What would happen in MT? vs whats happening in CA (Great Falls: vehicle registration, school)

[cherishedtiger]

So, here in wonderful Sacramento (note sarcasm) a local thug (as I am calling him) was pulled over due to expired vehicle registration. He ran, then, shot a cop 4 times and fled. Went into hiding, until someone ratted him out. He then resisted arrest and I guess ran again. Finally arrested the police were taking him in. Said thug, suddenly goes quiet and limp in the back of the patrol car and dies.

Now, the family of said thug, and community is holding candlelight vigils, and going after the police department for police brutality.

The whole thing is on camera (for the whole police brutality reasons) and not once was the thug ever beat, or brutalized by police.

The officer which was shot is in ICU but expected to live.

So, now all that's on the news is the investigation into the guys death, the family screaming stop the violence stop police brutality etc... what would have happened if say this would have taken place in the more peaceful state of Montana? Just wondering if its only California's cops that always seem to get the dirty end of the stick when it comes to things like this.

[FreedomThroughAnarchism]

I certainly hope there is more to the story than the offense you described. A web search at this juncture turns up very little information, as the police were reluctant to initially release details about what prompted the traffic stop.

If the "criminals" act was a malum in se offense rather than a trite malum prohibitum, I might feel sorry for the cop. The information you are relaying here indicates it wasn't, so I don't [feel sorry for the cop], barring additional details on the reason for the initial pursuit.

I consider this the moral equivalent of a guy who was caught standing on one foot while rubbing his belly counterclockwise on the third Tuesday of every month, which could just as well be against the law, should some idiotic legislature deem it so, and should some dangerous bureaucrat have the moral audacity to enforce it (nobody has a gun to their head making them do their job - so the typical argument that they "have to" is a total wash). In neither case do I consider the aggressor to be the one who legitimately defended himself from a possibly pernicious bureaucrat who is hell bent on victimizing ostensibly innocent people who have not objectively harmed another person by virtue of their specific actions. If it turns out, for example, that this guy got drunk and played sidewalk slalom with a bunch of pedestrians and maybe that is why his license was suspended such that he actually harming people, or otherwise engaging in reckless conduct, then I would view him as the bad guy.

Given the brief narrative offered thusfar, it seems this guys described offense amounts to a malum prohibitum with all the moral wrongness of a person who was caught illegally standing on one foot while rubbing his tummy counterclockwise on the third Tuesday of every month, and so absent additional details this seems a trite malum prohibitum offense not befitting serious consideration in a free country.


Translating that into slightly more Montana'ish terms, I'd feel the same was if this guys alleged offense was violating some trite malum prohibitum gun law (the difference between a person using their gun to commit an armed robbery versus a person who's offense was simply having a magazine that holds 6 cartridges instead of 5, or having a gun barrel that is 0.01 inches too short). I consider the aforementioned as morally insignificant (insofar as I do not take that to be a genuine harm which should ever legitimately be the object of a criminal offense) as a guy whos offense is rubbing his tummy counterclockwise while standing on one foot on the third Tuesday of every month. People like this need to do whatever it takes to physically stop the bureaucrat who is hell bent on harming citizens who have harmed no one.



So.... I certainly hope this guy original actions which promoted the initial chase was genuinely wrong such that it warranted his death, and perhaps forthcoming details will shed some light on that.

[cherishedtiger]

Here is the news story:
Injured School Officer 'Awake And Talking' - Sacramento News Story - KCRA Sacramento (http://www.kcra.com/news/29560788/detail.html - broken link)

[MTSilvertip]

There was a similar case in northern Montana about 2 years ago where a 16 year old kid stole a car and was pursued by the local sheriffs office and MHP.
The kid finally ran over a strip put down by the police that blew out his tires.
He stuck a rifle/shotgun, (can't remember which it was at this time), out the window of the disabled car and started firing at the police.

The officers returned fire and the suspect was killed.

His family tried to sue because he had been such a nice boy, and the cops should not have returned fire, but let him shoot until he ran out of ammunition I guess. The case was basically thrown out of court.

Does that answer your qustion?

[bongo403]

I was getting all worked up to comment on the first poster's reply, about how lawless and chaotic our society would become if everyone were allowed to shun authority to the point of murder, then I noticed the user name, so I doubt any amount of reason will sink in.

In response to the original question - I always hate to generalize in cases such as this. Yes, there are people in Montana who can be (and have been) very vocal about being victimized when the average thinking person could clearly see that this was not the case. Whenever this happens, an investigation usually is necessary to absolve any innocent parties of the accusation. With that said, I doubt that in Montana the police would ultimately be found at fault, but it doesn't sound like that has happened in California (yet) either. So yes, I could see the events you described so far happening here as well, although I would suspect it would be less frequent than you see it where you live.

[cherishedtiger]

Thank you, yes it happens here frequently. And its always the same "he was such a nice person, he would never do that!"

I dunno, just was curious to see if it was as big a thing elsewhere as it seems to be here. Here it seems like police are always under fire from someone. Crazy....

Thank you!

[cherishedtiger]

Originally Posted by MTSilvertip

His family tried to sue because he had been such a nice boy, and the cops should not have returned fire, but let him shoot until he ran out of ammunition I guess. The case was basically thrown out of court.

Does that answer your qustion?

Yup! Sounds like what the family is doing here in sort of the same way, but he was such a nice boy! He would never do that!! Ugh... Nice boys dont shoot at cops regardless the reason.

[GLS]

Originally Posted by cherishedtiger

Here is the news story:
Injured School Officer 'Awake And Talking' - Sacramento News Story - KCRA Sacramento (http://www.kcra.com/news/29560788/detail.html - broken link)

I was listening to a local Sacramento TV news station and the following additional information was reported that was not in the article: The perpetrator had an acute respiratory condition, i.e. asthma.

It is unclear if he was on medication that would have ameliorated a potential acute asthma attack. Note that the article did say the police administered CPR in an attempt to save the perpetrator that shot one of their fellow officers.

In terms of comparing California to Montana, I suspect that Montana police would make the same heroic effort to try to save a person's life, even though he had just shot one of their comrades. I also suspect that there are a few people in Montana dumb enough to shot a police officer.....hopefully just not as many as in California.

[MTSilvertip]

I know this is an old thread, but the second court case for the incident I noted in a prior post has just wrapped up.
Montana jury clears officers of negligence in Keeley trial | Great Falls Tribune | greatfallstribune.com

I was mistaken when I said that the kid who stole the car and shot at police was 16, he was 13 according to this article. I try to correct myself when I find I have put up incorrect information.

Anyway, the point still holds. The Montana jury only took 2 hours to find in favor of the Deputy and Highway patrolman involved.
The mother was suing the state for 2 million dollars for wrongful death. She said the LEOs should not have returned fire when the kid shot at them.

Other articles have noted the kid had told friends that he wanted to commit "suicide by cop" because he had just broken up with his girlfriend.

Sad case, but the law enforcement officers have now been found a couple of times to have acted properly when fired upon.

[Klapton]

I find the best way to determine if something was actually just is to re-tell the story without anyone being identified as police.

One person stole a car. Two people persued the thief, trying to recover the stolen vehicle. The thief opened fire on the persuers. The persuers returned fire, and the thief was killed.

I got almost no real information from the CA story link about how or why the now dead man was in custody. If I had access to the whole story, I would apply the same process. But then, I am one of those wierd people who actually BELIEVES that all men are created equal, and that some are NOT more equal than others.