Cops gun down man carrying legally

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Sep 26, 2007
Messages
895
Location
Midwest
http://www.wnd.com/2012/06/cops-gun-down-man-for-legally-carrying-firearm/

Quote:
Erik Scott was a West Point graduate who went on to serve honorably in the Army, get his MBA from Duke and establish a lucrative career in real estate and as a sales rep for a medical device company. He was 38 years old when he was gunned down in portico of a Las Vegas area Costco store by officers from the Las Vegas Metro Police Department.

Scott and his girlfriend had been shopping in the Costco, but had been asked to leave when an employee spotted Scott’s lawfully carried handgun. Scott had inadvertently exposed the gun when he squatted down to inspect some merchandise.

The store manager who had spoken with Scott seemed satisfied by Scott’s reassurance that he was a legal firearm carrier and would be finished with his shopping in a few minutes. But a store Loss Prevention Officer called the police and reported that an armed man was behaving erratically in the store.

Las Vegas MPD responded with a city-wide alert, street closures, helicopter support and deployment of a Mobile Command Center.

the Loss Prevention Officer who started the whole mess pointed toward Scott and a police officer at the door suddenly began yelling “Stop! I said Stop! Drop the gun! Get on the ground! Get on the ground!”

He fired these conflicting commands in quick succession giving Scott no opportunity to comply with any of them and then fired two rounds at Scott’s chest. As the officer began yelling and Scott realized he was the subject of the commands, he turned, lifting his hands, and apparently tried to follow the legal requirement to immediately inform an officer that he was an armed weapons permit holder, but he didn’t have time.

The officer’s frantic orders lasted for a slow count of 3 and were immediately followed by the two gunshots, a momentary pause, and a volley of several more shots. There was no pause or hesitation between the commands and the shots.


Dear Lord.
 
Why do I get the feeling that this wasn't an accident on the part of the "authorities".

Perhaps sending a message that legit gun owners are a target of the government?
 
Originally Posted By: antiqueshell
Perhaps sending a message that legit gun owners are a target of the government?


This is the stupidest thing I have ever heard.

QED; the loss prevention guy seemed like he had an itch to be an authority and overstepped the situation, and mixed with a cop who had an itchy trigger finger set off a powderkeg. Judging by the police response from the LP's call he obviously made it seem like a hostage situation was moments to unfold. An officer without a cool head ran into a situation and made some bad, hasty choices.

The real issue here is the authorities at work are far too green with far too much responsibility and need to slow down; a difficult thing to do when regularly they ARE getting shot at.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: antiqueshell
Why do I get the feeling that this wasn't an accident on the part of the "authorities".

Perhaps sending a message that legit gun owners are a target of the government?


That is a bit too tin-hat for me, and Im a true, distrusting federal reserve hater.

I think the video, which surely exists, should speak for itself.

The first question though, must be, what is the stance of costco on having firearms in their store? I noticed long ago in Ohio that many, many buildings (not just government) state their firearm position on a sign at the door.

If costco is anti-firearm, which they as a company have a right to be, I suppose, then the deceased was in violation and there was every reason to flag him and have a level of distrust.

Was there a wildly incorrect action on part of the "loss prevention" and the police? Absolutely. If they tazed him, it would have been too much.

I sure would want to go through the video with a fine toothed comb to verify what happened. Id throw the book at the guard and cop if it was as the story states.

But if the deceased was actually in the wrong, it gets much more difficult.

I wonder how many wrongful deaths occur each year by carrying folks wrongly shooting someone for erratic behavior or some similar excuse, when lesser force was warranted.
 
I would check whatever wacko conspiracy theorist websites you're visiting.

This isn't a new story. It happened in 2010. I question the motives of any site that would bring this up and present it as a new story.

That said, it has been through trial and a jury found the police officers justified in their response to the incident.

Just another conspiracy theorist website trying to stir the pot. Some people need to learn that dredging up and focusing on incidents like these doesn't doesn't help the cause for legal carry, it hinders it.
 
Originally Posted By: JHZR2
I wonder how many wrongful deaths occur each year by carrying folks wrongly shooting someone for erratic behavior or some similar excuse, when lesser force was warranted.


^ Rather unfortunately, thats probably extremely likely. I won't say anyone carrying a firearm is bad, but I will say there is a decent population among people who carry who carry to look for a "problem".

By the way antiqueshell is just like that. The entire world is out to get him. Even we're just FBI plants looking to "quiet down" the realities of the news posting here.
 
Last edited:
Is this a recent event? I think I read about this a year or more ago. It is bad no matter when it happened though. I get a little nervous carrying around police.
 
Originally Posted By: AVB
Is this a recent event? I think I read about this a year or more ago. It is bad no matter when it happened though. I get a little nervous carrying around police.


I would initially say "why"? If youre not pulling it on them, they should have nothing to fear.

Especially if you encounter them and you state it right away and show it in a safe position.

Of course it doesnt work that way, and Ill bet a good portion of the card-carrying population has such poor gun handling skills, there is a lot of basis to the fears.

Sad really.
 
Originally Posted By: tommygunn


By the way antiqueshell is just like that. The entire world is out to get him. Even we're just FBI plants looking to "quiet down" the realities of the news posting here.


Is that why the controlled media/ fatherland security plays "fear" stories about "terrorists" 24/7? Maybe THEY are the ones that are paranoid?
whistle.gif


It is true that those that are for globalism, that even our own presidents (both parties) clearly do not like those that are outspoken and stubbornly refuse to submit to their policies.

It is a fact that our Constitution has been repeatedly violated numerous times for many decades now by those that control the levers of power both economically, and politically. That my friend is defined as "tyranny".
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: antiqueshell
Originally Posted By: tommygunn


By the way antiqueshell is just like that. The entire world is out to get him. Even we're just FBI plants looking to "quiet down" the realities of the news posting here.


Is that why the controlled media/ fatherland security plays "fear" stories about "terrorists" 24/7? Maybe THEY are the ones that are paranoid?
whistle.gif


It is true that those that are for globalism, that even our own presidents (both parties) clearly do not like those that are outspoken and stubbornly refuse to submit to their policies.

It is a fact that our Constitution has been repeatedly violated numerous times for many decades now by those that control the levers of power both economically, and politically. That my friend is defined as "tyranny".


Suspicions confirmed.
 
Originally Posted By: JHZR2
Originally Posted By: AVB
Is this a recent event? I think I read about this a year or more ago. It is bad no matter when it happened though. I get a little nervous carrying around police.


I would initially say "why"? If youre not pulling it on them, they should have nothing to fear.

Especially if you encounter them and you state it right away and show it in a safe position.

Of course it doesnt work that way, and Ill bet a good portion of the card-carrying population has such poor gun handling skills, there is a lot of basis to the fears.

Sad really.


Not really nervous, just a little uncomfortable. The older officers who have been here since I was a kid don't bother me. But most of the young officers aren't from here. I know a lot of veteran officers support gun owners, but if you don't know them and they don't know you, you don't know what they are thinking. I guess partly because you don't see a lot of people carrying around here. I rarely see anyone carrying actually, most have a couple in the car/truck though.

But I guess it is mostly just in my head, I have only been carrying for a couple of years now, and I guess I just haven't gotten completely comfortable carrying in public. Also the laws have changed greatly over the last few years with respect to where you can carry here, and I don't know how up to date some officers knowledge of the new laws are.
 
This is a old story. It happen back in July 10, 2010.

As of March 13, 2012 his family has droped their lawsuit against the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department. They droped the lawsuit because the Ninth Circuit Court found the officers had immunity in the case.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: MrHorspwer
...That said, it has been through trial and a jury found the police officers justified in their response to the incident....


I agree with most of what you said, except for the above, which is completely false. There has been no trial, and there was no jury.

Way too much misinformation in this thread. Mr. Scott was carrying two handguns, one legally, one not. He had an almost fatal amount of painkillers in his system, and had been acting erratically. There were multiple officers outside the Costco, and a number of them fired almost simultaneously when Mr. Scott presented his holstered weapon to them (some accounts), or just raised his shirt to show it (other accounts), or pointed his weapon at police (police and the rare sycophant accounts). There were Costco cameras pointed at the area, but the video (recorded on a hard drive) was confiscated by the police. They were unable to extract any data from the hard drive, which magically failed after they were in possession of it.

Las Vegas has a non-adversarial Coroner's Inquest for all fatal police shootings. In the 16 years I've lived here, they have never ruled against the police, no matter how questionable the shootings were, and no matter how the events cited by the police were contradicted by physical evidence. In this case, only the small percentage of witnesses who confirmed the police version of events were called to testify in the inquest.

Lawmakers have changed the inquest system to be a bit more adversarial (meaning "fair"). So far, the police union has prevented the new laws from taking effect by specious legal challenges.
 
If Costco openly states no guns inside, the victim should not have brought one in. I'm sure there was some heated exchange before police was called in. I agree they should not use force to kill.

Edit: I posted without seeing the above one that clarified a lot.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: MrHorspwer
I would check whatever wacko conspiracy theorist websites you're visiting.


Exactly, WND is a tool for the ultra right-wing conservatives to sound their clarion calls to an unsuspecting public. Don't believe the hype.

This thread should be branded political, and deleted from this site. Period.
 
Originally Posted By: buickman50401


The officer’s frantic orders lasted for a slow count of 3 and were immediately followed by the two gunshots, a momentary pause, and a volley of several more shots. There was no pause or hesitation between the commands and the shots.

Dear Lord.

We signed our rights and freedoms away long ago and we're not giving them back. Let's revel in the long, dark reign of repression we are to live the rest of our lives under.
 
Originally Posted By: ArrestMeRedZ
Originally Posted By: MrHorspwer
...That said, it has been through trial and a jury found the police officers justified in their response to the incident....


I agree with most of what you said, except for the above, which is completely false. There has been no trial, and there was no jury.


I'm half the country away from Las Vegas, so you probably know better than me. I got my statement from this article printed in the Las Vegas Sun:

http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2010/sep/28/jury-shooting-justified/

Specifically:

Quote:
Goodman and Bill Scott talked to reporters outside the Regional Justice Center about 20 minutes after a seven-member Clark County coroner’s inquest jury ruled the death of Erik Scott as a justifiable homicide.

The jury of seven announced the unanimous decision at 5:29 p.m. after deliberating for about 90 minutes.

Jurors were instructed to determine whether the shooting was justifiable, excusable or criminal.


I suppose it does say "inquest" and not "trial". It definitely does say "jury" though.
 
Originally Posted By: tommygunn
Boldly encouraging censorship...ouch. :p


Not censorship. BITOG is not a governmental body. This site is a privately owned enterprise. It has rules against political discussions. There is no guarantee of having freedom of speech here.

Unfortunately, certain posters seem to want to explore the boundaries of the site rules as much as they can.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top