Philando Castile verdict not a good omen for concealed carriers

**scruff** · June 22nd, 2017, 04:52 PM

Originally Posted by Mitch10mm

So is a cop supposed to let the other guy shoot first? You know like some parents tell their kids not to throw the first punch?
If the cop thinks that the individual might be pulling a gun that's good enough for me. The alternative is getting shot because "benefit of doubt"..

It's frigging simple, keep your hands in view and get the details hammered out. If it takes some time so be it. I'd rather run late than get shot because the cop was acting like a dick and a fraidy cat or whatever.

Where's that video of the guy reaching behind and inside his vehicle while you decide to shoot or not shoot? It's a frigging eye opener for many.
Add in to it being argumentative and thought to be a robbery suspect.

Exactly. Cops are sometimes put in impossible circumstances, and are expected to know and anticipate everything 100% of the time. Anybody who expects cops to be perfect should have to run through some scenarios in a simulator, and see if they can make every split-second decision correctly, and then articulate the details of the encounter 100% accurately afterwards. Can't be done.

Originally Posted by twency

If you haven't already, watch the dashcam video with your eyes fixed on the second officer throughout the encounter. He seems shocked when Yanez starts shooting. To me that says a lot about whether Yanez's fear (which undoubtedly was real) was reasonable.

You don't know that both officers saw, heard, and believed the same things.

**Yoder** · June 22nd, 2017, 07:47 PM

If I run into someone and they tell me they carry a gun, and they start reaching into their pocket can I unload a mag on them? Oops, you were getting your phone! Sorry, my bad. I won't go to jail, right? I was scared so it's ok to shoot without seeing a threat, right?

**donotknowme** · June 22nd, 2017, 09:55 PM

Originally Posted by Yoder

If I run into someone and they tell me they carry a gun, and they start reaching into their pocket can I unload a mag on them? Oops, you were getting your phone! Sorry, my bad. I won't go to jail, right? I was scared so it's ok to shoot without seeing a threat, right?

Only if it's after you tell them to hand you their license.

**Mitch10mm** · June 22nd, 2017, 10:01 PM

Originally Posted by Yoder

If I run into someone and they tell me they carry a gun, and they start reaching into their pocket can I unload a mag on them? Oops, you were getting your phone! Sorry, my bad. I won't go to jail, right? I was scared so it's ok to shoot without seeing a threat, right?

Are you a cop? No? Then no.
It's an absurd comparison

**Yellowfin** · June 22nd, 2017, 10:52 PM

Originally Posted by GunLawyer001

As for police organizations not arguing for smaller government.....that kind of explains itself (but I'll help out anyway). Cops are the first to be downsized, because bad politicians always push back against those cheap little people who want to keep more of their own money, by making cuts where it hurts the taxpayers the most. They fire cops, and firemen, and they close schools and they eliminate trash pickup. They never sublet part of City Hall or sell off the personal-use vehicles or get rid of the mayor's bodyguards. And the worst (Democrat) governments never, ever take money away from the dependent voter class that faithfully votes for those who promise to take money from the workers and hand it to the bused-in voting class.

Ya see, that's actually the point I'm making. The bussed-in class is stealing money that would otherwise be used to pay them AND making life generally miserable not only for them but as you point out also for the teachers who have to deal with feral youth in their classrooms. They should be the first ones standing up to point this out, to say "Hey you ***holes, cut THOSE punks, not us!" and refuse to be a part of it instead of being willing (or at very least complicit by their silence) pawns to extort the very citizenry who we are always told they so nobly and honorably serve. They should be telling the 100% straight up truth to the public and put up with exactly none of this.

Even if, let's just say for a moment they had no interest at all in anything else other than their own self interests, shouldn't it logically follow that if as you say they're so often the first ones cut, shouldn't they want to remove something that takes the money being withheld from them? Shouldn't they, the teachers and the firemen also, be the first ones to say when all of the budget drama gets paraded around that hey, our families' income and your families' safety and education are apparently on the chopping block AGAIN, but somehow the people actually causing all the crime and all the crappiness in schools are taking all of OUR money AND YOUR money and they don't get cut a dime? Where's the outrage on where it is actually deserved?!

Again, that's entirely contingent upon them being honest, which if they're not honest enough to stand up against the D government machines, they're worse than the politicians and the criminals.

**Yellowfin** · June 22nd, 2017, 10:54 PM

Originally Posted by Mitch10mm

Are you a cop? No? Then no.
It's an absurd comparison

No, actually it's an absurd double standard. We are told over and over and over again you don't point a gun at anything you don't fully plan on destroying and if you make a shot you didn't absolutely have no other option beyond a shadow of a doubt then it's your ***.

**Mitch10mm** · June 22nd, 2017, 11:46 PM

Originally Posted by Yellowfin

No, actually it's an absurd double standard. We are told over and over and over again you don't point a gun at anything you don't fully plan on destroying and if you make a shot you didn't absolutely have no other option beyond a shadow of a doubt then it's your ***.

I agree. It's usually up to a jury of our peers though and that is how they see it. Guys are saying here all the time if you shoot someone in self defense you are likely to be prosecuted. ( I disagree ).

I don't think seeing a weapon is necessary to fear for your life, cop or some dude. Many here seem to think a cop needs to wait and wait and wait because they're pros and deal with these situations more often.

This Yanez suspected this guy was a suspect in a robbery, the suspect was having problems following what may have been unclear commands from Yanez. He reached and Yanez fired. Repeatedly. To stop what he perceived as a very real threat to his life. He was wrong but not necessarily guilty. IMO

**RenoV8** · June 23rd, 2017, 12:16 AM

Poorly trained officer is the bottom line in this scenario...nothing more, nothing less.

We will see more of this in the future...count on it. Police departments are lowering standards to meet societal needs. That guy with a chip on his shoulder just might be pulling you over next time.

**KCJones** · June 23rd, 2017, 12:27 AM

Well... read the whole thread thus far and I can only say a couple things:

1) Seems to me there's no clear right or wrong here. Mistakes on both sides. Officer issued vague direction, Castile should have just kept his hands on the wheel until told otherwise, etc.

2) I do think it ironic that (IMHO) this would likely not have happened if Castile had NOT informed of carrying. It's why I think "duty to inform" is silly. It just escalates the situation. I do tend to fall to the side that thinks "informing that you're carrying is typically not a precursor to blazing away at the cop..."

3) Convinces me that what I do when pulled over is what I'm gonna stick with: As soon as I stop moving, calmly get out my wallet and retrieve insurance/reg from the visor: put all on dashboard. Roll down the window, turn on the light, put hands at 10-and-2 (really more like 11 and 1) and keep them there until I'm specifically told to do something else with them.

4) Of the many wise things Phil has said here, the concept of "suck up the 'ego' shit and live to have your day in court if necessary" is a very good one indeed.

**Yoder** · June 23rd, 2017, 06:44 AM

Even in Iraq they they have rules of engagement. For a legal shoot they had to have a weapon and also be pointing it at an American. Reason why? Lots of people in Iraq carry guns. Some are just going to work, others are murdering pieces of shit. It only makes sense to try not to kill the good guys. But if you are scared, fuck it. Kill everyone. If it's ok here with our own citizens then it should be ok everywhere.

You need to verify there is an actual threat, not think or hope there's one. If you aren't willing to wait to see, then you probably shouldn't be a police officer. I'm not saying wait to get shot at, but you have to wait to see an actual threat. If not, anything could be a legal shooting. Human beings have more value that I thought he might.

Here's how this looks on video when you apply the logic being used here. Switch "It's coming right for us" with "Don't pull out your gun".