EDITOR NOTE–With that we are done! The suspect is dead and the details will play out in the national media. We gave folks their say. COMMENTS CLOSED. Subsequent comments were just blanket “cop bashing” and were not posted.

I feel bad for the lady who lost her cabin and everything in it, but collateral damage is the price we pay for freedom.

When people report hearing LE say over their radios, “Hold until we start mop up with fire.” “Still not ready for fire. There’s a lot of smoldering.” “More ammo going off.” “Fire doing quite well. I’m going to let it go.” It raises alot of questions. What would “Hold until we start mop up with fire” mean? Kind of a funny way of saying, keep the fire dept back until we mop up “IE secure” the situation. Fire doing quite well, I’m going to let it go. There is just something not right about these statements.

Be gentle your use of the term unconstitutional will be an affront to Josh and the rest of LE who read this page. They have a supreme court opinion that says they are right no matter what anyone or anything else says. The constitution be damned.

You said “There is an unholy alliance between cops, prosecutors, judges, and the federal justice department which is conspiring to trample the civil rights of people in America… and it all starts with this logic of WHAT THE COP PERCIEVES IN THE MOMENT IS THE MESSURING STICK OF RIGHT VS. WRONG.
You are exactly right. If a citizen goes to court they are judged after the fact as to whether or not their actions were reasonable and prudent. It seems to be a given, in some circles, that LE will act correctly in all situations, although the evidence shows otherwise. I was taught in a BSU Criminal Justice class (Intro to Policing) taught by a BPD Detective that courts will not examine a cops actions in the same way. His words were to the effect of…the courts will not play arm chair quarter back and decide if the actions in the heat of the moment were correct or not. Sounds real close to what you put in all caps in your post. I still have my notes from class. I wonder why the double standard?

I have said before and I will say again, cops have a tuff job (I have done it as a volunteer). Most people do not like or trust them and that makes it harder. The one thing they do need to remember is most of the reasons people do not like or trust them they have brought on themselves. Feeling like they should not be held to the same standards as regular citizens will drive a bigger and bigger wedge between them and those they are “supposed” to serve.

This page is not big enough to handle the answer to that question. You will have to narrow your scope ALOT. In all seriousness you hit it in the head it is people that cause 90% of our problems. The current debate is a classic example Josh believes it is right to shoot a fleeing felon down because of what he “might do in the future” while he is correct from a legal stand point from a moral stand point his argument is ludicrous.

WHAT THE COP PERCIEVES IN THE MOMENT IS THE MESSURING STICK OF RIGHT VS. WRONG?

I think your statement is correct – “My argument only applies to the statement made by David that shooting an escaping, known murderer is an affront to our legal system. I have shown the laws and Supreme Court case law backing my assertion that it is not.”

The problem Josh is the unconstitutional leap which is exploiting the laws/findings you outline: Cops, cop unions, and cop lawyers are too often claiming that cops perceived they faced the scenario you outline… Therefore it’s lawful that they proceeded with a violent attack on someone… even if in the aftermath it is determined to be a wrongful/mistaken/overreaction type police battery and violation of civil rights.

There is an unholy alliance between cops, prosecutors, judges, and the federal justice department which is conspiring to trample the civil rights of people in America… and it all starts with this logic of WHAT THE COP PERCIEVES IN THE MOMENT IS THE MESSURING STICK OF RIGHT VS. WRONG. This unconstitutional logic is the result of the American people failing to control the government… and government officials violating their oath of office. This loophole is being exploited by the thuggery mentality which is so prevalent in American police departments. I’ve even seen police reality TV praising the efficiency of the Russian Secret Police(KGB). Police departments in this country will continue to grow more powerful and unruly if they are not externally restricted by the public.

There is hope: The problem police have in the long-term is this: The base of support for bad police behavior is the American middle-class core. This group is only supportive because it rarely has police contact, sees only the sanitized version of last night’s activities on the TV, and has an out-of-site-out-of-mind attitude about everything. However, two things are happening the past few years. 1) The police have expanded their target population to include some in this group. 2) This group is now able to see the facts with their own eyes via the internet. As a result many upstanding Americans are teaching their children not to trust or support the police due to the corruption which even many “good cops” refuse to change. Even the President of the United States, due to his personal experiences has substantial distrust of cops.

Josh, just because the common interpretation of the law says you can… it does not mean that you should. Legally correct can still be an abysmal failure of oath and duty.

It probably wouldn’t be a smart move to make that call. I can just imagine the fire storm a simple ligitimate question would cause in light of the current california situation.

Eastern I have to ask this, what are you talking about?

Like Rodney King? Has that ever happened again?

Let’s keep in mind this is a case that broke into the media.
What doesn’t break into the media?