Good Move - Smart Cop

[mikeb302000]

http://www.orovillemr.com/rss/ci_18606762?source=rss">The Oroville Mercury Register reports

A man suspected of tending an illegal marijuana grow Tuesday morning near Highway 70 reportedly tried to remove a handgun from the holster of a deputy taking him into custody.

The suspect, Humberto Lepe-Cervantes, 25, of Jalisco, Mexico, grabbed the firearm, but was quickly subdued, a press release stated.

No other suspects were located. The deputy wasn't immediately identified.

A total of 6,018 mature marijuana plants and 550 pounds of processed marijuana was removed.

We've certainly seen cases in which "grabbing for the cops gun" received a harsher treatment than being "subdued." Congratulations to the unidentified officer for doing the right thing.

Or, I should say for not killing the stupid gun grabber (you see, this is the proper use of that expression). Being involved in a marijuana raid, of course, is not the right thing. This is waste of everybody's time and money.

What's your opinion? Why do some cops subdue the criminals and get their hands dirty, so to speak, while others just blow them away? Does it depend more on the circumstances or the temperment of the police involved?

http://mikeb302000.blogspot.com/">(cross posted at Mikeb302000)

What's your opinion? Please leave a comment.

[Webster Green]

1. Definitely the temperment of the police involved.

Lots of cops would just execute the guy on the spot, and get their rocks off doing so.

That being said, many of these large scale grows on public lands have a very negative impact on the environment, and I don't see these types of growers in a positive light, however, the solution is removing the profit motive through legalization, not spending a fortune on the impossible task of attempting to find and destroy all the illegal grows. I say that as an avid grower and smoker of the miracle herb. I've seen first hand the impact on the woods by greedy guerilla growers. These endeavors are a far cry from the efforts of mom and pop growers, trying to get by and doing their thing with a lot of respect for the environment. :hippie:

[mikeb302000]

5. yes indeed, legalization is the answer

at least to the problems caused by pot investigations and prosecutions.

[ileus]

2. He should have received a short wood shampoo at the very least.

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

3. I don't see what this has to do with gun politics, rights, or legislation. Why post it here?

Just more of your unwarranted blog spam, fishing for hits.

[mikeb302000]

6. it's posted here as an example

of a cop NOT shooting a criminal. Is that so hard for you to connect?

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

11. I don't find it all that unusual...

The criminal reached for and grabbed the cop's gun. What do you expect the cop could have shot him with... the gun he was in the process of losing? It's pretty basic knowlege that the cop needs (control of) his gun to shoot someone. Likewise, if the cop wrestled it back from the guy then that guy now no longer has a gun. I would expect that unless otherwise armed with some other weapon, the cop had no reason to employ lethal force agianst the guy. Would you expect the cop to shoot an unarmed man who has been subdued?

And, as I questioned earlier, why is a random story of a cop NOT shooting a criminal in the guns forum?
Shood we start posting all instances of cops who didn't happen to shoot the citizens they serve & protect?

I still don't agree this has anything to do with firearms politics or firearms policy.
Just more blogspam.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

29. More likely it was post to push traffic to your blog

[jeepnstein]

4. It depends on the situation.

If a suspect is grabbing at your weapon then you've entered into the deadly force zone. He's trying to kill you and that's no fun at all. I've been through it. The fellow we "subdued" that night really didn't want to go to jail. He did mostly because we're not allowed to lose. A deputy who was with me at the time was going to shoot him but couldn't get a clean shot since we were rolling around in a duck pen at the time. I finally managed to get enough space between myself and the suspect to use my baton since I didn't want my firearm out of the holster for obvious reasons. A few blows to the arms and hands with a baton was enough to convince the fellow that He Fought the Law and the Law Won. If that didn't work out then we would have wound up shooting him.

[mikeb302000]

7. another beautiful of proper law enforcement n/t

[jeepnstein]

10. And it would have been proper to shoot him too.

I'll never second-guess an officer for shooting a suspect who is ripping at someone's holster.

[RSillsbee]

14. Rolling around in a duck pen

Bet you smelled sexy after that


JIC :sarcasm:

[jeepnstein]

15. Did I ever...

Eau de Duck Poo mixed with OC spray. Add to that the fact that my vest carrier was always a bit funky and it's not a pretty picture.

[RSillsbee]

37. If you want to find all the cops they're hangin' out

in the duck shit....

Just doesn't have the same ring to it

[iverglas]

17. curious about this fellow you subdued

A few blows to the arms and hands with a baton was enough to convince the fellow that He Fought the Law and the Law Won. If that didn't work out then we would have wound up shooting him.

What was the offence he was alleged to have committed?

Supplementary: whose life or limb was in danger?

[Glassunion]

19. Fron the decription that he gave, I would have to say

that Officer Jeepnstein's life and limb as well as his parter were in danger. The suspect was grabbing at Officer Jeepnstein's side arm.

As to what offense he allegedly committed it does not matter. It could have been as simple as jay-walking. Once you start grabbing at an officer's weapon the game changes. Period.

[iverglas]

24. what a fun interpretation

Officer Jeepnstein's life and limb as well as his parter were in danger. The suspect was grabbing at Officer Jeepnstein's side arm.

Just any old excuse to kill somebody will do in your book, eh?

As to what offense he allegedly committed it does not matter.

Ah. Killing a jaywalker is better than LETTING HIM FUCKING GO if you can't hang onto him.

I get it.


I'm afraid that *I* don't see quite as much in the account actually posted as you apparently claim to.

That would be why I asked *the poster* the questions, since he seems to be the one and only one who knows the answers.

[Glassunion]

30. No not any old excuse.

Just any old excuse to kill somebody will do in your book, eh?
No. However, grabbing for an officer's weapon is a good way to get shot though. If you attempt to take an officer's weapon, you are a deadly threat. You are making an attempt to take a deadly weapon. Period.

Ah. Killing a jaywalker is better than LETTING HIM FUCKING GO if you can't hang onto him.

I get it.

No I'm afraid you don't. Killing a jaywalker for jaywalking is bad. Killing a jaywalker who assaults an officer and tries to take their weapon, is a completely different story.

Are you saying that if you can't hold onto a suspect for jaywalking, you should always let them go? How about if they steal a pair of sun glasses from a store? Should the officer even bother with these types of crimes? Should the police just sit by and ignore minor crimes, even though they witness them?

I'm afraid that *I* don't see quite as much in the account actually posted as you apparently claim to.

Reading is fundamental.

[one-eyed fat man]

20. Does the original offense really matter?

Supposing the local constable comes to issue you a citation for your dog license having expired. You take umbrage, and slap him, next thing you know you are in a tussle. Should he take a sap and knock you senseless, would you argue he used excessive force in enforcing a dog ordinance?

Resisting arrest, assault, grabbing the cops gun, these are escalations (and new crimes) that may very well and rightfully culminate in a policeman shooting a suspect.

The only possible bearing the original arrest warrant might have is that if it were for a violent crime where several people had been hurt or killed the suspect has already demonstrated a proclivity to violence and must be guarded against. Not every malefactor is as compliant as Otis.*



* Otis Campbell. Otis works as a glue dipper in a furniture factory Monday through Friday, and drinks all weekend. After a binge, Otis will usually lock himself in the town jail until he is sober. He has a key to the front door of the courthouse and the cell keys are hung on a nail near the cells (presumably, to accommodate Otis).

[SteveM]

33. This is "he was just stealing a T.V." response to home-invasion deaths...

Gun-controllers/banners persist in the cockeyed notion that someone who has broken into your house to steal, or mugged you on the street for your wallet, or held a gun on you in a store to get your money, reduce the "crime" to theft. No. That isn't the real crime. The real crime is home invasion and aggravated robbery in which the victim's life is threatened. The reason some controller/banners look past the elephant in the room is their desire to prevent people from defending themselves with deadly force.

It's not guns per se that bothers them. It's the whole notion of self-defense using deadly force. They don't want people to do this.

[iverglas]

38. actually, it was a question about a situation recounted as fact

I'm not surprised you can't see the difference, or feel the need to make up shit to avoid the question.

The real crime is home invasion and aggravated robbery in which the victim's life is threatened.

If that's the case, anyhow, eh?

The reason some controller/banners look past the elephant in the room is their desire to prevent people from defending themselves with deadly force.

I presume you've missed my posts about "home invasion" being the offence of robbery.

Actually, no, I won't presume to presume such a thing.

[mikeb302000]

43. I applaud the cop who chooses not to shoot

that's because too many of them shoot too quickly. Part of the reason is they think of criminals as a sub-species of human. Did you ever hear cops talk about "perps?" Did you ever hear the euphemistic expressions that have for the offending criminals? Now flip around on some of the most popular pro-gun blogs, you'll hear the same thing. They call these PEOPLE scum, goblins, POS, thugs, scumbags, etc., etc., etc. This attitude makes it easier to shoot them at the first oppurtunity.

The real criterion for deadly force is that you reasonably believe your life is in jeapordy. A guy grabbing at your gun, yep, a teenager climbing in the window, yep, a guy holding a gun who refuses to drop it immediately, absolutely. Then of course you've got the really good examples in which the cop "thought" his man was going for a gun but it turned out to be a cell phone or nothing at all.

[one-eyed fat man]

49. .....but it turned out to be a cell phone

For someone living in Italy you seem woefully uninformed. INTERPOL has posted warnings about these cell phone guns coming out of the former Yugoslavia for some years now. The Polizei in Germany have shot suspects reaching for such cell phone guns. Another one of your hare-brained notions dashed on the rocks of reality.

Italian Police arrest man with phone gun

http://www.geek.com/articles/gadgets/italian-police-arrest-man-with-phone-gun-ready-20081127/



http://gizmodo.com/5097754/cellphone-gun-delivers-hot-sneaky-death-cant-send-text-messages





http://www.spike.com/articles/ygd5t1/italian-mafias-secret-cell-phone-gun

[SteveM]

50. Anyone who breaks into my house is "scum, goblins, POS, thugs (correction),...

da thugs, scumbags, etc., etc." No problem with the descriptions; they are just bad humans. It doesn't mean I'll shoot, but the descriptions are apt and no predictor of the use of deadly force. Incidentally, the vast majority of defensive gun uses do NOT end in the (would-be) victim's firing a gun.

[RSillsbee]

23. As soon as you attack a cop

you have crossed a huge line. The original offense is irrelevant that attack becomes the main issue.

[Name removed]

8. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[one-eyed fat man]

9. You have removed all doubt!

Your heroic undocumented immigrant and oppressed migrant agricultural worker made an unsuccessful attempt to grab a deputy's gun. You will note he was in the company of other police and Forest Service authorities. Many departments issue retention type holsters that mitigate against an officer's gun coming loose or being grabbed during a scuffle.

Just what do you suppose your little buddy there had in mind? Had he been successful any officer present who had a clear shot at him would have been more than justified in taking it. Once the suspect made a grab for the gun he raised the stakes and turned a scuffle into a life and death fight. As he did this in the presence of not only the deputy who was arresting him but the accompanying cohort of law enforcement he either thought he might affect an escape thus avoiding arrest and deportation, or take out as many cops as he could before they killed him.

Obviously you feel that a suspect making a grab for a cop's gun should not be viewed as a lethal threat.



That really is YOUR brain!

[iverglas]

18. obviously ...

Obviously you feel that a suspect making a grab for a cop's gun should not be viewed as a lethal threat.

... you need ... oh, we'll just say "new eyeglasses". Because we're feeling enormously generous.

[RSillsbee]

31. I guess in your world

leathal force isn't justified until the bad guy is actually aiming the gun at you

[SteveM]

34. Yes, that is their world. Even so, they may STILL say it isn't justified.

[RSillsbee]

36. It's been my experience

that a lot of the pro restrictionists here claim to be gun owners at some point. I am sure that if their life were in danger the standards would change dramatically. My post only applied to we, the unwashed masses

[iverglas]

39. at least in my world

people who say things that aren't true are subject to public opprobrium.

[RSillsbee]

40. There is a large gap between objectively true and subjectively true Madame NT .

[mikeb302000]

44. did you miss the part

where this cop in this story DID NOT SHOOT THE GUY?

[one-eyed fat man]

47. No

Lots of cops don't shoot anyone everyday. All the article states is the Mexican marijuana farmer made an attempt to grab the deputy's gun. It indicates the deputy was not alone and had at least some US Forest service personnel with him.

Many police agencies for the past half century have required uniformed officers to use some kind of retention holster to preclude a snatch and grab by a suspect. With no more information than the article presents you cannot say what happened. But let's build you a little logic tree so your cannabis enhanced synapses won't have to struggle.

Doper makes a grab for the gun. If the doper fails, beat him about the head and shoulders with a nightstick to teach him some manners. Haul his ass to jail.

Doper makes a grab for the gun and succeeds. Somebody shoot him before he figures out how to work it. Tag him, bag him and send him to the morgue.

Based on the article it looks like the first situation was likely. Rolling around on the ground wrestling for his own gun is a place a cop never wants to be. The most likely time for something like that to happen is when a single cop has to get close enough to cuff a lone suspect. As this cop was was not by himself he would have likely used a technique that allowed his fellow officers to intervene as needed.

Perhaps I misunderstand you altogether and you have been saying all along that it is amazing that the cop didn't used the flimsiest of pretexts to engage in a little extra-judicial killing as is their wont?

[Name removed]

12. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[RSillsbee]

13. What does this have to do w/ policy discussion?

This thread isn't about guns it's about a guy that got arrested for weed

[iverglas]

16. hmmmmmm

Self-defence without using a gun to kill someone?

No, such talk cannot be permitted ...

[Blown330]

21. Snork.

Just snork.






And unrec for OP.

[RSillsbee]

22. I've defended myself w/out using a gun to kill anyone

and I've discussed it here. many self defnse uses of fire arms involve no shots being fired at all.

The fact that the cop was armed is incidental to the story.

[iverglas]

25. so what was your question

again?

[RSillsbee]

32. what does this story have to do w/ policy discussion

Specifically how does it for these parameters Discussion of gun-related public policy issues or the use of firearms for self-defense belong in the Guns Forum.

And why can't the whole world be like the gun free worker's paradise that is Canada ?

[Remmah2]

26. Proof that police don't need firearms.

Yup.

[iverglas]

27. proof that you have no ... um ...

... ability to read words on a monitor ...

Yes, that must be it. I'm sure.

[Name removed]

28. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

35. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Glassunion]

41. We've also certainly seen cases in which "grabbing for the cops gun" ends up in a dead cop.

Get pulled over in a traffic stop... dead officer. http://www.theppsc.org/forums/showthread.php?t=134
Steal a pair of sunglasses... dead officer. http://www.nytimes.com/1984/06/16/nyregion/officer-is-killed-with-his-own-gun.html
Steal a truck... dead officer. http://www.bakersfieldnow.com/news/local/107067123.html
Domestic dispute... 2 dead officers. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/12/nyregion/12cops.html?_r=1
No crime whatsoever... dead officer. http://www.nbcchicago.com/news/local/officer-involved-shooting-racine-61st-97976009.html
Walking a prisoner to a van... dead officer. http://themunz.wordpress.com/2011/04/18/deputy-sheriff-sherri-jones-bowie-county-sheriffs-department-texas-eow-monday-april-18-2011/
Steal a car... dead officer. http://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/25910241/detail.html
Try to steal a car... dead officer. http://themunz.wordpress.com/2011/01/06/chief-of-police-ralph-painter-rainier-police-department-oregon-end-of-watch-wednesday-january-5-2011/

You see there is a funny thing about law enforcement officers. They have to walk around all day with a bull's-eye painted on them.

Personally, I feel that if someone is attempting to take an officer's firearm, they are a deadly threat. They are making an active attempt to gain possession of a deadly weapon in a struggle.

I would be very interested in knowing what you think an LEO should do in that situation, when someone is attempting to take their firearm.

[mikeb302000]

45. prevent him from doing so

without killing him. The story I linked to was an example of that.

[Glassunion]

48. Your view is too narrow. And your evidence is anecdotal.

prevent him from doing so without killing him.

You have ONE example of ONE LEO taking down a bad guy who was going for the LEO's firearm where the LEO did not shoot the bad guy.

This ONE example is evidence of nothing and you can not base any type of policy or procedure from it. In 2003 nearly 1 in 5 officers killed as part of a crime, were shot with their own (or a partner’s) weapon.

Here is the problem with your statement.
Fact: Not EVERY officer in EVERY situation can effectively prevent a bad guy from taking their weapon.
Fact: Police officers are not super-humans... They are merely human.
Fact: By law, grabbing an officer's weapon constitutes a deadly threat.

Please share with us your view on a tactic or policy that will work in every single situation where a suspect is attempting to grab or take control of an officer's weapon? Please also let us all know what is the intent of someone grabbing at an officer's firearm? Why are they doing it?

What's your opinion? Please leave a comment.

[benEzra]

42. I'm not sure if you noticed that the gun was holstered, not in the officer's hands.

If the criminal's hands are on the holstered gun, the only think keeping him from using it against the officer is the fact that it's locked in a snatch-resistant retention holster. The last thing the officer would want to do in that circumstance would be to release the gun from the holster and initiate a tug-of-war over the gun (which would be necessary in order to shoot the guy), because the officer could easily lose that tug-of-war since the bad guy already has a grip on the gun.

Instead, if the bad guy's hands and focus are on the holstered gun, he's an unprotected sitting duck for hand/elbow strikes and takedowns, or deployment of a backup weapon (OC, Taser, baton, knife, whatever) should the dynamics warrant it.

If the gun were already in the officer's hands and someone were trying to wrestle it out of the officer's grip, it would be a much different scenario, but in this case a takedown was a no-brainer regardless of the officer's temperament, idealogy, or preferences. The circumstances drove the response here.

And I agree with you about the necessity of ending Prohibition. I'm not sure why some people find it so hard to apply the lessons learned from alcohol prohibition here (and sadly, this isn't just a U.S. thing).

[ileus]

46. Seems more like trained LEO policy than gun policy.