Off-duty officer shoots 2 in lot after Angels game, page 4

privacy

Pages: << 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 8 times

reply posted on 25-6-2009 @ 10:15 AM by thisguyrighthere

reply to post by semperfortis

So if I'm a free state with lax carry laws and lawfully carry into a place that has a rule about no weapons I am not breaking nay laws?

I'd like to see how that would play out in the real world.

reply posted on 25-6-2009 @ 10:17 AM by djvexd

reply to post by Nutter

I think you may have misread or misunderstood that email.
"APD, or ON-DUTY law enforcement who is attached to APD i.e. - Secret Service. "
Basically states that any APD officer( on or off duty) or any agency who is coordinating security with APD must be on duty. In essence if you or I work for say blackwater(this is an example only) and the company is contracted to supply security but you are not picked to work because you have tickets to the game you cannot carry. However an officer who works for a primary jurisdictionary agency can carry in an off-duty capacity.

reply posted on 25-6-2009 @ 10:17 AM by Nutter

Originally posted by Kevin_X2
get a life, and a gun wile your at it

And when I do and shoot someone in self defense at a ball park (where it is illegal to carry...even for an off-duty officer) would I as a regular joe schmoe have the same right to shoot as you say this guy did.

I don't care if he was a cop. Had this been another "thug" (a term some of you people keep throwing around) attacked by other "thugs", would you be in defense of said "thug"?

reply posted on 25-6-2009 @ 10:17 AM by mr-lizard

reply to post by semperfortis

But it still does not excuse firing live rounds at TWO men in front of children and fans.

He could have missed and killed a child.

But i guess Americans cannot deal with anything without a pistol handy eh?

reply posted on 25-6-2009 @ 10:19 AM by Nutter

Originally posted by grimreaper797
He should serve time for breaking that law then. Probably illegal possession of a fire arm.

But as the old saying goes, I'd rather be judged by 12 then carried by 6.

I can agree with every word.

reply posted on 25-6-2009 @ 10:19 AM by Kevin_X2

reply to post by mr-lizard

nope, putting a bullet in the brain of someone who has already assaulted me and is threatening everything i hold dear... that sounds rational to me. Besides, he didnt kill anyone.

Oh, and im canadian. obviously wherever your from is the perfect little garden of eden.

Id like to see your reaction when being attacked by 3 people, wile doing nothing but going for a relaxing ballgame with your young children and wife.

Did you think about the situation, or are you just another people-hating fearful paranoid standup kinda guy?

You obviously dont know what its like to have kids. and you know, neither do i. but i can only imagine how this guy felt... and it makes me sad that PEOPLE have become so low lifed.

good on the cop for not letting thugs get away with this crap

reply posted on 25-6-2009 @ 10:19 AM by grimreaper797

Originally posted by mr-lizard

So by putting a bullet in the head of someone who got a bit rowdy at a game makes you 'uncriminal'.

If I break my beer bottle on the ground, I'm being rowdy. If I sing at the top of my lungs while a occasionally curse random people off, I'm being rowdy. If I assault a man and posse imminent danger to him and his family, I'm committing a major crime. There's a difference.

I wouldn't expect somebody as bias as yourself to see the difference though.

If you think attacking somebody is just "being a bit rowdy" then shooting somebody must just be "getting too rough" right? But hey, double standards are fun. Downplaying assault is A-O-K, so long as the victim is a cop I bet.

reply posted on 25-6-2009 @ 10:20 AM by semperfortis

reply to post by thisguyrighthere

No you are NOT breaking any laws..

As a Law Enforcement Officer, trust me, this has come up before...

Private Citizens with CWP's are subject to "RULES" like that, but NOT, I repeat, NOT Law Enforcement Officers...

Semper

reply posted on 25-6-2009 @ 10:21 AM by Nutter

Originally posted by semperfortis
Guys!!!

Private Security Companies Can Not Make Laws...

It is NOT a law..

The Officer was perfectly correct in carrying

Semper

I'll take your word for it as an LEO. You'd know more about it than me.

reply posted on 25-6-2009 @ 10:21 AM by yeahright

The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.

reply to post by thisguyrighthere

Think of it this way - we have rules here at ATS. Violating them has a variety of different outcomes - warnings, edits, post bans, account bans. But you won't be prosecuted by a government body for violating them because they aren't "laws".

So if you go into an establishment with their own rules, and violate the rules, the establishment can do things like ask you to leave. But you can't be prosecuted for violating a rule that isn't an established law.

Calling the police and saying, "Arrest that man, he violated our rules" isn't going to get you very far.

As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.

Edit for tags.

[edit on 6/25/2009 by yeahright]

reply posted on 25-6-2009 @ 10:22 AM by Kevin_X2

Originally posted by Nutter

Originally posted by Kevin_X2
get a life, and a gun wile your at it

And when I do and shoot someone in self defense at a ball park (where it is illegal to carry...even for an off-duty officer) would I as a regular joe schmoe have the same right to shoot as you say this guy did.

I don't care if he was a cop. Had this been another "thug" (a term some of you people keep throwing around) attacked by other "thugs", would you be in defense of said "thug"?

if a group of "thugs" attacked one "thug" in an unprovoked assault for no apparent reason... more power to the lone ranger. people think because they have their friends with them that they can get away with murder. Im more then happy too see criminals get shut down.

or are you forgetting... these were criminals? the cop may have been commiting a crime, but who was out to get who, and who was having a day at the ballpark with their family?

check yo-self foo

reply posted on 25-6-2009 @ 10:23 AM by Nutter

Originally posted by djvexd
reply to post by Nutter

I think you may have misread or misunderstood that email.
"APD, or ON-DUTY law enforcement who is attached to APD i.e. - Secret Service. "
Basically states that any APD officer( on or off duty) or any agency who is coordinating security with APD must be on duty. In essence if you or I work for say blackwater(this is an example only) and the company is contracted to supply security but you are not picked to work because you have tickets to the game you cannot carry. However an officer who works for a primary jurisdictionary agency can carry in an off-duty capacity.

I think you're correct. So, I retract my statements.

reply posted on 25-6-2009 @ 10:23 AM by Kevin_X2

reply to post by grimreaper797

couldn't have said it better myself. you have a way with words my friend

apples to apples is the only way to judge an orange.

reply posted on 25-6-2009 @ 10:24 AM by grimreaper797

Originally posted by semperfortis
No you are NOT breaking any laws..

As a Law Enforcement Officer, trust me, this has come up before...

Private Citizens with CWP's are subject to "RULES" like that, but NOT, I repeat, NOT Law Enforcement Officers...

Semper

Which makes sense since I was doing a big sale not to long ago to a major at the police station and she said she carries "everywhere". On duty or off.

reply posted on 25-6-2009 @ 10:25 AM by mr-lizard

reply to post by Kevin_X2

Well your rationality is kind of flawed on moral grounds, because that kind of attitude is mainly reserved for the dark ages.

If anybody was threatening my kids, i'd do something about it, of course i would...

But i would NEVER pull a gun on someone in a parking lot. Let alone think of 'putting a bullet in their brains'.

reply posted on 25-6-2009 @ 10:27 AM by thisguyrighthere

reply to post by semperfortis

reply to post by yeahright

I believe this is how things are supposed to be. But if I'm on my way into Angels Stadium for instance and get wanded and my firearm found can I expect to simply be turned away? I doubt it. I'm pretty sure I'll be detained, hassled, forced to wait for the local cops, hassled some more depending on the cops mood or point of view toward an armed citizenry, etc...

If I'm lucky I'll only have a few hours wasted. If I'm in a slave state like CT I could see facing all sorts of charges from brandishing to disturbing the peace leading to a revocation of my CWP and years waiting to be heard by the licensing board just in case in the off chance I could get my 2nd Amendment right re-granted to me via a government license.

I wish the real-world worked as smoothly as you guys make it sound.

reply posted on 25-6-2009 @ 10:27 AM by Nutter

Originally posted by Kevin_X2
or are you forgetting... these were criminals? the cop may have been commiting a crime, but who was out to get who, and who was having a day at the ballpark with their family?

So, you were there and witnessed the whole thing?

reply posted on 25-6-2009 @ 10:28 AM by Kevin_X2

reply to post by mr-lizard

so.... what would you do then, mr-lizard?

mabey ask real nice if they would stop rushing you with blunt objects?

[edit on 25-6-2009 by Kevin_X2]

reply posted on 25-6-2009 @ 10:29 AM by Jakes51

Some of you folks are to harsh on the officer and most departments allow for their off-duty officers to carry their service weapons. This is so that they may be able to take control of a scene if necessary, like a robbery or other dangerous crime.

I have a member of my family who is a police officer in a big city and he carries his weapon off-duty. He told me the department expects them to carry their badge and weapon while off-duty. The only time when it is illegal is if alcohol is involved.

I'm pretty sure there will be an investigation following the shooting. The shooter will have a drug test and was most likely tested for alcohol at the time of the shooting. So the officer wont get off scot-free if he is in the wrong. In terms of the other two drunks --- maybe it would be a good idea to keep to yourself and not cause trouble?

reply posted on 25-6-2009 @ 10:30 AM by yeahright

The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.

reply to post by thisguyrighthere

That's an entirely different circumstance. What I'm suggesting is that breaking a private rule won't result in a criminal prosecution. Whether or not something results in being inconvenienced by the gendarmes in a particular jurisdiction is another issue altogether.

As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.