Ohio Cop Shoots Photog, mistaking Camera for Gun

naren said:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hg6NHuHbaqk
Click to expand...

I would be more inclined to fault the police for missing the person with the improvised flame thrower as well. I don't know any of the circumstances of that incident other than what appears to be very biased and sensationalist reporting.

EDIT: I can't positively identify any police in that video. There were a lot of people in clothing that appeared to be uniform like. I remember there was some local news reporting questions about why there wasn't more police intervention. They appeared to show the uniform and nothing else. That has not however, received much reporting, just like members of the left haven't had much press exposure for the fact many of them seemed to have come prepared for reaction to violence.
 
Calzone said:
OTH,

Makes a good point.

DISCLAIMER: The following actually happened, and I take responsibility for injuring and hurting an innocent person.

Understand it was in the 70's in NYC. This was an era of high crime and lawlessness. In 1974 NYC almost became like Detroit and was almost bankrupt.

So I was in the subway at 168th Street in Jamaica Queens, I was counting how many subway tokens I had, and someone approached me from behind and tapped me on the shoulder.

For me it was a matter of free association becoming "Free Assassination," partially a conditioned response from previous episodes of life threatening danger, where the subway system in the 70's was a dangerous place, I was counting money, and I was being surprised by being approached from behind.

So I turned and cold cocked a teenager not much younger than myself. Pretty much I laid him down. "Why did you hit me?" he said.

After the fact I realized that I over reacted, but really under the circumstances in the moment did I do the right thing? Hard to say, even though it was a mistake. I do understand why I did what I did. I can also say that under a similar situation today I really don't know how I would respond.

Not sure how others might of reacted, but research indicates that perhaps 3/4's of the population would of acted differently.

The kid only wanted to know if he was on the correct side for the train to Madhattan, but he made the innocent mistake of approaching someone from behind.

In WWII there was one study that suggested Army soldiers on their first day of combat were being killed at a high rate, and without having fired their weapon. It seems boot camp had inadiquitly had failed to prepare them for real combat. I am sure for some fear froze them, for others it was the inability to think under such duress, and for some it really was about the morality of violence and using lethal force. This study suggested that in WWII only 1/4 of the men in their first day of combat were able to fire their weapon.

In another study it suggests that during the Vietnam War that if new troops on the ground survived the first two weeks of combat that their odds of surviving their tour of duty rose dramatically.

In an analogy to these studies I mentioned I have an experience that supports the data.

I work in a nuclear physics lab: I run, operate and maintain a three and a half million dollar cyclotron (partical beam accelerator). One day at work I told my boss I was running down the block to Citibank to get cash from an ATM, but on my way back to work I saw that my building was evacuated due to a fire alarm, and I took notice that my boss was missing.

I have reason to dislike my boss, basically he is a jerk, but I broke procedure and did not follow my training, and I entered what could be like running into a burning building. When I got to my lab about 70-80 feet undergound which is built like a bunker I found out that the fire was real.

I saw my boss holding a CO2 fire extinguisher frozen right in front of an electrical cabinet that was on fire. Oddly a PhD Radio Chemist and a chemistry technician also stood by frozen. My boss had the same training I had, the fire extinguisher also was marked "safe for electrical fires," but my boss was unable to use his training and in that moment was also unable to read or process any information.

So basically I witnessed three smart highly educated people that were totally overwhelmed and unable to think, react, or process information. IMHO this is what really happens in an emergency.

I am no hero, but I had the sense to grab another CO2 fire extinguisher, pull the safety pin, and told my boss that it is safe to use the CO2 extinguisher and that a second one is right behind him.

I also told the other two bystanders not to leave my boss alone, and directed them that I was going to get the key and turn off the main breaker that was feeding the electrical fire.

So in a real life emergancy I witnessed three people who could not respond like in the WWII study, and only because I had experience with life threatening emergencies in my past that I was the only person able to respond to the stress that froze others.

I have not worn the uniform or shield, but I think I have had similar experiences that were potentially life threatening. I honestly told my boss that the next time I will not risk my life for him. LOL.

BTW the major cause of death among Cyclotron Engineers is electricution. My machine has voltages as high as 50K volts, and currents as high as 500 amps. When at full power and operating it consumes 80K kilowatts, or the equivelent power of 80 thousand hair driers.

Luckily the fire suppression system in my new building was faulty and did not get triggered. It seems the negative air pressure of my vault direct the smoke away from the smoke detectors.

Cal
Click to expand...

Fight, flight, or now recognized, freeze. It appears there have been some things in your life that inclined you to be willing to get involved. I am glad they also apparently gave you an ability to make good decisions. Probably going back to your grad school days.

Again, glad you have survived.
 
rfaspen said:
[Warning: long post with insider perspectives]

Thanks Cal!
I appreciate your kind words. I have been all of the people you mention. Emergency services, law enforcement, and even jobs I cannot talk about. I wasn't going to chime in, but this thread has shown a great amount of thoughtfulness and open-mindedness about the subject.

First. I am not currently in law enforcement. I have worked in law enforcement in the past. I am not currently a firefighter or paramedic, but I worked as such in the past. I am not an emergency services administrator, but I've worked as one in the past. I am a scientist whose lab is less dangerous than a particle accelerator apparently.

When I was younger, I wasn't interested in law enforcement, but did the coursework and training anyway (its a long story). I also wasn't interested in being a firefighter, but... I did want to travel to foreign lands and see the world. I did my POST and fire academy in southern California. My remaining training happened elsewhere. My careers in law enforcement, emergency services, and other service were all "accidental", but I'm glad I did them. I've had an interesting (to say the least) life. My current career is what I most wanted to do in life -- science.

I know about shooting and being shot:
I walk with a painful limp today. I was unarmed and checking up on a situation in a canyon on National Forest lands in southern California. As I wound my way up the canyon, on foot, I approached a bend with a large laurel tree on the side. A heavy set guy stepped from behind the tree. Looked at me. Reached down a pulled a rather long-barreled revolver (funny the details we remember). It was a target revolver with a 10-12 inch barrel and likely in .45 long Colt (in case any of you are interested). I had no time to think. This was the greatest fear I have ever felt in my entire life. I have been in many situations equally dangerous, but there is something about being unable to defend oneself from another human who is intent on ending your life. Obviously, I survived. I ran. Fast. The long barrel didn't help this guy and the only connection was above my left knee. We later found remnants of a methamphetamine "lab" behind the tree. Never found the shooter, but that wasn't my job. Every other time I've been shot at was different somehow. I never had that same fear experience as with the meth lab guy, and I never want to.

Anyway, that's off topic. I've known (and dated) many police officers and other law enforcement folks over the years, at local, state, and federal level. As with any group of people, they vary substantially in personality and "quality". Over the last 30+ years, I hate to say that I have noticed a shift in the number of local-level people that seem disconnected from the concept of law enforcement. Years ago, we built relationships with our community. Why? Because you NEEDED them as partners. Your job would be impossible otherwise. The buzzword for that nowadays is "community policing". I can tell you now that there can be no other kind if you wish to be successful. Someone above mentioned that many recruits are attracted to law enforcement because they crave the power that comes with it. Sadly, that may be a fair assessment of many new youngsters. It bothers me. At state and federal levels, not so much. The professionalism at these levels continues to impress me.

Culture is everything. Its been mentioned in posts above. And it was mentioned that there are "good" officers. Please believe me, there are many, many "good" police officers. But, in line with the trend I noted above, they seem to be the older, more experienced and level-headed guys (and gals), not so much the youngsters. Of course, that could be my perception bias, and I do know of very competent youngsters. Anyway, that culture also varies quite a bit among departments and gov't levels. But I see no pattern. People seem to expect small town departments to be more apt for "corruption" (I use this term very loosely), but not what I've seen. There are some small towns with top-notch professionalism and effective community policing policies that would (and should!) put larger departments to shame. Why? Culture (and luck). I can recall one small town in rural New Mexico with just a few officers. I happened to be speeding through the town one day and "met" one of those guys. Well, despite the deserved ticket, I had an opportunity to take a break with him and was I impressed. Turns out each of the guys (happens to be all guys, but they like gals too) really likes living in this small town. In other words, they want to be where they are, and they are intimate members of their community, and they are happy to be making a decent living that lets them live where they want. Sound familiar? All this fosters a positive environment and you get great police. By the way, plenty of guns in rural New Mexico. Still, I doubt these guys have ever come close to an unintended use of their firearm. I don't know what their training requirements or schedule might be.

Even though I'm trained and "authorized", I don't carry a firearm. After my incident with the meth lab shooter (which was about 27 years ago), I thought I would start, but I quickly began feeling odd about it. My job didn't really require it and I was self conscious. Today, none of my friends and colleagues even think I've held a gun, much less own one or be proficient. I like it that way. Still, I continued with training and certification, but that's about it. I mention the training because it seems to be a point of discussion here. Training does indeed vary a lot among local departments. Some small departments consider a few hours at the range as "training". Others have sophisticated scenario training (which I recommend for the curious). The advanced training is actually quite difficult. I hesitate to put it in writing, but I've made plenty of mistakes, misjudgements, and errors. That's why the training in the first place. I'm confident about my abilities to perform under "emergency" conditions, but I've definitely experienced the "frozen" moments Cal described, and I have been in a lot of "emergency" situations of many different kinds. (Feels odd to think back on it all). One training I don't think I received is how to defuse a situation with a mentally ill person. I did my academies in the late 1980s and it just wasn't a big topic then. Sure, there were plenty of classes on how to deal with the public, and that danced around the specifics of mentally ill, but not quite. I learned how to deal with difficult people on the job as a firefighter/medic. Mostly with people on drugs. Law enforcement is a difficult job, but firefighter/medic seemed harder. I worked in southern California and had the pleasure of seeing it all. I mean, I've seen it all. I also got to deal with nearly every kind of incident you can imagine. Especially once I moved to the mobile command unit for the state. Floods, riots (Rodney King), huge fires, tornados, earthquakes (SF world series quake), etc. Usually I developed and implemented multi-agency communications plans and infrastructure. I mention all this because the thread has touched on the topic of PTSD. I can tell you now that essentially all members of the law enforcement and emergency services community have some level of PTSD. If you know us (friends or family), then you know the rather twisted sense of humor that develops as a coping mechanism. Don't fault them for it. Its a necessary thing. I'm amazed at the resiliency of most members of this community. And it ties back into culture (I'm coming round to it). Like military veterans, cops and firefighters are in a "brotherhood" (we include sisters too). Even today, I continue to feel it. This is both good and bad. Without this strong, safe brotherhood, I think the PTSD and other rigors of the job would crush people. The bad part is the unwritten code of protection. The "Blue Wall" mentioned above is strong. You do not harm your brother (or sister), even when you know they did wrong. Period. For me, during the years I carried a badge, I never received a speeding ticket or anything. The culture we keep coming back to is a complicated thing. In my mind, it seems we should be able to exploit culture for positive change. For example, as mentioned above, if it were possible to recruit and keep quality people, the culture can be a positive force in helping to retain the good people via the effective support it provides. With culture comes a strong sense of pride and duty; if the shapers of this culture demonstrated the kind of behaviour and ethic associated with good law enforcement, the culture would be a great reinforcement. At FBI, despite my core disagreement with some administrators, I see this positive side of culture. The guys and gals I know are highly professional with an appropriate sense of duty and ethic. There's one agent in particular I admire for her ability to balance appropriate and inappropriate. She just has it down.

This post is long enough.. Sorry. Clearly this is something I think about and I'm not in those fields any more. I'm a scientist/statistician. Those careers were just "fun" stuff to do while on the way to becoming a scientist. I also managed to be a photographer and competitive rock climber as well. Sleep? Well yeah, a little.
Click to expand...

Thanks for your post. Quite insightful.
 
BillBingham2 said:
Fear is a very highly motivating emotion. It's easy to create in people and hard to address (provide sufficient facts to disprove and remove).

B2 (;->
Click to expand...

It makes sense that fear is higher in a country where so many tripods are around and with so weak a regulation. As long as people think that owning a tripod is a basic right, accidents will happen daily. :rolleyes:
 
sanmich said:
It makes sense that fear is higher in a country where so many tripods are around and with so weak a regulation. As long as people think that owning a tripod is a basic right, accidents will happen daily. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

I know you are trying to be cheeky- but I can't really tell what you are getting at here. Are you poking fun at gun regulation? Or just suggesting what happened here is absurd?

I bet this photographer would have a different feeling about his policeman friend if the guy had shot and harmed his wife or another loved one. Seems to be a strange psychology at play.
 
Huss said:
Does not work. Never leave your house (and make sure someone else answers the door for you) may work.


The only way something will change is if the cops are made liable. Right now tax payers are liable. They shoot someone, taxpayers pay the settlement. Not the cops. Not the police force. But us.
Click to expand...

I think this is one of the best responses I've seen here. And this one...
 
noisycheese said:
If a U.S. citizen were to do the exact thing the police officer in Ohio did - shoot first, ask questions later - and had shot a guy with a camera and a tripod, the citizen would be arrested, crucified in court and spend decades in prison.

Since we supposedly have the principle of equal treatment under the law here in the U.S., why does this police officer not face the same treatment that a non-police officer citizen would face?

Where is the equal treatment under the law in the Ohio shooting??
Click to expand...

So many tragic and unwarranted police shootings have occurred that clearly training, and hiring of LEOs needs to change.

If you like check out a photo-series I put together recently around this problem. Just search Naren.

https://www.exposureaward.com/entries.shtml
 
sanmich said:
It makes sense that fear is higher in a country where so many tripods are around and with so weak a regulation. As long as people think that owning a tripod is a basic right, accidents will happen daily. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Fear doesn't make sense. Folks have been stoking a variety of fears here in the US for a number of years.

B2 (;-?
 
BillBingham2 said:
Fear doesn't make sense. Folks have been stoking a variety of fears here in the US for a number of years.

B2 (;-?
Click to expand...
With so many guns around, and so many gun violence, I think that the average cop do have serious reasons to fear for their lives, which dramatically increases the chances of (deadly) mistakes.
If this is too political a post, mods, please remove it...
 
What comes to mind is the phrase-- often twisted for contrary ideological purposes-- about the price of freedom being eternal vigilance. You can, as a photographer, still bear witness without picking sides so that citizens who weren't there can examine images that test their values regarding law, order, safety, violence, freedom of speech.

In Eugene, Oregon some years ago we had a number of incidents involving questionable police force against people protesting the real-estate driven removal of downtown heritage trees--pepper spray, batons, gas, camera smashing. Later, there were overturned convictions, successful lawsuits against the city, etc. Because all that was illegal in the confrontation was shown in photographs and video.

This image showed up on a number of intersectional control boxes in the aftermath.

med_U45148I1417567158.SEQ.3.jpg


Is the camera mightier than the gun? Maybe there's such a thing as being too close to men with guns and questionable judgment.
 
rhl-oregon said:
.... Is the camera mightier than the gun? Maybe there's such a thing as being too close to men with guns and questionable judgment.
Click to expand...

I think it is long term yes. Sadly it seems that the way many departments have chosen to implement body cameras (perhaps for cost reasons, don't know) they are proving moderately helpful.

Body cameras should be on all the time with enough memory to hold 13 hours of video/audio. My gut tells me the cameras often chosen don't have that much memory. There's a lot of post processing that should be done to keep all interactions and get rid of the rest. But that's just a bit of coding and testing.

B2 (;->
 
As to body cameras: do you who advocate their use have even a faint clue about the $cost to a dept/agency associated with the acquisition, transmission, storage, security, retransmission of selected time-stamped segments of a particular event on a particular day w/ re to a particular officer and a particular encounter w/ a particular citizen across all the agencies across the country? Go to www.axon.com. And every one of you who knows photography knows that there are inherent distortions associated with the video'g of any event w/ respect to any particular encounter as a function of viewing angle, ambient illumination, distance from the event in question, blah blah blah. And of course anyone with even a faint knowledge knows that what the camera sees does in NO WAY represent what the LE w/ the body camera PERCEIVES, and it is the "reasonable PERCEPTION" that is a figure element in the legal analysis that follows the use of force.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top