's apparent mental state or capacity (Penal Code § 835a). Possible mental health issues. Unclear why he is non responsive, alcohol, language barrier, mental health issues, hearing issues are all possible, so is willfull non compliance
(g) The individual’s apparent ability to understand and comply with officer commands(Penal Code § 835a). Unclear, see above
(h) Proximity of weapons or dangerous improvised devices. 1 heavy brick no one is throwing at a high rate of speed, or a great distance
(i) The degree to which the subject has been effectively restrained and his/her ability to resist despite being restrained. N/A
(j) The availability of other reasonable and feasible options and their possible effectiveness (Penal Code § 835a). a variety of non lethal could have been employed effectively. based on proximity to PD, many were available if not on scene already.
(k) Seriousness of the suspected offense or reason for contact with the individual prior to and at the time force is used. Petty theft and potentially threatening the 911 caller.
(l) Training and experience of the officer. Still unspecified by ECPD afik after 3 months. not exactly promoting trust through transparency.
(m) Potential for injury to officers, suspects, bystanders, and others. Yes, single family residence as a backdrop for the gun shots
(n) Whether the person appears to be resisting, attempting to evade arrest by flight, or is attacking the officer. The suspect was trying to walk away from the encounter at a casual pace for about 5 minutes
(o) The risk and reasonably foreseeable consequences of escape. MexiBro was gonna go home and sleep off the alcohol, the Cop was going to go home and beat his wife with his bruised ego
(p) The apparent need for immediate control of the subject or a prompt resolution of the situation. Yes, Shift changeover dammit. No obviously apparent reason to prioritze prompt resolution over peaceful one.
(q) Whether the conduct of the individual being confronted no longer reasonably appears to pose an imminent threat to the officer or others. The only time the suspect was an imminent threat to anyone was that brief moment he was in the act of throwing the brick which was a reaction to having his life threatened by unreasonable escalation of force
(r) Prior contacts with the subject or awareness of any propensity for violence. None noted, and they would have been by now
(s) Any other exigent circumstances. None I see, but I will entertain em if you got em

So how are they justifying this shoot again? By a single brief instant the police provoked?

300.4.2 DISPLAYING OF FIREARMS
Given that individuals might perceive the display of a firearm as a potential application of force,officers should carefully evaluate each tactical situation and use sound discretion when drawing a firearm in public by considering the following guidelines (Government Code § 7286(b)):
(a) If the officer does not initially perceive a threat but reasonably believes that the potential for such threat exists, firearms should generally be kept in the low-ready or other position not directed toward an individual.

You understand this right. Let me connect the dots for you. Per policy, drawing a firearm is recognized as an application of force, with pointing a firearm at someone an even higher application of force. This application of force is what escalated the situation. Vargas holds brick at waist, Thug points deadly weapon at him. That's more than 1 level of escalaltion.

You also understand the LEO's #1priority, correct?

SB-230 SECTION 1.​

The Legislature finds and declares:

(a) The highest priority of California law enforcement is safeguarding the life, dignity, and liberty of all persons, without prejudice to anyone.

That includes safeguarding the life of Vargas. Who is dead, because the Cops escalated a petty crime in to a fatal shooting.



The tactical errors he mentions are about cover. He is seemingly oblivious to the fact that it was the cops that escalated this. He actually credits them with using death threats as a de-escalation tactic<Lmaoo>



Show me where you see any signs of this PRIOR to having a gun pointed at him?


Shit shoot = bad shoot = unreasonable shoot = unjustifiable shoot. Same Shit Sherbro.

@nhbbear , stay coward, just don't @ me again since you didn't show up in your own thread.

Again, laughable. I have been in this thread for about two months or so. I haven’t been on here for much the last week or so.

He already threatened to smash the caller with the brick. “He was going home to sleep it off.” Oh, well, the cops should have just let him go then-nothing wrong with a thief who threatens people with a deadly weapon to worry about. Because of his threats to use the brick and his refusal to drop it and eventually throw it at an officer, the threat of deadly force is authorized. I stated I didnt love their tactics and would have kept back some, or boxed him in using vehicles, but they chose to try and talk to him and order him to drop the brick and he chose to try and kill or seriously harm one of them.

And the police followed him and ordered him to drop the brick and you claim it must be a language barrier. Are you fucking serious? Pointing a gun is a pretty universal language. But your pussy is all sandy because the officer chose to use his firearm to confront a guy that had already threatened one person with a brick.

When discussing lethal use of force, the two main cases I discuss are tennesee v garner and graham v Connor. I don’t believe that there was an immediate need to take the suspect out as he was an immediate risk to the community like if he had a firearm, but he was a risk to simply allow him to just wander off. As for graham, suspect is refusing commands, ignoring officers in uniform and marked cruisers, has already threatened violence to the person that dared to call police because he was a thief, and when confronted by police after trying to follow him, he decides to throw the brick at them. This is a clean shoot. Not the greatest tactics, but you are blaming the cops because this guy chose to use his deadly weapon-and you actually tried to argue that he was the justified one because they were pointing guns at him. What a slimy piece of shit you are.

 

[nhbbear]

to be fair, just giving a cop some attitude is reason enough to get shot and completely justifiable. am i right?

Sure, that has always been my position you twat

 

[Via Heeto]

Sure, that has always been my position you twat

oh i know. you have said as much many times. you are just lucky you got out when you did. only would have been a matter of time before you got filmed violating someone's rights

 

[nhbbear]

We agree that it was okay for her to call police, got it.


We agree that they used poor tactics.


Seems to me that he is the one that escalated the situation. Cops have the right to have their guns drawn when confronting an armed suspect. The escalation occurred when the guy chose to throw the brick.


He wasn't walking away when he got shot, he was throwing the brick. Part A of what you mention is why I posted this shooting in the first place. Once the brick leaves his hand he doesn't appear to be an imminent threat anymore. Kinda like a greyer version of the San Antonio shooting where the lady inside her apartment threw a knife at the cops and got blasted even though she was no longer armed and they weren't at risk.


I agree that it's not the best idea for her to follow the guy, but she is within her rights to do so. The FAFO comment doesn't work here because it implies that she deserves to be threatened or hurt in this situation. Also, saying that I am "triggered" is rude.


Officer 2 had his gun drawn so by your standards he is indeed a piece of shit scumbag.


You are clearly minimizing his actions here. "He took someone's brick without permission"? He picked up the brick specifically to threaten the lady that he just stole from.


I said that to break the chops of @nhbbear but apparently he does not enjoy some chops bustin. With all of this being said, I am not here defending the shooting itself. I think I good cop would have recognized that he wasn't going to die from the thrown brick and shots wouldn't have been fired. So if this cop gets charged I wouldn't be upset in the least. However, I wouldn't bet on it happening because technically the guy was attempting to harm him with a deadly weapon.

He just wanted to go sleep off his stolen alcohol. Josh would have given him a ride and a handjob. He knows nothing of use of force and when to apply it. He is rattling off policy like that is what decides criminal charges. Violating policy is internal discipline. A taser would have been good, bean bag rounds, great. But we have no idea what those officers had with them at that moment, and even if officer two or whomever had a taser or other less lethal tools, it is absolutely appropriate to have that man covered with a firearm for lethal cover.

And you’re doing a pretty good job in my brief absence. I have been in the hospital twice in the last week, so my desire to be on sherdog has not been what it usually is

 

[nhbbear]

oh i know. you have said as much many times. you are just lucky you got out when you did. only would have been a matter of time before you got filmed violating someone's rights

Sure, ok, buddy. I never had one use of force complaint in my entire career. I’ve had retarded mutants make complaints over the stupidest shit ever imagined, but I have never been investigated, sanctioned, disciplined, or anything like that. And still, so bothered by my presence, that you are running your cocksucker in the award thread and coming in here and claiming that I say it’s ok to shoot people for attitude. Weak shit

 

[Poon Goon]

Josh would have given him a ride and a handjob

That was an excellent joke

And you’re doing a pretty good job in my brief absence. I have been in the hospital twice in the last week, so my desire to be on sherdog has not been what it usually is

Sorry bub, didn't know you were having problems. Hope you get better and disregard my chops bustin about you ignoring this thread.

 

[nhbbear]

That was an excellent joke


Sorry bub, didn't know you were having problems. Hope you get better and disregard my chops bustin about you ignoring this thread.

I think I am starting to get that about you. At first, I kind of thought you had issue with me, but lately, it just seems like busting balls. I can handle that just fine. I retired from the pd because of spine surgery. Back was hurting two weeks ago and I was using a back roller and something popped. Had to be carried to the er(where I work anyways) and got cat scans. I have degenerative disc disease which is making my discs bulge out and causing muscle spasms. Trying to get in to get a spinal block, but I have had literally no interest in any social media or arguing. The pain is not motivating me to want to do anything.

 

[Via Heeto]

Sure, ok, buddy. I never had one use of force complaint in my entire career. I’ve had retarded mutants make complaints over the stupidest shit ever imagined, but I have never been investigated, sanctioned, disciplined, or anything like that. And still, so bothered by my presence, that you are running your cocksucker in the award thread and coming in here and claiming that I say it’s ok to shoot people for attitude. Weak shit

what? no cops have ever taken a complaint that another cop was abusive? I mean it is almost like there are not hundreds of videos showing the pleasant process of the public going in to make a complaint about another officer. they are always treated so warmly.

and then you are gonna tell me that cops investigated cops and decided there was no wrongdoing? you don't say??!!

as for "running my cocksucker" in another thread, i nominated you. that is what we are supposed to do. then you came in to squeal about it

 

[nhbbear]

what? no cops have ever taken a complaint that another cop was abusive? I mean it is almost like there are not hundreds of videos showing the pleasant process of the public going in to make a complaint about another officer. they are always treated so warmly.

and then you are gonna tell me that cops investigated cops and decided there was no wrongdoing? you don't say??!!

as for "running my cocksucker" in another thread, i nominated you. that is what we are supposed to do. then you came in to squeal about it

No, this isn’t about other cops. You tried to say that I would have been on video violating rights trying to imply I was a dirty cop. Bitch, I have reported dirty cops myself.

 

[Via Heeto]

No, this isn’t about other cops. You tried to say that I would have been on video violating rights trying to imply I was a dirty cop. Bitch, I have reported dirty cops myself.

sorry. i wasn't clear in my post. i was meaning that I am shocked no cops ever took a complaint that another cop (meaning you) was dirty. They are usually so hopeful with the general public.

On side note, you have hit just about every name in the book towards me. twat, bitch, cocksucker....... yet not once have i called you a murderer, which you most likely are