TexasCHLforum.com

OlBill wrote: The final result was they shot and killed an unarmed man on his knees in a hotel hallway.

They never saw a gun because there wasn't one.

I would be in prison for that.

I don't understand how the jury came to their conclusion.

eureka40 wrote:There were six cops on that scene, video from the motel lobby shows them getting on the elevator together. If six cops can't handle one drunk guy without shooting/killing him, that dept has a serious problem.

Exactly ! The guy was drunk. He did not shoot at anyone. The call was only that someone saw "a gun sticking out of a window". The man did not resist arrest in any shape, form or fashion. He tried his best to comply with the conflicting and confusing demands being yelled at him--while begging them not to shoot him. These SWAT tactical assaults are being grossly overused and with far too many tragic results. They are the result of the militarization of many police departments and other LE agencies which, under the mantra "our first priority is to make sure we make it home safely ", approach every call with the preconception that they may encounter a crazed killer. While that situation does happen, statistically the vast majority of officers will never be in a live situation requiring them to discharge their weapon--EVER. There is no real justification for this "us against them" attitude. I saw some abuses of authority back in the 70's by some of the officers I worked with, but nothing ever close to approaching some of the stuff we see today. I didn't like the ones that bullied people then, and I hate it now.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-V5lxZUKhK8
Here is a youtube of a news report with some footage from before it happened. Apparently they were joking around. Not sure if that means much or if it was just a reaction to stress.

Here is video of the confrontation and shooting.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VBUUx0j ... e=youtu.be


One thing I wasn't sure about was if they knew he was the one who pointed the gun when they confronted him in the hallway or if there was any reason they thought he was a deadly threat at that time. It sounds like no on the last and maybe yes on the first?

Regardless, my impression was the guy giving the orders set him up to get shot by the other officer who was apparently way too trigger happy.

"If you talk to any combat veteran..."

OlBill wrote:"If you talk to any combat veteran..."

Maybe combat veterans should be vetted extremely well before being hired by police force, sheriff's department, mall security...

mayor wrote:

OlBill wrote:"If you talk to any combat veteran..."

Maybe combat veterans should be vetted extremely well before being hired by police force, sheriff's department, mall security...

That's not what I took from it, but yes. Absolutely. More than anyone else.

A little known secret - many combat veterans are not nice people.

WTR wrote:However, I think we need to quite making excuses for these deviants and clean our own house. Otherwise, we provide fodder for the left.

What do you mean "we" kemo sabe?

I agree many government professions are long overdue for house cleanings. The killer in this story was a member of one of those professions. I agree that profession needs to get rid of their bad apples. When they refuse to act before an innocent person is killed, the old saying "a bad apple spoils the whole bunch" rings true. That's burden is on his coworkers and supervisors if they condoned or encouraged bad apple behavior and attitudes.

However, I haven't seen any evidence the killer had a Texas LTC so he's not one of us. I also haven't seen any evidence the killer supported RKBA for the common people.

P.S. The Left has never had a shortage of people willing to just follow orders and pull the trigger.

I have no training in proper take-down and cuff procedures in situations like this but my lay opinion tells me the officer made a mistake--a fatal one for Daniel Shaver. The law cannot give Daniel Shaver back to his family--only provide reasonable compensation for his death which I believe will be substantial in this case.

Having said that let's keep all of this in perspective. I watch video after video on the web where thugs shoot, knife, run-over and punch officers in addition to refusing to follow easy to follow commands. I believe those cases far outweigh the cases of "police brutality." Have I done a fancy statistical analysis and published it in a scholarly journal? No.

I have the utmost respect for police officers as they keep us safe. I also acknowledge when they make mistakes--nobody is perfect--not judges, lawyers, doctors, engineers, police officers, etc.

mayor wrote:

OlBill wrote:"If you talk to any combat veteran..."

Maybe combat veterans should be vetted extremely well before being hired by police force, sheriff's department, mall security...

TAM recommended the book "Rise of the Warrior Cop" a few months back. I took that advice and in the book found the suggestion that the types of officers who were the most likely to want to join SWAT like teams were the ones who deserved the greatest scrutiny in the application process. The book suggests that the mindset can be just wrong.

Having said that, I think that we can miss the biggest problem. Departments are often driven by the mindset of chief. The rank and file officers are likely to reflect that mindset. A Facebook poster yesterday suggested that the best approach would be to elect politicians who would hire chiefs of police who didn't drive toward the "warrior cop" environment. The chief doesn't have to create warrior cop thinking but just tolerating it can be a problem.

A little known secret - many combat veterans are not nice people.

Also a little known fact, many "Combat veterans" heard a lot more combat then they ever participated in
A well known fact,"are not nice people" applies to any demographic you wish to label..teachers, Cops, real estate agents or librarians

chasfm11 wrote:

mayor wrote:

OlBill wrote:"If you talk to any combat veteran..."

Maybe combat veterans should be vetted extremely well before being hired by police force, sheriff's department, mall security...

TAM recommended the book "Rise of the Warrior Cop" a few months back. I took that advice and in the book found the suggestion that the types of officers who were the most likely to want to join SWAT like teams were the ones who deserved the greatest scrutiny in the application process. The book suggests that the mindset can be just wrong.

Having said that, I think that we can miss the biggest problem. Departments are often driven by the mindset of chief. The rank and file officers are likely to reflect that mindset. A Facebook poster yesterday suggested that the best approach would be to elect politicians who would hire chiefs of police who didn't drive toward the "warrior cop" environment. The chief doesn't have to create warrior cop thinking but just tolerating it can be a problem.

I would say the shooter was following the mindset of the guy giving the orders was repeatedly threatening to shoot to man if he didn't follow instructions exactly.

parabelum wrote:This murderer should not have been acquitted. Brings great shame for LE community. I wish there was a loud protest from the LE circles against this fascist thug who doesn’t deserve to be called cop.

What does that tell us when there isn't?

facebook.com/taprack.tactical/posts/1883248931985963

chasfm11 wrote:

mayor wrote:

OlBill wrote:"If you talk to any combat veteran..."

Maybe combat veterans should be vetted extremely well before being hired by police force, sheriff's department, mall security...

TAM recommended the book "Rise of the Warrior Cop" a few months back. I took that advice and in the book found the suggestion that the types of officers who were the most likely to want to join SWAT like teams were the ones who deserved the greatest scrutiny in the application process. The book suggests that the mindset can be just wrong.

Having said that, I think that we can miss the biggest problem. Departments are often driven by the mindset of chief. The rank and file officers are likely to reflect that mindset. A Facebook poster yesterday suggested that the best approach would be to elect politicians who would hire chiefs of police who didn't drive toward the "warrior cop" environment. The chief doesn't have to create warrior cop thinking but just tolerating it can be a problem.

I read it too on the same recommendation. I learned a lot, even after having been involved in some of it.

E.Marquez wrote:

A little known secret - many combat veterans are not nice people.

Also a little known fact, many "Combat veterans" heard a lot more combat then they ever participated in
A well known fact,"are not nice people" applies to any demographic you wish to label..teachers, Cops, real estate agents or librarians

Definitely agree with the former. Not so much with the latter.