I don’t see how the officer did anything wrong here. Thank goodness for body cameras. I think the camera is a great tool to prevent a public witch hunt when an officer is in the right.

As usual in these incidents we don’t have sufficient information to judge everything completely, but having any sort of burglar/intrusion alarm is saying, “Please, Mr. Policeman, come to my house because there may be a crime in progress and I’d like you to protect me and/or my property.” Once that invitation—no, request—is made, we don’t get to dictate how the police treat the possible crime in progress.

When responding to such situations LEOs are routinely taught to approach the scene in a stealthy manner to help them catch the bad guy(s) and, more important, for their own safety. Announcing one’s presence with lights and siren or by other means such as calling out before the area can be checked is a perfect way to walk into a deadly ambush—as has happened to many LEOs who approached an alarm call, sometimes their last, as nothing more than a nuisance.

If we don’t like how the police respond to a false alarm, then don’t be a delta sierra who can’t keep from setting it off in the first place and, to add a large scoop of sprinkles on top, don’t even realize that they did it.

quote:

Originally posted by sdy:
played the video in slow motion

the homeowner raises his gun and aims right at the officer

You'd almost think that if the officer hadn't fire his shot, the next thing you'd see would be the flash of the homeowners gun

quote:

Originally posted by 9mmepiphany:

quote:

Originally posted by sdy:
played the video in slow motion

the homeowner raises his gun and aims right at the officer

You'd almost think that if the officer hadn't fire his shot, the next thing you'd see would be the flash of the homeowners gun

Maybe. Or maybe the homeowner identified his target and elected not to engage. Maybe he would have done that anyway. In any case, it is a good thing that nobody was injured or killed. As has been stated repeatedly, not engaging and using the phone to contact the PD (911) and get more intel and help would clearly have been a smarter course. Thank goodness this lesson came without any spilled blood.

quote:

Originally posted by slosig:
Maybe. Or maybe the homeowner identified his target and elected not to engage...

The rule is, "Don't point your gun at anything you are not willing to destroy." That means something, and especially someone, should be identified as a threat BEFORE you point a gun at them.

Now I understand that in a high stress dynamic situation the adherence to the rules may get a little "fluid" for lack of a better word, and having the gun inadvertently sweep someone, or you may have it at the low ready and pointed in their general direction while you are identifying them. But he sure looked like he was in the process of acquiring a sight picture, which the cop would reasonably assume meant he was about to be shot.

quote:

Originally posted by gpbst3:
Who has a home security alarm that does not notify them when the alarm is activated? Homeowner would have to had turned the alarm off at the panel or get a call from the alarm company verifying the alarm, right?

Typically (in my experience), yes. I'll offer my own exception, though.

One summer day some years ago I had ridden the motorcycle to work and it began to rain as I left to come home. I put my phone in one of the hard saddlebags to keep it dry, and rode on home. I rolled into the garage, shucked my wet clothing, and headed upstairs for a shower and dry clothes. By that time the rain had stopped, and I started opening the windows upstairs.

I heard police radios outside and wondered what was going on. So I looked --> two cruisers in front of my house, and an officer headed for my front porch. I went downstairs to see what was up and was greeted with, "Do you have some identification, sir?" What the??

Shortened version: I had left the phone in the saddlebag when I came in. Upon opening the garage door, I triggered the alarm. I was concentrating on shedding my wet clothes and completely didn't think about the alarm. By the time I got upstairs (to where the alarm panel was), the panel's chime had stopped its audible alert and the panel had dialed the alarm service. The alarm service called me, but by then I was in the shower. Having not reached me, the service dispatched police. There we go.

The Ludwigs' case may be nothing at all like that, but my point is that it can happen that a homeowner sets off his own alarm and doesn't realize it.

quote:

Originally posted by slosig:

quote:

Originally posted by 9mmepiphany:

quote:

Originally posted by sdy:
played the video in slow motion

the homeowner raises his gun and aims right at the officer

You'd almost think that if the officer hadn't fire his shot, the next thing you'd see would be the flash of the homeowners gun

Maybe. Or maybe the homeowner identified his target and elected not to engage. Maybe he would have done that anyway.

As you say, Maybe.

Having had a gun pointed at me,having subsequently taken that person into custody, and later talking to them...it has been my experience that the only thing that causes someone to "not engage" is supreme cool and confidence in their own ability to make the shot...I'm just not seeing that here (having listened to the interview)

quote:

Originally posted by RichN:

quote:

Originally posted by slosig:
Maybe. Or maybe the homeowner identified his target and elected not to engage...

The rule is, "Don't point your gun at anything you are not willing to destroy." That means something, and especially someone, should be identified as a threat BEFORE you point a gun at them.

This further reinforces that going to the door was a bad idea, but let’s indulge in a little thought exercise. Imagine you are trained, you believe a criminal is at your door (and just for the sake of this exercise assume you’re not smart enough to stay inside and call for help). Is it possible that when you open that door and see that the “criminal” you expected has a gun in his hand you might automatically present yours? Yes, your finger must stay straight and surgically attached to your safety spot until you make the conscious decision to fire, but how possible is it that you are going to see a gun in the other guy’s hand and leave yours down while you mentally process the situation?

quote:

Now I understand that in a high stress dynamic situation the adherence to the rules may get a little "fluid" for lack of a better word, and having the gun inadvertently sweep someone, or you may have it at the low ready and pointed in their general direction while you are identifying them. But he sure looked like he was in the process of acquiring a sight picture, which the cop would reasonably assume meant he was about to be shot.

No argument at all about the cop taking the shot, just pointing out that the guy in the house may have been bringing the gun up on a conditioned response while he was processing what he saw. Hopefully, he figured out he was pointing a gun at a cop and stayed off the trigger. Again, the whole situation could have been avoided by calling 911. “I’m joe blow, badge #<x>, at my dad’s house at <wherever>, someone is trying to break in. Please send a uniform.” Presumably the dispatcher knows she has an officer there and defuses the situation. Guy may take some ribbing at the office, but ought to be able to avoid extra holes in his dad’s house...

This message has been edited. Last edited by: slosig,

quote:

Originally posted by 9mmepiphany:
As you say, Maybe.

Having had a gun pointed at me,having subsequently taken that person into custody, and later talking to them...it has been my experience that the only thing that causes someone to "not engage" is supreme cool and confidence in their own ability to make the shot...I'm just not seeing that here (having listened to the interview)

Went back and watched the interview again, this time listening more carefully to what the young man in the house said. It sounds like he heard the shot and bugged out back to cover without having made the connection he was pointing his pistol at an officer. While one would hope that he would identify the individual he was pointing his gun at (recognize the uniform) before pulling a trigger, it doesn't sound like that is what stopped him from firing. Maybe he would have got there before firing or maybe not, but it doesn't sound from the interview that he figured out it was a deputy and that was why he withdrew.