Ashland city shooting?

[DaveTN]

A couple of nights ago I heard on the news that Cheatham County deputies were stopping a car; a man walked out of a house and approached them carrying an AR (at least that is the picture they showed). They shot him. He is alive in the hospital. I don’t see anything else. Surely by now they have to know why this guy did what he did.

[Ronald_55]

Either he had ill intent or was stupid. Walking up on a LEO with a weapon in your hands is never a good situation.

[E4 No More]

IIRC, the car that was stopped was engaged in some type of road rage incident at that address, and the guy shot was a Nashville firefighter. 

[MacGyver]

Tough week in Ashland City.  They're looking for an officer this morning who went after a car in the river.

[Hozzie]

They reported they found his body. Sounds like he slipped. I suspect he hit his head, but not sure.

[MacGyver]

That's awful.  

[WindHawk]

Checked with the AC police.  No report of a incident here but there was one in Madison.  Metro officer lost his life according to the news media.

Edited February 2, 2017 by WindHawk
Spelling

[KahrMan]

They were referring to this...

http://www.tennessean.com/story/news/crime/2017/01/31/tbi-investigating-officer-involved-shooting-ashland-city/97275050/

[DaveTN]

Sill haven't heard any explanation on why he did what he did.

[KahrMan]

Finally an update.  Sounds like it was just a huge miscommunication with tragic results.

 

http://www.newschannel5.com/news/deputies-cleared-in-shooting-of-nashville-firefighter

[Dustbuster]

Woman involved .... say no more....


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[KahrMan]

43 minutes ago, Dustbuster said:

Woman involved .... say no more....


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The woman was trying to get away from a violent ex. How is she at fault?  

[KahrMan]

The fireman was trying to be a good citizen and protect the woman and inserted himself into a violent domestic situation and got shot by the cops for it. Bad situation all around. 

Edited March 23, 2017 by KahrMan

[Oh Shoot]

1 hour ago, Dustbuster said:

Woman involved .... say no more....


 

16 minutes ago, KahrMan said:

The woman was trying to get away from a violent ex. How is she at fault?  

 

The lesson as always -- few good deeds go unpunished.

- OS

[DaveTN]

Either the Fireman or the Cops made some really bad decisions. I bet that video would answer that question.

It should be released, if for nothing else; training.

[Just2Honor]

Appears to be an unfortunate incident.  It is dark, comes out of his house with a long gun.  Deputies don't know who is who or what they are dealing with.  They react and he is shot--lucky they didn't shoot better in the dark or he'd be dead.   Nobody won, but the attorney seems to be trying to get a win for himself

[Dustbuster]

domestics can be bad for the innocent as well as good folks trying to help....domestics are so dangerous for respondents.....never rational thinking across the board... men in a fight? usually a woman involved...hope the good guy gets better soon..

 

[btq96r]

I know this incident was a confluence of unfortunate events...but my mind says a man on his property with his weapon isn't a threat until hostile intent is demonstrated.  Not assumed, demonstrated.

[DaveTN]

7 hours ago, btq96r said:

I know this incident was a confluence of unfortunate events...but my mind says a man on his property with his weapon isn't a threat until hostile intent is demonstrated.  Not assumed, demonstrated.

How do you expect the Officers to get that piece of information?

Quote

 

Holland was crouched down beside Puckett's vehicle in the driveway. He was holding what appeared to be a long rifle and did not immediately identify himself.

Both Kellam and Deputy Royal took cover behind Kellam's vehicle.

Holland then moved, and a deputy commanded him to show his hands.

Officials said Holland's movements appeared to be threatening, and the three deputies fired, striking Holland twice.

 

I have no idea what he did; the piece of the video they show only shows the Officers shooting. But a group of citizens was convened and decided the Officers were justified.

We have had multiple threads on here over the years about what you should do if you are in a justified use of force and the cops are arriving. This shows why.

I’m not a fan of Grand Juries; they are one sided and they usually decide whatever the Prosecutor wants them to decide, but that is all we have.

Grand jurors can ask questions and mine would be this. If we can believe that story, there were two and possibly three Police cars on the scene. They were there long enough for them to get out and talk to one of the victims at her car. Why was the Fireman still crouching down behind a car?

[btq96r]

15 hours ago, DaveTN said:

How do you expect the Officers to get that piece of information?

I think "developing the situation" is warranted to try and ascertain the info.

 

15 hours ago, DaveTN said:

We have had multiple threads on here over the years about what you should do if you are in a justified use of force and the cops are arriving. This shows why.

I still default to a citizen on their property, with their legally owned weapon isn't a threat in and of itself.  I think we're getting too comfortable with officers inferring a threat before one is demonstrated.  Armed citizens being treated as a default threat where opening fire is justifiable isn't where I want things to be.

 

Not assessing blame on the individual officers in this situation, but bringing up my usual questions about the system and rules they are using in these situations.

[DaveTN]

8 hours ago, btq96r said:

I think "developing the situation" is warranted to try and ascertain the info.

If we are to believe the news story (That’s all we have right now); that’s exactly what they were doing. They were standing at the victim’s car talking to her trying to find out what was going on.

 

8 hours ago, btq96r said:

I still default to a citizen on their property, with their legally owned weapon isn't a threat in and of itself.  I think we're getting too comfortable with officers inferring a threat before one is demonstrated.  Armed citizens being treated as a default threat where opening fire is justifiable isn't where I want things to be.

Not assessing blame on the individual officers in this situation, but bringing up my usual questions about the system and rules they are using in these situations.

I don’t know why it matters that he was on his own property; many cops are shot by people on their own property. (Most domestics) I’ve taken legally owned guns from people standing in their living room that were trying to kill me.

As someone that has been in their shoes I’ll make this comment: Many people don’t think about how fast a shooting goes down. Those of you that have been though training or been in a shooting know what I’m talking about.

If this was a guy walking out of his house carrying a gun, I would say that the cops would have ordered him to put it down and probably given him more time, as long as he wasn’t moving the weapon into a position to fire.

But that’s why I asked the question above. The story claims he was crouching behind a car holding the rifle AFTER the Officers had exited their vehicles and was talking with the victim. Why? Why did he not stand up and identify himself when the Officers arrived? Why did he not lay the rifle down?

The rule any Police Officer (or citizen) has in a deadly force confrontation is make the suspect unwilling or unable to fire his weapon at you.

I’m guessing that these Officers were being told that a guy was trying to run both these women off the road, and all of a sudden, there he is and he’s now armed with an AR.

I’m not saying that something couldn’t have been done differently. But people can spend days or even weeks deciding what that Officer should have done in that very moment when he feared he had an armed attacker present.