Off-duty cop gets into an accident, shoots and kills other driver.

BCSO: Man dead in shooting involving off-duty Bexar Co. deputy on Loop 1604.

Authorities said the off-duty deputy was believed to be involved in a minor crash, and he and a man in the other vehicle pulled over.

There was an argument, and at some point, the deputy apparently felt threatened and fired multiple shots at the driver.

That man died on the scene.

Please, PLEASE let there be a video of this incident. I say incident, what I really want to say is murder.

I'm almost at a loss for words.

The cop allegedly felt threatened. How about the other side of the story? Well, we'll never get to hear that...

We, as a society, have to band together and put a stop to the new breed of criminal on the street: the police.

I know I'm going to get flamed for saying that but I'm sorry, this is a real problem

There are way too many cops, way too many rules and regulations. They have nothing to do except terrorize citizens and generate revenue.

Isn't San Antonio a hub for the Mexican Cartels?
Are we assuming that in Texas, where carrying a gun in your car is legal, that the shooting wasn't justified?
Does his job as a police officer somehow imply that he could not be a victim of road rage from the other driver, or somehow imply that he cannot defend himself when he isn't on the job?

Originally posted by Thorneblood
Isn't San Antonio a hub for the Mexican Cartels?
Are we assuming that in Texas, where carrying a gun in your car is legal, that the shooting wasn't justified?
Does his job as a police officer somehow imply that he could not be a victim of road rage from the other driver, or somehow imply that he cannot defend himself when he isn't on the job?

^^ This.

Before the anti Police war erupts, take a deep breath, and THINK. For yourself. Look at all the possible factors the surroundings on that road could add to the equation. The driver, the Officer, the crash.... it all adds to us knowing so little, that to run off on a rant is unacceptable really. Certainly emotional subject, but lets get facts first.....

Just look at the trouble the President of the USA caused when he opened up his mouth with rhetoric and not facts in the Trayvon shooting.... 'If I had a Son' and all that crap.

Originally posted by Thorneblood
Isn't San Antonio a hub for the Mexican Cartels?
Are we assuming that in Texas, where carrying a gun in your car is legal, that the shooting wasn't justified?
Does his job as a police officer somehow imply that he could not be a victim of road rage from the other driver, or somehow imply that he cannot defend himself when he isn't on the job?

^^ This.

Before the anti Police war erupts, take a deep breath, and THINK. For yourself. Look at all the possible factors the surroundings on that road could add to the equation. The driver, the Officer, the crash.... it all adds to us knowing so little, that to run off on a rant is unacceptable really. Certainly emotional subject, but lets get facts first.....

Just look at the trouble the President of the USA caused when he opened up his mouth with rhetoric and not facts in the Trayvon shooting.... 'If I had a Son' and all that crap.

When I feel threatened, I confront the guy and if it gets to fisty cuffs then lets do this, but once it gets to the point where I'm either laid our or hes laid out, that's when it stops. The better man won and both persons anger is subdued. You bring guns into this situation . . . Somebody is going to loose their life - This is a situation in america because they have guns, but that aint bad, I aint bringing this into a gun debate. The problem is that a big majority of police instantly think I AM THE LAW - and instantaneously reach for their firearm, because they have been conditioned with that behavior.

Police need to know that a firearm is the last resort, and if you have used your weapon in the wrong situation, you're going to serve even #ing longer than a normal civilian because you have been trained and are privileged to be issued a weapon to protect us, not to be a threat.

reply to post by gladtobehere


Right you are... But lets clarify... They aren't the Police anymore. They're Para-Military-cops that feel that NO ONE will dis-respect them period... Or they will lose control on your ass!!!

You will comply... Or else!

reply to post by Thorneblood


According to the story he "apparently felt threatened".. The verbiage doesn't mention any imminent danger, or an attack or anything.

This off duty officer had just got off of a night job as a security guard, so why is it not possible that his judgement was off? He could have very well caused the accident, and just been in an overall bad mood.

I do think the fact that he's a police officer does play a significant role because as I see it they are some of the jumpiest, scared, paranoid bastards on the streets, and are armed. A lot of them have served in the military and in the modern age that doesn't add to your case either thanks to PTSD...

Many possibilities but I don't like cops anyway..

tracehd1
You will comply... Or else!

That^^^ is what its all about, thats why the cops are protected in these MURDER cases.
All citizens MUST live in fear....or else!

We need to start showing some backbone and making it known to the police that this behavior is unacceptable.

Apple however is releasing a program that allows police to shut off your cell phones recording capability. Apple claims that it was created to prevent people recording concerts and movies but if the police know that they are not recorded... well if you think they are out of control now just wait until they can shut off your ability to record their brutality.

The reason he said he felt threatened is this a policy term. If an officer, in the line of duty that is, feels threatened ,he can kill who he likes and the internal policy says all is cool.

The interesting thing about this is, if this guy is NOT "on duty" then does that policy apply? If a soldier has the right to kill anyone that makes him feel uncomfortable in Iraq, does he have the right to do so in Texas during a traffic accident?

So, is this guy protected by policy and the union for actions that have nothing to do with his job? I'd say no, but I'd be willing to bet the world says yes. Had the opening line said, "man shoots and kills in traffic accident..." we'd have no story.

"I'm a policeman" will be his entire defense, and one has to wonder, is that a defense? Is your job a moral get out of jail free card? If he arrived at the scene of an accident as a policeman could he have shot the drivers dead?

n00bUK
When I feel threatened, I confront the guy and if it gets to fisty cuffs then lets do this, but once it gets to the point where I'm either laid our or hes laid out, that's when it stops. The better man won and both persons anger is subdued. You bring guns into this situation . . . Somebody is going to loose their life - This is a situation in america because they have guns, but that aint bad, I aint bringing this into a gun debate. The problem is that a big majority of police instantly think I AM THE LAW - and instantaneously reach for their firearm, because they have been conditioned with that behavior.

Police need to know that a firearm is the last resort, and if you have used your weapon in the wrong situation, you're going to serve even #ing longer than a normal civilian because you have been trained and are privileged to be issued a weapon to protect us, not to be a threat.

If you start kicking my butt I will most likely pull my gun and if you try to continue you will most likely get shot.

With that said, one would think just pulling the gun would be enough deterrent for the other person to stop. In the case of this Cop he should be in better control to determine when to pull the trigger, but without knowing the facts, the one negative side is that Cops have this "how dare you threaten me in anyway attitude" that while on duty they go to extremes quickly in reaction to the least bit of resistance.

I'm thinking that a cop could easily live this attitude all the time well into his off duty too, and in this case could easily over react as if he was on official duty and dictating the situation in an official status.

reply to post by gladtobehere


I'm having a very hard time picking sides here. I don't think I could pick one morally, because there just isn't enough information.

Was the other man trying to harm the cop? Did he have some kind of weapon?
Was shooting and killing the man the cop's only option?

Too many questions here...
I will wait until more information comes to the surface.