I actually got a bit of a chuckle out of that one. There were so many errors in that post That I just had to shake my head.

Many of us are subject to professional licensing/review boards. Those boards are staffed by professional peers. I would expect something similar in any citizens' review board with oversight over the police.

Because he was an officer. And now, it will never happen because he's not an officer. :confused:

It is in fact true here, i am therefore STUNNED if Ca PD departmental policies (if not the law itself) doesn't require a triple retention holster. Stunned. They are designed to save cops (and citizens, after the fact) lives by preventing their firearm being taken away, or falling out of their holster during strenuous activity. Even our ACT235(armed guards) are mandated to use them here in PA/NJ area. I had assumed that this was nationwide, but i will take your word for it. IMO it should be changed to law in Ca too though.

I am sorry, i must differ- it was not caused by stress- all of those cops were (rightfully) stressed, yet only one drew (let alone discharged) his weapon. What caused that shooting was negligence and incompetence. Stress was definitely a factor, but it was stress combined with negligence and incompetence that elevated the situation to manslaughter. :(

A lot of cops, soldiers and citizens feel exactly the same way as you and i on this topic. It's just common sense, IMO.

I hate glocks. Soon after they were chosen by our local PD a detective told me that the rate of AD's had increased threefold vs the previous .357 revolvers our cops were issued. Short, light triggers with no safety are a very bad combonation- IMO. Personally, i feel the .357 magnum is a much better caliber for police work than 9mm is anyway. To me it was a retrograde step in adopting the Glock 9mm. Just recently the Philly PD is allowing our cops to carry .40 cal glocks as optional. I like the caliber, but not the platform.

At any rate, if after reading all my posts the most egregious error you saw was that i stated it's law in Ca to use Triple retention holsters (which is in fact the case here in Pa and in NJ), i can live with it. ;)

My "qualifications", I was an Infantryman back in my "yute". In the 2 decades since i ETS'd i have at various times been a subpoena agent, a repossessor, a bail recovery agent and a private investigator (these are all really the same job, the only variance is what you do when you find the person you're looking for). So i have had a lot of experience with carrying weapons in the street, sometimes in highly charged situations.

Never been a cop, i wouldn't want the job. My dad was a Philly PD Narcotics cop though, and my 1st Repo partner is now a Philly PD patrolman.

I do not claim to be an expert in any way shape or fashion, but i do have a lot of 'street' and firearms experience.

PS: Stay safe MMarsh. ;)

The safety is your finger. :rolleyes::rolleyes:

Thank you for your service but the military and LE are two completely different things. Stick to what you know.

I think you saw "Blackhawk down" too many times...

Clearly in this cops case his finger was no safety at all, or that young man would still be alive. Which is blatantly obvious to most people. Apparently not to all of us though. :-/

Actually, basic firearms safety is the same in both the LE and the military. Never put your finger on the trigger until the moment you are ready to fire is taught to both cops and to soldiers alike.

Seriously, what was the point of your post? That a citizen of the United States is not allowed to have an opinion when a fellow countryman is shot to death by the police, even when said citizen has had the benefit of seeing it in full moving video?

If so, you may feel free to stick said opinion where the sun will never shine. :D

The cop shot an unarmed, restrained- very possibly cuffed, non resisting subject laying prone on the ground- in the back. The cop should have never drawn his weapon(note that none of the other cops do), and he should have never, ever, ever had his finger on the trigger.

To do so is in complete disregard of his training and common sense. It was gross negligence of the highest order. His finger should have NEVER been placed on the trigger.

That being said, even after he put his finger on the trigger, a manual safety would STILL have prevented this disaster from occurring. There is just no sensible reason to not have a safety on any firearm IMO. Even non lethal weapons like pepper spray/mace stun guns and yes- even tazers- have them. Guns should have them too.

All of them.

I personally think that he meant to draw his taser and under the stress of the situation drew his weapon. Why was he the only one to draw anything?

Well, on my department in situations like that, often times a person is designated as the taser or less lethal shooter. Sometimes while en route to the call, If the handling unit doesn't have a taser, he will request a unit to respond who has one. When reviewing a critical incident on my department, the executives will wanna see that you had less lethal options ready and available to deploy. If not, you've got big problems. I don't know how they operate up there or if thats even the case, but it's possible he was the designated "shooter" or was told to taser him. I don't know anything about the officer involved, but with only 2 years on the job, (and BART Police at that) he was really still a rookie and who knows how many real life stressful situations he's been in.

Just to be clear, I'm not saying that the designated shooter scenerio is the case here, I don't know. But I'm just trying to show you why when I see something like this, based on my training and experience I might look at it alittle different then some of you. Like I said earlier, its an unfortunate situation for the officer.


Thanks for the well wishes sniper, I appreciate that.

Supposedly, the BART Police are issued Sig-Sauer .40 caliber pistols. And some of them just started getting X26 Tasers about 3 months ago. I read that Mehserle had one.

http://www.insidebayarea.com/oaklandtribune/localnews/ci_11389946?source=rss

I am a vocal critic of bad policing, but i don't want to see any cops get hurt ever, especially not good ones, which most cops are.

There are some really, really bad ones though....we have to keep our eyes on those guys. There is nothing worse than a bad cop.

"Competent one" suggested the BART cop meant to reach for his tazer. To me that would elevate the incompetence level into the stratosphere. It seems so unbelievable to me that i jumped all over him saying there was no way. How do you grab the wrong weapon, then not even know it when it's in your hand? The weight difference is very significant. The grip shape and trigger shape would also be different. Did this guy not get trained, or never once practice his draw? He would have to have no muscle memory at all to grab for the wrong weapon entirely. Maybe you're right...who knows...assuming that's the case, cops like this guy tell me that we need to do a waaaaaay better job screening and training our LE people.

Way better.

The total incompetence on display in that video should never be allowed to happen. Reminds me of the DEA guy that shot himself in a classroom full of kids with his Glock. At least that guy had the common decency to shoot himself instead of someone else.

To me there was absolutely no cause to taze the subject anyway. He was clearly restrained, and not resisting in any real way. Tazing subjects like that is the whole reason that so many people are opposed to cops having Tazers at all. They are very, very easy to abuse.

FROM ARTICLE:

"If he thought he was reaching for a Taser and pulled a gun, that's negligent. That would be involuntary manslaughter, a negligent homicide," Burris said. "If he didn't have any Taser on him ... that's an intentional killing: second-degree murder."

They better prosecute this guy.

"Burris and BART police Chief Gary Gee have said the facts remain unclear whether Mehserle had been carrying a Taser that day."

See, i don't believe this bit at all.

"The department does not have enough of the stun guns to equip every officer with one, Gee said. When officers do carry Tasers, he added, they are kept on a separate part of their belts from their service pistols.

"They keep those Tasers on the opposite side of their gun hand, or in the middle, pointed the opposite direction so you have to turn your hand to get it," Burris said. "No movement (on the videos) suggests (the officer) was reaching for anything other than the location where the gun was.""

This is what i'm saying....how could you possibly reach around behind your back, twist your hand and not know it's your tazer? Likewise, how do you draw your main duty weapon from a completely different part of your person and not know it's a real god-damn gun!?!?!
It's hard to believe someone that stupid could even remember to breathe.

To me, if he actually MEANT to taze that guy, it's much, much worse. That shows intent.

PS: Here in Philly our SEPTA Transit cops go through the Phila PD police academy. So do the AMTRAK police around here i think. Same with a lot of the small suburban cops. This is a good system IMO, it ensures everyone is taught to the same (hopefully high) standard. I take it BART doesn't do the same?

It will be interesting to see if the "tazer mistake" story gets some legs. For anyone familiar with the two weapons, the initial and only reaction will be "no flippin' way". I have handled all manner of handgun extensively, and a few models of tazer as well. There is no way an even marginally sentient being could ever confuse the two. It would take me less than a day to train my dog to identify them.

I'm afraid if this story does develop into "the story", it will only be due to the public's general ignorance regarding these matters. It will happen only if the BART transit police, or their legal counsel, make a conscious decision to take advantage of the general public's lack of knowledge. The same lack of knowledge that worries them concerning citizen review boards...

One recent example of this approach was the murder of Peyton Strickland at the hands of deputy Christopher Long. Long fired through Strickland's front door as he was approaching it from inside his home to answer it after deputies and officers had knocked. Long claimed he had mistaken the dull thud of the SWAT battering ram on the outside of the front door for the sharp crack of gunfire coming from inside the home. The reaction from everyone who has ever so much as fired a gun was "no way". Including the other officers and deputies standing right next to Long at the time. Their stories changed over time, by the way, as the "battering ram" story became the "official" story...

But, that was the story they pushed and the story that stuck. The general public bought it, most having no experience in such matters. Deputy Long got away with murder. I wouldn't be at all surprised to see the tazer become Mehrserle's "battering ram".

Well thats all good Jeff but stress has caused stranger things, couple that with unfamiliar equipment and unfortunately there is a flippin way. It's the same reason that someone can be a hero shooting at paper targets or at the range, but not hit squat when it really counts. But to be honest, watching the video I really don't see a need to taser him in the first place. Regardless, I would hate to be him or his partners.

It's harder for me to believe Mehrserle intended to shoot Grant in the back.

It is also unfortunate for the guy in the coffin.

Agreed, stress can make one do some really bizzare things. I'm no LEO, and have never had anyone shooting at me, so it is admittedly hard for me to imagine that level of stress. This, however, does not appear to be anywhere near that level of stress. The suspect appears to be fully under the control of the officers on the scene. None of the suspects appear to offer even the slightest resistance, or appear to armed. No one there should have been stressed enough to become confused or disoriented.

Yet, something made this officer draw and shoot. I just hope we find out why. Unfortunately, I am, admittedly, jaded. I guess I need to slow down and give them a chance to issue the report; it is supposed to be out by the end of the week. I will be well and truly surprised if this officer is indicted. That might even restore a bit of my faith in "the system". I'll bet you a new hat he's not, though...

That guy didn't end up getting charged?!?!?!?!?

Mehserle was arrested in Nevada today in connection w/the BART shooting. Specific charges have not been disclosed.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/01/13/BAM615A08A.DTL

I agree with the last line of the story. This is a no-brainer.

Grant's family has filed a $25 million legal claim against BART

That will buy a lot of 40's and bling, but won't bring the guy back.

Wow, charged w/murder.

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1231967009.jpg