Quote:The officer is identified as plainclothes. Did he clearly identify himself as a police officer and clearly show a badge while approaching the assailant's truck, or was the assailant approached by some guy in a t-shirt and khakis shouting at him and waving a gun? None of the pictures posted show a badge around his neck, as many undercover officers wear. Several states have laws now that prohibit unmarked vehicles from initiating traffic stops, and preventing incidents like this is one of the main reasons why.

 

It's tough to condemn the initial incident without knowing the specifics of the situation. If the officer had clearly identified himself as such, including showing the assailant a badge, then it's pretty clear-cut. Note that simply emerging from an unmarked vehicle with light bars flashing is not sufficient identification as a police officer. It could easily be someone posing as an officer. If the assailant truly did not know (or have reason to believe) that the man approaching his vehicle with a gun was actually a police officer, then, well, if some unidentified, unknown guy comes running up to my car shouting and flashing a gun, I'm going to fight back by any means necessary as well, and I will do whatever I need to to make sure he stays down until a uniformed police officer shows up.

 

The conduct after the fact of taunting the injured officer by posting pictures and video online is disgusting, regardless of whether the person assaulted is a police officer or not. Police brutality, police overreach and militarization of police are three major problems in this country, and there are a lot of disgusting excuses for police officers out there, but something like this makes the people involved no better than them, and is completely counterproductive to efforts to rein in police officers and restore the rights that they deceptively take away from American citizens every time they walk up and say hi.

 

As to whether the officer should have used deadly force, two more thoughts arise:

 

1. What deadly force? He didn't have his gun, and there's no mention of a backup weapon in play. Presumably, if he was packing a small-caliber revolver around his lower leg, he'd have drawn it, used it and been completely justified in doing so once his gun was in an assailant's hands. I just don't get why people are saying that the officer should have shot the assailant. What would the officer possibly have shot the assailant for before his weapon was taken from him? Reaching for a cop's gun does not give that cop the right to kill you. Actually taking a cop's gun makes you fair game.

 

2. The notion that police are having second-thoughts about using deadly force is a good thing. If you want to spend a couple of terrifying hours on some boring weeknight, read through the articles (of varying credibility, no doubt) about what police are trained to do in terms of initiating interaction with you, getting your ID (whether they have a Constitutional right to it or not) and using that information, interrogating you by way of a friendly conversation and tricking you into voluntarily surrendering every Constitutional right that can be employed in your defense and ultimately trying to use that conversation to find a reason to arrest you. Then go to a couple of cop message boards and check out their attitudes. Watch some YouTube videos of actual police interactions.

 

Police in this country are trained that you and I, the common citizens, are all criminals first and human beings second. They're not around to serve and protect; they're around to harass and intimidate. When you're pulled over for speeding by the highway patrol, you're not an honest citizen who was doing 86 in a 75 without thinking about it. You're running drugs, smuggling illegals, in a stolen car, drunk or some combination of the above, and they're trained to lie, cheat and steal (including the old "I detect the odor of marijuana" trick) their way into a consensual search of your vehicle and a full confession. Because of that training, many officers are unnecessarily quick to resort to unlawful orders, intimidation and threats. If recent events are causing police officers to stop and think before drawing their firearm, then good. Something positive has been accomplished, and we're one small, informal step closer to reminding police that they exist to protect us, not manipulate, twist and urinate on the law to control us.