This article was originally published by Ryan McMaken at Mises Institute
When advocates of gun confiscation complain about “guns” and say “no one needs a gun for x” all they are really saying — whether they understand it or not — is “I want only cops and soldiers to have guns.”
While gun control advocates often claim to be suspicious of police power, logic dictates that the gun-confiscation position is simply the position that only government employees should have guns. Similarly, more mild gun-regulation positions are designed to increase the coercive power of government over the taxpaying citizenry, and to lessen access to private sources of self-defense — thus increasing private-sector dependence on government police for “protection.” The gun-regulation position is premised on the idea that only the police can really be trusted with gun ownership.
And what a terrible position that is.
Richard Black could tell us more about this. Were he still alive today. After Black killed a home intruder in self-defense, he called the police. Sometime later, the police showed up and shot Black dead in his own home.
The dead victims of the school shooting in Parkland could tell us more also. When sheriff’s deputy Scot Peterson — who was specifically supposed to provide security at the school — was faced with an armed intruder, he ran away and hid.
And now we hear about the case of Amber Guyger. Guyger is the police officer who confused another man’s apartment for her own. She trespassed on the man’s property, saw his “silhouette” and then open fired. Her victim, Botham Shem Jean, died.
A Double Standard
In cases like these, police could not be counted on to use firearms appropriately — or they failed to use them to defend the innocent.
Moreover, this latest case serves to illustrate, yet again, the enormous double standard that is employed when police behave in ways that any private citizen would be roundly and viciously denounced for. Were a private citizen to do what Guyger did, his actions would be provided as more evidence that private ownership of guns ought to be curtailed.
Guyger has claimed in her defense that she “gave verbal commands” to her victim before she shot him.
That this should even be considered any sort of “defense” requires a special kind of deference to government. But this is how police officers and their defenders think. If a normal person is woken or surprised in the middle of the night by an intruder with a badge, the victim is supposed to know — by magic, apparently — that the intruder is a police officer and then do what you’re told. Never mind that the person might just be claiming to be a police officer.
For police of course, private citizens are always supposed to respond calmly and obediently when screamed at by multiple police officers. Often, the victims receive conflicting orders from police.
Similar rules do not apply to police. Police — we are told — “must make split-second decisions under extreme pressure. “In other words, if the police make a poor decision under pressure, they’re heroes who did what had to be done. If a private-sector taxpayer like Richard Black makes the “wrong” decision? He deserved to die.
The law reinforces this view as well. It is extremely rare for a police officer to be prosecuted for gunning down unarmed victims. In the Black case, the police chief has already blamed the 73-year old war veteran for his own killing. The chief’s reasoning? Black, who was hearing impaired, should have responded faster to verbal police commands. Case closed.
Even when a trigger-happy police officer is brought up on charges, the law is written in such a way as to make it extremely hard to thread that needle. Members of the jury are easily browbeaten into coming down on the police officer’s side. We saw this in the case of Daniel Shaver, an unarmed man who was crawling and begging for his life when gunned down by police. Police officer Philip Brailsford was so fearful of this weeping, trembling man on the ground that Brailsford just couldn’t keep himself from opening fire. The jury’s verdict? Not guilty.
What If a Private Citizen Did the Same Thing?
But imagine if a private citizen did what Guyger did. If a private citizen trespassed into someone’s house, screamed at the residents, and then opened fire — regardless of the details in the case — we all know what would happen.1 We’d all be told we need to have “a national conversation” about how there are “too many guns” in private hands. If the whole thing were shown to be an accident, pundits would endlessly be quoting statistics designed to make it look as if guns in private hands lead to countless accidental shootings. But since it was a police officer who did the shooting, we’ll hear about none of this. Why? Because gun control does nothing to control the use of firearms by police. Although we’re repeatedly told that guns in private hands lead to spades of accidents, mistaken shootings, and overly-aggressive gun owners, none of this applies when that gun is in government hands. Then it’s all just unavoidable. It’s never a problem with the guns themselves.
And the double standard doesn’t stop with the media. Were the roles of Jean and Guyger reversed, the response by criminal-justice officials would be totally different. A person who trespassed into someone else’s home and started shooting — even if totally accidental — would be arrested immediately. A plethora of charges would be aggressively applied to the defendant, ranging from illegally discharging a firearm to criminal trespass to second-degree murder.
In Guyger’s case, she isn’t even arrested at the scene, and so far she only faces manslaughter charges. The Texas Rangers have handled her with kid gloves, allowing her to turn herself in at her convenience. All her statements to the police have been treated as indisputable facts — and not as the claims of a person who breaks into people’s homes and starts shooting. Attorneys who have read the arrest warrant are saying that, given the way it is written, law enforcement clearly thinks it’s all just an accident and “the Texas Rangers were careful not to implicate Officer Guyger.” It’s the usual “professional courtesy” of the Thin Blue Line. There is one set of laws for government agents. And another set of laws for the taxpayers who pay all the bills.
Guyger’s chain of mistakes in this case belies the pro-gun-control argument that police ought to have a monopoly or near-monopoly on firearms because private citizens can’t be trusted with weapons. These ordinary people are too likely to be mentally unstable, too trigger-happy, or too lacking in training to be allowed to own firearms.
But who is to defend us from the mentally unstable or poorly-trained police officers? Or perhaps from the ones who are too distracted or unintelligent to figure out which apartment is theirs?
It is precisely this sort of thing that led to the infamous Indiana law which explicitly states that it is not a crime to defend ones self from an abusive police officer — even using deadly force if necessary. That law was a response to an Indiana Supreme Court decision which stated that “there is no right to reasonably resist unlawful entry by police officers.”
Amber Guyger will benefit form this sort of judicial thinking if her case ever goes to trial. The deck in stacked in favor of the government and its law enforcement arm. It’s not a coincidence that government judges too often side with government police. They all work for the same organization — and they all live off the sweat of the taxpayers who have very little say in the matter. Moreover, courts have ruled that police have no obligation to protect the citizenry. Thus, “officer safety” is priority number one.
[RELATED: “Lack of Police Accountability Shows the “Social Contract” Isn’t Working” by Ryan McMaken]
At this point, the details of Guyger’s motivations and actions remain vague. But let’s assume it was just an innocent mistake. There’s not much comfort there since we’ve already seen the double-standard — even in cases of accidents — employed for police shootings and shootings by private citizens. The definition of “innocent mistake” varies widely between police officers and everyone else.
But could anything have been done to change the outcome in Jean’s apartment? Even once we know the details, it will be impossible to say — and there’s no way to assume that Jean would have successfully defended himself with a firearm in this case. But what if Guyger had missed at first? Botham Jean would have been perfectly rational to retreat, grab a gun, and then return fire. Then Jean might at least had a chance. After all, what reason had he to believe she was a police officer beyond her uniform? It’s not as if imposters can’t buy those. And even if Jean had believed she was a police officer, he still would have been within his rights — morally speaking — to shoot her dead.
Few who know the realities of real-life violence would see this is a “good” alternative — but it’s hard to see how this is any worse than a reality in which police can shoot innocent bystanders without any fear of self-defense on the part of the citizenry. For gun-control advocates, however, this is all too messy. For them, it would all be much more neat and tidy to make sure that private citizens like Jean have no access to the tools of self-defense. “Why you just want the Wild West!” is the typical refrain. The implication is that in a “civilized” society, these sorts of “shoot-outs” should never happen. Apparently, being shot dead while defenseless by a government-employed home intruder is the preferred “civilized” alternative — and only when we all learn to embrace this sort of untrammeled police power will we all be “safe.”
- 1. Guyger’s defenders are already trying to claim she is innocent of any misdeed because Jean’s door was unlocked. However, whether or not the door was locked is irrelevant to the question of whether or not Guyger was trespassing.
Ryan McMaken (@ryanmcmaken) is the editor of Mises Wire and The Austrian. Send him your article submissions, but read article guidelines first. Ryan has degrees in economics and political science from the University of Colorado, and was the economist for the Colorado Division of Housing from 2009 to 2014. He is the author of Commie Cowboys: The Bourgeoisie and the Nation-State in the Western Genre.
If you carry a badge, an elected person or a member of the 1%: you are above the law. Remember when Reagan said: “I am the president, I am above the law”.
Folks, it just goes on to prove yet again that the Brown-Shirts (Piglet killers I mean Cops) can just about do whatever in the world they want and then make up some silly story and reason and about 99.9% of the time, they get off Scott-free! I really don’t understand what has truly happened to the United States. The more I know, the more disgusted and infuriated I get. . .The Gov’t is NOT to be trusted and you best believe that Gov’t is NOT your damn friend for a second (although they do get to STEAL close to 1/2 of our sad and pathetic so called paychecks.
I don’t remember Reagan saying that.
Could you provide a link verifying it along with the context in which it was said?
FWIW. I’ve also heard that phrase attributed to both Obama and Trump, and I think it was also attributed to Bush as well but I don’t know for sure that it was actually said by them.
Could have been a joke, like when he said something like.’Russia has been outlawed, the bombers are on the way’.
Anyone even tries to break in my home they are gonna die. I’ll not just injure them to sue me or make up some shit. They die. Cop or not. Warrant or not.
At this point in the game I would have to agree. There are so many different ways that criminals of all types use very sophisticated tricks to enter your property or obtain info that, in regard to personal preservation, it’s best to use the same tactics as police and just start shooting. Just know the cowardly cops will not stop until you are dead. If you shoot 10 they will just get 20 more backup. Funny how a police states looks and works isn’t it? And it seems no matter how courteous or accommodating you may be to a cop, they often try to escalate the encounter into an arrest or firefight. POLICE STATE unveiled.
I think the home invasion story of Mr. Black is sort of like the folks who found the coffee cans full of 100+ year old gold coins in California.
The San Francisco mint claimed they were stolen and wanted them back. legal issues followed.
Those folks made the mistake of letting other folks know about their great find. rather than quietly selling them one my one at local coin stores all around the pacific northwest.
Mr. Black, honest 73 year old from another generation of americans did what he thought his duty was, call the police.
But we know live in a VERY different American from Mr. Black’s memories of America.
Here in very rural America the locals tell me local shootings follow the rule of three S’s
Shut the hell up about it.
WE might all do well to heed this advice.
Buy Quicklime and jumbo trash bags to have on hand should the need arise.
If someone invades your home, Its probably not a pillar of local society anyway, and with their mistake, they may as well just become another missing person.
These Pigs dressed in there revenue raising costumes with a badge are no different than any other Thief or Trespasser, and YES YOU DO have the right to shoot and kill them like any other thief trespassing or who is NOT-Invited and without permission to access or cross your property line and or comes on or wanders onto your property without permission. They carry guns and your life is threatened everything you see them.
This is why I put up plenty of NO Trespass signs around my property perimeter and I have a barbed wire security gate at my entrance with a chain and lock. Always keep it locked and secured. Any Mutha F*cker in any uniform or government shill or code enforcement or any other F-N Pig gets a bullet if they cross the line. This is why we have AR-15’s and use Green Tip Steel penetrators to pierce through their Pig Protection armor. Kill them, as they are in violation of the law!!
I had a St Trooper at my gate wanting to come onto my property and I said NO, I had County Code enforcement wanting to come onto my property and I said NO. I have had a couple CO Sheriff’s Deputies at my Gate and Not once did I let any of these costume clowns on my property. Unless they have a written Warrant signed by a judge, they cannot come onto your property period for any reason. Know the law folks. My Gate is very intimidating with 3 strands of sharp barbed wire and over 6 Ft tall. And No Trespass signs and a Video Recording Written on the No Trespass signs plainly visible at my gate. And you know what, they all became instantly very friendly, because they just may be filmed and their behavior be used against them in a court of law. Record secretly or film them every time as this is the open public air and there is NO expectation of privacy especially when they have not been contracted by you, but they approach you and start their questioning. You do not have to answer to any of them. Know the Law Folks, and don’t get taken advantage by any government costume clown.
Menzo, same goes for me. I don’t care who it is trying to break into my home or what they’re wearing. They die, plain and simple. They just need to forget the idea if they want to live. If that guy had been armed he would’ve been justified in shooting that stupid bitch. And she thought it was HER apartment? WTF was she smoking?
I had a Thief Pig steal about $80 off my wad during a traffic stop in Tampa back in 2006. I emptied my pockets and my wad hit the ground. I picked it up, and at least $130 in the wad, mostly $20’s. When I got my money back, there was about $32 left. I told my ATTY about that, and I got my charge greatly reduced. Hmmmm…. They did not even put up a fight in court. F*ck Pigs Scum thieves. Fact: It is NOT against the law to record, film or photograph Pigs in public. Case Law. Regardless of what they try to tell you. You have a right to film and record them. You tell them its for your safety and theirs and there is no perceived or expectation of privacy while in public. Know your rights, and F*ck them.
TSB, that’s right about videoing and recording cops in public and there are several federal court rulings that uphold the practice. There’s also a US Supreme Court ruling that says NOBODY, INCLUDING COPS, HAVE ANY REASONABLE EXPECTATION OF PRIVACY WHEN THEY’RE OUT IN THE PUBLIC.
Reagan said: “I am the president, I am above the law”.
The only thing Reagan said is “I do not remember.” He was ruthlessly mocked for it, then he was diagnosed with Alzheimer.
I believe you may be thinking of Nixon, who said “If the president does it, it is not illegal.”
Read Grisham’s book titled Rouge Lawyer about common occurance of police killing innocent homeowners and the cop and prosecuter and judge cover ups.
Isn’t there an IQ test, or do they want just the dumb robots?
From what I understand, she was arrested Sunday and criminally charged with Manslaughter. (Murder would require showing specific intent to do it)
That isn’t what I would call getting off Scott-free.
“(Murder would require showing specific intent to do it)”
In order to find that you have to investigate. Law Enforcement doesn’t do real well investigating their own.
Make sure you kneel at the next National Anthem….
I don’t understand how your allegation of not being patriotic comes from my distrust of authority. Do police investigate themselves? Ask Frank Serpico. Is he unpatriotic? The Philadelphia “special narcotics” squad has been repeatedly disbanded about every twenty years. The officers had homes in Stone Harbor NJ. They were impossible to afford on their wages. They socialize virtually exclusively with other cops, its Sgt Schultz time,” I see nothing”, “I hear nothing”,” I know nothing”. Does “internal affairs” get them? Nope the FBI does it and its done covertly so as to not tip them off.
I’m 100% correct.
Cops protect cops until they are utterly impossible to protect or the cop testifies against another cop. As my attorney friend, now deceased, who authored the “Second Amendment” in the Delaware State Constitution in 1987 repeatedly said.
“For police it’s cops, then family of cops, then everyone else”.
The below was written by him and put through the legislature and signed into law.
Article I Section 20 was added to the Delaware Constitution in 1987: “A person has the right to keep and bear arms for defense of self, family, home and State, and for hunting and recreation”.
If YOU walk across the road and hurt someone in their house, would you reasonably expect to go free, or go to jail.
If she gets off scott free: that state just printed a killing license for everyone.
Whoops… wrong Apartment AGAIN!
Jeeze Mrs. Jonston, that’s your 9th mistake this week… We’ll let you off with a warning, tbis time !
Well there is more to the story that we do not all know yet. I also read where witnesses said that she was yelling and pounding on the door demanding that it be opened. So lets wait and see exactly, as more facts roll out. Of course we all know Pigs Lie their asses off and she is just trying to cover her ass, and say oops she made a mistake. Mistake or not, this dumb Low IQ costume clown needs to be sent to prison or face Murder charges. Manslaughter is a Joke. Try Murder 1 B!tches.. Can’t even trust the FBI to come in and investigate, because letting their own investigate, well they all cover for each other and lie.
This is the most asinine excuse I’ve ever heard. Who does not recognize their own apartment especially after they have opened the door?
I have seen my wife, my mother, and my grandmother all get in to the wrong car in the parking lot a number of times.
My grandmother even got into the wrong car and her key worked starting the car!
Any questions? The officers walked. That wasn’t a shooting. That was an execution.
Go to copwatch. There’s plenty of them.
So her apartment was decorated exactly as his apartment?! I don’t think so. She knew exactly where she was.
Motivation? How about she’s just a bitch on a power trip.
She probably was attacked when she entered the wrong apartment and shot the guy.
She will later be found not guilty.
Police know that their shootings will be the most investigated and scrutinized shootings that ever occur.
It is MUCH easier for a citizen to justifiably kill someone than for the police to justifiably kill someone.
You are = SHEEP. Copsucker!
You know, to be a LEO is a thankless task. If you want to be a law enforcement officer, you probably shouldn’t be one. A third of the people will like you. A third of the people will hate you. A third don’t care. Maybe the last are the ones you should fear.
Our crazy legislators often make stupid laws and many are not lawyers. I reckon you should at least have been a judge and know the law thoroughly to even consider being a legislator. And we elect by popularity which is asinine. How is that logical?
So some guy or maybe a lady decides that since they most likely were soldiers, they might make good police or troopers or deputies. Well, that ain’t logical. A soldier kills people and breaks things. That’s what they do and that has nothing whatsoever in common with being an officer enforcing the law.
Now, I like supporting LEOs. They have a horse manure job. Everyone likes to bend the law. “Oh I can speed just a little more because I am in a hurry and it’s justified because I am special. These illegal drugs will not impair my driving. That neighbor is a jerk and I’m gonna clock him and shut his stupid mouth.” And so on.
And so they see us when we are not at our best but often as sniveling, creepy, sociopaths. And it wears on them. And they meet the seriously warped folks who are psychopaths who abuse women, create prostitution, sell drugs to kids, extort money, cause mayhem, etc. These psychos will hurt anybody who tries to stop them. And LEOs have to routinely see the satanic face of evil.
It’s an EVIL that Hollywood and popular music celebrates. Thug culture.
What in the world does this do to their personal relationships? It screws them up just as much as being a soldier. Sometime if you have a neighbor who is a policeman, invite him to have a beer. By the third one he is telling you is marriage is on the rocks, his kids hate him because of his job, he hates his job, etc. He sees all the ugliness of civilization that we pretend is not there.
He absolutely knows the Devil exists. Demons exist.
It stinks to do that line of work. In many ways, the very same issues that exist in being as nurse or a pastor where you see horrendous abuse or sin every single day, starts to harm their minds and spirit. Some jobs are so awful but essential and the responsibilities are not what you think they are.
A cop’s responsibility is to keep wolves from the sheep. We foolishly teach people to become sheep. And so wolves prey on often near helpess sheep.
Now because of all that, the laws often get bent for LEOs. They protect each other because anyone they arrest can then claim harrassment. That is just the same as a teacher, a physician, or a pastor.
The chance of a LEO being tried and convicted is terribly low. It is so bad that if a sociopath or psychopath becomes a LEO, there is not much chance of it going to trial or conviction.
I am not sure why anyone would want to do it. I suspect that at least a third are altrusitic and wanting to be heroes protecting and serving the community. The same proportion are like that as nurses and pastors. But the rest are just trying to make a living and a portion are EVIL.
Evil is everywhere and evil folks seek positions of authority which shield them so they can harm the helpess.
Bottom line, the cop was wrong and the victim was wrong too. WHILE HE STILL HAD 911 ON THE PHONE, Mr Black should have retreated to his bedroom with his grandson and STAYED ON THE PHONE while the cops came in the apartment. And should NOT have had a gun in his hands, Then Mr Black should have asked the 911 operator to name the cops that were coming into his apartment and then ask the cops their names. That way he would know that they were really cops. AND NO MATTER WHAT, STAY ON THE PHONE WITH 911 AND NEVER HAVE A GUN IN YOUR HANDS WITH COPS AROUND. I’m not saying this was Mr Black’s fault, but he made several mistakes that lead to that cop, who may indeed be a POS, killing him.
nope. WRONG DOPE HEAD. YOU HAVE EVERY RIGHT TO HAVE A GUN IN YOUR HAND IN YOUR OWN HOME. GO READ THE CASTLE DOCTRINE. SCREW 911, WE DONT CALL 911 WHERE I LIVE. WE TAKE CARE OF OUR OWN BUSINESS. 911 AINT GONNA STOP ANY COSTUME CLOWN FROM SHOOTING YOU. THIS COSTUME HO WAS OFF DUTY AND NOT CARRYING ANY RADIO OR VIDEO CAM TO RECORD ANTHING.
REMEMBER SHOOT TO KILL, DEAD PERSONS CAN’T TESTIFY AGAINST YOU IN COURT, SO IT IS YOUR WORD ONLY, THAT COUNTS.
Nope, sorry but you’re mistaken. The man has the right to take action against ANYONE who forces their way into his home. It’s irrelevant who they are. Self-defense is a RIGHT, NOT A PRIVELEGE. The cops was wrong, NOT that homeowner.
TAKE A LOOK AT THE FACE OF THAT BITCH. I AM A GOOD JUDGE OF CHARACTER.
That woman is pure EVIL. Look at her, Jesus H Christ, LOOK AT HER. Possible lesbian man hater. All she needs in the tats and its MS13.
If a cop like that approached me, I would have concern, as a martial artist, I would have concern. This bitch is very bad, very bad, did the act, murdered and innocent man. The police departments is responsible for hiring this physco, sick evil bitch, and should have known better not to hire on someone with this type of look to put on the streets to put people lives in danger. This not a cop bashing comment from me, since I have friends who are cops and know really good ones, who protect and serve and are here to stop bad people and protect the innocent.
But this bitch should not have been allowed to join the police force. Who did the physco evaluation? that person is also liable.
From what witnesses said, they said her outside of the victims door, and I saw that video that they had posted, showing her pouncing back and forth, outside of the victims door, they heard her yelling at him, let me in, let me in. So she lied her ass off, and others, now its confirmed that this bitch, MS 13 look a like cop, lived right below the victim, and she complained about him being too loud. She not just killed a black thug, the killed a man who works for Risk Management Insurance company, a highly respectable and responsible job, he had a good career, was goal oriented and was a pastor, and good African American citizen. So she just suddenly accidentally parked on the 4 floor, entered his suite by accident, saw something move, thinking that it was and intruder, gave verbal commands, that he disobeyed, they shot him on cold blood, and calls the ambulance for aid. I DONT BUY THIS CRAP. THIS IS TOTAL BULLSHIT. If they aquit her, this is going to be the trigger of a major civil war all over this country. The only negative is that the globalist will like the opportunity to deploy the chi-coms and UN and this is the perfect excuse. This cop was involved in another incident in which she shot another man who survived, who was a suspect, not involved in any crime and she got off on that one, now she is at it again.
I still believe 100%, that civil and revolutionary war will break out on the United States continent, and any one in the cabal, thinking that bringing in china, Russia and other UN nationals to police the American people, you globalist have lost your minds. The people will not be putting up with anyone, cops UN, chi-coms, russians, barging in their homes, shooting them, raping them and their children, dragging off women and children to camps, for mass rape, torture, and the other sick shit that UN soldiers like to do to people and children. You got it coming, don’t try that in America. You globalist and rogue cops need to pay attention. Trust me when we tell you that the American people will never kneel to this. You do not want a war with the Patriots and the American people. I could get killed in a car accident any day, disappear, not to ever post again, buried in a local grave yard, and nothing will stop what is coming in this country.
Revolutionary war and civil war 2018-2025.
Well said. Panic in Year Zero part two coming.
Just in case nobody knows what you are talking about.
Panic in the Year Zero (1962)
It’s an unusual for its time post-apocalypse film that probably made the studioheads nervous versus standard benign escapist fare.
“…lived right below the victim”
So she lived on a different floor? Damn, mistaken apparent on a different floor.
Good post. And I agree, that is one creepy looking bitch. Looks like the type who seeks out trouble and/or fabricates/escalates situations. I would cross a street just to avoid her, cop or not.
“”Guyger has claimed in her defense that she “gave verbal commands” to her victim before she shot him.””
Long enough for ANY sane, intelligent, aware ‘person’ to recognize….”””Oh, wait, that’s not my sofa”””..or lamp, or wall color for God sake.
This was murder..test for drugs yet??
This female costumed clown probably fell off her miniature tricycle and hit her head before going to the wrong apartment and killing the occupant.
He wasn’t shot because he was in the wrong apartment. He was shot because he wasn’t cop. And there is, as of now, no protection for not being a cop. They have what is called “qualified immunity”. Look it up. She will never spend a day behind bars.
It’s a serf versus the King’s Agents issue.
I dont take orders when I am in my own house.
The Texas Rangers also stood by and let the Waco Massacre happen. Texas Rangers ? =. Cowards?
Amber Guyger lived a block from the police station. She walked home. That meant she climbed 4 flights of stairs instead of 3 flights, going up a whole extra flight of stairs — OR she took the elevator and pushed “4th Floor” instead of “3rd Floor” as she lived right underneath the victim.
You’d have to be drunk or under the influence to make that mistake. And then to also not notice a big bright red rug in front of the door that she must have been standing on when she was pounding on the door yelling “Let me in” and when she tried to open the door — a red rug that wasn’t there when she left the apartment. How did she not see it when she was standing on it.
Details are not only sketchy but inconsistent.
Her story is full of holes and contradictions. They supposedly took a blood-alcohol test at the scene and also drew blood for a toxicology report 6 days ago when this happened and still no results have been released.
Seems to me that if the tests were negative they would be eager to release that information and we would have been told 4 or 5 days ago when they had the test results instead of this complete silence bs. Or maybe the tox report came back positive for anabolic steroids that many cops inject on a weekly basis, especially the younger ones like her, and it’s still under investigation.
Whatever really happened something isn’t adding up here.
CORRECTION to my 1:16 yesterday post:
The latest report says she did not walk home. She drove home and parked on the 4th level instead of her floor, the 3rd parking level.
Certain details of the story keep changing.
Anyway, if she was drunk and/or under the influence of drugs at the time of the illegal entry/shooting then she was also DUI/DWI and should be charged for that as well.
Hopefully, this gets posted soon, instead of two days from now as usual.
In my home town a cop off duty failed to navigate a turn (in good weather). He went across one yard, then between two homes and ended up deep in the back yard of the neighboring home. He got out of the car and fell on the ground. Cops arrived, no DWI check.
“Cops protect cops”.
We don’t have the full story, so I won’t convict the cop right away. That being said she should have been arrested and cuffed like anyone else would have been, had they trespassed and shot the resident of a domicile, even if it was a mistake.
That is the biggest error we make, is treating cops special even if they are off duty. Cops should get their guns issued when they go on duty and surrender them when they are off duty.
Off duty they should be subject to the same laws as us civilians regarding concealed and open carry of our personal weapons.
One could make the argument that sworn cops are always on duty,
So are soldiers, but in a non-war zone they are not allowed to be armed on post, and off post have to follow all the civilian rules in addition to the UCMJ.
Treating cops like the “little” people when they are off duty will go a long way towards decreasing the “us and them” mentality they develop.
I disagree. Cops need to be armed when off duty. The problem is not bad cops, the problem is disarmed civilians. Cops are human. We all make mistakes. No one should go to jail for an accident or an unintended mistake, but she should have to pay for the funeral and make restitution for this wrongful death. Say 10% of her paycheck for life.
Answer this with honesty. Why do people become cops? And don’t give me some bullshit answer like to protect and serve, or to help people. Be real.
It’s all about lust for power and control, right? Yes it is.
I know a few. For some its family linage, they’re all cops. For some others it pays well with security in a small town with somewhat limited opportunities otherwise. Big city cops have “perks” that aren’t necessarily quantified officially. State Troopers in NJ is a very prestigious position that pays damn well too.
Excellent! Cop unions, cop lobbyists and cops have all lobbied very hard for special accommodations. If a cop is off duty, they should have a CCW license, in proper order, all I’s dotted, T’s crossed, up to date and with current photo ID and absolutely ZERO drugs/alcohol in system- Just like everyone else. Police state on display.
“Cops are human. We all make mistakes. No one should go to jail for an accident or an unintended mistake”.
All I ask is that cops be treated like all the rest of us “humans”.
If I accidentally kill someone with a gun, I’ll be arrested and handcuffed at the scene. I’ll then be processed into jail, appear in court to be charged or not. The off duty cop should be treated the same way. That is all I’m saying. The purpose of courts and prosecutors is to determine what charges will be brought based on the evidence the police have gathered or observed.
Cops can be armed off duty, they can get concealed or open carry permits for their personal weapons like the rest of us, but should be their personal weapons. Duty weapons should be kept at the station, issued when they go on duty and returned when they go off duty. Cops want to act like the military they should have to have the same discipline.
Cops are killers for the state, all a heightened result of 9-11, DHS and the fake war on terror, a license to kill everyday innocent Americans. It happens every day. Until this government calls off their goon squads justice will cease to exist. This is a result of a hyper criminal police state with a green light to kill and rob rather than to protect Americans.
A trained police officer, should be able to defuse a situation, firing weapons is second or third level of action. How Long had Amber Guyger been living at that apartment?? If it had been a few days, a mistake can be made. But after 30 days, it would be very difficult for anyone to make that mistake of wrong apartment.
To make a mistake of going to the wrong apartment, and it is your apartment, that person is not mentally competent to be a police officer and needs immediate firing. If the trained police officer fired first and did not have the verbal skills to defuse a situation, that officer needs immediate removal. These are two basic mental health test evaluations that should be easy to evaluate, and Amber Guyger did not pass these two very basic mental health testing evaluations. Amber is dangerous and should never be allowed to have a firearm in her position for the rest of her life.
He had a large red rug/welcome mat in front of his door. She had to be standing right on it in order to pound on his door and when she tried to open the door. How could she not see that she was standing on a red rug that wasn’t hers and that wasn’t there when she left her apartment earlier that day. How could she have not noticed the rug she was standing on?
Some of her conflicting story details make no sense.
The fact that they withheld the toxicology report and blood test results for 5 days is a red flag. If it was clean/negative they would have made sure that was announced sooner than later.
In reference to the other high-profile, questionable(to say the least) shootings, I would offer this: Prosecutors are political animals. Since a good part of their support and money for election/re-election comes from police unions, they are going to handle such cases with kid gloves. Police unions are very powerful, and their PACS can and will give the kiss of death to any prosecutor or judge running for office who does not see things their way.
The elephant in the room is the FEDGOV. Title 18, section 242, USC provides the legal definition for DEPRIVATION OF RIGHTS UNDER COLOR OF AUTHORITY. In other words, violation of some innocent person’s civil rights. This section was originally intended to address such glaring injustices as the outright murder of innocent persons by police.
Here again, it is up to the Federal Prosecutor to apply the statute and bring an indictment or information against state or local police officers. The most celebrated case in the last 20+ years was Rodney King. There have been horrific cases happening since then, but NOTHING transcends politics. Sad.
Good luck with that particular law.
I’m trying to use it against my local police chief
for denying me a concealed carry permit.
The Federal prosecutors prioritize it into oblivion.
My Senators and congress critters are to the Left of
Bernie Sanders so no help there.
You are right about politics transcending law.
The reason why this idea doesn’t work — in other words, private gun ownership as a means of tyranny control — is 99% of your neighbors have sided with the tyrants.
Have you ever seen a dog just leave it’s yard, and follow someone down the street? Most people are that dog. They will side with whomever appears dominant or authoritative, at the moment, irrespective of demographics or worldview. Tyrants, if you’re reading, this evening, just tell them you have candy.
Now, I would like you to imagine a world without guns or violence. What if most people just didn’t like (random person or social institution). I think, her life would be impossible, if noone was to hurt one single hair on her head. What if you smelled her big, hairy, stinky, gorilla pheromones. You are passive, having a nice day, and, from where you sit, just don’t believe her, anymore. Then, what.
She is a female. May be White Hispanic. Probably affirmative action. No. She is affirmative action. Hiring individuals who can’t do a job as well as someone more qualified because they are darker, have different culture or different plumbing between their legs. Is that a good idea?
I think that nepotism is more honorable than telescopic philanthropy.
Choosing your own family or in-group, first, is an example of nepotism. You are technically picking someone, based on their skin color or what is between their legs, if you’re a cultural conservative.
Him — No, it’s a bad idea. Real bad idea.
The most qualified and capable of performing in the job and who has a good attitude should be the one selected. Anything else is asking for headaches and problems.
Although I have been in companies where we hired the slightly less qualified candidate because they had a much better attitude than the highly qualified candidate with an entitlement attitude. Because we can always provide proper training for the less qualified new hire, but we can’t fix crazy.
Also. I know from personal experience that individuals with political or family connections get hired even though they didn’t score high on the entrance exam. This goes for White males also. The connected ones are frequently the ones getting into trouble because they have protection from getting fired, etc.
Note to self: Keep the doors locked and If any cops come by saying let me in dont do it.
She lived directly below the man she killed??????
Perhaps there had be an ongoing feud over noise???? I suspect there is more to this story than is being told. And we will probably never know the truth.
Look at her mugshot. Two things seem visually relevant, she doesnt appear either physically strong or intelligent. She looks like a beaten down mouse of a person. How or why did she pass law enforcement academy training to become a LEO and who checked off on it?
I hate cops.Nuff said.