Police kill arson suspect in San Bernardino

[KC&97TA]

He got scared and tried to drive off, hitting a police car in the process.
He is NOT AN ARSONIST. He didn't start a fire.

the title says "Police kill arson suspect"... of course we aren't going to kill suspects, that would make us judge and jurry.

now if we know the person is "attempting to commit or consummate arson", that was the question... seems legal in alot of other states, even have some penal codes.

 

[Harley Quinn]

They didn't shoot him for being an arsonist, they shot him because he was assaulting an officer with a deadly weapon (his vehicle).

The officer or officers who shot at this person were trying to stop him from doing what he was attempting to do (run them over) Seems a very reasonable thing to me.

Inkhead, has not continued to post here

 

[M_Olson]

theres a lot of assuming going on. theres a lot of endings to this story, and acting like we know what it is before the actual truth comes out does nothing but fan flames...god im so not funny

chances are the cops were in the right, its possible they werent. its possible this person was the arsonist, its possible he had some other reason to run. we wont know till more of the story comes out.

 

[standerson]

"I know I'll probably offend LE on this site, but cops are often dirty, bloodlust, or just plain scared ****less, and use their weapons without thought. After all most LE are trained to protect themselves at all cost."

That has to be your butt talking, I would hope your head knows better.

 

[Harley Quinn]

For the start he is a possible arsonist, he may not have been one. The way they will have to determine that now is through the forensic evidence they find.

They may find that he was a serial killer for all we know by the newspaper report right now.

"Dexter" would have done something like that and figured the fires would hide his dirty work

Like others have mentioned it is an early release and more news will follow.

 

[glockman19]

He got scared and tried to drive off, hitting a police car in the process.
He is NOT AN ARSONIST. He didn't start a fire.

So...he was a fleeing SUSPECT, nothing more. So much for Due process. I'd say it was a bad shoot. Based on what I hear here.

It's amazing how bold police are becomming. Especially in CA where based on numbers the guy was probably un armed.

They probably should have taken down the car's plate & description called in a helecopter and let them track it and make a lawfull arest.

Sounds like another recent shooting here where a Gang member was shot and killed for not stopping for a Park Ranger.

What is this country comming to? A police State if you ask me. As I said in another thread I started. Don't be surprised when they show up at your house to confiscate your guns. Feels like Germany in the early 30's.

 

[Harley Quinn]

Don't be surprised when they show up at your house to confiscate your guns. Feels like Germany in the early 30's.

That will be a really tough thing to do now with all the SHTF stuff going down.
But yes they may start shooting sooner and sooner if they start feeling they are being put into danger.

Shooting at a vehicle in some areas is a no no now. Like mentioned get the lic number and get them another time rather then shooting the vehicle full of holes. Plus hitting someone else with a bouncing bullet. Happened a lot with the old 38 spl (bounced off).

Very tragic for all concerned, for sure. I know a CHP who shot at a car trying to run him over one shot, hit 2 persons caught them at the ER 2 hours later.

Good shoot, but that was in the 80's.

 

[JohnKSa]

So...he was a fleeing SUSPECT, nothing more. So much for Due process. I'd say it was a bad shoot.

From the article: "...the unidentified Arizona man backed his car into a cruiser..."

People who want to maintain their status as a merely "fleeing suspects" would do well to avoid ramming the police. A car can be a deadly weapon, just like a firearm--once a person demonstrates that they intend to use it in that manner against the police what happens from then on is their own fault and the police are WELL within the law to respond with deadly force.

 

[tbtrout]

Last time I was taught the rules of deadly force, shooting an arsonist in the commission of arson was legal. That was federal law, state laws my vary.

 

[AntiqueCollector]

I thought this same person had been caught setting a fire earlier, going around on a motorcycle, or was that someone else? Regardless, when he backed into the police he was endangering their lives and they had a right to stop him.

 

[RevolvingCylinder]

Not much of an article and this is the AP after all. If the individuals involved had reason to believe that the man was using the vehicle as a weapon against them then lethal force is justified.

 

[GRB]

Is it legal to virtually shoot a virtual arsonist (a flamer) here on THR?

The shooting by those officers may well have been justified, and the shooting itself has little to do with arson oir suspected arson, and then only indirectly at that. Putting the lives of the officers at risk is why he was shot as per that article, and he apparently did so not by arson or attempted arson but by ramming.

All the best,
Glenn

 

[JWarren]

/Tinfoil Hat ON


Suspected Arsonist.... says the media.

For most of us, we are running militia camps stocked with an arsenal of assualt weapons and large caches of ammuition. And gasp...! some of it was on Stripper Clips allowing for rapid reloading. More news at 10.


I'm sick of our news being reported by sensationalists with no knowledge of ... well, anything. I took Journalism classes in my Master's Program. Every freaking one of them was some kid dreaming of breaking that big story that would get them recognition. They'll probably all be working for the Weekly World News when they graduate. Well, that or the New York Times.

So, I'll reserve my judgement on that. I damn sure am not going to assume that a reporter got it right. After all, Foxnews was reporting that Cho at VT had a 9mm handgun and a 22mm handgun. I'd like to see a 22mm handgun... really.


Now that said....

/Tinfoil Hat OFF


The cops had reason to believe he was starting fires. They tried to apprehend him. He ran. Then he rammed their car. They shot him.

Guys... setting fires is TERRORISM. This is malicious intent to innocent people.

Running isn't going to help your case.

Now, I am not saying we should just be sheep to the powers-that-be. But Anyone that runs takes what they get.

I really think we have watched TOO many movies where the innocent victim runs and develops some elaborate plan to clear his name. Think about it... that is basically the plotline for 90% of the action movies out there. This isn't The Fugative. Sometimes -- maybe just sometimes-- people run because they got caught doing really bad things.

A long-standing debate exists as to whether Art mimics Reality, or does Reality mimic Art. The answer, sadly, seems to be that Reality mimics Art. That means a bunch of Hollywood pinheads are telling us what our own reality is.

And that just makes people stupid.

OK... next.

He RAMMED them. That gets you shot. I don't have a badge, but it would possibly get you shot by me as well if you decided "Hey... I think I'll ram this guy's Jeep." It won't end good for you.

OK... I get it. LEOs have different rules they have to follow. At the same time, they are human beings with spouses, kids, and a Yorkshire Terrier waiting for them at home. They probably don't like getting run over with cars, either. Seems to me that a car is a deadly weapon. Using it like a weapon... well, its gonna get you shot.


Seriously guys.... what happened to our society?


Read any of my posts and you will see that I am no fan of the Nanny State. But I gotta say this. If a lot of people would stop acting like Id-driven infants, the Nanny State arguement would have nothing to stand on.


-- John

 

[LaEscopeta]

I wonder if it would be legal to shoot an arsonist?

20 something years ago in Albany New York I had a co-worker who was targeted by an arsonist. He tried to set fire against the outside of the house at night, with people asleep inside, 3 times before he was caught (all three were put out before they caused serious damage.) After the second fire the city cops recommended my friend get a revolver and signed off on his pistol permit and CCW permit (or what ever it is called in NYS.) My co-worker said the cops told him to shoot anyone with a flame who was outside his house. Not sure if this is exactly legal or not, but the cops and my co-worker strongly believed it was.

(End of story, the brother of my co-worker had testified against the arsonist years before, and in classic dumb criminal fashion he tried to burn down the first house he found with the last name of his enemy on the mail box.)

 

[MASTEROFMALICE]

Whatever would give you the idea I'd be insulted by that?

After all, I wouldn't expect you to be insulted when I mention the "fact" that guys who go by the nickname Inkhead are often half-retarded circus freaks who come from trashy homes and were raised by bad parents. Rumor has it guys named Inkhead have a higher cancer rate, too.

Now, Inkhead, have we learned a lesson? Repeat after me:

"Making things up and presenting them as fact is stupid."

-Love

Master

I know I'll probably offend LE on this site, but cops are often dirty, bloodlust, or just plain scared ****less, and use their weapons without thought. After all most LE are trained to protect themselves at all cost.

 

[hotpig]

Many people do not think Arson is a crime. I get questions all the time when people see me wearing a gun. Even regular patrol officers look twice when they see a armed Arson Investigator.

 

[RPCVYemen]

but cops are often dirty, bloodlust, or just plain scared ****less, and use their weapons without thought

Do know this because many of them were beamed up by aliens from another galaxy at the same time as you, and you saw them in the same labs you were held in?

Or did Elvis tell you this yesterday?

Maybe you have a filling in your teeth that lets you read their thoughts?

Mike

 

[Zundfolge]

Y'all know I'm not the most pro-cop guy in the world, but even I have no problem with a cop opening fire on someone trying to run them down.

As for whether Arson is enough of a crime to justify lethal force, I'd argue that (especially in the case of setting these wildfires) Arson is attempted mass murder, so yeah, light 'em up.

I'm kind of curious who this Arson suspect is, because I still suspect the fires are a diversion of some kind (since they pulled all the CA Nat Guard troops off the border, one wonders what crossed that border while this was all going on).

 

[whited]

.

There's a lot of conjecture here, but what actually happened ?

 

[TexasRifleman]

one wonders what crossed that border while this was all going on

No one but tomato pickers you know. The borders are not a target for anyone other than poor hard working immigrants....

 

[Harley Quinn]

"Police shot and killed a man who fled Tuesday night when officers approached to see if he might be trying to set a fire in San Bernardino. The man, whose name was not released, had led police on a chase then backed his car into a police cruiser, police said."

The above statement was from another news release regarding the 15 various fires that were in the area.

 

[shield20]

In NY:

S 35.30 Justification; use of physical force in making an arrest or in
preventing an escape.
1. A police officer or a peace officer, in the course of effecting or
attempting to effect an arrest, or of preventing or attempting to
prevent the escape from custody, of a person whom he reasonably believes
to have committed an offense, may use physical force ... except that he may use deadly physical force for such
purposes only when he reasonably believes that:
(a) The offense committed by such person was:
(i) a felony or an attempt to commit a felony involving the use or
attempted use or threatened imminent use of physical force against a
person; or
(ii) kidnapping, arson, escape in the first degree, burglary in the
first degree or any attempt to commit such a crime; or

 

[Bailey Guns]

I know I'll probably offend LE on this site, but cops are often dirty, bloodlust, or just plain scared ****less, and use their weapons without thought. After all most LE are trained to protect themselves at all cost.

I'm sure the person who fired the kill shot is mentally upset right now. Most cops who have a first kill become frustrated, and upset.

inkhead: No, you won't offend only LE people here...you'll offend a lot of people.

I find it amusing you'll write this chicken**** statement then you don't have the stones to respond to anyone.

 

[perpster]

Even in uber leftist NY it is legal to use deadly physical force to stop an arson (forcible rape, too). I'd want to be very sure the crime was in fact being committed before using such force, though. It still is NY.

 

[Sistema1927]

IBTL

How did this thread survive past Post #2?