7 Law Enforcement Officers Shot, One Fatally, in South Carolina

According to the Associated Press, the sheriff's office says Hopkins fired on deputies investigating alleged sexual assault of a child by another person. The AP says officers were trying to serve a warrant involving an accusation that a 27-year-old person at the home sexually assaulted a foster child in the home. The AP also reports 74-year-old Hopkins is a disbarred lawyer, charged with disorderly conduct in 2014.

LINK

Where is the 27 year old they were originally looking for? The shooter was 74 years old and was not even the guy they were looking for. Just weird all around.

originally posted by: Lagomorphe
I have been scratching my nogging about this random search warrant thing too.

I found this if it can be of any help? :

There are times when police can perform a search without a warrant, and most searches actually do occur without warrants being issued.

Exemption 4 – Exigent Circumstances: If the police feel that the time it would take to get a warrant would jeopardize public safety or lead to the loss of evidence, they can perform a search without a warrant. For example, the police can forcibly enter a home if it is probable that evidence is being destroyed, if a suspect is trying to escape, or if someone is being injured. The police officer's responsibility to preserve evidence, arrest a suspect, or protect an individual outweighs the search warrant requirement.

Full information is here : www.legalzoom.com...

There is a whole ton of information for search and seizure laws by state for the USA here :

resources.lawinfo.com...

I know that there are some members here who are LEO so maybe they could also enlighten us?

Kindest respects

Lags


a reply to: odzeandennz

If this is true, this means they do not need a warrant, ever. The destroying evidence clause could be applied to probably every crime or suspected crime if they really wanted.

ETA: Disregard

How can so many of you jump to conclusions about the "suspect" who was being served? How many times have we seen or heard stories where LE says they were fired at first, only for the opposite to be true - or stories like Ruby Ridge where the guy was set up and entraped by ATF b/c they didn't like the guy.

Just b/c the guy had overwhelming fire power doesn't mean that LE didn't do anything wrong. To call out the "victim" (I don't know what to call the guy who was being served the warrant... maybe "person of interest" or "person to be arrested"??) as the sole instigator of the incident before we hear the story seems callous. Maybe he had a family there and they did one of those "no knock" breach entries. I can see how something like that could lead to a blood bath if the man thought he had to protect his family or even himself.

This forum/site sure is a bit odd. people complain and moan about not having personal freedoms and when things happen where there isn't any clear information about what happened, why, or who initiated, it seems that LE gets the benefit of the doubt most of the time, when we have more threads than can be counted that say "never trust the police" and that the police can legally lie to you and they are trained to do so. Let's not even get started on all the dirty cops that have been busted recently planting evidence, drugs, etc or that cowboy captain down in Georgia that ordered his officer to kill the driver of the pickup truck pulling the trailer of lawncare equipment that was initiated from a simple traffic violation.

This is in no way to say that I'm happy anyone was hurt, not in the least, but the comments on here are pretty cold hearted when we don't even know what happened or who provoked what.

originally posted by: karmicecstasy

According to the Associated Press, the sheriff's office says Hopkins fired on deputies investigating alleged sexual assault of a child by another person. The AP says officers were trying to serve a warrant involving an accusation that a 27-year-old person at the home sexually assaulted a foster child in the home. The AP also reports 74-year-old Hopkins is a disbarred lawyer, charged with disorderly conduct in 2014.

LINK

Where is the 27 year old they were originally looking for? The shooter was 74 years old and was not even the guy they were looking for. Just weird all around.

If it turns out that the 27 year old who has allegedly commited sexual assault on a child is guilty then I hope that the said 27 year old gets life in the roughest prison possible.

If said person is guilty of this crime then he/she has devasted the lives of so many people.

What a truly tragic situation.

Kindest respects

Lags

originally posted by: DigginFoTroof
How can so many of you jump to conclusions about the "suspect" who was being served? How many times have we seen or heard stories where LE says they were fired at first, only for the opposite to be true - or stories like Ruby Ridge where the guy was set up and entraped by ATF b/c they didn't like the guy.

Just b/c the guy had overwhelming fire power doesn't mean that LE didn't do anything wrong. To call out the "victim" (I don't know what to call the guy who was being served the warrant... maybe "person of interest" or "person to be arrested"??) as the sole instigator of the incident before we hear the story seems callous. Maybe he had a family there and they did one of those "no knock" breach entries. I can see how something like that could lead to a blood bath if the man thought he had to protect his family or even himself.

This forum/site sure is a bit odd. people complain and moan about not having personal freedoms and when things happen where there isn't any clear information about what happened, why, or who initiated, it seems that LE gets the benefit of the doubt most of the time, when we have more threads than can be counted that say "never trust the police" and that the police can legally lie to you and they are trained to do so. Let's not even get started on all the dirty cops that have been busted recently planting evidence, drugs, etc or that cowboy captain down in Georgia that ordered his officer to kill the driver of the pickup truck pulling the trailer of lawncare equipment that was initiated from a simple traffic violation.

This is in no way to say that I'm happy anyone was hurt, not in the least, but the comments on here are pretty cold hearted when we don't even know what happened or who provoked what.

I will just leave this with you Dig :

148 police officers killed in their line of duty in 2018 in the USA and this will be now 150 when the below site is updated.

Most of them were shot or assaulted.

Check this site out :

www.odmp.org...

Kindest regards

Lags

originally posted by: Lagomorphe

originally posted by: DigginFoTroof

I will just leave this with you Dig :

148 police officers killed in their line of duty in 2018 in the USA and this will be now 150 when the below site is updated.

Most of them were shot or assaulted.

Check this site out :

www.odmp.org...

Kindest regards

Lags

Thanks for the link. It's a tough stance to take to speak up for someone who does these things but from what I read, there was very little information given and NO MATTER how it happened, it is a tragedy. I think that site is great and more people need to see it. Whenever an officer is killed in the line of duty it gets near endless local coverage and sometimes massive amounts of national coverage.

But the problem is when "the shoe is on the other foot". Does the victim get the same amount of coverage (if it doesn't serve an agenda like supporting BLM or some other propaganda like movement)? Do those victims, like the 82 year old woman being held hostage at knife point at a church in LA, who was shot and killed by 6 officers from LAPD when they unloaded almost 40 rounds into a suspect only armed with a kitchen steak knife?

I see those 148 people on that page, but I'm wondering where the page is of the citizens who have been killed by officers due to their new rules of engagement let along the "perps" who were either unarmed, fleeing (armed or unarmed), or in the process of surrendering (laying down any possible weapon or perceived weapon), or killed because the officer "thought" they were armed, or because the officer was "in fear for their lives". How many of those who turned out to have a weapon, actually possessed that weapon before being killed (many reports claim no weapon present before officer searched slain victim).

When we put the flag at half staff for the innocent lives lost to those who are sworn to "serve and protect" the public/citizens, then I will see a state/nation that values the lives of their citizens and not just their enforcers, that they value the people who produce the goods and services that make this nation (and the officers jobs) possible. THEN we will have a nation that lives by the words on which it was founded, until then, IDK what we call what we live under, I'm sure some have some choice words for it.

originally posted by: Lagomorphe
ooohhh stop it.

No, thank you.

I explained why further up.

a reply to: Boadicea

Rationalize and make whatever pathetic excuses you want. It is what it is and the end result is the same.

You chose to disrespect the dead with your political baiting and taunting. You made it political when you made it political. I don't believe for a minute that you thought your taunts would preclude any such comments. Exactly the opposite. You knew it would provoke exactly those people.

Well report me to the moderation staff then if you feel that way instead of mini modding me.

End of discussion with you as far as I am concerned.

Have a nice day.

Lags

a reply to: Boadicea

originally posted by: Lagomorphe

originally posted by: DigginFoTroof
How can so many of you jump to conclusions about the "suspect" who was being served? How many times have we seen or heard stories where LE says they were fired at first, only for the opposite to be true - or stories like Ruby Ridge where the guy was set up and entraped by ATF b/c they didn't like the guy.

Just b/c the guy had overwhelming fire power doesn't mean that LE didn't do anything wrong. To call out the "victim" (I don't know what to call the guy who was being served the warrant... maybe "person of interest" or "person to be arrested"??) as the sole instigator of the incident before we hear the story seems callous. Maybe he had a family there and they did one of those "no knock" breach entries. I can see how something like that could lead to a blood bath if the man thought he had to protect his family or even himself.

This forum/site sure is a bit odd. people complain and moan about not having personal freedoms and when things happen where there isn't any clear information about what happened, why, or who initiated, it seems that LE gets the benefit of the doubt most of the time, when we have more threads than can be counted that say "never trust the police" and that the police can legally lie to you and they are trained to do so. Let's not even get started on all the dirty cops that have been busted recently planting evidence, drugs, etc or that cowboy captain down in Georgia that ordered his officer to kill the driver of the pickup truck pulling the trailer of lawncare equipment that was initiated from a simple traffic violation.

This is in no way to say that I'm happy anyone was hurt, not in the least, but the comments on here are pretty cold hearted when we don't even know what happened or who provoked what.

I will just leave this with you Dig :

148 police officers killed in their line of duty in 2018 in the USA and this will be now 150 when the below site is updated.

Most of them were shot or assaulted.

Check this site out :

www.odmp.org...

Kindest regards

Lags

In regards to why, I think it has A LOT to do with the differences between peace officers and law enforcers. The modern day cop is outfitted with military grade weapons, equipment and tactics and it somehow a mystery why this occurs.

There used to be peace officers who worked IN the community, not ON the community.

You might argue that the public and crime has become worse since those days,..... but nowhere near as bad enough to justify transforming cops into 'operators'.

So the laws aren't enough apparently, so fear and intimidation is the new go to??

When did it become okay to have standing armies on US soil? Isn't it a bit naive to think that everyone is going to be apathetic and subservient?

The shooter was in his 70's. He's not the only one who can understand the difference between peace policing and 'policy conditioning'.

This WILL keep happening, which makes all this prayers and hero praising sh# seem so scripted and dull. Like, 'this is what your supposed to say everytime...'.

Perhaps the cops need some classes other than kick the door in, and flashbang 101.

Shooter was a Vietnam vet and competition shooter 😣
www.yahoo.com...

FLORENCE, S.C. (AP) — A Vietnam veteran who bragged online about maintaining his target-shooting skills was being held Thursday in the shooting of seven law enforcement officers, one of whom died, as deputies tried to serve a search warrant at his home. Authorities said Frederick Hopkins opened fire on the deputies from inside the home and held children hostage while shooting long-range at other officers who rushed to the suburban neighborhood. The sheriff department's armored personnel carrier was brought in to recover the wounded during Wednesday's two-hour standoff, and the shooter finally released the children as he was taken into custody, authorities sa

To the special ones complaining about the militarized police chew on this little piece...

Boone credited his department's military equipment for enabling them to pull the wounded from the field of fire. "Thanks to our MRAP, armored personnel carrier, we made sure all the officers that were shot were protected and brought for medical attention," he said.

a reply to: BigDave-AR

The question is WHY do cops need a MRAP in the first place? Because of situations like this??

Is there a proliferation of automatic weapons?
Are civilians better at assault these days?

There's absolutely no need to militarize the police as this very scenario shows.

Equipment and mentality escalated this far beyond what was required.

a reply to: EternalShadow

Equipment and mentality escalated this far beyond what was required.

How is that?

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: EternalShadow

Equipment and mentality escalated this far beyond what was required.

How is that?

When you walk the walk you usually talk the talk.

Having been given equipment and training reserved for the military only, these cops are now empowered and feel emboldened to stick their jump boots down your throat. Gone are the days of effective and reciprocal policing.

Hell, cops aren't even obligated to protect you, but let yourself not come to a complete stop...oh man....look out!

And yet they are held as 'heroic'??

Like I said, loss of life sucks, but let's keep it real.

a reply to: EternalShadow

That's all pretty abstract and irrelevant, to be honest. None of it applies to this situation. That cop wasn't murdered because his agency has an MRAP. I don't think any officer answers a shots fired call, an officer down call, a signal 13, a 10-13, a 10-33, or any other emergency assistance call and thinks "well my agency has an MRAP so I can just go big-dick this call."

Equipment and tactics evolve along with society. Cops carried revolvers, up until the Miami shoot-out definitively demonstrated that revolvers are inferior guns in a gunfight. Cops never carried rifles, up until North Hollywood definitively demonstrated that handguns and shotguns are inferior when faced with an assailant that has a rifle and the distance to use it. Cops always set up a perimeter and contained a situation until SWAT arrived, right up until Columbine definitively demonstrated the need for officers to be trained to immediately interdict an active shooter.

The list goes on and on. No, patrol officers don't need up-armored Humvees and MRAPs. Armored vehicles do, as was demonstrated here, provide a means to rescue people from a hot zone.

originally posted by: DigginFoTroof
How can so many of you jump to conclusions about the "suspect" who was being served? How many times have we seen or heard stories where LE says they were fired at first, only for the opposite to be true - or stories like Ruby Ridge where the guy was set up and entraped by ATF b/c they didn't like the guy.

Just b/c the guy had overwhelming fire power doesn't mean that LE didn't do anything wrong. To call out the "victim" (I don't know what to call the guy who was being served the warrant... maybe "person of interest" or "person to be arrested"??) as the sole instigator of the incident before we hear the story seems callous. Maybe he had a family there and they did one of those "no knock" breach entries. I can see how something like that could lead to a blood bath if the man thought he had to protect his family or even himself.

This forum/site sure is a bit odd. people complain and moan about not having personal freedoms and when things happen where there isn't any clear information about what happened, why, or who initiated, it seems that LE gets the benefit of the doubt most of the time, when we have more threads than can be counted that say "never trust the police" and that the police can legally lie to you and they are trained to do so. Let's not even get started on all the dirty cops that have been busted recently planting evidence, drugs, etc or that cowboy captain down in Georgia that ordered his officer to kill the driver of the pickup truck pulling the trailer of lawncare equipment that was initiated from a simple traffic violation.

This is in no way to say that I'm happy anyone was hurt, not in the least, but the comments on here are pretty cold hearted when we don't even know what happened or who provoked what.

Honestly the "victim" line above is one of the most ridiculous statements I have ever seen here.
Lemme see if i get this right..Kills 1 cop, shoots 6 others and you are struggling to find a name for him>?

originally posted by: EternalShadow
a reply to: BigDave-AR

The question is WHY do cops need a MRAP in the first place? Because of situations like this??

Is there a proliferation of automatic weapons?
Are civilians better at assault these days?

There's absolutely no need to militarize the police as this very scenario shows.

Equipment and mentality escalated this far beyond what was required.

Well you certainly have that backasswards.

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: EternalShadow

That's all pretty abstract and irrelevant, to be honest. None of it applies to this situation. That cop wasn't murdered because his agency has an MRAP. I don't think any officer answers a shots fired call, an officer down call, a signal 13, a 10-13, a 10-33, or any other emergency assistance call and thinks "well my agency has an MRAP so I can just go big-dick this call."

Equipment and tactics evolve along with society. Cops carried revolvers, up until the Miami shoot-out definitively demonstrated that revolvers are inferior guns in a gunfight. Cops never carried rifles, up until North Hollywood definitively demonstrated that handguns and shotguns are inferior when faced with an assailant that has a rifle and the distance to use it. Cops always set up a perimeter and contained a situation until SWAT arrived, right up until Columbine definitively demonstrated the need for officers to be trained to immediately interdict an active shooter.

The list goes on and on. No, patrol officers don't need up-armored Humvees and MRAPs. Armored vehicles do, as was demonstrated here, provide a means to rescue people from a hot zone.

That cop was murdered because of the MRAP.

Now hang on a minute and let me explain.

Do you honestly believe the police agencies nationwide upgrading their equipment and tactics militarily would not garner a more aggressive response by the citizens they train to 'dominate'?

Are police who look and act like soldiers supposed to make one feel all warm and fuzzy?

No. They are not approachable. They are not keeping the peace or even promoting it. Their image is that of a soldier of war in a supposed war zone.

Listen to your own terminology, either you're a cop, ex-military or very well conditioned and acceptive of this.

Your last line of your response:

The list goes on and on. No, patrol officers don't need up-armored Humvees and MRAPs. Armored vehicles do, as was demonstrated here, provide a means to rescue people from a hot zone.

"Hot zone"??? Really? This isn't the middle east, this is America...WITH CIVILIANS not combat insurgents!!

Because of a few high profile shootouts, the WHOLE nation has been militarized and every person is considered an enemy combatant until 'cleared'.
Just as much as the police felt they needed to go this route, so too do the citizens feel a need to confront this ever growing oppressive agenda.

Therefore, you will have skirmishes.

Nothing heroic about it at all.

a reply to: BigDave-AR

I'll take that under consideration, but most likely from what I've seen, I'm not far from the truth.

Shame some folks can't see through the BS. If they could, situations like this may become less frequent, because it isn't going away, ever.

Problem is, there's misplaced hope that it will.

There's not enough prayers, speeches or memorials to make a dent.

You'll see.....its called reality.

a reply to: EternalShadow

That cop was murdered because of the MRAP.

We don't know why Hopkins chose to murder one cop and try to kill a bunch of others. I say "we," but evidently you have information as to his motives the rest of us haven't seen.

Do you honestly believe the police agencies nationwide upgrading their equipment and tactics militarily would not garner a more aggressive response by the citizens they train to 'dominate'?

I honestly believe the change in police tactics and training is directly tied to events that have happened to cause tactics and training to change. I've never once claimed that there are no cops who try to Rambo their way through a career. That type of cop has always existed, regardless of whatever the training and tactics were at any point in history.

No. They are not approachable.

And yet people keep showing up to shop-with-a-cop events, coffee with a cop events, block party events, etc.

Listen to your own terminology, either you're a cop, ex-military or very well conditioned and acceptive of this.

I've never hidden who I am on this site. If you're unaware, that's your problem.

"Hot zone"??? Really? This isn't the middle east, this is America...WITH CIVILIANS not combat insurgents!!

Yea a hot zone is the immediate area around an active shooter. EMS, who are not law enforcement, use it to differentiate between an area they can't enter and a warm zone, which is an area they can enter. Furthermore, a gunfight is by definition "combat" so...getting all worked up about a combat term being used in a combat situation is pretty silly.

Because of a few high profile shootouts

Yea, generally speaking when fatal encounters things change.

the WHOLE nation has been militarized and every person is considered an enemy combatant until 'cleared'

Not really.

Nothing heroic about it at all.

Running towards gunfire in an effort to save lives is heroic, whether one has a badge or not. Just because you have a chubby for anybody with a badge doesn't change that.

Trouble is......last year we here at ATS had the thread showing the South Carolina Leo mob at the front door with no knock

A camera in the doorbell got the video....they were not wearing badges or insignia...no markings at all so