Deputy shoots home owner after alarm call

[MechAg94]

IMO, these risks you mention don't have to be as big as they are.  They should try to do better.  I am concerned the LEO side of this sees it as normal with no need for changes.  An innocent man was shot in his own home by a sheriff's deputy.  That is a negative outcome and shouldn't happen. 

[cordex]

IMO, these risks you mention don't have to be as big as they are.  They should try to do better.

The acceptable number of innocent people shot by cops is zero.  The actual number is tiny, but larger than the acceptable number.  But what is an acceptable solution in order to get that number even closer to zero?  I can think of plenty of ways to close the barn door that would have prevented this particular incident but would have adverse implications elsewhere.

I am concerned the LEO side of this sees it as normal with no need for changes. 

Changes for the better would be awesome, but (whether or not this particular case qualifies) there are times where everyone involved can be smart, reasonable, well-intentioned, and acting in good faith and still have things end up sideways.  Just because something bad happened here doesn't mean there is a magical policy or law that will fix it and be bunnies and sunshine forever.  And sometimes the very policy that would seem to fix problem A would make problem B worse and be a net negative.

An innocent man was shot in his own home by a sheriff's deputy.  That is a negative outcome and shouldn't happen. 

Absolutely.

I understand the platitudes and emotional pleas, but they're essentially the same lines that we hear from anti-gunners whenever someone does something stupid with a gun.

[dogmush]

Sometimes shootings are not good or bad, just a tragic mess.

With regards to the freedom of opening your door holding a pistol, that may be so, but deconfliction is a critical tactics element.

Having worked old clothes as a police officer, I can assure you that identification of friend/foe can be difficult.

Not all police shootings are bad.....

I can assure you that the involved officer is a mess and facing months if not years of investigatory stuff as well as a lifetime of doubts.

Let me add a military perspective on this, since we also train heavily on this.

If freind/foe identification is giving you trouble, DON'T *expletive deleted*ing SHOOT!

What is so *expletive deleted*ing hard about the basic tenant of fire arm use: "Obtain positive target ID before firing"?

The police officer did not have positive ID of a threat, and fired prematurely.

Honestly the real problem here is that police officers have forgotten,  and convinced us to forget, that their job might entail taking incoming fire before they are justified in returning it. Sucks, but that's the gig.

ETA:

Cordex was actually pretty accurate in post 18:

The cop sees someone moving around in the house with a firearm when the homeowner was reportedly unreachable and had ostensibly activated a silent panic alarm.  At that time he reasonably believed the person he saw turning around with a gun might be an active threat.

I'd agree with that. Guy might be a threat. Cops shouldn't shoot at "might be a threat". It's their job to ascertain threat vs. Not threat before firing. Or it should be.

[Hawkmoon]

I'm glad there are no sidelights next to the doors to my house.

[MechAg94]

The acceptable number of innocent people shot by cops is zero.  The actual number is tiny, but larger than the acceptable number.  But what is an acceptable solution in order to get that number even closer to zero?  I can think of plenty of ways to close the barn door that would have prevented this particular incident but would have adverse implications elsewhere.
Changes for the better would be awesome, but (whether or not this particular case qualifies) there are times where everyone involved can be smart, reasonable, well-intentioned, and acting in good faith and still have things end up sideways.  Just because something bad happened here doesn't mean there is a magical policy or law that will fix it and be bunnies and sunshine forever.  And sometimes the very policy that would seem to fix problem A would make problem B worse and be a net negative.
Absolutely.

I understand the platitudes and emotional pleas, but they're essentially the same lines that we hear from anti-gunners whenever someone does something stupid with a gun.

I am not trying to give "platitudes and emotional pleas, I am trying to say that the attitude of "well, crap happens" is flat out wrong.  If the cops can't do their job without accidentally shooting homeowners then they should shut it down until they figure out how not to do that.  I hope that entire department was looking at this as a training opportunity.  Sheriff's deputies are more likely to roll up on rural houses and armed homeowners. 

Dogmush hit the nail on the head for me and similar thoughts have come up before.  The officer should have expected an armed homeowner to come to the door. 

[Hawkmoon]

IMO, these risks you mention don't have to be as big as they are.  They should try to do better.  I am concerned the LEO side of this sees it as normal with no need for changes.  An innocent man was shot in his own home by a sheriff's deputy.  That is a negative outcome and shouldn't happen. 

Police could do with a lot of improving across the board.

A couple of decades ago (when I was still answering my telephone), the phone rang late one night. I picked up, and a voice said "This is the ___ Police Department. You need to secure your dogs and let the officers into the house."

I looked out my window -- no flashing lights, no police cars. I asked the caller what he was blathering about. He repeated that I must immediately secure my dogs and let the officers into the house. I then informed him that I didn't own any dogs, and that there were no police outside my house waiting to be let in. Turns out the cops were at another home, a mile down the street, of a family with the same last name but no relation to me. Stupid dispatcher couldn't even look up a telephone number correctly when he had the correct names and correct street numbers to start from.

And we let these people carry guns ...

[zxcvbob]

Do away with "qualified immunity" and most of this will quickly go away.  I know that will expose the police to all kinds of frivolous lawsuits, but I'm okay with that.  They've abused the privilege, it needs to be taken away.

[Hawkmoon]

Do away with "qualified immunity" and most of this will quickly go away.  I know that will expose the police to all kinds of frivolous lawsuits, but I'm okay with that.  They've abused the privilege, it needs to be taken away.

I think that would be a good start.