TexasCHLforum.com

StewNTexas wrote:TAM's post above is as usual, on the mark.

His well thought out comments are the reason that when I see any post that he has made, I make it a point to read it.

Thanks for your well thought out comments.

Agreed. Very well said.

ffemt300 wrote:

StewNTexas wrote:TAM's post above is as usual, on the mark.

His well thought out comments are the reason that when I see any post that he has made, I make it a point to read it.

Thanks for your well thought out comments.

Agreed. Very well said.

Add another very well-worded post...sums up my thoughts about the situation too.

When I became a homeowner (ie - out of college) I made the decision that *anyone* kicking in my door would be treated as hostile and I would do everything in my power to stop the threat...and anyone coming to my door uninvited would be treated with much suspicion until I know *who* they are and *what* they are up to. I usually do not answer the front door, I stick my head just barely out of the side door (about 15 feet from the front door, separated by a 6' tall iron gate/fence, along with my Great Dane) and make a quick assessment of the situation. I have had a 2 am visit from Grapevine's finest (and I mean that with respect), my old German Shepherd was going CRAZY...so even before the doorbell rang I knew it was a stranger approaching...gun in hand, peeped out, saw it was an officer. Opened door, officer said he was making a courtesy call, he saw my garage door open and wanted to let me know and he guessed right that I had a gun on me as he saw my old CHL test target hanging up in the garage and he commented on "nice shooting"...it was a very professional / positive contact. That is how it *should* be.

The Annoyed Man wrote:Quoting the article:

In the early-morning hours, deputies knocked on 26-year-old Andrew Lee Scott's door without identifying themselves as law enforcement officers. Scott answered the door with a gun in his hand.

"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."

{snip}

"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.

What is truly remarkable is the complete lack of remorse, and the fact that he makes sound like the dead man did something wrong by answering an unidentified knock in the middle of the night with a gun in his hand. It would have been smart to ask who was at the door, but still... To suggest that it is all his fault? That's just inexcusable.

Exactly!! They're totally downplaying the fact that two people knocked on an innocent stranger's door at 1:30 in the morning, and they were armed at the time, and then shot without asking questions.

If he was really armed.

Not to be redundant but I really liked TAMs post as well. Thank you sir.

All of us good guys/gals, either LEO or not, are in this together. We should be able to expect each other to act that way. I know LEO are often in really crummy positions. And I know that the good ones will often lose stomach lining stressing about that. But I would like to think that them being in a crummy situation wouldn't readily cost my wife's or my kids' or my life. I think that this one greatly boils down to the cavalier tone of their message.

The Annoyed Man wrote:...
I WANT successful law enforcement. Our communities require it. Despite this rant, I do NOT have it in for the police. But when cops get away with gunning down innocent people, when they act with contempt for the rights of the people as enumerated in the Constitution, then they have nobody but themselves to blame when the communities they police begin to treat them with contempt in return. That officer's superior did as much or more damage to the cause of community relations as the officer himself did.

A simple, "Yes, it is a terrible situation, and we are trying to sort out what happened and why. When we have more details, I will provide them." That's all the press needed to hear from him, and that's all they had any right to expect. They do not need to hear his opinion—which may be prejudicial to future jury panelists—about his officer's alleged innocence and the homeowner's guilt.
...

I think what gets me is the reaction in general by some. It almost seems a "hmmm, nothing really here to see" thing.

If the homeowner had been a civilian in Afghanistan, and instead of a policeman the shooter had been a 19 year old kid 6 months into a deployment, the press would have been all over it.

danpaw wrote:Well, they did find some drugs in the apartment and the dead guy did have a gun. That was convenient.

And both are totally irrelevant to what happened with the exception of the second being used as a vague excuse for killing someone.

I grew up watching World War 2 movies that showed the evil ways that the Nazi Gestapol and the SS would kick down doors in the middle of the night and carry people off, to be tortured and interrogated, never to be seen or heard from again. And now, I see almost the same thing happening here in America with the news agencies seemingly praising them for their tactics. And evening worse, many of this county’s citizens seem to believe that this is acceptable behavior.

Since the only person who can refute the LEO version of this is dead I think the title says it all. "Oops!"
added by me: "We shot the wrong guy what are we going to say now? OK let's see. He pointed the gun at us. That should work."
The guy didn't have time to shoot us because we're both quick draw artists.
Not identifying themselves as police officers for safety reason is the first outrageuos act of many in my opinion. FDLE investigating this is just as outlandish. It should be done by an independent group.

There are too many dedicated, honest LEO's to let this travesty tarnish their profession by being charactarized as the victim's fault and minimized in the manner this PD has chosen.

Not irrevelant if both were planted.

puma guy wrote:Since the only person who can refute the LEO version of this is dead I think the title says it all. "Oops!"
added by me: "We shot the wrong guy what are we going to say now? OK let's see. He pointed the gun at us. That should work."
The guy didn't have time to shoot us because we're both quick draw artists.
Not identifying themselves as police officers for safety reason is the first outrageuos act of many in my opinion. FDLE investigating this is just as outlandish. It should be done by an independent group.

There are too many dedicated, honest LEO's to let this travesty tarnish their profession by being charactarized as the victim's fault and minimized in the manner this PD has chosen.

Agreed. Not ID'ing themselves as cops for "safety"? I dont get it. Either way you stand the chance of meeting someone with a gun...

ffemt300 wrote:

StewNTexas wrote:TAM's post above is as usual, on the mark.

His well thought out comments are the reason that when I see any post that he has made, I make it a point to read it.

Thanks for your well thought out comments.

Agreed. Very well said.

+1.

I could sum this up in one word: complacency.

How bout, "Stupidity".

goose wrote:All of us good guys/gals, either LEO or not, are in this together. We should be able to expect each other to act that way. I know LEO are often in really crummy positions. And I know that the good ones will often lose stomach lining stressing about that. But I would like to think that them being in a crummy situation wouldn't readily cost my wife's or my kids' or my life. I think that this one greatly boils down to the cavalier tone of their message.

There it is. We......at least those of us who care about the quality of life in our neighborhoods and cities.....are in this together with our local law enforcement agencies. They cannot efficiently and safely perform their duties, going home to their families unhurt, if decent citizens don't have their six o'clock. But decent citizens cannot be expected to be supportive of a police department that refuses to accept responsibility for their own mistakes, and it is even worse when it tries to blame the tragic consequences of those mistakes on innocent citizens instead of on their own ineptitude.

ScooterSissy wrote:

The Annoyed Man wrote:Quoting the article:

In the early-morning hours, deputies knocked on 26-year-old Andrew Lee Scott's door without identifying themselves as law enforcement officers. Scott answered the door with a gun in his hand.

"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."

{snip}

"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.

What is truly remarkable is the complete lack of remorse, and the fact that he makes sound like the dead man did something wrong by answering an unidentified knock in the middle of the night with a gun in his hand. It would have been smart to ask who was at the door, but still... To suggest that it is all his fault? That's just inexcusable.

Exactly!! They're totally downplaying the fact that two people knocked on an innocent stranger's door at 1:30 in the morning, and they were armed at the time, and then shot without asking questions.

The city administration has got to be cringing every time they see and hear Lt. Herell's statement. As TAM said, a total "lack of remorse" & coupled with a "hey, what do you expect attitude"....unbelievable...not just downplaying that THEY were at fault, but actually trying to justify it as a "bizarre set of circumstances" because hey... if you open the door to us with a gun in your hand (even though we didn't identify ourselves) we're gonna' shoot you.