Quantcast

Comments about ‘Police shooting at McDonald's not legally justified, DA says’

Return to article »

West Valley officers cleared in separate shooting

Published: Thursday, March 29 2012 7:10 p.m. MDT

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Noodlekaboodle
Salt Lake City, UT

@Pat Reavy
Could you please explain WHY this shooting wasn't justified, or explain what actually happened. The headline of this article makes it sound like we might actually get some info about the case.

Truthseeker
SLO, CA

So, the police can't even get it right and we want citizens to be armed?

Noodlekaboodle
Salt Lake City, UT

Nevermind. The trib actually has information on their site....

milhouse
Atlanta, GA

@Noodlkaboodle, you do know the article stretches across three pages, right?

ute alumni
Tengoku, UT

why would anyone want to be a cop

Geek Man
,

I think it's great that DA Gill is holding police accountable. It's really important. But, it doesn't seem totally unreasonable for the officer to gain entry to the car by shooting through the window IF THE CAR COULD HAVE HURT PEOPLE. According to the officers words he was trying to protect himself and others from a possible out of control car.
Having said that it seems to me police are a bit trigger happy sometimes. It can't be easy being a cop.

One comment off point- I have several friends who are prosecutors. They have freely admitted to me that in their job the most important thing is to have a great win record and to never put there neck on the line in a case if it could hurt their future political or career goals. They said it was embarrassing to say but, justice ranked far down the list.

I remember thinking- I sure hope judges have a higher standard.

rogerdpack2
Orem, UT

Not justified for stopping some guy from rampaging through a parking lot?

Mike IsBell
Ogden, UT

The DA has it wrong in classifying the 1st shot as using "deadly force". From the news report, no one was in danger from it.

Rifleman
Salt Lake City, Utah

Re: Truthseeker
"So, the police can't even get it right and we want citizens to be armed?"

No, we don't expect our citizens to perform law enforcement duties. In Utah we want our citizens to be armed because we understand the concept of "Response Time". Typically that is the time between when a frantic home owner finally makes contact with a 911 operator and the time the police arrive to put up the crime scene tape and take photos of the victim's body.

I can't speak for California but here in Utah we have more confidence in the judgement of our armed citizens.

Lyle
Springville, UT

I think it is interesting that a shot fired to break a window was considered to be unjustified. The passenger seat was probably not killed, right? Whether something is deadly ought to depend on how it is used. I have a flashlight that would have smashed the window easily, but could also have been used to kill the driver very efficiently. Would smashing the window with the flashlight therefore have been unjustified? I have used firearms to do all sorts of non-deadly tasks (installing phone lines comes to mind). Obviously, police officers work under tighter constraints.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments