• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Police Officer accidentally shoots 70 yr old man at traffic stop on NC-SC border

Big difference between that and going to the back of his pickup.
 
The point is the same. Same with my 75 year old mother. Old guy who makes a mistake and spooks an inexperienced cop and BAM.

Look, I understand if he had been resisting arrest and being chased, or the license plate had been called in as stolen car, or if he was visibly attacking the woman in the car with him, etc. But an old dude, innocent of any crime, didn't understand this high-minded "dynamic situation" and it almost cost him his life. I think we have a problem as a society if this is happening. That guy isn't a good cop.

But if you are comfortable living like this then cool.
 
WakeandBake said:
The point is the same. Same with my 75 year old mother. Old guy who makes a mistake and spooks an inexperienced cop and BAM.

Look, I understand if he had been resisting arrest and being chased, or the license plate had been called in as stolen car, or if he was visibly attacking the woman in the car with him, etc. But an old dude, innocent of any crime, didn't understand this high-minded "dynamic situation" and it almost cost him his life. I think we have a problem as a society if this is happening. That guy isn't a good cop.

But if you are comfortable living like this then cool.
Click to expand...

Maybe the old guy was Elkman's dad and had a gun implanted in his cane.
 
WakeandBake said:
The point is the same. Same with my 75 year old mother. Old guy who makes a mistake and spooks an inexperienced cop and BAM.

Look, I understand if he had been resisting arrest and being chased, or the license plate had been called in as stolen car, or if he was visibly attacking the woman in the car with him, etc. But an old dude, innocent of any crime, didn't understand this high-minded "dynamic situation" and it almost cost him his life. I think we have a problem as a society if this is happening. That guy isn't a good cop.

But if you are comfortable living like this then cool.
Click to expand...


I get it, you like pot and you don't like cops.

You trot out the imaginary and intentionally extreme, bordering on the absurd, scenario of a police officer shooting your 75 year old mother simply for reaching into her purse, absent any other circumstances, as if it had some sort of relevance to the particular incident that is the subject of this thread. If such an incident were to happen in this vacuum, with no other factors involved (as you posit), then of course the officer should be charged with homicide and prosecuted to the full extent of the law. At no point have I, or anyone else you may be deriding for "defending this cop," advocated that law enforcement officers should be allowed to shoot people willy-nilly for simply reaching into their purse or other similar activity. Again, however, that is not what happened in the particular incident that we are discussing in this thread. And you know it.

Again, you seem to be completely unwilling to, or totally incapable of, putting yourself in the law enforcement officer's shoes and seeing the situation from his perspective. This was not just an "Old guy who makes a mistake and spooks an inexperienced cop and BAM," as you claim. Watch the video. There were a lot of factors that would, and did, lead a reasonable deputy to believe that he was facing a deadly threat. That deputy had to make a split-second life or death decision with incomplete information. Had the deputy known that in reality, the subject was an elderly man, likely with hearing problems, who was just reaching for his cane in the bed of his truck, of course he not have shot him. But the deputy did not know this, and could not have reasonably known this. Your expecting him to have this sort of omniscience is what is unreasonable.

I am sorry that you feel insulted when I point out that you do not seem to understand the "tense, uncertain, and rapidly evolving" (to quote the Supreme Court) nature of these kinds of incidents, but with each post you demonstrate more and more to me that you indeed do not. You insinuate that law enforcement officers should have no reason to be on their guard during "routine" traffic stops, and that they should anticipate danger only if the subject "had been resisting arrest and being chased, or the license plate had been called in as stolen car, or if he was visibly attacking the woman in the car with him, etc." You are very naïve in this view. Hell, Timothy McVeigh was pulled over simply because the license plate on his car was missing. He certainly wasn't a dangerous individual, was he?

You appear to advocate a bright-line rule of engagement in which an officer must wait until he is staring down the barrel of a gun before he can respond to defend himself and others. This is not the law throughout is nation. Numerous Court opinions have held that "our constitutional safeguards do not require an officer to gamble with his life," or words to that effect. See e.g. Commonwealth v. Morris, 537 Pa. 417, 644 A.2d 721 (1994) (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania)

At no point have I seen you acknowledge that the officer's life and safety are of any value or merit any consideration in these very difficult situations, no two of which are alike. You talk about yourself and your 75 year old mother, and both of your lives are indeed precious and irreplaceable. Likewise, this deputy was a 20ish or 30ish son/husband/father/brother, who has a very tough and dangerous job. His life and safety are also precious, and do not diminish in value simply because he is wearing a badge.

I agree with others in this thread who believe that these kinds of incidents are in large part a product of the fact that a lot of people have guns in this Nation, and that some of them do stupid and illegal things with them. That reality is not the deputy's fault, but he and others who do his job have to deal with that reality every day. As sad as this incident was, I am quite confident that the North Carolina or South Carolina SBI (whoever is investigating the incident) will find that the shooting was justified. Moreover, the deputy would almost undoubtedly be entitled to qualified immunity against any civil suit against him pursuant to Section 1983.
 
well i'm impressed at elkman's posts... i wouldn't have figured him to write that. i really don't like to assign blame in a situation like this, sure the officer is in the wrong, but punishment beyond termination also seems unfair (and believe me, i rather dislike cops).

The fundamental way (profiling and whatnot, not forcing all officers to work with a partner) and actual reason people are stopped for traffic (it's about money and power at the end of the day; mainly money generation) violations are flawed, as are the intentions of officers (it ain't for safety). The criminal justice system is broken on multiple levels, and our culture/society is surprisingly violent for a developed country in the twenty-first century.

For all these reasons I tend to blame the systems rather than individuals...one thing is for sure, if we didn't live in a gun culture, within a gun infested country, this wouldn't have happened as if the populace didn't have ready access to guns then officers would mainly leave theirs at the station, and the particular way this incident played out would be impossible.

FYI in the past 3-4 years according to deac92, ~25 or so police officers were murdered in the entire country. well it's certainly fair to point out in the past four years cops, have killed way, way more innocent citizens than that over the same period. the numbers almost seemingly suggest police are the bad guys. their certainly more violent than average citizens, regardless of the purity of their motivations, that's a fact.

it doesn't have to be this way though.
 
Last edited:
True. It bothers me when a cop killed in the line of duty is some great tragedy but when a cop kills an innocent person, it is shrugged off as just the cost of safety.
 
just want to reiterate the problems are systemic guys, that's why this sort of thing happens fairly frequently. If this was just a problem with the subject's conduct or the officer's this would be a lot more straightforward to prevent and also assign the all-important blame.

In no way am I excusing the shoot first ask later mentality of some of those who we as a society look to for order and protection, just simply trying to account for mitigating factors from the PoV of both parties.

here are some fixes though: all PD work in pairs, period. All PD wear protection, period. All PD squad car front doors withstand 7.62 FMJ rounds, period. All PD have minor level equivalent education in social science studies (if you're gonna regulate society, i'd appreciate you making the effort to understand it). All PD have graduate degrees or better, period. All PD on the beat are between ages of 30-60, period. First 5 years on the job you get everything but then gun. Years 5-10 you get the gun with rubber bullets. After being 40 years old with at least 10 years on the job then we put you in the position this officer in the OP was in and I bet you get a different outcome most of the time, especially with added security of working with a partner.

these reforms aren't unrealistic; it's a matter of priorities, and we as a soceity obviously don't really have a problem with borderline renegade cops. Cops should behave in a manner that begets respect, and we as a society should value them much more greatly, then we can afford to pay the sort of salary that the responsibilities associated with the job demand. Currently we literally employ 23 y/os w/GEDs and give them immunity and a gun and tell them to go do what they think is best, which is what street level bureaucrats are always ultimately tasked to do, which is why they should be educated and experienced before they get life or death powers.
 
Last edited:
dmcheatw said:
FYI in the past 3-4 years according to deac92, ~25 or so police officers were murdered in the entire country. well it's certainly fair to point out in the past four years cops, have killed way, way more innocent citizens than that over the same period. the numbers almost seemingly suggest police are the bad guys. their certainly more violent than average citizens, regardless of the purity of their motivations, that's a fact.

it doesn't have to be this way though.
Click to expand...

I believe those numbers were from routine traffic stops. The totals are much higher for all deaths.
 
dmcheatw said:
FYI in the past 3-4 years according to deac92, ~25 or so police officers were murdered in the entire country. well it's certainly fair to point out in the past four years cops, have killed way, way more innocent citizens than that over the same period. the numbers almost seemingly suggest police are the bad guys. their certainly more violent than average citizens, regardless of the purity of their motivations, that's a fact.
.
Click to expand...

Qft
 
19deac92 said:
I get it, you like pot and you don't like cops.

You trot out the imaginary and intentionally extreme, bordering on the absurd, scenario of a police officer shooting your 75 year old mother simply for reaching into her purse, absent any other circumstances, as if it had some sort of relevance to the particular incident that is the subject of this thread. If such an incident were to happen in this vacuum, with no other factors involved (as you posit), then of course the officer should be charged with homicide and prosecuted to the full extent of the law. At no point have I, or anyone else you may be deriding for "defending this cop," advocated that law enforcement officers should be allowed to shoot people willy-nilly for simply reaching into their purse or other similar activity. Again, however, that is not what happened in the particular incident that we are discussing in this thread. And you know it.

Again, you seem to be completely unwilling to, or totally incapable of, putting yourself in the law enforcement officer's shoes and seeing the situation from his perspective. This was not just an "Old guy who makes a mistake and spooks an inexperienced cop and BAM," as you claim. Watch the video. There were a lot of factors that would, and did, lead a reasonable deputy to believe that he was facing a deadly threat. That deputy had to make a split-second life or death decision with incomplete information. Had the deputy known that in reality, the subject was an elderly man, likely with hearing problems, who was just reaching for his cane in the bed of his truck, of course he not have shot him. But the deputy did not know this, and could not have reasonably known this. Your expecting him to have this sort of omniscience is what is unreasonable.

I am sorry that you feel insulted when I point out that you do not seem to understand the "tense, uncertain, and rapidly evolving" (to quote the Supreme Court) nature of these kinds of incidents, but with each post you demonstrate more and more to me that you indeed do not. You insinuate that law enforcement officers should have no reason to be on their guard during "routine" traffic stops, and that they should anticipate danger only if the subject "had been resisting arrest and being chased, or the license plate had been called in as stolen car, or if he was visibly attacking the woman in the car with him, etc." You are very naïve in this view. Hell, Timothy McVeigh was pulled over simply because the license plate on his car was missing. He certainly wasn't a dangerous individual, was he?

You appear to advocate a bright-line rule of engagement in which an officer must wait until he is staring down the barrel of a gun before he can respond to defend himself and others. This is not the law throughout is nation. Numerous Court opinions have held that "our constitutional safeguards do not require an officer to gamble with his life," or words to that effect. See e.g. Commonwealth v. Morris, 537 Pa. 417, 644 A.2d 721 (1994) (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania)

At no point have I seen you acknowledge that the officer's life and safety are of any value or merit any consideration in these very difficult situations, no two of which are alike. You talk about yourself and your 75 year old mother, and both of your lives are indeed precious and irreplaceable. Likewise, this deputy was a 20ish or 30ish son/husband/father/brother, who has a very tough and dangerous job. His life and safety are also precious, and do not diminish in value simply because he is wearing a badge.

I agree with others in this thread who believe that these kinds of incidents are in large part a product of the fact that a lot of people have guns in this Nation, and that some of them do stupid and illegal things with them. That reality is not the deputy's fault, but he and others who do his job have to deal with that reality every day. As sad as this incident was, I am quite confident that the North Carolina or South Carolina SBI (whoever is investigating the incident) will find that the shooting was justified. Moreover, the deputy would almost undoubtedly be entitled to qualified immunity against any civil suit against him pursuant to Section 1983.
Click to expand...

I just watched the video. The old guy was moving at a snails pace. It was not split second at all. The officer had plenty of time, if he believed this slow-moving old citizen was going to threaten his life, to take cover behind his patrol car until he could confirm that the man was producing a weapon.

I don't know man, the video is not helping this officer IMO. You seem like you know a lot about this shit so I'll concede the point to you, but as an ordinary citizen and a long gun owner and gun rights advocate this cop seems to have an overly nervous trigger finger. I'm no law enforcement expert but I grew up with guns and have fired many different types, and I feel like i understand and respect the dangers and safety precautions pretty well.

As for cops and pot, I guess I've seen enough cops jack booting kids at rock concerts and even pulling their sidearms out on them over a bag of weed to feel like cops in general feel they are above the law. There was a story not too long ago posted here about a mentally ill kid who hadn't taken his medicine and some cops had him somewhat subdued and another cop arrives and shoots him dead. So yeah, when I see this I feel like we are living in a police state . But I understand the need for cops to shoot to protect themselves and I respect that. The Peters creek pkwy Bojangles case springs to mind, as does the Michael Hayes case on old Salisbury road.
 
Last edited:
someone fact check this, but, by my offhand reasoning, you're much more likely as an average citizen to be shot by a police officer than any other cohort of people.

that speaks for itself.
 
WakeandBake said:
There was a story not too long ago posted here about a mentally ill kid who hadn't taken his medicine and some cops had him somewhat subdued and another cop arrives and shoots him dead. So yeah, when I see this I feel like we are living in a police state . But I understand the need for cops to shoot to protect themselves and I respect that. The Peters creek pkwy Bojangles case springs to mind, as does the Michael Hayes case on old Salisbury road.
Click to expand...

W&B:

Thanks for your post. As a whole, we agree about some things and disagree on others. Fair enough. That's what makes the world go around. If we all thought the same way, the world would be both a boring and scary place.

For whatever it is worth, Bryon Vassey, the Southport Police Department Detective who fatally shot 18 year old Keith Vidal in the incident you discuss, was indicted last month by the Brunswick County DA for voluntary manslaughter. http://www.cnn.com/2014/02/04/justice/north-carolina-slain-teen/
 
Last edited:
The cop knew who owned the car before getting out his patrol car. He knew the car was owned by an old guy. It's not like he thought the car was owned by a convicted felon.
 
RJKarl said:
The cop knew who owned the car before getting out his patrol car. He knew the car was owned by an old guy. It's not like he thought the car was owned by a convicted felon.
Click to expand...

RJ:

Where did you get this information? I have re-read the article from the OP several times and did not find it mentioned anywhere that the Deputy knew what you say that he knew. The article says that Mr. Canipe was from Lincolnton, North Carolina, and that the deputy who mistakenly shot him was from York County, South Carolina.

I certainly agree that if the Deputy knew the driver of the vehicle, particularly that he was elderly, that that would change the arithmetic of the situation.
 
19deac92 said:
RJ:

Where did you get this information? I have re-read the article from the OP several times and did not find it mentioned anywhere that the Deputy knew what you say that he knew. The article says that Mr. Canipe was from Lincolnton, North Carolina, and that the deputy who mistakenly shot him was from York County, South Carolina.

I certainly agree that if the Deputy knew the driver of the vehicle, particularly that he was elderly, that that would change the arithmetic of the situation.
Click to expand...

Those South Carolinian bastards fired the first shot! Let the war begin!
 
19deac92 said:
W&B:

Thanks for your post. As a whole, we agree about some things and disagree on others. Fair enough. That's what makes the world go around. If we all thought the same way, the world would be both a boring and scary place.

For whatever it is worth, Bryon Vassey, the Southport Police Department Detective who fatally shot 18 year old Keith Vidal in the incident you discuss, was indicted last month by the Brunswick County DA for voluntary manslaughter. http://www.cnn.com/2014/02/04/justice/north-carolina-slain-teen/
Click to expand...

yes, fair enough. Thanks for the update on the indicted cop. I hope he is prosecuted for what - on the surface - appears to be an extremely heinous crime.
 
just to bring some stats here, in 2013 a total of 309 people were killed by police. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_killings_by_law_enforcement_officers_in_the_United_States,_2013
Somebody else can delve into the individual accounts to see how many were "justified" and how many involved "innocent citizens". That's in the eye of the beholder, as shown by this whole thread. I bet charges/discipline were brought against the police in only a tiny fraction of those.

On the other hand, only 33 police officers were killed by gunfire in 2013, the lowest number since 1887, according to this piece. http://articles.latimes.com/2013/dec/30/nation/la-na-nn-police-deaths-20131230
 
Deacon923 said:
just to bring some stats here, in 2013 a total of 309 people were killed by police. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_killings_by_law_enforcement_officers_in_the_United_States,_2013
Somebody else can delve into the individual accounts to see how many were "justified" and how many involved "innocent citizens". That's in the eye of the beholder, as shown by this whole thread. I bet charges/discipline were brought against the police in only a tiny fraction of those.

On the other hand, only 33 police officers were killed by gunfire in 2013, the lowest number since 1887, according to this piece. http://articles.latimes.com/2013/dec/30/nation/la-na-nn-police-deaths-20131230
Click to expand...

These are interesting numbers. As you say, the figure of 309 killed by law enforcement includes all deaths, whether justified or accidental/negligent, and by any and all means. I haven't dug too deep into the link you posted, but I wonder if that 309 even includes people killed in car accidents with law enforcement who are running blue-light traffic (such as driving through a red light into an intersection while responding to a call, etc.).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top