Thursday, June 11, 2009

Query...

David Woycechowsky,

Is this a real gun?

How about this one?



Let me tell you a story...

Once upon a time, a tweak (that would be a methamphetamine addict, David) decided it would be a good idea to rob an ice cream shop.

Our tweak friend went into the shop and brandished one of the above weapons at the clerk. He demanded loudly "Give me the fucking money bitch! Give me all of it!"

The manager, who was working in the back office heard the tweak yelling obscenities, then she saw the tweak on camera. She had the presence of mind to call 911.

We'll call the tweak a suspect now.

When the call went out on the radio of an in progress armed robbery, six officers responded and were approaching the shop when the suspect came running out the door with the gun in his hand.

He ran up the block, directly toward a police officer.

When the officer pointed his gun at the suspect, it scared the suspect so badly he involuntarily threw the gun in the air over his head. The suspect was taken into custody without further incident.

I ask you this David. If the suspect had pointed one of the guns in the above pictures at the police officer, should the officer have shot the suspect? Perhaps you think the officer should have asked the suspect "Is that a real gun?" and waited for an answer in the affirmative before shooting.

I think I already know your answer to this, but I'll leave it up to you.

31 comments:

Meadowlark said...

What's the polite terminology for "cap the fuck*r".

Oh. Maybe there isn't any.

Husband's coming home EVERY SINGLE DAY. I don't care who has to die to make that happen.

Yeah, I suck. I know.

Front Porch Society said...

Don't you just love how a patent lawyer thinks he knows all when it comes to doing our job?!? *shaking my head in disgust*

I don't care to stop to ask if it is a real gun or not. There is not time to contemplate if it is a toy or if it is real. You point a gun at me and I will shoot you. End of story.

If it so happens to be a fake gun after the fact, well, then you made a really poor choice. And it sucks to be you but that is the choice you made when you pointed the gun at me.

The Dispatcher and Her Officer said...

I have had a few similar incidents. In one of them, the suspect did not live to regret his actions. - Officer

David Woycechowsky said...

I have zero problem with police shooting suspects brandishing toy guns. At least if the suspect is over the age of, say 10. There seems to be some confusion about this, so I am glad for the opportunity to clear that right up.

The only thing I was saying is that toy guns make better throwdown because they have no serial numbers. That is why it is especially important to allow grieving parents the right to see the video if their child is shot down for brandishing a toy gun. Parents see vid. Parents shut up and take their grief private. Problem solved.

Roanoke Cop said...

Don't feed the trolls Smith. They thrive on attention.

Sandra G. said...

Check mate.

But I agree with RC.

Rivers said...

Shot. Yes.

Officer "Smith" said...

David Woycechowsky said...

"The only thing I was saying is that toy guns make better throwdown because they have no serial numbers."

You know, all this time I actually thought you were trying to have an intelligent, although lopsided, conversation with me, then you throw out a line like that.

You really do watch too much television.

Bye David. It's been real.

David Woycechowsky said...

Here is a real life example of a throw down gun in the news last month:

http://minnesotaindependent.com/35527/the-story-of-a-gun-jury-weighs-fong-lee-case

BTW, I don't watch television. I haven't had a television since 1998 or so.

David Woycechowsky said...

And let's be clear. I do not think the police in Rock Hill threw down the gun. I am reserving my own judgement on that issue until I see the alleged video.

Police should show the parents the video now. To avoid a repeat of what happened in Madison.

David Woycechowsky said...

Slight correction to earlier post: I had a television in 2003 and part of 2004, but it only got two channels: FOX and PBS.

Tim said...

David, in the politest possible terms; and on behalf of most of the readers of this blog, can I invite you for the last time to F*ck the HELL OFF!!!

Tim said...

Thank you and have a nice day.

Ronjii said...

Hi David,
Because of your obvious distrust of police, you may be interested in this free service - just dial 1-366-843-5763 (that's 1 DONT HELP ME) and your phone number will be put on a 911 'do not respond' list. If you need the cops in the future, you'll be on your own......

2 wheel terror said...

Idiot gets what's comin' when you bring a piece of plastic to a gun fight.

Shawn McManus said...

New 'round these parts. Mark Bennet, a Houston lawyer, linked the site, and a blog I read linked him, etc. etc.

I'm laying money that the top one is the fake and the bottom real.

I wouldn't bet my life on it, though.

David Woycechowsky said...

Here is my summary of what we agree on and what we don't agree on:

AGREEMENTS:

1. If a suspect won't drop a toy gun after being ordered to do so, then the police should shoot the suspect until the threat is stopped.

2. Staunch police supporters like to cuss.

DISAGREEMENTS:

1. If police shoot a 15 year old with a toy gun, then the parents should be expected to be suspicious about the circumstances of exactly how that happened.

2. If parents are suspicious about how their 15 year old got shot, then the police department should allay those suspicions by not acting as if it has something to hide from the parents.

COMMENT:

Despite our disagreements, I am happy to see some agreements here.

The Dispatcher and Her Officer said...

If a suspect has a gun... I don't care what goes on after that, as long as my officer and every other officer gets home safely after shift! It was the suspects choice to pick up that darn gun!!!!

And the parents can gripe all they want - but they raised him!! Where were they when they should have been teaching him about right and wrong actions!
-Dispatcher

Joel Rosenberg said...

Let me tell you a story. A guy I know -- he's real, but he's not me; he's a retired cop, I'm neither -- once rolled up on what looked like it was about to be an execution. A grumpy old guy was very unhappy with the kid who was trespassing on his lawn, and he had him at what looked like gunpoint.

The cop shot once, center of mass, and killed him. He said -- I believe him, but I wasn't there -- that he honestly thought the kid was about to die.

The kid wasn't about to die; the gun was a realistic fake.

I got no patience at all for thumpers or murderers with badges; this guy, I feel sorry for, because he's got to live with having killed a guy, who, as it turned out, was just using him as a suicide device.

That's an easy one, given those facts.

It isn't easy -- in the same way -- as in the Minneapolis case, where the gun (and it was a real gun; no question) was reported to have been in the MPD property room.

In that case, by the way, the jury found that the cop didn't use unreasonable force; the family lost the suit.

'Course, several days later, the same cop was arrested for domestic assault, and is, of course, presumed innocent. In a court of law.

I won't be on the jury, even if called (which is unlikely); I've already pretty much made up my mind that this guy is either the unluckiest SOB to ever wear a badge, or something a lot worse, and I'd be disqualified, quite appropriately, for cause.

David Woycechowsky said...

Exactly, Joel.

David Woycechowsky said...

Here is another story where people are wondering whether the gun was planted:

http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/local_news/SAPD_officer_shoots_kills_man_.html?c=y&viewAllComments=y

Officer "Smith" said...

David,

I'm not even sure why I'm biting on this, other than morbid curiosity perhaps, but...

Where, exactly, in the news article does it claim there is suspicion that the gun was planted. Perhaps I need to learn how to read, but I never once saw mention of a planted gun in the news article.

Maybe you are reading the comments, which I didn't bother to read. If that's the case, I have no doubt some jackass made some comment about the gun being planted. There is always at least one anti cop "commenter" in every bunch. That doesn't mean there is any real suspicion of the gun being planted. At least not by anyone who matters.

Officer "Smith" said...

As for the first link you posted regarding the Minneapolis case, that is pure speculation by some attorney trying to make the police look like idiots and his gang banging dead client look like a proverbial Golden Child.

There is no evidence the gun was, in fact, a "drop gun". It's just another tactic used to try to demonize the police.

David Woycechowsky said...

Like Mr. Rosenberg said, the gun was supposed to be in the MPD evidence room. According to evidence room records. What is astonishing is that MPD talked there way out of the situation. What is also astonishing is that it took a lawyer to figure out the gun was supposed to be in the evidence room and that IAD had missed that little prob, somehow.

Officer "Smith" said...

But then doubt was cast on whether or not it was actually the gun that was supposed to be in the evidence room.

David Woycechowsky said...

Oh, sure. Just like Johnnie Cochran cast doubt over whether OJ really did those stabbings. It is clear enough what happened in Minneapolis.

MsPsycho said...

2 wheel terror said...
Idiot gets what's comin' when you bring a piece of plastic to a gun fight.
******************

Maybe the person who knowingly brings a plastic gun to a real fight is trying to actually make law enforcement do what they can't or won't? .... Suicide by cop?
Why else would someone point a piece of plastic at an officer who has a real weapon?

I know you can't tell the difference in some toy guns, but isn't there possible another way to handle someone pointing an object at law enforcement without them so quickly doing a double tap to the center of a IDIOTS chest? Maybe re-train to allow for certain IDIOTS, and only shoot them in the leg?...or hand???

Even IDIOTS deserve a chance to live.

Sabra said...

Maybe re-train to allow for certain IDIOTS, and only shoot them in the leg?...or hand???


Wait, I know this one! It's actually a really easy question to answer.

In the midst of a confrontation, it is next to impossible (so close that it really doesn't matter) to tell the difference between a real gun and a fake one. Hell, look at the pictures in this post. It's not so easy when you're not worried about getting made dead.

Shooting to wound has a BIG problem inherent, even if it can be done (and it's not that easy to hit someone in the hand or the leg, especially if they/you are moving, at an odd angle, wearing those idiotically baggy pants, etc etc):

It still leaves the possibility of the officer getting made dead. A wounded goblin is still a goblin and that gun may still be real and may still be capable of being shot at said officer.

Pop quiz time: Who do we want more of in this world? Officers, or goblins? Dunno about you, but I'll take the guy charged with protecting my ass any day.

Officer "Smith" said...

MsPsycho said...

"I know you can't tell the difference in some toy guns, but isn't there possible another way to handle someone pointing an object at law enforcement without them so quickly doing a double tap to the center of a IDIOTS chest? Maybe re-train to allow for certain IDIOTS, and only shoot them in the leg?...or hand???

Even IDIOTS deserve a chance to live."

This is exactly the thought process that I have spoken about ad nauseum.

No, we will not train to shoot certain people in the leg, or certain people in the hand. That's absolutely ridiculous.

If a police officer is going to shoot someone, that officer is going to be in fear of his or her life, or the life of another. Under such circumstances, the officer will be making a split second decision, and will not have the time to think "should I shoot him in the leg or center mass?"

Contrary to popular belief, Ms. Psycho, we are not trained to "shoot to kill". We are, in fact, trained to stop the threat. If the person dies as a result, that's just too bad.

An idiot is an idiot the world round. If that idiot has a desire to be shot at by the police, and decides to bring a plastic gun to such a confrontation, it sucks to be that idiot.

That idiot just made the decision to forfeit his "chance to live".

Mrs. "Smith" said...

To quote Meadowlark: "Husband's coming home EVERY SINGLE DAY. I don't care who has to die to make that happen."

I agree, and I don't think you suck.



MsPsycho posted:"I know you can't tell the difference in some toy guns, but isn't there possible another way to handle someone pointing an object at law enforcement without them so quickly doing a double tap to the center of a IDIOTS chest? Maybe re-train to allow for certain IDIOTS, and only shoot them in the leg?...or hand???

Even IDIOTS deserve a chance to live."

Oh, boy, how original. "Why didn't they shoot him in hand/leg?" Hmmm, maybe because it's NOT SAFE??? *rolling eyes* Hate to break it to you sweetie, those idiots don't deserve a chance to live. Especially if they are stupid enough to point a gun (real or real-looking) at a cop. Idiots need to be removed from the gene pool, there's already too many swimming in the shallow end...

Loren Pechtel said...

I think I understand where these idiots are coming from. Many of them seem to take it as a given that there is a good solution to any problem. (I've seen the same idiots committing the same error on many issues, it's not just with police shootings.)

If there was a bad outcome to the situation then someone failed to find a good solution--and the one with the most power is the one most responsible.

Thus if you shoot someone with a fake gun it's always your fault for failing to figure out a better solution to the problem.

Furthermore, anyone who argues that there is no better solution to the problem is an evil person who desires the bad outcome--after all, a good outcome exists if you'll just get out of your hidebound ways and look for it.