SuperJail Warden
Gone Forever
+640|3935
When it comes to these debates gun enthusiast like to pretend that guns don't have the capability to produce carnage faster and more efficiently than bladed weapons. They will pretend knives are equally as deadly as guns until they can find a story of a child offing a criminal with a gun. Then the gun is suddenly "the great equalizer, supreme to all weapons".

I have come to accept that no amount of carnage will ever be enough to convince gun owners that they wouldn't be able to John McClain a situation if they were there with their guns.
https://s.yimg.com/ny/api/res/1.2/hbxyiuw8qBUDk2V9qzct3Q--/YXBwaWQ9aGlnaGxhbmRlcjt3PTY0MDtoPTQ0MC44ODg4ODg4ODg4ODg5/https://media.zenfs.com/en-US/blogs/movietalk/bruce-willis-john-mcclane-20th-century-foxs-die-970431329.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/xsoGn9X.jpg
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5574|London, England

DesertFox- wrote:

I only saw that when some gun nuts were all self-congratulatory about the "good guy" stopping them. Sidebar: I know it's Texas, but what kind of church has multiple armed guards? However, people still died. Mitigating the effects of shooting sprees isn't preventing them. Is the free-dumb crowd just resigned that their best case scenario is to have public gunfights every now and then?

Disingenuous gun policy makes me think of the current approach to climate change from the same ilk. Delay, delay, delay ---- oh, it's past the critical point now. There's more guns than people, so anything that would've previous worked, won't. The planet's on track to cause all sorts of displacement and resource wars, but I'll be gone by then.
No, it's about deterrence. I lived in Texas. People don't have fights in the streets or mouth off to each other. It's legitimately a polite society because you don't know who is carrying concealed. Is that ideal? Hardly. Is it effective? Yes. You would think that this creates an environment of fear, but it's actually the opposite. People are more open because they don't have to be concerned with escalation.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
uziq
Member
+493|3668
i have friends who go on holiday to austin once every few years. there are never fights in the streets of texas? LOL

great idea, though. i only hope that one day i can live in a society where everyone is polite to one another because they are terrified of being shot in the face.

Last edited by uziq (2019-12-30 14:53:52)

uziq
Member
+493|3668
i don't know, you're the one evidently reading the daily mail every day and whipping yourself into an erotic frenzy over every news story involving black teenage gangs, muslims, and lesbian school teachers. why don't you tell me?
DesertFox-
The very model of a modern major general
+796|6900|United States of America

Jay wrote:

DesertFox- wrote:

I only saw that when some gun nuts were all self-congratulatory about the "good guy" stopping them. Sidebar: I know it's Texas, but what kind of church has multiple armed guards? However, people still died. Mitigating the effects of shooting sprees isn't preventing them. Is the free-dumb crowd just resigned that their best case scenario is to have public gunfights every now and then?

Disingenuous gun policy makes me think of the current approach to climate change from the same ilk. Delay, delay, delay ---- oh, it's past the critical point now. There's more guns than people, so anything that would've previous worked, won't. The planet's on track to cause all sorts of displacement and resource wars, but I'll be gone by then.
No, it's about deterrence. I lived in Texas. People don't have fights in the streets or mouth off to each other. It's legitimately a polite society because you don't know who is carrying concealed. Is that ideal? Hardly. Is it effective? Yes. You would think that this creates an environment of fear, but it's actually the opposite. People are more open because they don't have to be concerned with escalation.
The perverse incentive in such a scenario is that it also becomes incentivized for criminals to arm up and increase violence if they want to commit a crime. A fully armed populace probably would decrease nonviolent crime, but again, I wouldn't wish for a society a hair's breadth away from a shootout at any given time. Though, you did literally describe an environment where you have a fear of getting shot if you make someone too angry. It's like the Twilight Zone episode with the omnipotent child.

I have no qualms with wishing all these enablers experience gun violence on someone they love. The rest of us have to deal with the consequences of their actions; if only sometimes it happened to someone actually responsible.
SuperJail Warden
Gone Forever
+640|3935
There are better ways to combat violent crime besides arming every normal person. A base level of violent crime is still less traumatic for communities than dozens of people killed in a single incident.
https://i.imgur.com/xsoGn9X.jpg
uziq
Member
+493|3668

Dilbert_X wrote:

Might be better than living in fear of being stabbed and being unable to defend yourself.

How many stabbings in London this year?
also, not that it needs to be pointed out, but the number of terrorist incidents involving the public/bystanders is not exactly higher than in any other major world city and top target. you don't walk around london keeping to yourself for fear that someone will stick a knife in your chest, that's just not how it works. it's gang-related, which is a terrible phenomenon, but not quite the same state of affairs as a public being armed to the teeth in a mix of terrifying random violence and vigilantism.

last time i checked, people don't catch a stray knifing, either, simply by being in the wrong part of town or whilst sat inside their clapboard houses.

Last edited by uziq (2019-12-31 02:14:22)

unnamednewbie13
Moderator
+2,053|6987|PNW

Father and 9-year-old daughter are mistaken for deer, shot to death by fellow hunter
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/fa … h-n1110071
SuperJail Warden
Gone Forever
+640|3935
Sad story I guess. But it could have been avoided if they bought some meat from Walmart and played Call of Duty instead of trying to off some deer with families.
https://i.imgur.com/xsoGn9X.jpg
SuperJail Warden
Gone Forever
+640|3935
https://cbsnews2.cbsistatic.com/hub/i/r/2020/01/06/35327d37-266b-4be8-b025-721e7c7659e7/thumbnail/1200x630/d58778fea54c5a976aee5c4d9325ab82/trumpjr.jpg
Trump's son. The magazine has a Hillary Clinton in prison. The magazine is attached to a Crusader helmet and cross. It was also engraved with the "Crusader" and "Deus Vult".

Disgusting. A godless Protestant using Catholic iconography. The Protestants are just as awful as the Muslims.
https://i.imgur.com/xsoGn9X.jpg
War Man
Australians are hermaphrodites.
+563|6929|Purplicious Wisconsin

SuperJail Warden wrote:


Trump's son. The magazine has a Hillary Clinton in prison. The magazine is attached to a Crusader helmet and cross. It was also engraved with the "Crusader" and "Deus Vult".

Disgusting. A godless Protestant using Catholic iconography. The Protestants are just as awful as the Muslims.
Funny, I have a tendency to debate in my head whether Catholics or Muslims are more irritating

Last edited by War Man (2020-01-08 07:34:29)

The irony of guns, is that they can save lives.
RTHKI
mmmf mmmf mmmf
+1,741|6953|Oxferd Ohire
Why Catholics and Muslims specifically?
https://i.imgur.com/tMvdWFG.png
SuperJail Warden
Gone Forever
+640|3935
He is disappointed a priest wouldn't touch him since the child abuse scandal is mostly fake news.
https://i.imgur.com/xsoGn9X.jpg
unnamednewbie13
Moderator
+2,053|6987|PNW

War Man wrote:

Funny, I have a tendency to debate in my head whether Catholics or Muslims are more irritating
Slated for OCS and already bigoted against two religions.

Truly the future pride of our American military.
SuperJail Warden
Gone Forever
+640|3935
Thousands of people descended on Richmond, the capital of Virginia, on Monday to show support for the rights of gun owners as a push for gun control measures by that state’s newly empowered Democrats has inserted Virginia into a nationwide debate over gun violence and the Second Amendment.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/20/us/v … e=Homepage
https://static01.nyt.com/images/2020/01/20/us/20VIRGINIA-GUN-RALLY-promo/20VIRGINIA-GUN-RALLY-promo-superJumbo-v2.jpg?quality=90&auto=webp
Look at these fine urban commandos. It's a shame there isn't a Christian equivalent of a Jihad for them to go off to.
https://i.imgur.com/xsoGn9X.jpg
KEN-JENNINGS
I am all that is MOD!
+2,978|6847|949

LARPers. I wonder if those overalls are part of the standard costume? Or the chest plate that looks about 2 sizes too small.
uziq
Member
+493|3668
no doubt they can use all that gun practice at the range to defeat the government in glorious battle.
HollisHurlbut
Member
+51|6213

KEN-JENNINGS wrote:

LARPers. I wonder if those overalls are part of the standard costume? Or the chest plate that looks about 2 sizes too small.
The chest plate is probably an AR500 trauma plate or something similar.  As it is a hard plate, it offers greater protection against rifle rounds than the usual Kevlar soft body armor that people are more accustomed to seeing.  It is also quite a bit smaller that soft armor because it's a thick (about one inch), solid mass.  I usually see it used as an insert to be used on top of standard soft armor, but I've also seen it used as the sole piece of protection.

There's nothing unusual here with that armor.
HollisHurlbut
Member
+51|6213

SuperJail Warden wrote:

The cop in the Daniel Shaver case wasn't great at giving directions. But Daniel Shaver was pointing his pellet gun out of the window of his hotel while drunk with a woman who was not his wife. He didn't deserve to be killed. Be he totally brought it on himself.
Old post, I know.  Don't care.

That he was in his hotel room with two other people with whom he had been drinking and to whom he was not married is utterly irrelevant to any justification to use force.  In what way do you consider it relevant?  In what way is drinking with someone who is not your wife in a hotel room bringing your death by police upon yourself?

Also, the officer shouting conflicting instructions wasn't great at pretty much anything in this scenario.  Everything he did was wrong.  His most grievous error was setting himself and his partner up to arrest an allegedly armed person in a hallway corridor with no concealment or cover whatsoever.  Making an apprehension while sitting in the dead center of a fatal funnel.  There was no report of actual shooting, so the worst they're responding to is a suspicious individual, or possibly brandishing a firearm.  There was nothing to necessitate an immediate extraction of the suspect from his hotel room.  Given this, the best course of action would be to obtain access to hotel rooms on opposite sides of the hall and use the door jambs as cover to minimize exposure to incoming fire.  Were the rooms occupied?  Good question.  If they weren't, there would be no reason to not use them for cover.  If they were, there was every reason to gain access to evacuate the occupants and then use the rooms as cover, if this was the kind of response they believed was required.  Not having cover likely increased the perceived danger by the officer who took the shots.

As you already admitted, he also was't great at giving directions.  In fact, he was awful at giving directions.  Out of any of the people involved in that situation, he should know best that simple and direct instructions are most likely to be understood.  Doing the equivalent of playing Deathmatch Twister is not likely to have positive results.  Screaming that you're going to kill him if he makes "another mistake" is not likely to garner positive results.  All you're doing is stirring the pot and making things more volatile.  And he wasn't even just freaking out Shaver, either.  He was also freaking out his partner.  The officer who shot wasn't the one screaming commands.  The one screaming commands, though, was all too likely burying his rookie partner's "oh shit"-o-meter.

So no, he wasn't good at anything that night.  He probably shouldn't even be a cop.  And he probably knows it, too, which is why he retired from the police department and hot-footed it to the Philippines before he could be charged or sued, where he remains to this day.
unnamednewbie13
Moderator
+2,053|6987|PNW

More on that mess:

wiki wrote:

Later that month, the Mesa Police Department fired Brailsford, citing several policy violations and unsatisfactory performance.[26] An internal investigation report revealed that Brailsford had violated department weapon policy by engraving his patrol rifle with the phrases "You're fucked" and "Molon labe" (a Greek expression meaning "come and take them").[27][28] Brailsford had also previously been investigated for body slamming a teenager during an arrest.[29]

aclu.org wrote:

The jury that acquitted Brailsford did not hear about the two words that were on his dust cover because the judge excluded that evidence.

wiki wrote:

In January 2018, Brailsford filed for bankruptcy.[4] In early 2018, the United States Department of Justice opened its own investigation into Shaver's killing.[3]

In August 2018, Brailsford was reinstated by the Mesa Police Department, staying for a further 42 days in what the department described as a "budget position". The department agreed to reimburse Brailsford for medical expenses related to post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Brailsford's lawyer has said that Brailsford suffered PTSD due to his shooting of Shaver and the resultant criminal trial. The reinstatement allowed Brailsford to apply for "accidental disability" suffered during the course of work. As a result, Brailsford was unanimously approved to be retired on medical grounds. Brailsford was also given a pension of $2,500 per month. The fact that Brailsford was ultimately medically retired instead of remaining fired was only revealed to the public in July 2019.[4][5][35]
HollisHurlbut
Member
+51|6213

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

More on that mess:

wiki wrote:

Later that month, the Mesa Police Department fired Brailsford, citing several policy violations and unsatisfactory performance.[26] An internal investigation report revealed that Brailsford had violated department weapon policy by engraving his patrol rifle with the phrases "You're fucked" and "Molon labe" (a Greek expression meaning "come and take them").[27][28] Brailsford had also previously been investigated for body slamming a teenager during an arrest.[29]

aclu.org wrote:

The jury that acquitted Brailsford did not hear about the two words that were on his dust cover because the judge excluded that evidence.
Just to show I'm doing my best to be objective...

I understand the desire of Mesa PD to enforce their policies on their officers, but that was Brailsford's personally-owned rifle.  If they want to limit what officers can engrave on the rifles they carry on duty, they should supply the rifles instead of telling their officers it's BYO.

As far as the jury not being told of the inscriptions, it was 100% the correct decision.  An inscription carved into the rifle long before this incident occurred is utterly irrelevant as to the determination of whether or not the use of force was objectively reasonable under the circumstances that night.
SuperJail Warden
Gone Forever
+640|3935

HollisHurlbut wrote:

Also, the officer shouting conflicting instructions wasn't great at pretty much anything in this scenario.  Everything he did was wrong.  His most grievous error was setting himself and his partner up to arrest an allegedly armed person in a hallway corridor with no concealment or cover whatsoever.  Making an apprehension while sitting in the dead center of a fatal funnel.  There was no report of actual shooting, so the worst they're responding to is a suspicious individual, or possibly brandishing a firearm.  There was nothing to necessitate an immediate extraction of the suspect from his hotel room.  Given this, the best course of action would be to obtain access to hotel rooms on opposite sides of the hall and use the door jambs as cover to minimize exposure to incoming fire.  Were the rooms occupied?  Good question.  If they weren't, there would be no reason to not use them for cover.  If they were, there was every reason to gain access to evacuate the occupants and then use the rooms as cover, if this was the kind of response they believed was required.  Not having cover likely increased the perceived danger by the officer who took the shots.
Are you a cop or just some person on the internet who thought up how they would handle the situation based off of a grainy internet video?

HollisHurlbut wrote:

And he probably knows it, too, which is why he retired from the police department and hot-footed it to the Philippines before he could be charged or sued, where he remains to this day.
You don't know what you are talking about. The officer was charged and found innocent by a jury of his peers. he got his job back before taking a disability pension.
https://i.imgur.com/xsoGn9X.jpg
SuperJail Warden
Gone Forever
+640|3935
He invited two acquaintances, Monique Portillo and Luis Nunez, to his room for drinks. There he showed them a scoped air rifle he was using to exterminate birds inside grocery stores. At one point the gun was pointed outside his fifth-floor window, prompting a witness to notify the hotel receptionist; the police were immediately called.
Don't stick guns out of hotel windows if you don't want the police to shoot you.
https://i.imgur.com/xsoGn9X.jpg
unnamednewbie13
Moderator
+2,053|6987|PNW

HollisHurlbut wrote:

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

More on that mess:

wiki wrote:

Later that month, the Mesa Police Department fired Brailsford, citing several policy violations and unsatisfactory performance.[26] An internal investigation report revealed that Brailsford had violated department weapon policy by engraving his patrol rifle with the phrases "You're fucked" and "Molon labe" (a Greek expression meaning "come and take them").[27][28] Brailsford had also previously been investigated for body slamming a teenager during an arrest.[29]

aclu.org wrote:

The jury that acquitted Brailsford did not hear about the two words that were on his dust cover because the judge excluded that evidence.
Just to show I'm doing my best to be objective...

I understand the desire of Mesa PD to enforce their policies on their officers, but that was Brailsford's personally-owned rifle.  If they want to limit what officers can engrave on the rifles they carry on duty, they should supply the rifles instead of telling their officers it's BYO.

As far as the jury not being told of the inscriptions, it was 100% the correct decision.  An inscription carved into the rifle long before this incident occurred is utterly irrelevant as to the determination of whether or not the use of force was objectively reasonable under the circumstances that night.
Or … OR, if they want to limit what officers can engrave on the rifles they carry on duty, they can make it department policy. Also, I'd think the inscription would be relevant to character. Although I'm not an expert in trial law and don't know how admissible it would be, I suspect that detail was omitted because it would speak ill of his character.

I think I'm being pretty objective here too.
HollisHurlbut
Member
+51|6213

SuperJail Warden wrote:

Are you a cop or just some person on the internet who thought up how they would handle the situation based off of a grainy internet video?
I'm late in my second decade of sworn law enforcement.  And I've received training in active shooter response.  And for the last five years I've been the chief firearms/deadly force instructor for an area that covers four states in my agency.

You don't know what you are talking about. The officer was charged and found innocent by a jury of his peers. he got his job back before taking a disability pension.
Officer Brailsford was the one who took the shots and killed Shaver.  He was not the only officer in the hallway.  Sgt Charles Langley was the one screaming conflicting instructions and telling Shaver he was going to be killed.  Langley was the one who skipped off to the Philippines.

Remind me, which one of us doesn't know what we're talking about?

SuperJail Warden wrote:

Don't stick guns out of hotel windows if you don't want the police to shoot you.
It has not been established that anyone was sticking a gun out a hotel window (i.e., any part of the rifle was beyond the plane of the exterior wall of the structure).  Witnesses observed someone handling a rifle in the room through the window in a way that it was pointed toward (aimed out) the window.  This is a significant difference.  And I would also note that, at the time Shaver was shot, he wasn't pointing a gun in any direction whatsoever.  And that's the biggest factor in any use of force analysis: threat presented at the time force was used.  Less weighty (but still key) factors are the severity of the crime at issue and what level of resistance the subject is presenting.  All three of these factors are extremely low in this instance and the only thing that saved Brailsford was the fact that Shaver reached for his shorts to keep them from falling down.  Had Shaver not "reached for his waistband," Brailsford would likely be sitting in prison for murder.  And had Langley and Brailsford not been so careless as to set themselves up in a hallway with no cover or concealment despite an abundance of doorways that could be used as such, Brailsford might not have been so jittery as to light Shaver up with five rounds because his shorts were falling down.

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2024 Jeff Minard