Why does a deputy have a gun in the courtroom? Is he scared of all those people that won’t have guns?
Also, this seems like a legitimate shooting, although I wish there were other ways to stop a 16 year without resorting to killing him.
It was an answer to a question, with a cite. It’s in this thread. You don’t want to look in the thread for it, then don’t. I don’t give a fuck either way.
At least some of the controversy is that that is the cop’s side of the story. I don’t do audio at work, so I can’t hear what the grandmother is saying in the twitter clip, but from reactions to it, I would assume that her story is not the same as the policies statement.
But, lets say that the family has one story, and the cop has another, I assume that you will take the cop’s side of the story, as always.
BTW, and video or body cams?
Circumstantial at best. If he is completely honest, and everything he says is true, how would he act differently than if everything he says is a lie and he is just doing it to hurt his former employers?
Your statement could be made about any lawsuit or court case or witness testimony ever.
Yes, it is a weasel word that allows one to make “inferences” with no support or evidence.
Like a taser? Shouldn’t that have been the first option as opposed to firing in an enclosed area?
Yes, I would agree with that.
Yes, the grandmother’s story does not square with the official report. It is, as you would expect, basically polar opposite. But again, courthouses tend to be just about as secure as airport concourses, so there is little need for officers to have firearms, because the bad guys cannot even bring in a nail file.
And traditionally, courtrooms have been places where electronic recording devices are prohibited.
Aren’t there independent witness reports? I would think so, although eyewitness reports do have a lot of inaccuracies. Video evidence? The judge?
A quarter of a billion dollars is the cost of our new courthouse serving a +100k population. Airport level scans/searches by police for the public to enter; judiciary, prisoners and public each have entirely separate corridors and elevators, all public spaces are under audio surveillance and all courtrooms, corridors, and open areas are under audio and video surveillance. That’s our new courthouse. It was time to retire our 90+ year old one – the one in which a respondent husband shot to death his petitioner wife and the presiding judge. But despite court security, people still try to bring guns into our courthouses, such as happened last year in my sister’s county.
Even a quarter billion dollars and the best of design and technology is not sufficient without properly trained and armed courthouse security. The simple fact of the matter is that there is a conflict between access to justice, which in most circumstances necessitates open courtrooms, and courthouse security during criminal and family matters in which the parties and the public are often extremely agitated and occasionally violent, necessitating use of force to protect the judiciary, court staff, and members of the public.
Around here, court security tries to maintain a presence without intimidating people, and tries to diffuse emerging situations, but the simple fact of the matter is that the courthouse is where crazy and/or bad people who are in conflict with the law or with each other are brought to deal with issues that enrage them. And often they bring along their supporters (family, friends, fellow gang members) who sometimes are just as crazy and/or bad. Mutterings turn to shouts, shouts turn to rising up, rising up turns to rushing the dock. The mob rules.
Axiom: when the mob rules, people get hurt. That is why court security is either armed or has arms available.
The issue concerning the shooting in the Ohio courthouse should be whether or not the actions of court security were appropriate in those particular circumstances. If the courthouse is up to snuff with audio and video surveillance of the courtroom, the facts will emerge.
I am not quite clear on the concept of using sheriff’s deputies for courthouse security, or if that was what the deputy’s responsibility was there. None of the stories I have seen say that.
Wow, that sure does sound scary! And of course, spectators are allowed to bring their lawfully owned weapons too, right? I mean, if it’s so scary that the guards need a gun, how am I to protect myself if the guard gets killed?
Not in my state, and I doubt any others. If a permit holder shows up at the door with a handgun, he is accompanied to a locker area where he places the firearm in a locker. It can be picked back up on the way out of the courthouse.
Only in shithole countries where guns have rights where sometimes some jurisdictions let some guns in courtrooms under some circumstances.
But you just said it was so dangerous that trained police officers need to carry a gun. How am I to protect myself if something goes down in the courtroom?
Wouldn’t having MORE guns carried by lawful concealed or open carriers make the courtroom even MORE safe than just having an armed guard there?
That sounds like an infringement on the second amendment to me.
Me too. I don’t make the rules. But those are the rules here.
Yeah, you’d think the NRA would be all over that. Not to mention members of this board who are highly in favor of personal carry of weapons in public. I mean, carrying a gun in a random public place to protect yourself, when that place has a low percentage of bad people is one thing.
But not being able to carry it in a court room that contains a high percentage of bad people, just seems like a tragedy waiting to happen! One that could have been prevented by a good guy with a gun.
It does seem like a legitimate shooting, but there are some disturbing questions. I mean, it does have the feel like this was an inexperienced and possibly panicked deputy. A taser sounds like a better option. So does a billy club. The cite I was able to read was light on details.
Was it just the deputy vs the kid? Or were other family members joining in? Where were the other deputies? This was Columbus Ohio, not Podunk Idaho. There HAD to be other deputies nearby.
I don’t know what this means, or if it’s accurate. Why would the deputy threaten this? Did he have cause to arrest already? Or was the deputy taunting him?
So who told you? Was it a white person? I bet it was a white person. amirite? I’m right aren’t I?
Because to non-white America, all this shit was pretty obvious a long time ago, like 50 years ago and frankly it actually BETTER now than it used to be. If someone told ME that this wasn’t going on for decades, i would laughed at them if I could get away with it. Go ahead and ask your token black friend if driving while black was a real thing before YOU found out about it? You do have a token black friend don’t you? Because if you don’t, you really ought to go get one, it’ll make you feel more WOKE.
We are not FINALLY learning any of this shit. White people like you are finally starting to believe black people because now there is photographic evidence. This stuff has been going on my entire life and you are either very young or very sheltered if you didn’t know this was going on.
Well, it depends on the color of the gun. What color is the gun?