Family claims there was no reason to shoot Grandma

Perspectives on our world and our universe, how it works, what is happening, and why it happens. Whether by a hidden hand or natural laws, we come together to hash it out, and perhaps provide a little bit of education and enlightenment for others. This is a place for civil discussion. Please keep it that way.
Forum rules
1) Remain civil. Respect others' rights to their viewpoints, even if you believe them to be completely wrong.
2) Sourcing your information is highly recommended. Plagiarism will get you banned.
3) Please create a new thread for a new topic, even if you think it might not get a lot of responses. Do not create mega-threads.
4) If you think the subject of a thread is not important enough to merit a post, simply avoid posting in it. If enough people agree, it will fall off the page soon enough.
User avatar
Blaze
Crazy Person
Posts: 20221
Joined: Fri Feb 14, 2003 10:31 pm
Location: Michigan

Post by Blaze » Thu Nov 23, 2006 1:17 am

Well it's not like anyone wants the old woman put on trial for premeditated attempted murder or something. But it seems pretty obvious to me she is clearly at fault, since there are a number of scenarios which would have involved someone entering the home forcibly that was NOT an attacker.
Image

User avatar
jimkatai
Crazy Person
Posts: 1982
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2003 5:37 am
Real Name: Yahweh
Gender: Male
Location: Olympia, WA

Post by jimkatai » Thu Nov 23, 2006 1:25 am

And there are plenty of scenarios for an elderly woman of someone entering the home forcibly that was an attacker. In a case where it was an attacker, should she just open the door and let him in? Given, a threat at gunpoint would have been advisable but if she somehow saw or knew through looking through a peephole or something that they also had guns, then a threat at gunpoint would be kind of pointless.
Stand in awe of my creativity

User avatar
Blaze
Crazy Person
Posts: 20221
Joined: Fri Feb 14, 2003 10:31 pm
Location: Michigan

Post by Blaze » Thu Nov 23, 2006 1:33 am

So you're a fan of the "shoot first, ask questions later" idea, then? Okay, I'll remember that the next time an officer guns down somebody he thinks has a weapon, maybe.

And no, before you ask, it doesn't matter she's an old lady. If she's capable of using a deadly weapon, she needs to be capable of using it safely.
Image

User avatar
jimkatai
Crazy Person
Posts: 1982
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2003 5:37 am
Real Name: Yahweh
Gender: Male
Location: Olympia, WA

Post by jimkatai » Thu Nov 23, 2006 1:41 am

they also had guns
In most cases with this conditional? Hell's yeah, shoot first!

EDIT: And "guns down somebody he thinks has a weapon?" You do realize that it is proper protocol to shoot at the person if he has what seems to be a weapon out. Regardless if it's a squirt gun or a cell phone, if that cop has a reasonable explanation for why he thought it was a gun, and that explanation can be corroborated, then I accept it.
Stand in awe of my creativity

User avatar
Blaze
Crazy Person
Posts: 20221
Joined: Fri Feb 14, 2003 10:31 pm
Location: Michigan

Post by Blaze » Thu Nov 23, 2006 1:53 am

Yes, but you'd argue that one too. I mean, you're arguing this one.

Any gun saftey course, ANY gun saftey course will tell you to be ABSOLUTLEY certian what you're shooting at before you shoot. If you're a hunter, and part of that deer you see is behind a tree, DO NOT SHOOT. That might actually be a deer carcass another hunter is carrying. If there's a mugger hiding in the shadows, DO NOT SHOOT. There might be 5 of them down that dark alley, and shooting one will get you killed.

She couldn't use the weapon safely. She shot before she knew what she was shooting at. She shot at something that scared her. What if instead of police officers, it had been a 12 year old kid who thought the place was deserted and went exploring?
Image

User avatar
NorthernComfort
Crazy Person
Posts: 2755
Joined: Fri May 23, 2003 8:13 pm
Real Name: Alex
Gender: Male
Location: Brooklyn, NY

Post by NorthernComfort » Thu Nov 23, 2006 1:56 am

If there's a mugger hiding in the shadows that is actually about to attempt to kill you, you have the right to take him down.

Whether or not you do it, purely personal choice
What if instead of police officers, it had been a 12 year old kid who thought the place was deserted and went exploring?
Has it really come down to a bunch of bullshit "what if" statements?

Zzzzzzz......
"I guess I have a gift for expressing pedestrian tastes. In a way, it's kind of depressing." -Bill Watterson

User avatar
jimkatai
Crazy Person
Posts: 1982
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2003 5:37 am
Real Name: Yahweh
Gender: Male
Location: Olympia, WA

Post by jimkatai » Thu Nov 23, 2006 2:08 am

Yes, but you'd argue that one too. I mean, you're arguing this one.
Ummmmm... no. and about the training, Officers are taught to shoot first but to also warn against such movements that might be misleading. There is a big difference between discerning between a dear and a person and discerning between a dangerously armed person and an unarmed person. Deers don't shoot back. And about the mugger, you are told not to shoot because the mugger is most likely not going to shoot you if you give him the money. Your life is not in direct danger if you just let pride and possessions go in favor of your life. Police are supposed to put their duty above their life so letting the man go free is not an option and their life is in danger.

EDIT: And that is a pretty stupid statement within itself. I could have ignored the comment and not argued against it but I did argue against it, so obviously that statement is wrong.
Stand in awe of my creativity

dmpotter
Crazy Person
Posts: 4057
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2003 7:10 pm
Location: Massachusetts, US

Post by dmpotter » Thu Nov 23, 2006 3:21 am

[quote="NorthernComfort";p="695287"]Has it really come down to a bunch of bullshit "what if" statements?[/quote]
Come down to? That's all we can do.

There are "what ifs" that place her at fault and "what ifs" that place the police at fault.

Since the news stories don't give us enough information, we can't decide which what-if actually happened.

User avatar
Deacon
Shining Adonis
Posts: 44097
Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2003 3:00 pm
Gender: Male
Location: Lakehills, TX

Post by Deacon » Thu Nov 23, 2006 3:52 am

There are two versions of the story I've seen so far:

1) The police execute the warrant, announcing themselves properly, and knocking down the door. The woman is grabs a shotgun and blasts three of them before police eventually return fire, killing her.

2) As the police make their way to the door, having gotten out of marked police cars and everything, she starts gunning them down.

Note, here, that I don't know what kind of shotgun it is, but we're talking about THREE shots, here, probably pump action 12 or 16 gague. If you've ever fired a shotgun like that, you know that this is no sweet, frail little old lady just getting a cup of tea and a little saucer of milk for her cat. Once again, if the resident who opened fire on police were simply referred to as "the assailant" without mentioning the age, this would not be news. Instead, people are immediately jumping to say, "Awww...poor little old lady," a dangerous assumption.

Either way, if she were guilty, then it's a damn good thing she was taken down. If, as some of you are saying, she were simply too senile to own and responsibly wield a weapon, then it's just a tragedy and a damn shame, and perhaps the media-pandering daughter should be held partly responsible for arming her. According to her, the police "shot her down like a dog," though she seemed unconcerned that at least three men were fired upon, as three were hit before police even opened fire.

And those are pretty much the options. THAT seems to be "case closed" either way.
The follies which a man regrets the most in his life are those which he didn't commit when he had the opportunity. - Helen Rowland, A Guide to Men, 1922

User avatar
jimkatai
Crazy Person
Posts: 1982
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2003 5:37 am
Real Name: Yahweh
Gender: Male
Location: Olympia, WA

Post by jimkatai » Thu Nov 23, 2006 3:59 am

Or if the announcement wasn't clear. Case not closed Deacon. I'm not saying she was senile. I'm saying she might not have known who was screaming and trying to knock down her door and might have seen a weapon in the cop's hand and shot in panic, especially with them being in plain clothes. The marked police car makes it an iffy situation, and the fact that the police were probably wearing their badges on their neck. But, in a moment of panic, when you have a shotgun branded because someone is trying to bash your door down and said gun is your only defense, and you see a gun being pointed at you, one can't really blame Grandma for having an itchy trigger finger.
Stand in awe of my creativity

User avatar
Deacon
Shining Adonis
Posts: 44097
Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2003 3:00 pm
Gender: Male
Location: Lakehills, TX

Post by Deacon » Thu Nov 23, 2006 4:24 am

jimkatai, NOBODY has said the police didn't execute it properly, not even the neighbors or any other witnesses. Even the spotlight-grabbing daughter didn't accuse them of that. And why did the assailant have a shotgun at the ready? You don't just magically have a shotgun appear in your hands if you're shocked and surprised to hear someone knocking your door in.
The follies which a man regrets the most in his life are those which he didn't commit when he had the opportunity. - Helen Rowland, A Guide to Men, 1922

User avatar
JudgeMental
Crazy Person
Posts: 2138
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2003 1:48 am
Gender: Male
Location: Oregon

Post by JudgeMental » Thu Nov 23, 2006 4:52 am

Hmmm, I'd love to know more about the situation. It seems that there is just enough information given to hang almost anybody you like, from the little old lady with a gun she shouldn't have had, to the police screwing up their intel or something.

In my nose, the situation smells of a much messier background story than what's being reported on. The only FACTS that seem to be established are as such

1. The 'victim' shot first.
2. The police responded with appropriate force.

What caused the woman to shoot first is unclear. Why the police where there (reason behind the warrant, for instance) is unclear. The "what ifs" go in circles. Why is this even being debated? It's like debating the existence of life on Mars based on those grainy pictures of that "face" on the Martian landscape.

Based on the conversation in this thread, I hope nobody here decides to run for public office. I certainly wouldn't vote for any of you :P

*edit* Hear, here, what's the difference?
Last edited by JudgeMental on Thu Nov 23, 2006 5:07 am, edited 1 time in total.
Image

"HTRN, you've failed. Give up now and praise the awesomeness that is JudgeMental." - Arc Orion

User avatar
Blaze
Crazy Person
Posts: 20221
Joined: Fri Feb 14, 2003 10:31 pm
Location: Michigan

Post by Blaze » Thu Nov 23, 2006 5:03 am

Well I wouldn't vote for you, 'cause you're a lousy fence rider! :P
Image

User avatar
JudgeMental
Crazy Person
Posts: 2138
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2003 1:48 am
Gender: Male
Location: Oregon

Post by JudgeMental » Thu Nov 23, 2006 5:05 am

Heh, if I were to become a politician, there are votes I wouldn't get, and it would NOT be because I'm a fence rider :P I'm far too opinionated to be voted into public office. That, and I don't brown-nose enough.
Image

"HTRN, you've failed. Give up now and praise the awesomeness that is JudgeMental." - Arc Orion

User avatar
jimkatai
Crazy Person
Posts: 1982
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2003 5:37 am
Real Name: Yahweh
Gender: Male
Location: Olympia, WA

Post by jimkatai » Thu Nov 23, 2006 6:02 am

jimkatai, NOBODY has said the police didn't execute it properly,
Including me. Have you seen how a "No Knock" warrant is served? It is served with a lot of noise and speed, most the time, because the situation warrants a shock tactic to debilitate the opponents with limited fatalities, i.e. the occupants are most likely dangerous. And about having the shotgun ready, do you know what neighborhood she lived in? Taking into account that she is 92 and easy prey for robbers and rapists, it isn't surprising at all that she had the shotgun at the ready, especially when she lives on "run-down northwest Atlanta street where Kathryn Johnston lived fortify their windows with metal bars and arm themselves for protection."
Stand in awe of my creativity

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Ahrefs [bot], Common Crawl (Research) and 0 guests