Second Amendment Foundation, demands independent probe of Minnesota police shooting

[EMNofSeattle]

There's no way this officer gets off, the Teamsters Union, and the Gun lobby are now after him, no way in Minnesota does this get swept under the rug. FUQ

SAF, CCRKBA CALL FOR INDEPENDENT PROBE OF FATAL SHOOTING OF LEGALLY ARMED CITIZEN
BELLEVUE, WA — In the aftermath of Wednesday’s shooting of a legally armed citizen in the St. Paul, Minnesota suburb of Falcon Heights during a traffic stop, the Second Amendment Foundation and Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms are calling for an independent investigation.

“Wednesday night’s shooting of Philando Castile is very troubling, especially to the firearms community, because he was a legally-armed private citizen who may have done nothing more than reach for his identification and carry permit,” said Alan Gottlieb, SAF founder and executive vice president. He also chairs the CCRKBA. “We have received calls of alarm today from many of our members across the country. They are justifiably concerned that a law-abiding citizen may have been wrongfully killed.”

Gottlieb has viewed a video that was reportedly broadcast live on Facebook in the aftermath by Castile’s girlfriend, Diamond “Lavish” Reynolds. She was in the car, along with her 4-year-old daughter and witnessed the shooting.

“America’s 13 million citizens who are licensed to carry deserve to know exactly what happened and why,” Gottlieb stated. “There are conflicting explanations, and only an independent investigation can hopefully reveal the truth.

“We understand that Gov. Mark Dayton has asked the White House for a federal investigation,” he added, “and we believe that either the Minnesota State Patrol, or an agency of equal stature from another state could also be invited to investigate.

“We are cognizant of the racial overtones arising from Mr. Castile’s death,” Gottlieb noted. “The concerns of our members, and honest gun owners everywhere, go even deeper. Exercising our right to bear arms should not translate to a death sentence over something so trivial as a traffic stop for a broken tail light, and we are going to watch this case with a magnifying glass.”

He's absolutely right, Gottlieb, this was not a death penalty offense.

 

[Excon]

Re: Second Amendment Foundation, demands independent probe of Minnesota police shooti

He's absolutely right, Gottlieb, this was not a death penalty offense.

No.


The guy, while reaching for his wallet, told the Officer he had a gun.

Think about it.

As you are reaching where the Officer can not see, you tell him; "I have a gun", and then you do not follow his direction.

 

[Moot]

Re: Second Amendment Foundation, demands independent probe of Minnesota police shooti

No.


The guy, while reaching for his wallet, told the Officer he had a gun.

Think about it.

As you are reaching where the Officer can not see, you tell him; "I have a gun", and then you do not follow his direction.

That is possible because the girlfriend kept saying he shot him the arm...or he blew his arm off. Apparently, he was shot four times.

But that part wasn't caught on film. So there are too many varibles to second guess what happened in the moments leading up to it. Do you know if the cop was wearing a body cam? The dash cam might help.

 

[SocialD]

Re: Second Amendment Foundation, demands independent probe of Minnesota police shooti

No.


The guy, while reaching for his wallet, told the Officer he had a gun.

Think about it.

As you are reaching where the Officer can not see, you tell him; "I have a gun", and then you do not follow his direction.

We don't know how it was handled. For me if I was concealed carrying and needed to get id I would keep my arms at my side and inform the officer I was a permit holder and carrying and then let him decide how he wanted to proceed with getting the ID.
Maybe it was poorly handled in something like you describe . maybe not.

 

[Excon]

Re: Second Amendment Foundation, demands independent probe of Minnesota police shooti

That is possible because the girlfriend kept saying he shot him the arm...or he blew his arm off. Apparently, he was shot four times.

But that part wasn't caught on film. So there are too many varibles to second guess what happened in the moments leading up to it. Do you know if the cop was wearing a body cam? The dash cam might help.

Once the Officers statement is released we will know more, but until then we can only go off of what she said and what the Officer can be heard saying as captured by her recording.

@0:18 into the video she said he let the Officer know he was armed and said he was reaching for his wallet. She reiterates this @ 7:00 in the video.
@0:41 the Officer can be heard saying he told him not to reach for it and that he told him to get his hand off it.

Nowhere was it claimed he said it (licensed to carry) to the Officer.
She is the only one making the claim that he was licensed to carry.


Then if you watch her public statement on CNN you can hear her say he was reaching for his wallet when he told the Officer he had a gun.
Think about that for a second. He was reaching and told the Officer he had a gun. Come on. That immediately elevated the threat level.

She then continued on to say she is the one who "yell"ed, "but he's licensed to carry".
What she says to the Officer is irrelevant, especially as he is concentrated on the guy with the gun, not her.


Her further statements are irrational and illogical bs.

---

We don't know how it was handled. For me if I was concealed carrying and needed to get id I would keep my arms at my side and inform the officer I was a permit holder and carrying and then let him decide how he wanted to proceed with getting the ID.
Maybe it was poorly handled in something like you describe . maybe not.

We know how she said it went. I am going to guess she changes her story.

See above reply.

 

[Moot]

Re: Second Amendment Foundation, demands independent probe of Minnesota police shooti

Once the Officers statement is released we will know more, but until then we can only go off of what she said and what the Officer can be heard saying as captured by her recording.

​

---

We know how she said it went. I am going to guess she changes her story.

See above reply.

I think her first statements in the video are probably closet to what really happened...because it was closer to the event and she was trying to explain to the cop what happened. The cop kinda acted like he was in shock, imo. Like he was frozen in time.

 

[Thoreau72]

Re: Second Amendment Foundation, demands independent probe of Minnesota police shooti

No.


The guy, while reaching for his wallet, told the Officer he had a gun.

Think about it.

As you are reaching where the Officer can not see, you tell him; "I have a gun", and then you do not follow his direction.

I have 3 different friends who carry, and their own personal policy is to inform the police officer stopping the vehicle, when it happens, that they are an armed citizen. None of them have ever been shot when doing that, but they are all white men.

 

[QuadpolarNutjob]

Re: Second Amendment Foundation, demands independent probe of Minnesota police shooti

isis and/or blacks use guns to kill white people, the left's solution; take guns from white people. not surprising, considering the left's history of genocidal tendencies.

Left-Wing Bloodbaths

 

[Excon]

Re: Second Amendment Foundation, demands independent probe of Minnesota police shooti

but they are all white men.

Likely not in the way this chap informed the Officer.

 

[Hatuey]

Re: Second Amendment Foundation, demands independent probe of Minnesota police shooti

isis and/or blacks use guns to kill white people, the left's solution; take guns from white people. not surprising, considering the left's history of genocidal tendencies.

Left-Wing Bloodbaths

Oh hey, another moderate position from a Trump supporter.

 

[TurtleDude]

Re: Second Amendment Foundation, demands independent probe of Minnesota police shooti

I have 3 different friends who carry, and their own personal policy is to inform the police officer stopping the vehicle, when it happens, that they are an armed citizen. None of them have ever been shot when doing that, but they are all white men.

In Ohio you have to tell the Police officer you have a CCW and where the weapon is. I have been pulled over a couple times and never had a problem. of course I was a white guy and had a federal credential.

 

[Hatuey]

Re: Second Amendment Foundation, demands independent probe of Minnesota police shooti

In Ohio you have to tell the Police officer you have a CCW and where the weapon is. I have been pulled over a couple times and never had a problem. of course I was a white guy and had a federal credential.

This usually helps. My personal theory is that there a predominant mentality in many police agencies that if you own a gun, and you're black, you couldn't possibly have obtained it legally. That's how we get situations like this one.

 

[TurtleDude]

Re: Second Amendment Foundation, demands independent probe of Minnesota police shooti

This usually helps. My personal theory is that there a predominant mentality in many police agencies that if you own a gun, and you're black, you couldn't possibly have obtained it legally. That's how we get situations like this one.

I think you make a good point and that has a fair amount of validity. The cop assumed that a middle aged white guy in a Brooks brothers suit in a lexus who informed him that he had a CCW was not someone he had to worry about. I was not actually carrying the last time-it was in the console of my vehicle. I asked him if he wanted me to leave the vehicle so he could check the weapon and he said no. Rather he said no problem counselor have a nice day and remember the speed drops from 45 to 25 at the bridge.

 

[Excon]

Re: Second Amendment Foundation, demands independent probe of Minnesota police shooti

That's how we get situations like this one.

No, we get a situation like this one because the guy was reaching for his wallet when he announced he had a gun and then didn't follow the Officer's instructions.
Which isn't anything like getting pulled over and informing the Officer you are licensed to carry and are armed, while your hands remain on the wheel.

 

[Hatuey]

Re: Second Amendment Foundation, demands independent probe of Minnesota police shooti

I think you make a good point and that has a fair amount of validity. The cop assumed that a middle aged white guy in a Brooks brothers suit in a lexus who informed him that he had a CCW was not someone he had to worry about. I was not actually carrying the last time-it was in the console of my vehicle. I asked him if he wanted me to leave the vehicle so he could check the weapon and he said no. Rather he said no problem counselor have a nice day and remember the speed drops from 45 to 25 at the bridge.

You name drop more than a rapper. :mrgreen: Anyways, yeah I understand what you're getting at and I think that's where the problem is. If cops assume that a guy who wasn't dressed like you couldn't have possibly legally owned a gun, then it was just a matter of time before something like this happened. This is a combination of both police culture, lack of training and complete disregard at the microscopic level for both state and federal laws.

I think the scariest thing about this situation is that we have no indication that the cop bothered asking this gun owner if he owned the gun legally. In what world could this then be considered an 'accident'? If I was a gun rights advocate, I'd be more concerned about situations such as these ones and finding more like it than I would be about federal gun control laws which can be overturned and depending on the make up of congress have little chance of standing.

 

[Excon]

Re: Second Amendment Foundation, demands independent probe of Minnesota police shooti

Your discussion has absolutely nothing to with what happened in this case.

 

[JasperL]

Re: Second Amendment Foundation, demands independent probe of Minnesota police shooti

No, we get a situation like this one because the guy was reaching for his wallet when he announced he had a gun and then didn't follow the Officer's instructions.
Which isn't anything like getting pulled over and informing the Officer you are licensed to carry and are armed, while your hands remain on the wheel.

So the standard here is comply exactly with the ideal "how to behave while stopped" instructions that aren't actually written down anywhere but are assumed, or the cop should shoot the guy 4 or 5 times with a woman in the passenger seat and child in the back seat? That's how they draw it up in the police academy training room?

I guess I can accept these explanations if they're intended to explain how police with no ill intent can make tragic mistakes, but not to shift blame from the LEO to the person killed.

 

[Excon]

Re: Second Amendment Foundation, demands independent probe of Minnesota police shooti

So the standard here is comply exactly with the ideal "how to behave while stopped" instructions that aren't actually written down anywhere but are assumed, or the cop should shoot the guy 4 or 5 times with a woman in the passenger seat and child in the back seat? That's how they draw it up in the police academy training room?

I guess I can accept these explanations if they're intended to explain how police with no ill intent can make tragic mistakes, but not to shift blame from the LEO to the person killed.

You are reaching for your wallet and tell the Officer you have a gun.
That would reasonably appear to the Officer as an actual threat.
The Officer apparently did what he was supposed to do and gave him instructions to not reach for it, and to get his hand off it.
The guy did not listen. Under those circumstances it is reasonable for the Officer to believe that his life is in danger.


The Officer's action ...
Tragedy? Yes.
Mistake? No. It is never a mistake to protect yourself from what is reasonably perceived to be a threat.

 

[JasperL]

Re: Second Amendment Foundation, demands independent probe of Minnesota police shooti

You are reaching for your wallet and tell the Officer you have a gun.
That would reasonably appear to the Officer as an actual threat.

Right, any reasonable person would expect a motorist stopped for a tail light violation but wishing to kill the LEO to first announce that he has a gun, then reach for it.

The Officer apparently did what he was supposed to do and gave him instructions to not reach for it, and to get his hand off it.
The guy did not listen. Under those circumstances it is reasonable for the Officer to believe that his life is in danger.

You're assuming he was reaching for his gun, and had his hand on the gun. Where is that in the record? If he'd pulled him over on suspicion of murder, or being a violent felon of any kind, OK (not really OK but more understandable), but he had no record of violent crime and was pulled over for a BS broken tail light.

The Officer's action ...
Tragedy? Yes.
Mistake? No. It is never a mistake to protect yourself from what is reasonably perceived to be a threat.

Frankly it is these kinds of excuses that fuel the BLM movement. Imagine this explanation in a civilian context. Anyone actually carrying a weapon legally is just one tiny unexpected move from being "justifiably" killed. Clerk at convenience market: "I saw he was carrying a gun and he reached back for his wallet to pay for his purchase OR for his gun, who knows, so I shot him five times, with three people in line right behind him." Right, does not work. It's not reasonable to assume that any time a person carrying a weapon makes a move towards any pocket, or his jacket, is about to kill you.

 

[jet57]

Re: Second Amendment Foundation, demands independent probe of Minnesota police shooti

There's no way this officer gets off, the Teamsters Union, and the Gun lobby are now after him, no way in Minnesota does this get swept under the rug. FUQ


He's absolutely right, Gottlieb, this was not a death penalty offense.

And I've said I don't how many times, that carrying a gun increases your chances of being shot and that is exactly what happened.

This cop, like the one on Louisiana should go down on murder chargers; and suddenly the Teamster's union looks like they know what they're doing...

You gun guys have got to change your stance on this stuff, because it is coming back to bite you.

 

[reinoe]

Re: Second Amendment Foundation, demands independent probe of Minnesota police shooti

There's no way this officer gets off, the Teamsters Union, and the Gun lobby are now after him, no way in Minnesota does this get swept under the rug. FUQ


He's absolutely right, Gottlieb, this was not a death penalty offense.

Glad to see that the 2nd amendment foundation is stepping up to the plate to fill the void left by the NRA's silence. This is why I abandoned the NRA years ago. They don't actually care about gun rights.

 

[Excon]

Re: Second Amendment Foundation, demands independent probe of Minnesota police shooti

Right, any reasonable person would expect a motorist stopped for a tail light violation but wishing to kill the LEO to first announce that he has a gun, then reach for it.

1. You have the narrative screwed up. He was reaching for his wallet and then told the Officer he had a gun.
2. Doesn't matter what a responsible person would think in regards to what the facts actually say. And that is what the facts currently say.
3. Turns out that the taillight thing was a false claim by her. So now what ever she has said is suspect, and we will have to wait for what the Officer says happened.
But based on what she said and that she recorded the Officer saying, it would still be a good shoot.

You're assuming he was reaching for his gun, and had his hand on the gun.

No. I said the Officer would have a reasonable belief at that point that he was. It is also obvious that is what the Officer believed at that point because of the instructions he gave.

Where is that in the record? If he'd pulled him over on suspicion of murder, or being a violent felon of any kind, OK (not really OK but more understandable), but he had no record of violent crime and was pulled over for a BS broken tail light.

No. Had he been pulled over for matching the description of an armed robbery suspect (which he was) the reasonableness of the Officers action does not change. The threat was there.

It is never a mistake to protect yourself from what is reasonably perceived to be a threat.

Frankly it is these kinds of excuses that fuel the BLM movement. Imagine this explanation in a civilian context. Anyone actually carrying a weapon legally is just one tiny unexpected move from being "justifiably" killed. Clerk at convenience market: "I saw he was carrying a gun and he reached back for his wallet to pay for his purchase OR for his gun, who knows, so I shot him five times, with three people in line right behind him." Right, does not work. It's not reasonable to assume that any time a person carrying a weapon makes a move towards any pocket, or his jacket, is about to kill you.

Your ignorance of the facts is as astounding as your willingness to exaggerate is.
That is not an excuse.
Every one has the right to protect their self. Even you.
If you have a reasonable belief a gun is being drawn on you, you have the right to defend yourself against it, even if you are an Officer.

BLM need to get a grip if they believe what you just spewed.

 

[Excon]

Re: Second Amendment Foundation, demands independent probe of Minnesota police shooti

Glad to see that the 2nd amendment foundation is stepping up to the plate to fill the void left by the NRA's silence. This is why I abandoned the NRA years ago. They don't actually care about gun rights.

This was nothing but a publicity move.


Besides the guy was pulled over because he matched a description of an armed robbery suspect.

 

[EMNofSeattle]

Re: Second Amendment Foundation, demands independent probe of Minnesota police shooti

I have 3 different friends who carry, and their own personal policy is to inform the police officer stopping the vehicle, when it happens, that they are an armed citizen. None of them have ever been shot when doing that, but they are all white men.

I never recommend "informing" the officer, with one caveat, if your state requires it then I will not recommend you break the law.

as I've said before, If my gun is concealed and will not be revealed by me getting my documents I just don't bother. The only time I told an officer i was carrying was when cops got called to assault crime I was a late witness too, obviously when officers are responding a dangerous scene one may wish to be a little more cautious, but I never said the word "Weapon" or what have you, I just handed the licnese to the officer.

 

[TurtleDude]

Re: Second Amendment Foundation, demands independent probe of Minnesota police shooti

You name drop more than a rapper. :mrgreen: Anyways, yeah I understand what you're getting at and I think that's where the problem is. If cops assume that a guy who wasn't dressed like you couldn't have possibly legally owned a gun, then it was just a matter of time before something like this happened. This is a combination of both police culture, lack of training and complete disregard at the microscopic level for both state and federal laws.

I think the scariest thing about this situation is that we have no indication that the cop bothered asking this gun owner if he owned the gun legally. In what world could this then be considered an 'accident'? If I was a gun rights advocate, I'd be more concerned about situations such as these ones and finding more like it than I would be about federal gun control laws which can be overturned and depending on the make up of congress have little chance of standing.

I was talking about me. a friend of mine who is a bartender where I eat lunch 3 X a week is a 30 something black male who I go shooting with. He said he was worried about getting a CCW after this nonsense but I noted that MOST Police figure if you have a CCW you are even more likely to have a clean record than a guy who doesn't but comes up clean when they run your name after they pull you over