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

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was in the College Park Ikea a few months ago and a pretty large man aggressively rushed towards me. I stopped walking immediately and turned to face him. He stopped maybe 3 feet away from me and just stared at me, with his fists clenched. You know what I did? I assessed the situation, realized he was with a group of people, and a woman was coming over to get him. He clearly had some sort of intellectual disability, so I just stepped away from him and let the woman guide him away.

These cops surely have much more training in assessing situations than I do. If I can diffuse a situation in Ikea, surely these cops can diffuse situations as well before they turn deadly. Police are way too eager to arbitrarily impose the death penalty on people who are just out in public going about their lives, and it must stop.

Well, that's great, but him being with a group of people was actually no guarantee that he wasn't going to attack you. You didn't come through this unscathed due to your good judgment. You got lucky.

The cop in Costco and his child were seemingly unscathed, so the "attacker" couldn't have been too violent.

You're not required to permit an attacker to inflict any harm on you before you defend yourself. Try again.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was in the College Park Ikea a few months ago and a pretty large man aggressively rushed towards me. I stopped walking immediately and turned to face him. He stopped maybe 3 feet away from me and just stared at me, with his fists clenched. You know what I did? I assessed the situation, realized he was with a group of people, and a woman was coming over to get him. He clearly had some sort of intellectual disability, so I just stepped away from him and let the woman guide him away.

These cops surely have much more training in assessing situations than I do. If I can diffuse a situation in Ikea, surely these cops can diffuse situations as well before they turn deadly. Police are way too eager to arbitrarily impose the death penalty on people who are just out in public going about their lives, and it must stop.

Well, that's great, but him being with a group of people was actually no guarantee that he wasn't going to attack you. You didn't come through this unscathed due to your good judgment. You got lucky.

The cop in Costco and his child were seemingly unscathed, so the "attacker" couldn't have been too violent.

You're not required to permit an attacker to inflict any harm on you before you defend yourself. Try again.

And you don't go about defending yourself by shooting someone. If someone punched you, you punch him back, not shoot him dead,.Trigger happy cop.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was in the College Park Ikea a few months ago and a pretty large man aggressively rushed towards me. I stopped walking immediately and turned to face him. He stopped maybe 3 feet away from me and just stared at me, with his fists clenched. You know what I did? I assessed the situation, realized he was with a group of people, and a woman was coming over to get him. He clearly had some sort of intellectual disability, so I just stepped away from him and let the woman guide him away.

These cops surely have much more training in assessing situations than I do. If I can diffuse a situation in Ikea, surely these cops can diffuse situations as well before they turn deadly. Police are way too eager to arbitrarily impose the death penalty on people who are just out in public going about their lives, and it must stop.

Well, that's great, but him being with a group of people was actually no guarantee that he wasn't going to attack you. You didn't come through this unscathed due to your good judgment. You got lucky.

The cop in Costco and his child were seemingly unscathed, so the "attacker" couldn't have been too violent.

You're not required to permit an attacker to inflict any harm on you before you defend yourself. Try again.

You're not permitted to execute an unarmed man in Costco. Try again.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was in the College Park Ikea a few months ago and a pretty large man aggressively rushed towards me. I stopped walking immediately and turned to face him. He stopped maybe 3 feet away from me and just stared at me, with his fists clenched. You know what I did? I assessed the situation, realized he was with a group of people, and a woman was coming over to get him. He clearly had some sort of intellectual disability, so I just stepped away from him and let the woman guide him away.

These cops surely have much more training in assessing situations than I do. If I can diffuse a situation in Ikea, surely these cops can diffuse situations as well before they turn deadly. Police are way too eager to arbitrarily impose the death penalty on people who are just out in public going about their lives, and it must stop.

Well, that's great, but him being with a group of people was actually no guarantee that he wasn't going to attack you. You didn't come through this unscathed due to your good judgment. You got lucky.

The cop in Costco and his child were seemingly unscathed, so the "attacker" couldn't have been too violent.

You're not required to permit an attacker to inflict any harm on you before you defend yourself. Try again.

And you don't go about defending yourself by shooting someone. If someone punched you, you punch him back, not shoot him dead,.Trigger happy cop.

You aren't a lawyer. There is no requirement to respond with equal force. The law allows for you to defend yourself. If you can make the argument that this was an appropriate response it would be legal. You need to consider far more than punching.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was in the College Park Ikea a few months ago and a pretty large man aggressively rushed towards me. I stopped walking immediately and turned to face him. He stopped maybe 3 feet away from me and just stared at me, with his fists clenched. You know what I did? I assessed the situation, realized he was with a group of people, and a woman was coming over to get him. He clearly had some sort of intellectual disability, so I just stepped away from him and let the woman guide him away.

These cops surely have much more training in assessing situations than I do. If I can diffuse a situation in Ikea, surely these cops can diffuse situations as well before they turn deadly. Police are way too eager to arbitrarily impose the death penalty on people who are just out in public going about their lives, and it must stop.

Well, that's great, but him being with a group of people was actually no guarantee that he wasn't going to attack you. You didn't come through this unscathed due to your good judgment. You got lucky.

The cop in Costco and his child were seemingly unscathed, so the "attacker" couldn't have been too violent.

You're not required to permit an attacker to inflict any harm on you before you defend yourself. Try again.

You're not permitted to execute an unarmed man in Costco. Try again.

Can you cite the code section for this?

[Anonymous]

Police use of force is judged by a "reasonable officer" standard, not a "reasonable person" standard, the assumption being that police should have a lower standard because some of them sometimes have to make "split second" decisions, and they somehow ostensibly possess arcane knowledge not available to mere ordinary people. Expect this to be in full play here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was in the College Park Ikea a few months ago and a pretty large man aggressively rushed towards me. I stopped walking immediately and turned to face him. He stopped maybe 3 feet away from me and just stared at me, with his fists clenched. You know what I did? I assessed the situation, realized he was with a group of people, and a woman was coming over to get him. He clearly had some sort of intellectual disability, so I just stepped away from him and let the woman guide him away.

These cops surely have much more training in assessing situations than I do. If I can diffuse a situation in Ikea, surely these cops can diffuse situations as well before they turn deadly. Police are way too eager to arbitrarily impose the death penalty on people who are just out in public going about their lives, and it must stop.

Well, that's great, but him being with a group of people was actually no guarantee that he wasn't going to attack you. You didn't come through this unscathed due to your good judgment. You got lucky.

The cop in Costco and his child were seemingly unscathed, so the "attacker" couldn't have been too violent.

You're not required to permit an attacker to inflict any harm on you before you defend yourself. Try again.

And you don't go about defending yourself by shooting someone. If someone punched you, you punch him back, not shoot him dead,.Trigger happy cop.

You aren't a lawyer. There is no requirement to respond with equal force. The law allows for you to defend yourself. If you can make the argument that this was an appropriate response it would be legal. You need to consider far more than punching.

there is no "stand your ground" in California. In California you have to retreat, and you can only show the affirmative defense if you have a "reasonable belief that he or someone else was in imminent danger of being killed or suffering great bodily injury”. You can't use any more force than necessary.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why was he carrying his gun into Costco if he’s off duty and just shopping with his child?

Same reason firefighters keep fire extinguishers in their cars and EMTs carry first aid kids and CPR masks. To do that they need to do in an emergency.
I am not condoning this shooting as I dont know the situation, just answering your question.

Right. In case he needs to shoot any scary people with special needs or their elderly caregivers. My neighbor is blind, deaf, and completely nonverbal, and sometimes he bumps into people in crowded places. He never apologizes either. I wonder if, when he bumps into the wrong off duty cop someday, he’ll shoot his guide dog too since he doesn’t have elderly parents with him to shoot.

We already know what would happen. Blind man bumped into a cop, got a beating and charged with aggravated assault.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/10/us/phoenix-police-shootings.html

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was in the College Park Ikea a few months ago and a pretty large man aggressively rushed towards me. I stopped walking immediately and turned to face him. He stopped maybe 3 feet away from me and just stared at me, with his fists clenched. You know what I did? I assessed the situation, realized he was with a group of people, and a woman was coming over to get him. He clearly had some sort of intellectual disability, so I just stepped away from him and let the woman guide him away.

These cops surely have much more training in assessing situations than I do. If I can diffuse a situation in Ikea, surely these cops can diffuse situations as well before they turn deadly. Police are way too eager to arbitrarily impose the death penalty on people who are just out in public going about their lives, and it must stop.

If he had run up and aggressively attacked you...you would have not fought back, right?

Probably, but not with a deadly force. We are not living in the cave age anymore.

[Anonymous]

there is no "stand your ground" in California. In California you have to retreat, and you can only show the affirmative defense if you have a "reasonable belief that he or someone else was in imminent danger of being killed or suffering great bodily injury”. You can't use any more force than necessary

Police never have a duty to retreat. In fact, they are sworn not to retreat, but rather to enforce the law. Reasonable force standards still apply, but as noted, what is reasonable for a police officer may be different that for non-police.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

there is no "stand your ground" in California. In California you have to retreat, and you can only show the affirmative defense if you have a "reasonable belief that he or someone else was in imminent danger of being killed or suffering great bodily injury”. You can't use any more force than necessary

Police never have a duty to retreat. In fact, they are sworn not to retreat, but rather to enforce the law. Reasonable force standards still apply, but as noted, what is reasonable for a police officer may be different that for non-police.

An off duty cop shooting 3 shoppers in a Costco is not enforcing the law. Step away from the LSD.

[Anonymous]

Why does an off-duty cop wear a gun?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why does an off-duty cop wear a gun?

The purported reason is that they technically are "always on duty" to intervene in a crime they witness or to assist another officer. Practically, many police fear running into people they may have had on duty contact with. There also are some who view the gun as a badge of office and want it around to bolster their ego.

[Anonymous]

An duty cop shooting 3 shoppers in a Costco is not enforcing the law. Step away from the LSD.

PP cited a duty to retreat in CA. Response addressed lack of duty to retreat on part of police. Then you chime in with your witty personal insult.

Rest assured that the officer in question is going to assert that he was acting legally to defend himself, his child and others when he was brutally blindsided without provocation. You don't have to like the information provided but attacking the messenger on a subject you know nothing about hardly raises the tenor of the discussion.

The fact is that there should not be special privileges for police. They should be judged by more rigorous standards, not less rigorous. They should be expected to act reasonably and not be able to escalate situations in the guise of merely carrying out the law. Not relevant here, but vehicle pursuits are a perfect example. Police pursue a stolen vehicle at high speed. A property crime, but they endanger everyone they pass.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am sure he had his reasons to shoot.

Only someone who is incredibly stupid would believe this.

NP. I believe only someone who is incredibly stupid would rush to judgement on case like this when all the facts are not known.

What is in dispute? That an unarmed person was shot?

Dp- unless you were there and witnessed this event, I think it’s better to STFU and wait until the facts come out. Be rational, not emotional.

Rational like you? Nah, I prefer to be mentally stable.