WESH: Deputies shoot, kill man after knocking on wrong door

[Bang]

So they shot him for doing something legal... I guess if they police shoot you while doing something we should stop doing it, even if they are in the wrong. I dont really care if you dont like guns for whatever reason, the fact of the matter is what he was doing was perfectly legal. And he was killed for it.

It's not a matter of whether i like guns or not.

This guy had his gun, and now he's dead.

He would have been perfectly legal doing like Larry said, and asking who it is first.

But he got his gun, which inflated his balls, which in turn got his skull aerated.

Oh well for him. If he was in that nightclub in Florida last night that got shot up, maybe he could have protected someone then?

~Bang

---------- Post added July-17th-2012 at 07:51 PM ----------

As I read it, Bang wasn't saying that anything was the guy's fault.

All he was saying is that having all these guns around don't appear to be making us live longer. I tend to agree with him, at least with regard to handguns. People may have a legal right to have handguns in their house, but I think they are making themselves and their families less safe, not more safe when they choose to do so.

This is exactly what I'm saying.

Thanks.

The majority of gun owners live in fear of the bad guy. The majority of gun owners will never meet the bad guy.

The majority of gun owners who DO run across the bad guy will likely not be home, and their gun will be stolen. It's one of the most burgled items in America. In fact, crooks hearing you have one does not make them stay away. In fact it attracts them.

I'm not against the 2nd amendment.

I am against the absolute gun craziness that we live under.

we're CRAZY for this ****, innocent people die by the truckload every single day as a result of it, and any talk of doing anything about it is, pardon the pun, immediately shot down as tyranny.

It's INSANE.

~Bang

[Jumbo]

Just two thoughts (at least that I'll post) for now.

1. It's an apartment complex. So here's a genius observation (or you'd think it might be given it's absence): perhaps many of you have the rather common human experience I have had in parking your mode of transport by, or across from, or even in front of the door of, (if you're a dick) that isn't the apartment you're visiting (or whatever). I would find it troublesome that the cops would just assume because a bike is parked there, that's the place he's definitely in and decide not to announce who they are. Put someone on the exit, and announce using proper protection procedure at the front door (I've had training too). But really, it's the first part of this paragraph I emphasize.

2. So we really don't know what transpired (whether the guy pointed the gun, whether he asked who it was, or anything else, other than what the cops who shot him are telling us he did (so far---going by the article). Now I'n not "going for" anything here with this comment, but anyone who knows law enforcement and tries to tell you that CYA even to some extreme degrees (sometimes very illegal) isn't a common practice among many LEOs anywhere---and I have grown up with, worked with, and supported such my entire life, military and civilian--- is either lying through their teeth, willfully blind, or quite ignorant. This all makes it hard to say what happened without other witnesses or personally knowing all the officers involved (even then that's no guarantee as I have learned the hard way). It's simply dumb to state a strong position one way or another as to "how right or wrong" either the dude or the cops were in this case at this point. I give neither any substantial benefit of the doubt based on the info in the article and my knowledge of related occurrences. I will hope more evidence of what went down becomes available. But this is just one out of hundreds of such events annually. LEOs, even if they are the best of the breed and really believe "to serve and protect", have a damn tough, and obviously dangerous, job much of the time.

I also join those (including most LEOs everywhere) who believe that a large population of gun-owners are more in danger from owning guns than they are protected by them. Of course, the rub there is even gun owners who agree with that are sure they aren't in that group.

[MrSilverMaC]

I wonder a couple of things.

First for the people asking why he came to the door with a firearm, perhaps you have not stopped to consider the fact that he apparently lived in a place where a man on the run for being suspected in an attempted murder visited or stayed at. That would probably be cause for any of us to come to the door at 1:30 in the morning armed and perhaps more ready to show that we were armed than if you lived somewhere where that wasn't the case.

The second thing I wonder is if those people who feel the police were justified in shooting the victim, would you feel he would have been justified if he had managed to shoot and kill all the armed men knocking on his door at 1:30 in the morning. Would that have also been a "good shoot?"

Them going to the door like that just seems like a very bad call that literally turned out to be the worst case scenario as far as police victimizing an innocent man.

[jnhay]

It's funny how this guy dies and people are still saying "at that time of the morning I'd bring my gun too!" Uhh... This guy is dead! How effective was his gun?

[Bang]

I wonder a couple of things.

First for the people asking why he came to the door with a firearm, perhaps you have not stopped to consider the fact that he apparently lived in a place where a man on the run for being suspected in an attempted murder visited or stayed at. .

This could be any neighborhood, anywhere.

As others have said, there were better things he could have done even if he DID want to go to the door armed.

Like don't point it directly out as soon as he opened the door.

(now, this assumes the cops, being the only witnesses, are telling the truth. I have serious doubts about that.)

~Bang

[MrSilverMaC]

It's funny how this guy dies and people are still saying "at that time of the morning I'd bring my gun too!" Uhh... This guy is dead! How effective was his gun?

One person armed against multiple trained, coordinated, armed men generally doesn't turn out well for the one. That is the case whether you are armed or not. Especially if that group has bad intentions which isn't unheard of, at least not around here.

---------- Post added July-17th-2012 at 03:49 PM ----------

This could be any neighborhood, anywhere.

As others have said, there were better things he could have done even if he DID want to go to the door armed.

Like don't point it directly out as soon as he opened the door.

(now, this assumes the cops, being the only witnesses, are telling the truth. I have serious doubts about that.)

~Bang

I agree that pointing his gun immediately after answering the door probably wasn't his best move, even assuming that someone dangerous (besides the cops) was knocking.

My guess is though, that if he was answering the door with a gun not only in hand but pointing out the door at whoever was knocking he feared someone or something enough to cause him to do so unless he was severely mentally impared and did that regularly.

A bunch of guys standing outside my door would probably make me get a gun if they came knocking at 1:30 in the morning.

[Popeman38]

Yeah, let's go ahead and take away a liberty for safety. Funny how those screaming about liberty being sacrificed for safety by our government are also now posting that maybe exercising a liberty is stupid. Wonder why that is? The Constitution is sacred.......until I disagree with it

[Teller]

The second thing I wonder is if those people who feel the police were justified in shooting the victim, would you feel he would have been justified if he had managed to shoot and kill all the armed men knocking on his door at 1:30 in the morning. Would that have also been a "good shoot?"

I have a feeling I know what you're driving at (and I don't intend for that to sound condescending at all.) Let me take your scenario a step further. Let's say the cops kick his door in, guns drawn, without identifying. IMO, at that point, he has a right to go full slaughterfest on their asses, and there's NO way I would vote to convict if I was on his jury. No way. So yes, there absolutely are scenarios in which I would say the resident is completely justified in opening fire on the officers. That's one of them.

To your scenario of "armed men." This leaves a lot open to interpretation. Deputies who are process servers are often "armed men." Granted, they don't usually arrive at 1:30 a.m., but are you authorized to shoot them for knocking on your door? Absolutely not.

Now, if said process server comes to your door, weapon at the ready, waiting for you to answer, without identifying? Ruin his day. By all means. Again, I would support the home owner.

I was probably too aggressive in my defense of the officers earlier, for one reason, and one reason only. The status of their weapons is not reported in the story. I should have pumped the brakes a little, and considered that, before mounting my (I believe very valid, knowing what we know) defense of the moment the shooting happened.

I think those on the opposite side have jumped to conclusions and made assumptions as well. "Breaking down the door," etc. We're both wrong, IMO.

But again, anyone (cop or not) who has a firearm raised toward them, that has a firearm of their own, is 100% authorized to kill before he is killed. Can we all agree, removing the other circumstances that may or may not have been present, solely on this much: If someone points a gun at you, you have a right to kill them if you have the means.

---------- Post added July-17th-2012 at 09:02 PM ----------

Yeah, let's go ahead and take away a liberty for safety. Funny how those screaming about liberty being sacrificed for safety by our government are also now posting that maybe exercising a liberty is stupid. Wonder why that is? The Constitution is sacred.......until I disagree with it

As I just said, we need more of the facts, and I absolutely jumped the gun in the officers' defense. But IF the facts in this case were true, what liberty was sacrificed? Do we have the right not to have a police officer knock on our door? Should we?

[Popeman38]

As I just said, we need more of the facts, and I absolutely jumped the gun in the officers' defense. But IF the facts in this case were true, what liberty was sacrificed? Do we have the right not to have a police officer knock on our door? Should we?

Psssttttt, I was referring to these clearly advocating the abolishment of private gun ownership.

[Destino]

No, but I would expect you to argue at least somewhat honestly.

I didn't see the "hostile" door knock mentioned either. But whatever. Seems like this is pretty cut and dried, sans all the speculation and outright falsification.

You're right it's cut and dry. An innocent man was shot dead in his own home by cops that felt no need to announce themselves a 1:30am. The article says they did this for their own safety. I guess people are supposed to assume the stranger outside in the middle of the night mean well.

---------- Post added July-17th-2012 at 09:31 PM ----------

I agree that pointing his gun immediately after answering the door probably wasn't his best move, even assuming that someone dangerous (besides the cops) was knocking.

My guess is though, that if he was answering the door with a gun not only in hand but pointing out the door at whoever was knocking he feared someone or something enough to cause him to do so unless he was severely mentally impared and did that regularly.

A bunch of guys standing outside my door would probably make me get a gun if they came knocking at 1:30 in the morning.

is there anyone other than the men who did the shooting that saw the gun pointed at anyone?

[Bang]

Yeah, let's go ahead and take away a liberty for safety. Funny how those screaming about liberty being sacrificed for safety by our government are also now posting that maybe exercising a liberty is stupid. Wonder why that is? The Constitution is sacred.......until I disagree with it

This is part of what I view as the problem.

ANY discussion is immediately assumed to mean to completely abolish.

Nothing is absolute, so why do we view this from such an absolute position?

~Bang

[RansomthePasserby]

I wonder if it ever crossed the cops' mind that knocking on the door at 1:30 am unannounced instead of following proper procedure might end poorly. Cutting corners catches up with you. Bad move 'A.'

Bad move 'B' was the apartment owner answering the door at 1:30 am. If you're scared enough to come to the door with a gun in your hand, why even come to the door at all?

I put most of the responsibility for this tragedy on the cops' shoulders though.

-They were the ones in authority,

-They were the initiators, and

-They failed to follow correct procedure.

[Bang]

If I were a gambler, i'd bet that there's more to this the cops aren't saying.

Since when are they even allowed to perform an operation like this without announcing themselves?

Isn't the act of announcing themselves for the protection of themsevles and those within?

Has there been some rules change I don't know?

~Bang

[Popeman38]

This is part of what I view as the problem.

ANY discussion is immediately assumed to mean to completely abolish.

Nothing is absolute, so why do we view this from such an absolute position?

~Bang

How many gun control laws are on the books already? Chicago banned handguns. DC did. NYC makes it so painful to own a hand gun that many give up. Now, how much impact have those laws had on crime? Chicago is in a gang war right now. With handguns. That are illegal. Criminals don't follow existing laws. All gun control laws do is legislate guns out of the hands of law abiding citizens.

And this board would go apoplectic if anyone suggested the federal government restrict free speech to "protect" the population. Think about that. People are willing to legislate away the 2nd so fast.o

[Bang]

How many gun control laws are on the books already? Chicago banned handguns. DC did. NYC makes it so painful to own a hand gun that many give up. Now, how much impact have those laws had on crime? Chicago is in a gang war right now. With handguns. That are illegal. Criminals don't follow existing laws. All gun control laws do is legislate guns out of the hands of law abiding citizens.

And this board would go apoplectic if anyone suggested the federal government restrict free speech to "protect" the population. Think about that. People are willing to legislate away the 2nd so fast.o

Lots of dead people out there with bullet holes in them.

~Bang

[Popeman38]

Lots of dead people out there with bullet holes in them.

~Bang

So we should ban guns? I seem to recall war and murder and death before guns too. Let's ban all weapons.

[twa]

If the situation necessitates police not identifying themselves,a no-knock warrant should be required

I hate no-knocks,but at least then there is some oversight

djtj and des make good points

as far as weapons and defending yourself.....doing so means endangering yourself by default,a risk I accept (but one that should not be increased by police unnecessarily)

[Teller]

So we should ban guns? I seem to recall war and murder and death before guns too. Let's ban all weapons.

Hands, feet, elbows, knees, hell, HEADS can be used as weapons.

Off with 'em!!!!

:evilg:

[The Sisko]

There's no legal requirement for the police to retreat in FL. They have the right to stand their ground. And though not printed in this article, I have it on good authority that the cops were ambushed and both had their heads bashed against the concrete. Clearly this was an act of self defense on the part of these heroes.

HIs mistake was POINTING the gun at the person knocking. If he kept it low by his leg, or even behind the door as he opened it a tad and peeked out, the police would have been able to speak to him and had an interaction. At that point, it MAY or MAY NOT have escalated, but at least a conversation would have transpired. By opening the door with the gun raised, aimed, and at eye level, he was in essence delivering the message that he was ready and willing to kill. Now, he may NOT have been willing, but the message he was portraying is that he was. And that made the cops react in a truly tragic manner.

Actually his mistake was opening the door. If I see through my peep hole that there are armed men knocking on my door at 1:30 AM who haven't identified themselves as cops I'd immediately assume it was a home invasion and put as many rounds through the door as I have in my clip. Let the lawyers sort it out later but (in the vernacular) I ain't goin' out like no ole b****.

And no, I'm not kidding.

[Koala]

If I were a gambler, i'd bet that there's more to this the cops aren't saying.

Since when are they even allowed to perform an operation like this without announcing themselves?

Isn't the act of announcing themselves for the protection of themsevles and those within?

Has there been some rules change I don't know?

~Bang

Apparently. Apparenlty the cops can just knock on your door at 1:00AM, refuse to identify themselves, and then act dumbfounded that this might scare the **** out of you and cause you to try to defend yourself.

[aREDSKIN]

"When we knocked on the door, the door opened and the occupant of that apartment was pointing a gun at deputies, and that's when we opened fire and killed him," Lt. John Herrell said. "Even though this subject is not the one we were looking for when he opened the door. He was pointing the gun at the deputy and if you put yourselves in the deputy's shoes. They were there to pick up someone who was wanted for an attempted homicide."

"It's just a bizarre set of circumstances. The bottom line is, you point a gun at a deputy sheriff or police office, you're going to get shot," Herrell said.

First off does anyone really think anyone wanted for attempted murder is going to answer the door at1:30 in the morning?? If the victim was so afraid that he had to open the door with a gun why open the door in the first place? Was the gun REALLY pointing at the officers?? I have my doubts. As always JMO.

[MisterPinstripe]

The truck driver and the cops are in the wrong.

Stepping out in front of a speeding truck, while legal is bad for your health. Pointing a gun at police is also apparently bad for your health.

I agree pointing a gun at the police is a pretty stupid thing to do. The issue is, he didnt know they were the police because they didnt announce themselves.

While I think he was stupid to open the door without first finding out who was out there, the police are at fault.

---------- Post added July-18th-2012 at 08:18 AM ----------

There's no argument.

He had his gun, and now he's dead because he had his gun.

Is this arguable?

~Bang

He is dead because the police chose the wrong house and also didnt announce themselves. If either of those two things had occurred, he wouldnt be dead. I wont deny they shot him because he had a gun. But he was in his home. If they didnt assume that the guy they were chasing was in the house, they wouldnt have shot this guy. I think he was stupid to not find out who was at the door before opening it. But besides being stupid, he didnt do anything wrong. The police did.

---------- Post added July-18th-2012 at 08:25 AM ----------

As I read it, Bang wasn't saying that anything was the guy's fault.

All he was saying is that having all these guns around don't appear to be making us live longer. I tend to agree with him, at least with regard to handguns. People may have a legal right to have handguns in their house, but I think they are making themselves and their families less safe, not more safe when they choose to do so.

I would disagree with that. Guns are used on average close to 7000 times a day for self defense, well over 2 million times a year. This includes brandishing a gun or firing a warning shot to end a situation. They are used way more often in self defense, to protect self rather then to kill someone. Studies also show that crime fell in relation to concealed carry being introduced in states. The facts show that people as a whole are indeed safer with a hand gun.

[MrSilverMaC]

I have a feeling I know what you're driving at (and I don't intend for that to sound condescending at all.) Let me take your scenario a step further. Let's say the cops kick his door in, guns drawn, without identifying. IMO, at that point, he has a right to go full slaughterfest on their asses, and there's NO way I would vote to convict if I was on his jury. No way. So yes, there absolutely are scenarios in which I would say the resident is completely justified in opening fire on the officers. That's one of them...

That's a really fair answer.

Thank you for taking the time to respond.

The scenario regarding armed men isn't really up for interpretation though as given in the story posted. We know the officers were armed for sure and definitely knocked without identifying themselves by their own admission. What we don't know but can probably assume is that the officers had their guns drawn as going into that situation without them drawn would be silly and we also don't know if the man knew he was answering the door to armed men.

It's part of what makes me wonder why the hell he came to the door and pointed his gun immediately or even answered the door to begin with. Either way like I stated above your answer is really fair and for me at least makes your original post easier to accept for whatever that is worth.

---------- Post added July-18th-2012 at 08:34 AM ----------

is there anyone other than the men who did the shooting that saw the gun pointed at anyone?

Not that I know of, and short of a lie detector test from the officers I guess it's what we have to go by. It just strikes me as odd that someone would come to the door automatically pointing a gun. It seems like the whole thing could have been avoided by a little better prep from the police in this incident which makes it all the more tragic.

[Bang]

So we should ban guns? I seem to recall war and murder and death before guns too. Let's ban all weapons.

the ONLY person who has used the words BAN GUNS is you.

I never said BAN GUNS.

I said there needs to be a discussion on what can actually be DONE to control the violence.

You pointed out gun bans being ineffective in the district and other cities.. of course they're ineffective.. they're totally USELESS if the crooks can go 30 minutes into virginia and buy shopping bags full of them and drive them right back home.

There is no reasonable discussion, because as I said, and you've proven, the moment anyone says "what can be done".. the jump is immediately to assume that it will inevitably be a full scale ban.

Lots of gun violence in this country, innocent people get killed every single day just by being in the wrong place.. like those folks the other night in the bar that got sprayed by the guy with the military rifle. (amazing no one died. even more amazing is the cops think he targeted one person,, and the best way to do that would be to shoot everyone in front of him.

SOMETHING should be done to try and reduce this threat to our population. There is no reasonable answer because no one tries to have a reasonable discussion.

If a crib collapses and 2 or 3 toddlers get killed, that crib is immediately recalled, and it's not sold anymore.

Kids find guns and accidentally kill themselves. and the discussion of trigger locks simply to protect them from accidents is as cutthroat as it gets.

FTR, I support the 2nd amendment. But we're CRAZY when it comes to guns.

~Bang

[Corcaigh]

While I think he was stupid to open the door without first finding out who was out there, the police are at fault.

The police AND the deceased were at fault.

If he thought it was a safe thing to do to open a door at 1.30am in a bad neighborhood because he was holding a gun, then that delusion contributed to his death.