Suburban security guard stops shooter, gets killed by police

[Tom Sawyer]

while the "bad guy with a gun" is alive and not even charged with a crime yet.

Well, is he at least suspended until Internal Affairs does an investigation into the shooting?

 

[Jarhyn]

while the "bad guy with a gun" is alive and not even charged with a crime yet.

Well, is he at least suspended until Internal Affairs does an investigation into the shooting?

You know, if the first officer involved in any situation was required to be unarmed, there would be a lot fewer police shootings, especially if the backup or covering officer(s) weren't allowed to ever shoot first. It is an entirely different proposal to shoot someone who everyone, including you, know is unarmed. It's like shooting a kid at that point. It's just straight-up murder, with no defense of self-defense. It is the ultimate example of a first-degree murder, where the backup officer has every right and reason to be judge, jury, executioner because there is no ambiguity, especially if there are liability traps for cops who turn off their body cameras.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

"We all yelled. 'He's a security. He's a security,' and without ... giving any thought, they shot him," Harris told the station. "The vest said security as well ... and they shot him in the side."

The suspected gunman in the initial bar shooting is being treated at a local hospital and has not been charged, Ansari said.

So the "good guy with a gun" is dead - shot by police - while the "bad guy with a gun" is alive and not even charged with a crime yet.

https://www.cnn.com/2018/11/13/us/security-officer-police-shooting-suburban-chicago/index.html

In their defense, they did shoot and kill the witness, so charges will be a little harder now.

 

[Worldtraveller]

Key: "man with a gun". If you're in a situation where the police are coming you do not want a gun in your hand!

BULL FUCKING SHIT!!!

What do we hear with shootings? The place should have had security. Well, this place had a shooting, security apprehended one of the shooters, security was killed by the police.

Other counterpoints: The Bundy terrorist group, the Malhaur refugre, etc.

Guess what was different there, besides the locations?

 

[James Brown]

If you wish to avoid being shot and are any color..
It is standard procedure to holster your weapon when the threat is eliminated. There is no reason to wave a gun around when it is not being used... no wonder someone thought he was the perp.. that is not how a guard acts.

Did you read a different article than was in the OP? It reads:

However, when a Midlothian, Illinois police officer showed up on the scene, he opened fire and killed Roberson because he thought Roberson was the true assailant.

So where did you get the information that Roberson was "waving a gun around"?

 

[Gun Nut]

I can't find any details on what happened between when the cops arrived, witnesses in the bar exclaimed, "He's Security", and the cop opening fire. All any articles says is "some time after, the cop opened fire"... Some time? How much time and what was happening during that time... that is the critical piece of info.
Another piece of interesting information is that while the guard had a permit to OWN a gun, he did not have a permit to concealed carry a gun. This means that he didn't take the required class or classes that would have taught him what to do in this situation, which would have started with good information being provided to the 911 operator (description of perp, description of guard, so no confusion - that is taught), securing of the weapon (and the perm, obviously), and clear communication with the police upon engagement.

Once again, you are making stuff up. You have no idea whether this man had the right training or not. We have no idea whether this security guard was in uniform. We have no idea what information the police officer was given. We have no idea what the police officer did, other than kill the security guard.

We do know one of the "good guys" was killed. In the absence of more information , that suggests the police officer screwed up.

Actually I just read today that the guard was in uniform.

a black shirt with the words "Security" on it is not a "Uniform"... I have one of those, except it says "Insecurity".

 

[Gun Nut]

Key: "man with a gun". If you're in a situation where the police are coming you do not want a gun in your hand!

BULL FUCKING SHIT!!!

What do we hear with shootings? The place should have had security. Well, this place had a shooting, security apprehended one of the shooters, security was killed by the police.

false equivalence... "Having security" is not equal to "waving a gun around in a cop's face"

 

[Gun Nut]

If only outlaws have guns, it makes the job of the police in deciding who is an outlaw a LOT easier. Just sayin'.

If only people just stopped committing crimes, we wouldn't even need police!
If we just remove freedom of speech, then there would be no hate speech
If we just eliminate democracy and voting, there would be no voter fraud.
If we just take all the things away to do anything, then nothing bad can happen!

 

[Gun Nut]

If you wish to avoid being shot and are any color..
It is standard procedure to holster your weapon when the threat is eliminated. There is no reason to wave a gun around when it is not being used... no wonder someone thought he was the perp.. that is not how a guard acts.

Did you read a different article than was in the OP? It reads:

However, when a Midlothian, Illinois police officer showed up on the scene, he opened fire and killed Roberson because he thought Roberson was the true assailant.

So where did you get the information that Roberson was "waving a gun around"?

Where did you read that the guard properly handled his weapon? I read that he had it pointed in the back of a prone suspect when the cops arrived... and "shortly after" the cops opened fire. What happened in the "short time" between arrival and shooting?

You don't know... but immediately assume it was "being black".

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Key: "man with a gun". If you're in a situation where the police are coming you do not want a gun in your hand!

BULL FUCKING SHIT!!!

What do we hear with shootings? The place should have had security. Well, this place had a shooting, security apprehended one of the shooters, security was killed by the police.

false equivalence... "Having security" is not equal to "waving a gun around in a cop's face"

The security guard couldn't be "waving a gun around in a cop's face" as he was in a position of subduing the shooter.

 

[Elixir]

Did you read a different article than was in the OP? It reads:



So where did you get the information that Roberson was "waving a gun around"?

Where did you read that the guard properly handled his weapon? I read that he had it pointed in the back of a prone suspect when the cops arrived... and "shortly after" the cops opened fire. What happened in the "short time" between arrival and shooting?

You don't know... but immediately assume it was "being black".

Why don't you ever cite or link to your "sources"?

 

[James Brown]

What I'm hearing is that the guard "made a bad mistake" but that the police officer must have had a perfectly good reason to shoot a man who was not a threat.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Am I the only one who thinks that it's odd that a guy who calls himself Gun Nut is so cool with the cops shooting someone because they have a gun?

 

[Jarhyn]

Did you read a different article than was in the OP? It reads:



So where did you get the information that Roberson was "waving a gun around"?

Where did you read that the guard properly handled his weapon? I read that he had it pointed in the back of a prone suspect when the cops arrived... and "shortly after" the cops opened fire. What happened in the "short time" between arrival and shooting?

You don't know... but immediately assume it was "being black".

Why don't you ever cite or link to your "sources"?

Even taking it at face value, the scene he described is not an acceptable grounds for the police opening fire. One person in control of a situation, especially when the guy doesn't resist or reject the advance of the police, is not a "threat".

 

[Elixir]

Why don't you ever cite or link to your "sources"?

Even taking it at face value, the scene he described is not an acceptable grounds for the police opening fire. One person in control of a situation, especially when the guy doesn't resist or reject the advance of the police, is not a "threat".

True. I didn't mean to derail the conversation.
I'm just a little mystified when people are satisfied with creating the appearance that they are inventing shit out of whole cloth. Especially when they have a strong recent history of stating things as facts that turn out to be utterly false.

 

[ZiprHead]

Actually I just read today that the guard was in uniform.

a black shirt with the words "Security" on it is not a "Uniform"... I have one of those, except it says "Insecurity".

"We all yelled. 'He's a security. He's a security,' and without ... giving any thought, they shot him," Harris told the station. "The vest said security as well ... and they shot him in the side."

Uniform dictionary definition: noun
1.the distinctive clothing worn by members of the same organization or body or by children attending certain schools.

His uniform was the security vest. Quibble now debunked.

 

[ZiprHead]

Am I the only one who thinks that it's odd that a guy who calls himself Gun Nut is so cool with the cops shooting someone because they have a gun?

Nope.

 

[Gun Nut]

Why don't you ever cite or link to your "sources"?

Even taking it at face value, the scene he described is not an acceptable grounds for the police opening fire. One person in control of a situation, especially when the guy doesn't resist or reject the advance of the police, is not a "threat".

source for the claim that the guy "didn't resist or reject the advance of the police"?

My source is the same as everyone else's.. I just.. you know... actually read it. I also googled other sources, but they all had the identical story.

 

[Elixir]

Why don't you ever cite or link to your "sources"?

Even taking it at face value, the scene he described is not an acceptable grounds for the police opening fire. One person in control of a situation, especially when the guy doesn't resist or reject the advance of the police, is not a "threat".

source for the claim that the guy "didn't resist or reject the advance of the police"?

My source is the same as everyone else's.. I just.. you know... actually read it.

I just ... you know ... actually read that the earth is flat. And I assign that the same credence as your "I read that...".
FYI, citing a source would mean naming or linking to it... you know... like this:

THE EARTH IS FLAT

If you need some help creating links or finding the sources of what you read, please say so - there are many here who can help you.

 

[Gun Nut]

Am I the only one who thinks that it's odd that a guy who calls himself Gun Nut is so cool with the cops shooting someone because they have a gun?

source for the claim that the cops shot "someone because they have a gun"?

I am well trained for how I use my guns... I don;t have advanced tactical training... so something like shooting from a quick draw in under 1 second is not something I can say I know how to do properly. I might shoot myself in the leg, or worse, shoot someone else. I do have other types of training.. so something like knowing how to handle a subdued perp, speak with 911, and deal with the cops arriving IS something I know how to do. "not being black" is not on the checklist. Having the gun out of your hands (preferably holstered) IS.
Once the cops arrive there is no need for the civilian to have the gun out. Let the guy run away and let the cops chase and catch (or shoot) them themselves... not your job to deliver justice... just to stop the threat.