A really ugly shooting from Philly...

[Jim March]

http://www.philly.com/philly/news/l...y_off-duty_officer_is_in_an_induced_coma.html

Short form: a guy is transporting an unloaded handgun into his house from his car and then back out. Off-duty cop from across the street freaks out, charges in, guy with the unloaded gun runs into his own house, cop kicks his door open and shoots him. Guy is fighting for his life right now. The guy who was shot has no criminal record, gun was 100% legal *and* unloaded. Cop is claiming the guy shot pointed it at the cop, witnesses disagree.

This is by far not the first weirdness of this sort coming out of Philly of late. Tom Gresham recently commented that police trainers are having cops shoot in practice on the "go command" of "GUN!".

This looks...bad.

 

[hardworker]

Hard to tell who's in the wrong here. If the dude pointed an empty gun at the cop he brought it on himself, if the cop was just being trigger happy than that family ought to get a nice settlement. Hopefully the dude pulls through.

 

[kx592]

Way I look at it, we cannot really comment because we do no know if it was pointed at the officer or not. One of those situations where you HAVE to be there.

 

[2guns]

We do not know all of the facts but there are numerous witnesses who say the cop's side of the story is untrue.

Having said that, I object to the following comment:

"if the cop was just being trigger happy than that family ought to get a nice settlement."

I have a very big problem with this line of thinking.
It implies a sort of cavalier indifference to the prospect of a wrongful shooting. When a cop shoots someone unjustifiably he is put on "administrative leave". He still collects his pay and will still collect a pension when he retires. On many cop talk forums it is a common joke that cops get a paid vacation when they shoot someone. I find it distasteful in the extreme. If the cop is found to be in the wrong he does not pay any of the "nice settlement". It is the taxpayers who pay! Would you care to tell the children of a deceased father that the world is right because even though they don't have a daddy anymore they got a "nice settlement"? Somehow I doubt they would be satisfied with that.

There is a pattern of behavior among some PPD officers wherein they routinely violate citizen's rights to carry firearms. There have been several recent incidents of unlawful behavior on the part of PPD which could have ended in this type of tragedy. The fact is that the mayor and city council as well as hierarchy of the PPD have an anti-gun agenda. The law is clear in PA that open carry is legal yet there are cops who disregard that fact. This incident may be the beginning of the end of that type of unlawful behavior on the part of some PPD officers. I hope so.

 

[Kreyzhorse]

If it happened as reported, if the officer opened the door and entered that person's home and shot the gentleman, there will be problems in Philly.

 

[LinuxHack3r]

What if a (legally) armed citizen was sitting in his lawn chair, and sees his neighbor carrying a shotgun from his house to his car (or vice versa). So at this point the citizen rushes across the street, and follows the neighbor who is now running back inside his house. The armed citizen shoots the man, who cannot defend himself because the shotgun was unloaded.

DO YOU THINK A NICE SETTLEMENT WOULD BE ALL THAT THE SHOTGUN GUY AND HIS FAMILY WOULD GET?

No, because the armed citizen would lose his CWL, and probably go to jail.

What about our cop friend here? Will he lose his badge? Will he go to jail? Chances are he'll get some vacation time with pay, and maybe a stern talking to.

If the guy pointed the gun at the cop he was in the wrong. He started the situation. But I'm giving him the benifit of the doubt, thinking he is smart enough to know that pointing any gun at any cop is a stupid idea. I suspect the root of the problem here is that police officers in big(ger cities than mine) are taught and trained that any civilian with a gun is a bad guy, and is up to no good.

Sent from my Droid using Tapatalk

 

[nathaniel]

I understand some guys take their job seriously but if there wasnt any threats or no hostages the guy shoulda been left alone. I dont know what philly law is but around here off duty means off duty as in they can assist on duty officers but they cannot make arrests or use their gun unless the threat is on them and the way it sounds the guy didnt do anything wrong. What Id like to know is if the off duty officer announced if he was an officer or if he just yelled "stop" as he was pulling a gun. I wont even go into him kicking down the guys door. Until I know if he announced that he was an officer cause the tables could be turned if he didnt and the home owner would be in prison instead of the officer being on "administrative leave". But like someone else said we need to know the TRUE story first.

 

[nathaniel]

If the guy pointed the gun at the cop he was in the wrong. He started the situation. But I'm giving him the benifit of the doubt, thinking he is smart enough to know that pointing any gun at any cop is a stupid idea.

The cop was off duty so (and not making excuses for the guy) did he accidently "sweep" the cop while he was in civilian clothes or was he in uniform? These are all things you have to take in account. I know most people try not to sweep anyone but sometimes it happens. And how do we know how he "pointed" the gun at the officer? Did he aim it at him or did he just sweep him? Or did he even do it at all? There are too many open ends on this story.

 

[Jim March]

"If he pointed a gun at a cop he deserved to die" - really? Let's see here. You're on your own property. You're not threatening anybody. Your gun is empty. Some guy acting like what you percieve as a lunatic rushes you with a drawn gun from across the street. In a last-ditch move you try and make him go away by pointing a loaded gun. Ooops, it doesn't work, you get shot.

Umm...yeah, whose fault is that?

The assailant!

Who's the assailant?

Think.

Who's the assailant?

Hint:

It ain't the guy that got shot.

 

[LinuxHack3r]

Until I know if he announced that he was an officer cause the tables could be turned if he didnt and the home owner would be in prison instead of the officer being on "administrative leave".

I understand the cop should have announced he was an officer, but I ask so what? Here a guy is, minding his own business on his property (supposedly), and a guy rushes him from across the street. After he guy locks himself in his own house, the guy outside yells that he is a cop. This normal looking guy busts himself into the house through the locked door, and he is wearing everyday casual clothes. This guy has a gun. He is pointing it at the civilian. I ask is the civilian even in the wrong if he shoots the guy defending his life and that of his family?

Anyone can yell "NYPD" and bust in a door. If for no apparant reason some guy without a uniform does so and then knocks down a door, I stand that the homeowner should have the right to defend himself.

ANYONE can say those 4 letters.

The point here is that officers have a SOP, and that is what is supposed to protect them from us. That is why their SOP is so important.
Sent from my Droid using Tapatalk

 

[spacecoast]

Sounds like a fair bit of stupid on both sides, but the cop seems to have gone way over the line pursuing the guy into his house to shoot him. Calling for (on duty) backup and getting some more info about the situation would have been a bit more reasonable IMHO.

Guns taken out of the house (in view of neighbors) to go to the range should be in some kind of case or bag, even if it's clearly a gun. At least that's how I do it.

 

[Uncle Buck]

Even if the truth lies somewhere between the two stories, since when does an officer leave a shooting victim?

Why did a friend drive him to the hospital instead of someone calling an ambulance?

I am in total agreement with Jim March on this one.

 

[youngunz4life]

I don't think the dept lawyers will be there for this officer as these actions seem to be not under the scope of his employment. he can't get upset and shoot someone because they run away from him. that is speculation but being offduty and charging into someone else's home isn't warranted. this officer let his emotions get the better of him. the gun was unloaded, so the victim pointing the firearm at the officer is extremely questionable at best. there was obviously some sort of verbal communication from the offduty cop and the victim. I doubt it was gun drawn, commanding voice stating to drop the weapon and I'm a cop. I can wonder about some of the conversation they had with the street in between them. try to be optimistic: call for backup and have a buddy with you. this article is very troubling but that's why there is a process. this is just an article, much more sifting is needed. I don't think anyone wants this man to die...

 

[nathaniel]

LinuxHack3r: your not getting what Im saying. Im saying if the officer didnt announce he was an officer(ie. he didnt say freeze NYPD, AND show a badge) the homeowner could have easily shot the off duty officer not knowing he was an officer and he would be thrown in jail as the "bad guy" even though he didnt know he was an officer. I can tell you if I was the homeowner and some crazy guy came running after me with a gun I would have done the same thing, ran inside and put cover between me and the madman untill I could properly defend myself( ie load the gun in my hand or get a different gun). So like I said if he didnt announce he was an officer how does the homeowner know that he actually was an officer? And if he would have shot the off duty officer he would be labled as a cop killer and thrown in jail, even though the officer never annouced himself as such.

 

[BlueTrain]

Do I have this right? These two men are neighbors living across the street from one another?

 

[lawnboy]

Wow! What a mess.

This is precisely why I transport my guns either in:

• CC mode
• in a case
• in my range bag

I don't HAVE to do this. But I know the area I live in has a high percentage of gun hating busybodies. Even though OC legal.

Pretty sad.

 

[Mike Irwin]

Because threads like this can VERY quickly flash over into acrimonious exchanges between members, I'm going to go ahead and issue a warning right now.

Keep it civil.

If anyone doesn't know exactly what I'm asking, PM me.

 

[RimfireChris]

I'm sorry, and no disrespect to LEOs out there, but isn't the behavior of the officer a bit...odd? I mean, I realize in some locales cops are required to respond to any crime, even when off duty, but, what was the crime here? And further more, would you bust down someone's door with your off duty piece to go after a "dangerous" ,man with a gun or given that no one had been threatened yet, wait for back up? I hope some of our LE members join in here, because from where I sit, the officers behavior seems screwy at best.

 

[GoOfY-FoOt]

Do I have this right? These two men are neighbors living across the street from one another?

According to the story, the cop's relative was moving in, across the street from the victim, and the cop was helping him move in.

The story itself, is poorly written, though. It is hard enough, attempting to establish a timeline, based on the author's jumping around, and it is nearly impossible to infer any probabilities from it, either.

Although, the most interesting part, was the IAB statement that they take off-duty shootings, "very, very seriously."

 

[glockcompact]

If I was transfering an unloaded firearm into my house from my vehicle and, what I percieve as a nut or BG, comes charging at me, I may very well point my unloaded firearm anyway. But in reality since I have a CCW when I am transferring weapons (unloaded) I'm always loaded up with a sidearm. This is too bad. Very unfortunate for both parties. I don't like to advertise my weapons when transporting them to and from my vehicle but I don't necassarily think it's wrong either. I just don't think it's very smart.