Shooting Sparks Threats

No, we go to the range and practice the art of shooting.  We don't shoot with the intent to maim or wound, we are trying to eliminate whatever threat there is.  Ask any officer if he wants to kill someone.  I bet the resounding answer will be "no, not unless I have to".  I don't do this job with the intent to kill someone, I do it to make this the safest place for my kids to grow up.  But, if it comes down to it and someone becomes a threat, I'll do what's required to go home in one piece.

Frog, that's one reason I would not want to live in county. If all Mr. Campbell was doing was shooting, it wasn't illegal. No, I wouldn't want to be his neighbor.

As for time of day, a murder of a juvenile in Leighton happened at about that time of night. They were shooting targets. While I have a handgun and have practiced with it, it's always been in the daytime, but oddly enough the only time I've fired a rifle (twice in same session) was around ten at night. My friend was shooting and wanted me to try it. There were only woods behind the target my friend was using. How far can a .22 travel?

Yes, most private companies drug test after any accident. I would certainly think that would be standard in a death--not odd at all.

Just out of curiosity, was the reserve deputy on "duty" with the regular deputies or was he called in?

Yes, what is the point?  You have a wreck that looks suspicious or someone is killed drug testing is often done, you have an accident at work, it is done,  you work on public transportation and there is a wreck and you get tested, you....the list goes on.  Yes, it is sad anyone has to be tested for drugs and it's too bad incidents happen, but cops are just like anyone else.  Yes, they are held to a higher standard hopefully and should be, but testing them for drugs after a shooting is a good idea whether anyone was shot awhile back or not.  

Thanks for the information, and wow.  Scary stuff.  Not that anyone has a gun, but that it would be okay to just shoot it wherever and whenever you like if you don't happen to see anyone right in front of you.

Well, unless a person has no conscience and/or is mentally ill, I would think that would be the case for most LE.  Not only is a human being hurt or killed, but the publicity and the investigation after it would seem to make it not worth it for a bit of fun (fun to a sick person).  Makes sense to me LE people want to go home as anyone else does, so why go around having gunfights?

QD, I know I'm going to be sorry for asking this, but could you give some details of any forum member being threatened with a gun. You say the Lauderdale Sheriff's dept. was called, so it had to have been in the county--right?

Kate

The warning on a box of .22 long rifle used to say the maximum range was a mile.  Of course, that’s going to depend on the elevation, wind, and the type of firearm used.  Rifles tend to develop higher muzzle velocities than to handguns and consequently shoot further with the same ammo.

So what were the circumstances when the lawyer won two cases against LEOs.  Criminal?  Civil?  Was there a settlement of sorts or did they go to trial?  Details, Kate, please.

BTW, it doesn’t matter if there are pictures of the lawyer doing the funky chicken.  He’s not on trial.

Teyates,

Doc, in addition to pre-employment and random drug testing, it was SOP with my department in shooting incidents as well as traffic collisions involving serious injury or death that the LEO[s] involved take blood & urine test.  And they were done quickly due dissipation of possible evidence as required by law in DUI procedure.

Except for one thing...the LEOs participation in these test was a condition of his/her employment.  Neither probable cause nor implied consent applied.  In short, should the LEO refuse the tests, he/she was subject to immediate termination despite whatever the outcome of the investigation may be.

And not for reasons QD predictably suspected, but to remove that doubt and close that door should any civil suit come to pass.

We were doing this in the mid 1970s.

And yes, in a night-time "shots fired" events, blue lights  become bullet magnets.

One of the tactical courses I taught was on light.  How it works for and against LEOs.  How it can be used for concealment, distraction, and yes, illumination for target identification were a few of the topics discussed, demonstrated, and evaluated.

I wont give details but it was real to the person.  "watch your back" or as bud told someone recently " watch you 6". That's a threat.  That kind of threat by a police[ bud says he is one] is what makes one suspicious of cop's intentions. The deputy that shot Dr. Long's son was not drug tested even though the deputy had a joint in his cruiser .  Why not if it was SOP?

Bud, thanks for the info on the .22.

As for Mr. Sherrod, I believe he has been involved in more than the two I mentioned, but of the two that I can remember off the top of my head, one was criminal and one was civil. He won a suit (settlement as I recall) against Lauderdale brutality in the detention center. He also won a criminal case for a man accused of punching a police officer who had entered his home without a warrant. That incident was in Lauderdale County somewhere in the Lexington/Anderson area as I recall.

The man is killed on Saturday & the family has already hired an attorney? Has he even been buried yet? Could it be this family is looking to get a bundle? So many questions that may never be answered.

I'm like many of you wondering why & what he was shooting at that time of night? Could a bullet not easily bounce off of something & hit/kill someone?

I saw that FB page almost as soon as it was made & there was one threat after another from several people but most have now been taken down. I'm sure that order came from the attorney. He said the family doesn't condone anything that was posted on FB that was derogatory. Dozens of those post were from members of the family directly. I know this because they identified themselves as such.

Below is some quotes from the attorney. Does he know these things personally? Was he there?

"He was doing what is OK by law in Alabama, just sitting on his porch target shooting. He was shooting without endangering anyone off his porch.”

"The truth is the man is dead and the only witnesses are police officers,” Sherrod said. “There’s a lot of questions we can’t answer.

It is my department's policy to submit to a screening after the use of deadly force. I'm sure your mind can't wrap your head around doing the right thing.

Yes. All departments should have it in policy to screen in deadly force situations and automobile accidents.

QD predictably suggest that "Watch your 6" is a threat.  And just as predictable when discussing any matter related to LEO, QD is wrong.

For whatever disagreements Jank and I have, I respect her.  I said so.  I mean it.

The meaning of "Watch your 6" is "be safe" and is in fact a compliment.  It’s commonly used by members of the USAF from which I retired.

And not the sort of thing I would expect QD to understand.

A settlement is hardly the same as winning. In a number of instances, it is cheaper to pay the settlement than go to trial. Also, the criminal case was a "not guilty" to a land owner who argued that the police were in his home unlawfully when he struck one of them. A jury found reasonable doubt and did not convict him.

I concur. It is a comradery term.

The civil settlement called for a little more than money: Abuse/Torture Suit

BTW, I can see asking an officer to leave who hadn't been invited in, but not hitting one. I was surprised that Mr. Sherrod got that verdict.

From Semi:

Below is (sic) some quotes from the attorney. Does he know these things personally? Was he there?

"He was doing what is OK by law in Alabama, just sitting on his porch target shooting. He was shooting without endangering anyone off his porch.”

"The truth is the man is dead and the only witnesses are police officers,” Sherrod said. “There’s a lot of questions we can’t answer.

______________________________________________

No, he can't know the first, but I pretty much thought the second was a given. If you saw the photo(s) of the trailer, you saw how remote it was. The wife has said she and the toddler were inside. That just leaves the three deputies and one reserve officer outside with Mr. Campbell, who's dead.

Nobody stated that they expected them to drive down the driveway and be shot at.  I was wondering why there were no blue lights visible (according to some of the comments, so the other question is were lights used or not when they arrived at the neighbors house)?  9PM at night, you would think that blue lights would be visible enough from down the road for someone to see that police were around.

You make the assumption that I am arguing against the police officers - I've already said I don't yet have an opinion.  My question is a valid one - if the guy who was shot did not know they were police as the family is saying, what lead to him not knowing that they were officers in the driveway?  Ive read that the family's entire argument is that he didn't know that officers were approaching - I'm looking for something to counter that argument......

You are assuming that they contacted the attorney - do we know that's the case?

________

Yes, I did assume that & no, I don't know it for a fact. If that's the way it sounded, I apologize.

If the attorney knocked on their door & offered to represent them, all they had to do was say no, it's to soon. I guess they didn't believe it to be to soon.

I don't know much about that attorney, I was curious as to whether they went out of their way to retain him -or- if he showed up and offered his services.  If he offered his services, they may have been compelled to think it was time.  I would think it would be pretty easy for an attorney to convince a family in this situation that they need an attorney to speak for them early in the process.

Look at all the wreck victims that retain attorneys long before they know what really happened in the wreck or whether or not there was any need for an attorney in the first place.  Or all the ads for attorneys out there now - think 'in a wreck?  need a check?'  

Shoalanda Speaks, the know it all with the gossip blog seems to think no threats were made. The threats have been taken down. On one page someone posted, "Revenge starts today." And the "cop will get what's coming to him." There were many more, & as bad as those two. My guess is the lawyer made the family members take them down.

BTW - I didn't mean to sound snippy with my comment about you assuming that....

Someone needed to pull the family back.  No need in adding a charge of making a threat to the situation.  I would hate for someone to miss the funeral because they were in jail.....

I heard a rumor today...

A friend said that they knew the next door neighbors that called the police. Rumor has it that Campbell was threatening them with a gun and then started shooting towards their house. They called the police and when the police got there Campbell was still shooting the gun. The neighbors said that the police tried to call out to him twice and he did not respond. They then tried to get closer and get Campbell to put down the gun. When they called out again for him to put down the gun, he supposedly turned it towards them. Then they shot. 

I have no idea how much of that is true. I probably shouldn't spread rumors either.  So take it all as only hearsay and nothing more.

I'm thinking it's pretty much common knowledge that the neighbors called the sheriff's dept. They had argued earlier according to Campbell's brother.

This was on the TD not here, but someone commented that hiding behind a car was safer than hiding in a house. That didn't really seem plausible to me. That's why I wondered if Campbell were really shooting at them. I would have tried to get inside.

I apologize if my response came across the way you took it. It was meant to be educational, not rude. I made no assumption. I simply pointed out that if it was reported that shots were fired, it would be illogical to allow your "blue lights" to be seen. Officer safety is paramount in these situations. From the account I have been told, the deputies announced their presence. The news article even stated that he met them at the gate.

Capt. he is well known for his taking cases against law enforcement. And I'm not saying it is a bad thing. He is actually a good, educated attorney. If everyone jumped on our side, it wouldn't be fair and balanced. As long as the truth is sought, and not a vendetta, I appreciate attorneys like him.

I personally read numerous threats. There were calls to arms. The friends wanted to "empty a clip" in his name. Some said they dared the neighbors to call police this time. I hate they were taken down, because they were really out of line. And Shoalanda isn't known to be pro law enforcement.

I concur. There has been enough loss. The family lost a loved one, and a deputy will forever live with taking a human life.

That is in line with the statement the news reported.

How sad.  I don't get why people do those things.  Yes, I see being upset of course, but threatening to harm or kill someone and write it online is stupid, and those kind of statements don't help anything.  

The bolded part is so true especially.  Well, and the part you said about there being enough loss.  Honoring the person who died (in whatever way in a given situation) wouldn't include killing someone else.  

Wright, I read some of the postings on the brother's page, but certainly not all. They weren't exactly literate, but the ones I saw about emptying a clip were talking about shooting into the air. I would think anyone (think QD) could take something the wrong way, as in watching a six whatever a six may be. FRT, I would think shooting into the air would hardly be safe.

Don't worry they took down the threats and are like "threat, what threat?".  I don't know which side I would have supported but when you call a police officer a pig and say you hope he gets what he deserves and justice starts today and you've got a profile picture with a rifle YOU LOST ANY CHANCE OF MY SUPPORT. 

It is a bit odd that they paint this man almost as a "saint", yet this "saint" seemed to have a lot of stupid trash for friends. Here's my suggestion for their "protest". Instead of firing into the air and endangering people who had zero to do with this, they can all gather in a field, form a circle, and start firing at a target mounted in the middle of the circle.

--------------

You didn't sound snippy at all. I probably sounded like a know-it-all & didn't mean to.

Yes, let me clarify. The emptying of clips was a remembrance thing, not a threat. It was mentioned along with a vigil.

Once again, QD is proven to be the 'know nothing' that he is.  'Watch your 6' is LE-speak for 'Be careful'.  'Check 6' is military slang for 'look out behind you, because that is where most threats come from'.

dog it was the context after an argument that made it a threat.