quote:

Originally posted by ElToro:
I think thumperbfc is a member of that department. Maybe he can add some on the ground color commentary.

Different agency, same town. It is not unusual for departments to allow officers to carry a personally owned pistol of their choosing, assuming it meets certain pre-determined standards.

As a firearms instructor, this guy did a good “tactical reload”, which is good. A lot of cops goof those, if they even have the presence of mind to recognize the opportunity.

I didn’t watch the video linked, so I don’t know where it ended or began, but I’ve seen it elsewhere. This officer jumped in with life saving actions too... successful or not it, it is clear he deals with pressure well.

I agree with Sigfruend, as I typically do. Mindset going in matters greatly... what info was preloaded into the officers response? What did he THINK in the moment? That matters. It is measuring stick, per case law.

I won’t be commenting further on justification.

Generally speaking though, videos aren’t as clear-cut as they seen upon casual observation. The appropriate investigations are ongoing, I’m sure. And I trust the agencies involved.

quote:

Originally posted by 220-9er:

quote:

Originally posted by sigfreund:
NOTE:

quote:

Originally posted by Jester814:
Here's the link to the video from the beginning instead of in the middle, after the shooting like you linked:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AFWR73R9G3E

It often helps to read all the posts in a short thread.

Yes, they both appear to be the same to me.

Look again. Same video but OP's link starts at 1:56 and Jester's link starts at 0:00. 0:00 shows the 50 yard shots (~1:30) and 1:56 starts with the 25 yard shots.

The camera doesn't do the officer any favors at 50 yards, but the camera is clear at 25 yards.

As the irksome narrator said, still under investigation. Thanks for convicting him prior to that being done, though. That's always helpful.

I love the folks here attacking Correia and not Correia's arguments.

quote:

Originally posted by Keystoner:
I love the folks here attacking Correia and not Correia's arguments.

Focusing on the messenger rather than the message is one of the most common logical thinking mistakes people make.

quote:

Originally posted by corsair:
Trolling for a reaction from a single body-cam video smh

A fuzzy video at that, and quite obviously the OP (and narrator of the video) is attempting to instill confirmation bias on the part of members by informing us that this officer had been involved in prior shootings, when in fact IF those incidents DID occur, they could have been totally justified uses of deadly force. Funny how this bit of information is deemed important, but a dispatcher's warning that the subject has stated he has possession of a firearm and has threatened to kill police officers is dismissed as something that creates a deadly bias on the part of the responding officers.

I stopped watching the video prior to the actual shooting because I recognized that CONTEXT is everything and having a frame by frame narration replaces CONTEXT when interpreted through the eyes of the presenter, rather than what the officer saw, experienced, and felt as the incident unfolded before him (them). Body cam video is just one part of an equation which determines whether or not a use of deadly force is justifiable, not THE sole deciding evidence. SCOTUS clearly ruled in Garner v. Tennessee and four years later in Graham v. Connor that:

“The ‘reasonableness’ of a particular use of force must be judged from the perspective of a reasonable officer on the scene, rather than with the 20/20 vision of hindsight.”, and:

“With respect to a claim of excessive force, the same standard of reasonableness at the moment applies: ‘Not every push or shove, even if it may later seem unnecessary in the peace of a judge's chambers,’ Johnson v. Glick, 481 F.2d, at 1033, violates the Fourth Amendment.”

How objective can we be when the OP states, "Here is a video of a trigger happy LEO murdering a civilian", and continues the same path through his surrogate on the video? I have questions to ask in EVERY use of force incident, but they sure aren't going to be answered objectively in cases where this sort of presentation occurs.

quote:

Originally posted by jcsabolt2:
Custom milled slide for sure on the cops gun, odd on a police issued firearm. I can't make out any type of threat, especially from the initial distance he started slinging lead, I could barely make out the guys location in the shade. How do you make a positive ID at that range in only a few seconds? If he was pointing a 12ga it would be different, but this looks bad to me.

I have a Glock 35 that was issued by the Tennessee highway patrol. How is this any different? More milled holes = more evil and scary?

What troubles me is this is the officers 5th on duty shooting. His 4th fatal.

quote:

Originally posted by walker77:

quote:

Originally posted by jcsabolt2:
Custom milled slide for sure on the cops gun, odd on a police issued firearm. I can't make out any type of threat, especially from the initial distance he started slinging lead, I could barely make out the guys location in the shade. How do you make a positive ID at that range in only a few seconds? If he was pointing a 12ga it would be different, but this looks bad to me.

I have a Glock 35 that was issued by the Tennessee highway patrol. How is this any different? More milled holes = more evil and scary?

What troubles me is this is the officers 5th on duty shooting. His 4th fatal.

Why is that troubling? Each one of those shootings presumably had a hearing and he passed. Perhaps he just happens to be assigned to locations that are more dangerous?

flashguy

quote:

Originally posted by walker77:
I have a Glock 35 that was issued by the Tennessee highway patrol.

Hey Walker,

Could you post pictures of this gun? To my knowledge, THP never had or issued the Glock 35. Now, the 35 was the issued pistol for the Kentucky State Police from 2002 to 2017. This was issued after a failed attempt to adopt the Smith and Wesson 4566 to replace their aging 1076s.

To my knowledge THP issued the Glock 31 in .357 SIG.

I know a guy who's been in 6 on duty shootings over his lengthy career. Excellent detective. And a nice guy. But for whatever reason, folks kept deciding they wanted to try to kill him, and he quite rightly took offense to that and had to do something about it, multiple times.

The technical term for someone like that is a "shit magnet". They don't necessarily go out looking for shit, but yet shit damn sure has a way of finding them.

quote:

Originally posted by walker77:

quote:

Originally posted by jcsabolt2:
Custom milled slide for sure on the cops gun, odd on a police issued firearm. I can't make out any type of threat, especially from the initial distance he started slinging lead, I could barely make out the guys location in the shade. How do you make a positive ID at that range in only a few seconds? If he was pointing a 12ga it would be different, but this looks bad to me.

I have a Glock 35 that was issued by the Tennessee highway patrol. How is this any different? More milled holes = more evil and scary?

What troubles me is this is the officers 5th on duty shooting. His 4th fatal.

Are you troubled because the 5th one got away?

quote:

Originally posted by jljones:

quote:

Originally posted by walker77:
I have a Glock 35 that was issued by the Tennessee highway patrol.

Hey Walker,

Could you post pictures of this gun? To my knowledge, THP never had or issued the Glock 35. Now, the 35 was the issued pistol for the Kentucky State Police from 2002 to 2017. This was issued after a failed attempt to adopt the Smith and Wesson 4566 to replace their aging 1076s.

To my knowledge THP issued the Glock 31 in .357 SIG.

Sorry, it was KSP.

quote:

Originally posted by Copefree:
This is the officer's fifth officer-involved shooting, four of which have been deadly.

I’m not sure what this has to do with anything. Unless you’re generally opposed to LE. Whether this is a good shoot or not, prior history is not relevant. Unless you know that the other events were bad shoots. If they were not sure how he could still be in the field.

So the incident essentially took place in about 30 seconds. The officer was dispatched to investigate a man who has previously made threatening remarks (speculation on my part but probably made threats more than 5 times) about police officers because the man’s own sister is concerned he may try to injure officers as he has specifically told her he has just purchased a handgun with the intent of killing police officers. The officer identifies the suspect from a distance and closes ground toward the suspect. Naturally his weapon is drawn. He feels the suspect is making a threatening movement from the shadows and bushes and proceeds to fire at the suspect but presumably does not hit his target. (Again, speculation on my part and also honoring the YouTube personality from the video but the officer didn’t tactically pull his range finder prior to firing and was unable to accurately judge the distance given the shadows and shrubbery thus not striking the suspect with his initial shots).
The officer issues commands which the suspect partially follows, despite essentially receiving 3 warning shots only seconds earlier. The officer communicates with backup and continues to close distance on the suspect while keeping the suspect covered. At this point I think it’s important to remember the suspect is an adult male that has made previous threats against police officers and has recently informed his own sister that he’s obtained a weapon and is in fact not a Cub Scout selling popcorn or a local religious leader checking on community members. (For the officer this sounds like another case of SSDD but what the heck, may as well continue community relations since receiving that position after 5 previous reviews for discharging his weapon on duty). Now the suspect (standup citizen, pillar of the community) is still intermittently following commands when from the shadows of the building and partially obscured from view by the shrubbery in which he is hiding (almost as if he was planning an ambush) the suspect lowers his right arm once again before raising it back by extending his arm forward rather than the traditional “jumping jack movement” that most folks use when raising their hands. Clearly the suspect doesn’t account for the tubular metal bench there that is nearly perfectly in the line of site of the officer and can be confused for a firearm in a split second. (Also the suspect hasn’t recognized by watching the local news and is unaware he’s dealing with department Grim Reaper complete with ported scythe). The suspect makes the fatal mistake of raising his right arm, which has been lowered once again despite orders from uniformed police officer Callahan whom just seconds earlier fired 3 shots at him.
Unfortunately the officer has forgotten he is no longer allowed to defend himself as he has already met his quota of deadly force tokens for the year despite his reasonable belief that the suspect (a man who believes the only good cop is a dead cop) is raising a weapon toward the officer.

The long lost bearded Paul brother was able to analyze every second of the half minute event and criticize the majority of the officer’s actions despite the fact no innocent bystanders were injured nor were any officers injured. The reviewer also promptly informed his followers that officer Callahan has used his weapon multiple times in the line of duty previously. Similar to the wonderful southern tradition of saying “Bless their heart” prior to delivering a significant insult the personality proclaims his love and respect for police officers. I doubt the YouTube personality himself has ever fired a weapon in defense of his own life or someone else’s life but clearly he’s an expert because he’s watched every episode of COPS since the beginning and he’s picked up a very nice tactical polo shirt complete with his YouTube channel logo. I guess there was some damage to the building in the background but I’m going to speculate some more that the owners are willing to repair the damage and not have to deal with the suspect again.
It doesn’t appear that Officer Callahan just drives around until he decides to randomly shoot some innocent citizen because he likes being reviewed by his superiors and the community but rather leads the charge into dangerous situations that most of us try to avoid at all costs. I also think it’s interesting that the OP’s CUT is ‘stop talking, start doing’. Officer Callahan stopped talking when he felt it was time to start defending himself. I pray daily for the men and women that protect this country from foreign and domestic threats.

quote:

Originally posted by jcsabolt2:
Custom milled slide for sure on the cops gun, odd on a police issued firearm.

This is my city issued gen4 Glock 31 and city issued Trijicon RMR.
I got approved to mill the slide as a test case. Everyone else is stuck using the Trijicon RM44 dovetail mount.




I even have a city issued RMR on my personal off duty weapon (Glock 45) for testing purposes. I had that slide milled as well.

I watched John Correa’s video the other day and I disagreed on a few of his “opinions” on the video.

Yes the video does look bad but video doesn’t tell the entire story.

The officer is skilled under pressure and did a fine tactical reload to top his gun off.

Every dept has a “shit finder”. It’s the guy that always finds shit. They get into more fights, they make more arrests, they find more drugs and guns, they might have more shootings under their belt... because they do ACTUAL police work rather than look the other way or grab donuts and coffee from the local stop and rob.

As for John Correa YouTube commentary channel , he is a smart guy, he usually gets it right, and I believe every cop and every citizen that carries a gun should absolutely watch every single video on his channel. And there are thousands of them; it will take you weeks or months to do so. Plenty of real life lessons there to be had....

The Force Science Institute has discussed and warned that body cameras are a double-edged sword when it comes to determining what happened in incidents like this.

The worst problem is that the ignorant will view a video and assume that what they see in it is what the officer saw and perceived. As already pointed out here, the wide angle lenses the cameras use to help provide as wide a field of view as possible distort the perspective to a very large degree and make objects appear to be much farther away than they actually were. In addition, the dynamic range of the images recorded by the cameras may be much less than what the human eye can perceive. In other words, it’s possible that the officer can see things that are not recorded clearly, or at all, by the camera.

Unfortunately, some people are evidently incapable to understanding such highly technical ( ) details, even when they are explained to them and persist in the “I know what I saw, damnit!” mindset.

quote:

Originally posted by sigfreund:
The Force Science Institute has discussed and warned that body cameras are a double-edged sword when it comes to determining what happened in incidents like this.

The worst problem is that the ignorant will view a video and assume that what they see in it is what the officer saw and perceived. As already pointed out here, the wide angle lenses the cameras use to help provide as wide a field of view as possible distort the perspective to a very large degree and make objects appear to be much farther away than they actually were. In addition, the dynamic range of the images recorded by the cameras may be much less than what the human eye can perceive. In other words, it’s possible that the officer can see things that are not recorded clearly, or at all, by the camera.

Unfortunately, some people are evidently incapable to understanding such highly technical ( ) details, even when they are explained to them and persist in the “I know what I saw, damnit!” mindset.

In my near 15 years I’ve taken a lot of classes and training.... the absolute best was a 40 hour Use of Force Analysis class by FSI. A large portion of the class was devoted to looking at video evidence and applying some science to it.

It was fantastic.

quote:

Originally posted by sigfreund:
The Force Science Institute has discussed and warned that body cameras are a double-edged sword when it comes to determining what happened in incidents like this.

The worst problem is that the ignorant will view a video and assume that what they see in it is what the officer saw and perceived. As already pointed out here, the wide angle lenses the cameras use to help provide as wide a field of view as possible distort the perspective to a very large degree and make objects appear to be much farther away than they actually were. In addition, the dynamic range of the images recorded by the cameras may be much less than what the human eye can perceive. In other words, it’s possible that the officer can see things that are not recorded clearly, or at all, by the camera.

Unfortunately, some people are evidently incapable to understanding such highly technical ( ) details, even when they are explained to them and persist in the “I know what I saw, damnit!” mindset.

This. The video is in a sense (partial) raw data, which often cannot fully provide complete context. It's the interpretation of our sensory inputs filtered by our own subjective experiences that can lead to faulty conclusions.

quote:

Originally posted by sigfreund:
The worst problem is that the ignorant will view a video and assume that what they see in it is what the officer saw and perceived. As already pointed out here, the wide angle lenses the cameras use to help provide as wide a field of view as possible distort the perspective to a very large degree and make objects appear to be much farther away than they actually were. In addition, the dynamic range of the images recorded by the cameras may be much less than what the human eye can perceive.

On the flip side, under stress, the camera:
- Doesn't experience tunnel vision.
- Doesn't experience auditory exclusion.
- Doesn't experience distortion of perceived time or distance.
...whereas us pesky, fallible, knuckle-dragging LEOs sometimes do. Sometimes all at once. And as you point out, we might concurrently know a lot more about the context (cough... Graham Factors... cough) than the average camera.

So thankfully, the courts don't consider Use of Force incidents with the same conviction of "Well, it's perfectly clear to ME that..." that the narrator and some in this thread might.