jkf
2hr ago
We got into the Milkbones as kids once -- as you might expect they are pretty dry, but more bland than anything else. Maybe with some dip?
I think once dogs get the idea that something is a treat they will consider it to be so whether it's truly 'tasty' or not.
jkf
4hr ago
I mean they must have some way of confirming that it's tasty, right? They can't just say that!
jkf
4hr ago
Apparently it can be kind of like a job title: https://www.nlg.org/massdefenseprogram/los/
Doesn't sound like a paying job, but the words do have meaning I guess...
jkf
4hr ago
I'm also frustrated that they don't make Cosequin for humans.
It, uh -- doesn't look like it has anything in it that would hurt humans, and it says that the chews are tasty?
jkf
8hr ago
what about the 2nd and 3rd shot .33 seconds later which went 6 inches to the right through the side window'
https://youtube.com/watch?v=K9CJY5p0xz4&t=16
He's pivoted more than 90 degrees since the first shot, and has pushed his gun forward almost to the point where it's within the vehicle through the side window -- there's some argument to be made that training/target fixation kicked in so he's not really culpable, but that argument is not "double-tap is standard procedure" nor "nobody could possibly have stopped shooting in such a short time".
jkf
9hr ago
Maybe it's not over, (like, she might back up and have another go at you!) but it's no longer immediate.
Where are you going to draw the line on that? He had to pivot quite a bit to get the shot from the side, can he just keep tracking the target and shoot her in the back? It's a Glock, not a machine gun -- when you are no longer under immediate threat, you can just... not pull the trigger anymore.
jkf
10hr ago
Like shaken says, this is normally pretty ironclad because normally they are defending themselves from a guy with a gun etc who is hard to cross-off as a threat -- so continuing to shoot if he drops the gun or something isn't too bad.
This time, the car was clearly past him, and he had to actively turn his body to get the shot -- you could argue about target fixation or something, but based on the video I don't think it's an easy sell to a jury.
jkf
17hr ago
Particularly if it turns out that the first shot was non-fatal -- which actually seems kind of likely given the location of the hole + quickdraw; he might not have even hit her at all there.
If he doesn't exactly have self-defence for the shots through the window, this would leave him only with defense of others/the public -- which might fly for a normal cop in this situation with a normal (here meaning crazed out of his mind on liquor and drugs) fleeing suspect; preventing a dangerous high-speed chase, heat of the moment, etc.
In this case that seems like kind of a tough row to hoe.
jkf
18hr ago
This is indeed department policy for most normal police organizations. (Blocking the suspect's vehicle in with a car where feasible)
I'm not against what these guys are doing or anything, but I will say that based on the first part of the video their training might not be the most modern; either that or they are all sick and tired of being yelled at and obstructed all the time...
There's now an unedited video with context:
https://x.com/JoshEakle/status/2008970977699639681
The other ones kind of gave a different impression; I still think it's, like -- a pretty defensible shoot, but not as good as (say) Rittenhouse.
The guy did in fact dodge the car; some of the other ones make it look like she hit him a bit with the hood. This doesn't seem significant to me, and the first shot he fired was golden (pretty polished draw BTW), but it sure looks/sounds to me like he cranked a couple rounds in the open side window as she's going by, which was probably not a great decision.
I'm now having Binger flashbacks in which he rolls the tape back and forth pointing at blurry items onscreen with a laser pointer and trying to look imposing -- alas, I think the Feds have jurisdiction on this one?
EDIT: Actually that's the same as the youtube version of Angle 2 in @zoink 's post -- I kind of get the impression that the driver may not have even noticed the guy in front until she started forward, which is always a mistake, especially when the guy in your path is an armed cop. Always check that your way is clear before shifting into drive, people!
jkf
19hr ago
Probably, but when aggressive people are surrounding your car, the flight or fight response might kick in.
It might, but that doesn't seem to be an acceptable legal defense, historically.
I mean if you hit somebody with a car you are always gonna be at least in jeopardy for "failure to yield to pedestrians" or something -- if that someone is a cop it's probably more like "failure to stop when directed by an officer or whatnot" -- 50 Felonies a Day may be an exaggeration, but 50 Traffic Violations a day really isn't.
More options
Context Copy link