Costco shooter was a cop... and all 3 victims were unarmed

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

what we DO know is that nobody would be dead or in the ICU shot if he hadn't had a gun.

No, we absolutely do NOT know that. Who knows how long/how that man would have attacked the officer and his child? Who knows what other customers might have done to try and jump in and "help?"

Exactly. We don’t know what would have happened.

stop it. other countries with better gun laws have fewer gun deaths and lower homicide rates. no gun, nobody gets shot. situation gets de-escalated.

And Emmanuel Aranda didn't need a gun to inflict serious damage on a 5 year old innocent boy when he threw him off a 3 story balcony in the Mall of America. When someone with mental illness starts attacking an innocent child, I don't care about "de-escaulating" without a gun. I care about stopping the assault on the child. If using a gun gets the assault STOPPED with minimal damage (the only ones hurt in this situation were the perpetrator and his enablers) that is success.

This right here.

If indeed the cop was assaulted, then the man who was shot was the perpetrator and not an innocent victim.

It just depends on the specifics of the situation. Generally speaking, a fist fight should stay a fist fight. You better have a damn good reason for taking out your gun in that type of situation. Being a puzzy is not a good reason. Not that it is very relevant to this incident, but cops have become to dependent on tasers and freak out if they have to fight someone nowadays.

Would you want to get into a fist fight with a massive 32 year old man while holding your baby? All while two other people (his parents) AlSO come charging at you? Are there more of them? How about if you don't know if this massive man or any of his accomplices have weapons? How many other innocent people are also standing by that could possibly be hurt?
And you have the power to "de-escalate" the whole situation...with your gun. You're really telling me you're going to keep "fist fighting" this guy, and his parents, and who knows who else he has with him--while holding your baby in one arm?

First of all - YES I expect police officers to be trained in de-escalation. THAT IS THEIR JOB. Not to shoot every time they feel scared. I mean really, have some higher standards?

Second of all - you have to look at this on a society-wide level. It is NOT OK to live in a society where everyone is packing and shoots wildly in public places whenever they get into an altercation. This is the WHOLE REASON to have gun control: so the consequences of these kinds of incidents can be reduced.

NP. You can't deescalate someone attacking you. You have to beat their ass or taze them!

As far as shooting wildly, most cops miss most of their shots. It's not easy to put rounds on target, especially when you feel that your life is in danger. It sucks that innocent people get hit sometimes, but there is often no alternative.

I just find this post incredibly disgusting and scary. The police are supposed to "protect and serve." Not approach every situation with fear for their lives and armed to the teeth, focused on protecting themselves and then shrugging that "innocent people get hit sometimes, but there is often no alternative." What kind of absolute dystopia do you live in?

Please tell us your recommended tactic for stopping someone who is trying to kill you? How will you "deescalate"? Are you posting from your safe space in Bethesda?

I don't know -- but morally, it doesn't involve shooting innocent bystanders.

Another armchair quarterback who knows nothing about weapons or tactics. It takes a special kind of liberal nut to think that it's bad for cops to be armed to the teeth.

PP, if you are such a law enforcement expert, why don't you sign up for the force?

Please tell me that an emotional nut like you doesn’t actually have a gun. That’s a scary thought.

+1 I can't believe that someone could look at this situation with a disabled man dead, his parents in critical condition at the hospital, and a cop unharmed, and say that everything went correctly in this situation.

Who said that everything went correctly?

Initially I would say that it doesn't look good for the cop, but nobody knows what happened at this point.

The thread is going downhill because a cop hating old hen is making ignorant comments.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To the posters writing “massive” and “monstrous”, this guy is not Andre the Giant. Look at the photo with his parents. He was large, but not your Lenny from Of Mice and Men nightmares.

The media attention seeking cousin has described him as a "giant."

Did you look at the photo? He’s standing next to his parents. Unless they are extremely tall people like the dad is 6’4 or something, he was not a giant. I have 8th graders that are 6’2 in September and keep growing.

I assuming that is a VERY old photo. People here keep claiming that the parents are "elderly" and those people are no where near "elderly." The photo must be at least 20 years old. So if French was 11 in that photo, he had plenty of time to grow into a giant.

You would only assume that it was VERY old if you hadn't looked at it properly. French was 32 when he was shot and killed. He looks about that age in the picture to me. His mom has gray hair in the picture. If the parents had him at age 28, they would be 60 now. The AARP definition of elderly starts at 52.

No 52 year old considers themselves elderly. Are you 12?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Irrational trigger happy cop with gun vs. autistic teen? Why is this even a question?

If anyone is in a position to deescalate this situation, it should be the person with the gun. SHOULD BE.

What autistic teen? Kenneth French was 32 years old.

People with autism can also get violent

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

what we DO know is that nobody would be dead or in the ICU shot if he hadn't had a gun.

No, we absolutely do NOT know that. Who knows how long/how that man would have attacked the officer and his child? Who knows what other customers might have done to try and jump in and "help?"

Exactly. We don’t know what would have happened.

stop it. other countries with better gun laws have fewer gun deaths and lower homicide rates. no gun, nobody gets shot. situation gets de-escalated.

And Emmanuel Aranda didn't need a gun to inflict serious damage on a 5 year old innocent boy when he threw him off a 3 story balcony in the Mall of America. When someone with mental illness starts attacking an innocent child, I don't care about "de-escaulating" without a gun. I care about stopping the assault on the child. If using a gun gets the assault STOPPED with minimal damage (the only ones hurt in this situation were the perpetrator and his enablers) that is success.

This right here.

If indeed the cop was assaulted, then the man who was shot was the perpetrator and not an innocent victim.

It just depends on the specifics of the situation. Generally speaking, a fist fight should stay a fist fight. You better have a damn good reason for taking out your gun in that type of situation. Being a puzzy is not a good reason. Not that it is very relevant to this incident, but cops have become to dependent on tasers and freak out if they have to fight someone nowadays.

Would you want to get into a fist fight with a massive 32 year old man while holding your baby? All while two other people (his parents) AlSO come charging at you? Are there more of them? How about if you don't know if this massive man or any of his accomplices have weapons? How many other innocent people are also standing by that could possibly be hurt?
And you have the power to "de-escalate" the whole situation...with your gun. You're really telling me you're going to keep "fist fighting" this guy, and his parents, and who knows who else he has with him--while holding your baby in one arm?

First of all - YES I expect police officers to be trained in de-escalation. THAT IS THEIR JOB. Not to shoot every time they feel scared. I mean really, have some higher standards?

Second of all - you have to look at this on a society-wide level. It is NOT OK to live in a society where everyone is packing and shoots wildly in public places whenever they get into an altercation. This is the WHOLE REASON to have gun control: so the consequences of these kinds of incidents can be reduced.

NP. You can't deescalate someone attacking you. You have to beat their ass or taze them!

As far as shooting wildly, most cops miss most of their shots. It's not easy to put rounds on target, especially when you feel that your life is in danger. It sucks that innocent people get hit sometimes, but there is often no alternative.

I just find this post incredibly disgusting and scary. The police are supposed to "protect and serve." Not approach every situation with fear for their lives and armed to the teeth, focused on protecting themselves and then shrugging that "innocent people get hit sometimes, but there is often no alternative." What kind of absolute dystopia do you live in?

Please tell us your recommended tactic for stopping someone who is trying to kill you? How will you "deescalate"? Are you posting from your safe space in Bethesda?

I don't know -- but morally, it doesn't involve shooting innocent bystanders.

Another armchair quarterback who knows nothing about weapons or tactics. It takes a special kind of liberal nut to think that it's bad for cops to be armed to the teeth.

PP, if you are such a law enforcement expert, why don't you sign up for the force?

Please tell me that an emotional nut like you doesn’t actually have a gun. That’s a scary thought.

+1 I can't believe that someone could look at this situation with a disabled man dead, his parents in critical condition at the hospital, and a cop unharmed, and say that everything went correctly in this situation.

Who said that everything went correctly?

Initially I would say that it doesn't look good for the cop, but nobody knows what happened at this point.

The thread is going downhill because a cop hating old hen is making ignorant comments.

NP here. I'm generally very supportive of LEOs, but I think they will be hard pressed to show this was a justifiable shooting. It just doesn't make sense.

[Anonymous]

So according to the recent LA Times article, the officer is being identified as Salvador Sanchez.

So we've got a "gentle giant" WHITE man attacking a BROWN man and his baby, and many posters on this thread want to say that the racist officer shot a "disabled man" because of his brown skin.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To the posters writing “massive” and “monstrous”, this guy is not Andre the Giant. Look at the photo with his parents. He was large, but not your Lenny from Of Mice and Men nightmares.

The media attention seeking cousin has described him as a "giant."

Did you look at the photo? He’s standing next to his parents. Unless they are extremely tall people like the dad is 6’4 or something, he was not a giant. I have 8th graders that are 6’2 in September and keep growing.

I assuming that is a VERY old photo. People here keep claiming that the parents are "elderly" and those people are no where near "elderly." The photo must be at least 20 years old. So if French was 11 in that photo, he had plenty of time to grow into a giant.

You would only assume that it was VERY old if you hadn't looked at it properly. French was 32 when he was shot and killed. He looks about that age in the picture to me. His mom has gray hair in the picture. If the parents had him at age 28, they would be 60 now. The AARP definition of elderly starts at 52.

No 52 year old considers themselves elderly. Are you 12?

Nope, are you unable to read AARP's membership requirements? They start at age 50+, regardless of how youthful inside you may feel.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So according to the recent LA Times article, the officer is being identified as Salvador Sanchez.

So we've got a "gentle giant" WHITE man attacking a BROWN man and his baby, and many posters on this thread want to say that the racist officer shot a "disabled man" because of his brown skin.

What are you babbling about? No one even knew the race of the officer until now. But way to play the victim to defend the 100% innocent cop.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It looks like the LA Times is reporting that the man pushed the officer down somehow. I am trying to figure out how you draw a weapon and shoot 3 people while on the ground holding a child who was unhurt.

They're reporting that the officer was holding his 1 1/2 year old and feeding the child food samples when he was suddenly attacked by the man and knocked down, briefly going unconscious. He came to, drew his weapon and wound up shooting his assailant, along with the assailant's parents, in self defense. The attack was caught on Costco security cameras.

Another example of why guns should be banned. Your right to self defense does not permit you to shoot innocent bystanders.

An assailant who would slam a 1 1/2 year old child to the ground is very violent and scary - at least in that moment in time. I don't know what triggered the guy but he is the one who lashed out first and, unfortunately for him, he chose a guy who happened to be armed and could defend himself/his child.

I’m thinking that the disabled man wanted a food sample and reacted towards the man in his way. That is consistent with the lack of impulse control with autism

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So according to the recent LA Times article, the officer is being identified as Salvador Sanchez.

So we've got a "gentle giant" WHITE man attacking a BROWN man and his baby, and many posters on this thread want to say that the racist officer shot a "disabled man" because of his brown skin.

What are you babbling about? No one even knew the race of the officer until now. But way to play the victim to defend the 100% innocent cop.

Hmmm but apparently the skin color of the victim was relevant when it was presumed he had darker skin than the officer.

And I'm not "playing victim."

[Anonymous]

Red flag: cousin could not identify what was wrong with the guy, but knew enough about him to declare the officer wrong

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So according to the recent LA Times article, the officer is being identified as Salvador Sanchez.

So we've got a "gentle giant" WHITE man attacking a BROWN man and his baby, and many posters on this thread want to say that the racist officer shot a "disabled man" because of his brown skin.

What are you babbling about? No one even knew the race of the officer until now. But way to play the victim to defend the 100% innocent cop.

Leftist swiveling when the race card was first played and the leftists find out the officer is brown

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Red flag: cousin could not identify what was wrong with the guy, but knew enough about him to declare the officer wrong

Huh? Plenty of family members will know that cousin Jimmy is "off" in someway given that he's 32 and required care from his parents, even if they can't describe the exact medical diagnosis. But way to search for ways to throw shade at relatives who have just had a family member gunned down.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It looks like the LA Times is reporting that the man pushed the officer down somehow. I am trying to figure out how you draw a weapon and shoot 3 people while on the ground holding a child who was unhurt.

They're reporting that the officer was holding his 1 1/2 year old and feeding the child food samples when he was suddenly attacked by the man and knocked down, briefly going unconscious. He came to, drew his weapon and wound up shooting his assailant, along with the assailant's parents, in self defense. The attack was caught on Costco security cameras.

Another example of why guns should be banned. Your right to self defense does not permit you to shoot innocent bystanders.

An assailant who would slam a 1 1/2 year old child to the ground is very violent and scary - at least in that moment in time. I don't know what triggered the guy but he is the one who lashed out first and, unfortunately for him, he chose a guy who happened to be armed and could defend himself/his child.

I’m thinking that the disabled man wanted a food sample and reacted towards the man in his way. That is consistent with the lack of impulse control with autism

His disability doesn't change the fact that the guy slammed the officer onto the ground. The officer didn't know that guy from Adam, all he knew was that some big hulk of a guy was attacking him and his small child.

Hindsight is 20-20, of course and it is so easy to point the finger of blame at the cop for not handling the situation "right".

[Anonymous]

If you go to the perpetrators facebook page, there's some very interesting comments (made since the incident) as comments to the perpetrator's last (public) post. Someone named Jeremy Ma has interesting information, not sure how he knows it or if it's completely accurate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

+1 I can't believe that someone could look at this situation with a disabled man dead, his parents in critical condition at the hospital, and a cop unharmed, and say that everything went correctly in this situation.

If you are attacked and have a reasonable fear that your life is in danger, then "attacker ends up dead and you are unharmed" is precisely the desired and proper outcome.

No. Attacking someone without sufficient mental capacity means the cop basically killed someone who had the mental equivalent of a minor child. And the elderly parents of that child are in the hospital in critical condition. If you see this as "the proper outcome," I recommend counseling because you sound like a sociopath.

NP to this thread.

I don't know what exactly unfolded in Costco, but I don't know what bringing up the "gentle giant's" mental capacity has anything to do with this story. The cop may have gravely overreacted, but he's not psychic. This is not something he could have possibly known. The victim's mental capacity is completely irrelevant - all the cop knew, was he was dealing with a grown adult man.

Thank you. I mentioned this earlier - the guy wasn’t wearing a sign saying he was disabled, how was the officer to know? - but was ignored.