Seattlest: More Than One Tragedy in UW Student's Shooting Death

Euromutt

Sun, 04 Jan 2009 23:37:46 -0800

Quoth the KOMO commenter: "the policemen never saw him shoot one shot." What, the cops are supposed to wait until you actually put a bullet into someone before they can try to stop you? That's not an idea that appeals to me. And unfortunately, at present, there exists only one class of weapon that can reliably incapacitate a man with a gun before he can use it, and that is other guns. Kudos to Seattlest for taking the sensible attitude to this incident. It is a tragedy, yes, but at first blush I'm definitely inclined to think it was caused by Mr. Murphy acting in stupidly inappropriate fashion with a firearm. I also suspect he'd had more than just "a few beers." That said, if I intend to have even a few beers, I make sure my guns are all securely locked away first (in my gun safe, with cable or internal locks which require small fiddly keys that are difficult to use when inebriated). Guns and alcohol: bad combination. Say, Matt @ [1], does the name Jean-Charles de Menezes mean anything to you? The police who, according to you, "don't carry guns" shot him eight times at extremely close range, of which seven times in the head, and he wasn't even brandishing a weapon.

rjh

Sat, 03 Jan 2009 12:24:19 -0800

@1: Not all London police carry firearms, but some do. And you can be sure that those responding to an incident involving a man dressed in military uniform and carrying a rifle are well-armed.

seattlescott69

Fri, 02 Jan 2009 17:01:16 -0800

While it's unfortunate that this kid got shot, it could have been avoided by using a little common sense. Don't point a gun at a cop (if that's really what he did). The cop WILL shoot you, as well he should. How would the cop know that this guy wasn't just going to randomly start shooting people, that's fairly common these days. It's incredibly foolish to even put yourself in that situation. That being said, it's a sad story....

rubics

Fri, 02 Jan 2009 15:46:16 -0800

There's no reason to suggest that the suspect raised his firearm and took aim at the cops except to obfuscate the story as we know it. If the point is that we shouldn't jump to conclusions about whether the action was justified because we don't know all the facts, then it's generally best to withhold moral judgment either way until more details are reported. Sadly, the real problem is that before the internal investigation is completed, we will all have moved on to the next big story. As far as the empirical statement about not having a self-preserving police force, that is patently false. The law ALWAYS gives police officers the benefit of the doubt and an ambiguous question of appropriateness will always favor the police. There is no conspiracy there, though. That's just based on a policy decision that the police cannot function properly if they are fully accountable for their actions to the same degree that ordinary citizens are. I think if more people realized that, we'd hear less cover-up conspiracy theories, but perhaps also become more skeptical of police accounts. However, for me, this one isn't a tough question. If you're brazenly brandishing a firearm in the middle of the city and you get shot by police officers who cannot easily discern your intentions, it's not a huge stain on the reputation of the SPD. I can't identify the duty that they owed this kid and failed to provide him.

ronaldholden

Fri, 02 Jan 2009 15:39:07 -0800

Rule #1: if the cops show up at your house, for whatever reason, it is not a good idea to greet them wearing an old military uniform. Rule #2: should you unavoidably happen to be wearing an old military uniform at any rate, do not, under any circumstances, add fuel to the fire by holding an object that might be construed as a weapon, least of all an actual weapon.

iSamurai

Fri, 02 Jan 2009 14:59:41 -0800

When it comes down to it, the kid was being stupid. I'm sure he was smart enough to realize shooting guns in an alley for fun is going to attract police, and opening the door with rifle in hand is not the best way to greet those police. Giving the police the benefit of the doubt, I think they did the right thing. I'm sure the police were not trying to kill the kid but rather incapacitate him, and I don't think any non lethal weapons save rubber bullets and bean bags (which riot police are usually the only ones carrying) would've been a better option.

Matt

Fri, 02 Jan 2009 14:28:10 -0800

Whatever the truth is, this is a terribly sad event. Though I didn't know him, I can completely picture the guy - just a fun-loving but odd young man, perhaps having a few beers, when he runs into police and probably makes a stupid or accidental move. Maybe he didn't even realize they were actually police. I'm sure this isn't easy at all for the police. It couldn't have happened in a city where police don't carry guns, but then we don't live in such a city. And I have no doubt that the officers felt their lives were in danger.