Deputies shoot, kill man after knocking on wrong door

And another thing to consider. The cops know who the dangerous people are, and where the dangerous neighborhoods are, and the residents know this also. This Andrew Scott fellow was obviously worried about his safety and so were the police, and it might be because the area is known for crime.

According to Lake County Court Records, Mr. Andrew Scott (if it is the same one) already has 2 felonies of his own, and 9 traffic citations, with the most recent being a careless driving in February of this year.

Perhaps he isn't an innocent victim, but more of a known trouble maker that just happened to be the wrong guy this time?

reply to post by getreadyalready


Yes. Exactly.

As far as police "getting away with this", they pretty much have to. They MUST have the ability to fire if someone's life is in danger. I don't remember if there was mention of how many officers were at the door... but every one of them was in danger as a result of a pointed firearm. As far as I'm concerned, their reaction needed to be "stop this guy from shooting".

Originally posted by getreadyalready
There is definitely fault on both sides. Why did the guy answer the door if he didn't know who it was? Obviously his gun was no help for him. If he was trying to protect himself he did a piss-poor job at it.

If you are scared of the people at the door, you don't just swing it open holding a gun and get shot to death. You investigate a little, you ask who it is, you peek out another window. If you are going to open it, you make sure you are ready to shoot!

The guy should never have swung open a door to unknown parties and pointed a gun at them. Sure, the cops are not supposed to shoot the wrong guy, but if a cop thinks they are approaching an attempted murderer, and a guy fitting the description opens the door and points a gun at them, of course they are going to shoot.

It is a tragedy, but there is enough blame to spread around to everyone on this one.

Florida has, since 2005, the Castle Doctrine Law

The Florida "Castle Doctrine" law basically does three things:

One: It establishes, in law, the presumption that a criminal who forcibly enters or intrudes into your home or occupied vehicle is there to cause death or great bodily harm, therefore a person may use any manner of force, including deadly force, against that person.

Two: It removes the "duty to retreat" if you are attacked in any place you have a right to be. You no longer have to turn your back on a criminal and try to run when attacked. Instead, you may stand your ground and fight back, meeting force with force, including deadly force, if you reasonably believe it is necessary to prevent death or great bodily harm to yourself or others. [This is an American right repeatedly recognized in Supreme Court gun cases.]

Three: It provides that persons using force authorized by law shall not be prosecuted for using such force.

It also prohibits criminals and their families from suing victims for injuring or killing the criminals who have attacked them.

In short, it gives rights back to law-abiding people and forces judges and prosecutors who are prone to coddling criminals to instead focus on protecting victims.

SO -- is this the impression you got from the news? Why not? Aren’t media people impartial purveyors of objective facts, with no bias or spin, faithfully and accurately reporting the news? Everyone who believes that’s an accurate description of the news media please raise your hand. See? No hands go up. Despite their protests otherwise, the news media has, in general, and especially with respect to gun issues, become an outrageous purveyor of agenda-driven nonsense on the dark side of the force.

www.gunlaws.com...

this put the police "who did not identify themselves" in the wrong on this one.

i hope his family sues them for every penny they have.

reply to post by LittleBlackEagle


I'm in Florida, and I love my guns! I also love the fact that we expanded the Castle Doctrine a few years ago. I also would NEVER just allow cops into my home without a warrant.

If you've followed my postings, about 4 years ago my house was raided by a SWAT team, helicopter over head, full riot gear, and my 90lb Pitbull charged the police attempting to secure the back door! My wife and parents had no idea what was going on, I wasn't home, we had a 1 year old and my wife was pregnant with our second. My dog went nuts at the back door, scared my wife, so she let him out. The dog charged out, she heard cussing and scrambling, then a knock at the front door, my family armed themselves and asked who it was. They didn't open the door, they waited, and the police then identified themselves and read what was on the warrant, and my Dad eventually let them in and went peacefully.

They didn't shoot my dog, they didn't shoot my Dad, they didn't confiscate my guns. The police acted very responsibly and professionally, because my family acted very responsibly.

If my Dad had swung the door open wide while wielding a pistol, they would have surely shot him!

Castle Doctrine does not give someone the right to wield or brandish a weapon based on irrational fear of a stranger at the door. It is for those specific occasions where you are in fear for your life from a KNOWN threat, not an unknown one.

reply to post by detachedindividual


Unless I misread your post...are you saying you would still open the door with a gun knowing it was the police on the other side???????

This truly terrifies me. =/

Ive said it before and I will say it again. The justice system not only exists to pursue the Guilty, but more so to Protect the Innocent.

Originally posted by xyankee
reply to post by WildTurkey101

 

I thought that they were required, but I guess not. This is a really bad job on the part of the county and someone should pay the price but they will cover it up, just watch.

I have no doubt that nothing will be done. They get away with anything because they are protected by a badge and their buddies.

Originally posted by Bedlam
[alternative ending 1]
BANG BANG Open up!

yah what's up

POW POW POW stop POW halt POW hands up you POW POW arrrgh...thump.

Hey Ed - it's the wrong guy.

Aw, *. Ok, you got a hold out?

Yep, here you go. Ok, he opened the door with a gun, right?

You bet. Oh, and let's sprinkle a little crack on him too.

this sounds like the more probable scenario. the modern cop is a liar and a thug, they don't give a s**t about the public, only covering their arses after every stupid mistake they continue to make.

reply to post by getreadyalready


all i'm saying is the law stands with the man protecting his home because the police did not identify themselves when knocking. that is standard procedure and they f'ed it up and now an innocent man is dead. the man had the law on his side when he opened the door with a gun pointing at whom ever was on the other side because they didn't identify themselves as police.

it's not brain surgery and every law enforcement officer learns you must identify yourself first and foremost. oh and please get the right address you incompetent fools.

reply to post by autowrench


That's what I thought...so why didn't they identify themselves? Tactical advantage???? someone please explain.

So being safe in one's own house is now out the door? Cops should shoot the guy because he had a gun in his house? They had no warrant for him and he was the wrong guy to boot.

Hard to believe people will just give the police such an easy pass on this one.

reply to post by getreadyalready


Seriously...oh, then it's no big deal his dead. Shew....glad to know he was a bad guy.

reply to post by LittleBlackEagle


I agree, they definitely have a portion of the blame, but they won't be tried for any crime, because they can assume they are acting on good information in carrying out their duties. Hopefully, if they are decent human beings, they are feeling this guilt more than anyone can imagine. I know a lot of cops, and most of them would be devastated by shooting the wrong person. Sometimes they are devastated even when they shoot the right person. Of course there are a few cowboys that just can't wait to shoot someone, but those folks are usually not very popular on a police force, and they don't have a lot of friends or eager partners, and they would likely get hung out to dry if something like this went down.

The victim here was not within his rights to brandish his weapon to strangers at the door. A knock at the door is not a reasonable threat to warrant brandishing your weapon. These were cops, but what if it had been a neighbor needing to use the phone, or someone broken down in the parking lot, or his own dear mother. Just because a stranger knocks at the door is no reason to open a door and point a weapon. Maybe you want the weapon in your hand and concealed behind your back, or maybe you want to not open the door until the people are identified to your satisfaction, but you NEVER just swing open a door and point a gun. If they hadn't shot him, they still could have arrested him.

reply to post by CrikeyMagnet

I would expect that police would not have identified themselves as police because maybe they had no indication that someone was going to answer the door.

Then why knock?
I knock on a door anticipating that someone will answer. If I thought no one would answer, I wouldn't bother knocking.

The good idea that has already been posted would be for the police to announce who they are when they knock. If the police announce who they are at 1:30 am at my residence, I will inform them before I open the door that I am armed and will need to see a badge and ID through a window before I put down my gun and open the door.

Originally posted by CrikeyMagnet
reply to post by getreadyalready

 

Yes. Exactly.

As far as police "getting away with this", they pretty much have to. They MUST have the ability to fire if someone's life is in danger. I don't remember if there was mention of how many officers were at the door... but every one of them was in danger as a result of a pointed firearm. As far as I'm concerned, their reaction needed to be "stop this guy from shooting".

It probably would have been better for him if they asked him to drop the weapon first...instead of just shooting.

Originally posted by roadgravel
So being safe in one's own house is now out the door? Cops should shoot the guy because he had a gun in his house? They had no warrant for him and he was the wrong guy to boot.

Hard to believe people will just give the police such an easy pass on this one.

He opened the door. They didn't bust it down.

I have no problem with this shooting, but I do have a problem with the no-knock warrants. What if these para-military raids run up against some guy that is able to defend himself and kill several of them, before the miscommunications are all worked out. Will he face charges? I would hope not. My house has solid wood interior doors, and I have guns all over the place. If my house were raided by guys in black riot gear, and I was half asleep, I wouldn't know if they were friend or foe, and I would likely barricade myself in and defend myself.

If someone breaks into your home, you have every right to defend yourself with force, but if they knock at the front door, you ought to ask who it is before you just point a gun at someone.

If the guy was a convicted felon, he shouldn't own a firearm.

The cops were wrong for not announcing who they were.

Just a question though, I didn't see anything in the article about this....

Who witnessed the deceased pointing a gun at the officers?

Other than the police?
Other than those officers who would be implicated in this affair where a man was gunned down because they made a mistake... at 1:30am?

I am willing to bet that in Florida, a legal gun owner answering the door to his house holding a gun, is not a crime.

Was this man allowed to own a gun?

reply to post by getreadyalready


you're wrong, he did have the right to brandish his weapon at his front door since he was still in his home and the police have all the blame when it comes to the law we all have to live by. he can also answer his door naked holding a gun and eating Frito's if he chooses.

reply to post by LittleBlackEagle


No he can't.

He can possess the gun inside his home, clean it, do whatever he wants to do with it, but once he opens the door and points it at someone it becomes a crime. He also cannot be naked in front of an open door or open window. Many people have been given citations for that very thing. I was arrested once naked at my front door, but the arrest was for not paying a dog ticket, the nakedness was just me being a smartass.

Even if he was having a private party, and he was asking someone to leave, it would be illegal to threaten them with a gun. In fact, for me personally, if someone even mentioned having a gun, or going to get a gun, I would take that as a threat to my own safety, and I might choose to end the threat immediately rather than see if they were serious or not, and I would be justified in doing so.

You don't point guns at people unless you intend for one of you to end up dead. Not even in your own home, and not even at 1:30 in the morning.

I love guns, but guns should be respected, not flashed about as a threat.