Do Private Citizens Have Greater Responsibility Than Cops?
Bing Michael Yee, a concealed handgun licensee, was walking his dog, when another dog “ran out of a house and toward him.” Yee fired an unknown number of rounds, killing the dog. In an email interview, Cedar Park Police Captain Jeffrey Hayes said:
Mr. Yee was arrested and charged for Deadly Conduct and Aggravated Assault with a Deadly Weapon.
The Deadly Conduct charge comes after he discharged his weapon in the direction of individuals, resulting in shrapnel or debris striking a female causing an injury.
The Aggravated Assault with a Deadly Weapon charge comes after he then aimed his gun at the people in the front yard of the home across the street, as well as aiming his gun at a non-involved witness to the incident.
Texas Penal Code states that defensive force can be used when “reasonable,” meaning that objective criteria must exist to justify the use of force. (“Feeling afraid” doesn’t exist in Texas Penal Code.) Further, a justified defense doesn’t absolve the defender if he “injures or kills an innocent third person.”
The justice system should properly determine if Yee’s shooting was “reasonable,” or if the shooting was reckless enough to justify a major felony conviction. According to Captain Hayes, Yee violated NRA’s first gun safety rule: “ALWAYS keep the gun pointed in a safe direction.” (For defensive purposes, the “safe” direction is towards the attacker.)
Last month, two NYPD officers wounded nine innocent bystanders in a shootout with an armed man who’d just killed his ex-boss. Three of those wounded remained hospitalized for days. In fairness, there’s no evidence the cops aimed anywhere but at the shooter.
Today, a NYPD Public Information Officer confirmed that both officers are back on active duty.
Do Private Citizens Have Greater Responsibility Than Cops?
Yes, because cops are employees of the government, and government always has lower standards for itself.
According to the President’s political party, “Government is the one thing we all belong to.”
I guess this is an example of what it means to be owned by a government.
Much, much greater. I forget who I’m quoting, but:
If we screw up, we go to prison. If police screw up, they get a paid vacation.
Sure do… public service unions, no duty to protect, fat pension and bennies for serving 20 years. They can just shoot someone if they feel like it and go “uh, my training kicked-in” with no problem. Soldiers would get life in military prison plus a dishonorable or bad conduct discharge.
If you ask a police officer to help you and he declines, there is no penalty. You cannot sue the officer, nor his department, nor the division of government they serve for failing to protect you even if they said they would and yet fail to do so. This has been established by numerous court cases.
But. If a police officer or judge requires your assistance in apprehending a criminal, you are required by law to lend it, and you can be fined if you fail to do so. (Eg: CA PC.150)
So, who really has the responsibility to protect?
Was it a pit bull? Maybe they SHOULD be going after a negligent dog owner for allowing a dangerous dog to charge at an innocent citizen. I’m just saying…
I wonder, inescapably, what the Dunphy thinks the answer is.
I carry a shovel handle refashioned as a walking stick on my walks. A couple solid pokes dissuade most chargers. I have not needed to use more force than that, so far, but could inflict significant damage to any jumper or lurcher. Seems like Yee used excessive force to me but probably to be expected in this world of over-kill we inhabit.
> In fairness, there’s no evidence the cops aimed anywhere but at the shooter.
All the wounded people would tend to indicate that the cops’ guns were in fact aimed at targets other than the perpetrator… unless you believe in “magic bullets”.