Ex-Marine Shoots Police Officer's Killer - Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community

Ford Prefect · 05-13-2007, 05:22 PM

According the to following Boston Globe article, a former marine picked up a downed officer's service weapon and shot the killer. Charges were not laid against the former marine.

http://www.boston.com/news/local/new..._deadly_in_nh/

I have two questions about this incident for CPers ...

One, are such acts of vigilantism justifiable, and two, would the marine have been charged with assault or illegal use of weapon or some such thing if this story had occurred in Canada?

CaramonLS · 05-13-2007, 05:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ford Prefect

According the to following Boston Globe article, a former marine picked up a downed officer's service weapon and shot the killer. Charges were not laid against the former marine.

http://www.boston.com/news/local/new..._deadly_in_nh/

I have two questions about this incident for CPers ...

One, are such acts of vigilantism justifiable, and two, would the marine have been charged with assault or illegal use of weapon or some such thing if this story had occurred in Canada?

According to the article, this was definately not an act of vigilantism, this was an act of self defense.

Quote:

The elder Floyd picked up McKay's gun from the ground and ordered Kenney to drop his weapon. Kenney refused, and Floyd saw Kenney appear to be reloading, Conte said. Floyd then shot and killed Kenney, Conte said.

Kill or be killed. Completely justifiable in this instance.

If this had happened in Canada? Our self defense laws are quite screwy and convoluded that I wouldn't want to be in this situation. You could be charged by the letter of the law I believe.

Ford Prefect · 05-13-2007, 05:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CaramonLS

According to the article, this was definately not an act of vigilantism, this was an act of self defense.

Kill or be killed. Completely justifiable in this instance.

If this had happened in Canada? Our self defense laws are quite screwy and convoluded that I wouldn't want to be in this situation. You could be charged by the letter of the law I believe.

I'd say it was vigiantism ... the former marine was driving by and witnessed the incident. He didn't have to get out of his vehicle, pick up the service weapon and get personally involved in the affair. Since he chose to get involved rather than just driving by and calling 911, doesn't that make it vigilantism? He decided to take things into his own hands.

Flames_Gimp · 05-13-2007, 05:34 PM

Awesome, good for him!

CaramonLS · 05-13-2007, 05:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ford Prefect

I'd say it was vigiantism ... the former marine was driving by and witnessed the incident. He didn't have to get out of his vehicle, pick up the service weapon and get personally involved in the affair. Since he chose to get involved rather than just driving by and calling 911, doesn't that make it vigilantism? He decided to take things into his own hands.

So you'd leave the scene and call the cops while someone who just got shot was laying there dieing on the ground?

It also mentioned that the guy used the police radio to call for help. Maybe he didn't have a cell phone?

Would you risk leaving someone who just got shot, and might be still alive to run to the nearest pay phone? Which could be god knows how many miles away?

From my perspective he did everything he could to a) try to save the officer's life, and b) prevent himself from getting killed.

If I drove by the scene and then watched the man put 2 more bullets in his head to finish him off, I don't think I'd be able to live with that on my head.

Flames_Gimp · 05-13-2007, 05:43 PM

"Kenney pulled out a .45-caliber handgun and shot McKay four times. As McKay stumbled across the road, bleeding, Kenney ran his vehicle over the dying officer, Ayotte said."

So sick..glad the POS is dead

Flames_Gimp · 05-13-2007, 05:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ford Prefect

I'd say it was vigiantism ... the former marine was driving by and witnessed the incident. He didn't have to get out of his vehicle, pick up the service weapon and get personally involved in the affair. Since he chose to get involved rather than just driving by and calling 911, doesn't that make it vigilantism? He decided to take things into his own hands.

"The elder Floyd picked up McKay's gun from the ground and ordered Kenney to drop his weapon. Kenney refused, and Floyd saw Kenney appear to be reloading, Conte said. Floyd then shot and killed Kenney, Conte said."

doesn't sound like vigilantism to me

Table 5 · 05-13-2007, 05:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CaramonLS

So you'd leave the scene and call the cops while someone who just got shot was laying there dieing on the ground?

well, i wouldnt blame him if he did. his marine training put him on a different level, but if it was just you or me, im not sure it's the best idea to try to take on an armed gunman (especially with your kid in the car).

what Floyd did definitely took balls. hard to say what any of us would do in that situation, but i wouldn't blame anyone for not trying to take on a the guy.

Flames_Gimp · 05-13-2007, 05:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Table 5

hard to say what any of us would do in that situation,

i would have just run him down...

Clever_Iggy · 05-13-2007, 05:50 PM

Very interesting legal hypothetical here. The marine had every right to defend the fallen officer as if he was defending himself. The facts are a little light to make a definite decision. Did the marine feel as though the shooter was still a threat, to himself, the officer or his son in the vehicle? If so, then it's a good shooting. About stopping and getting involved... again, too light on the facts.

I dont think this is vigilanty justice - too little time between the first shooting and the marine shooting.

Im surprised more liberal, gun fearing groups arent up in arms about this... the guy was a scumbag and the situation was so specific, the risk of a slippery slope into wide spread vigilanty justice, is minimal.

Displaced Flames fan · 05-13-2007, 05:51 PM

BTW...the cop killer is Bodie Miller's (he of US Ski tame fame) cousin.

Ford Prefect · 05-13-2007, 05:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CaramonLS

So you'd leave the scene and call the cops while someone who just got shot was laying there dieing on the ground?

It also mentioned that the guy used the police radio to call for help. Maybe he didn't have a cell phone?

Would you risk leaving someone who just got shot, and might be still alive to run to the nearest pay phone? Which could be god knows how many miles away?

From my perspective he did everything he could to a) try to save the officer's life, and b) prevent himself from getting killed.

If I drove by the scene and then watched the man put 2 more bullets in his head to finish him off, I don't think I'd be able to live with that on my head.

Actually, I didn't mean to say anything about what I think or would do in this situation. Personally, I think what he did is right on and I would hope more people would react that way.

All I is was disputing was whether what he did was self defense or vigilantism. Since he made a point of stopping and getting involved, to me that is vigilantism because he had the option to chose otherwise. Had he been in a situation where he had no choice but to shoot or be shot, then yes, that is clearly self defense. But he made the choice to get involved, therefore, IMO, it's an act of vigilantism rather than strictly self defense.

And yes, it was the right thing to do. However, in Canada, I suspect our messed up legal system would punish citizens for such acts of vigilantism, no matter how appropriate it might seem. At the very least, I think a person would at least get charged. They might not get convicted, but I think they would get charged and have to defend themselves in court. It seems to me that Canada's legal creed is guilty until proven innocent.

Clever_Iggy · 05-13-2007, 05:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ford Prefect

And yes, it was the right thing to do. However, in Canada, I suspect our messed up legal system would punish citizens for such acts of vigilantism, no matter how appropriate it might seem. At the very least, I think a person would at least get charged. They might not get convicted, but I think they would get charged and have to defend themselves in court. It seems to me that Canada's legal creed is guilty until proven innocent.

What basis do you have for this?

Ford Prefect · 05-13-2007, 05:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Displaced Flames fan

BTW...the cop killer is Bodie Miller's (he of US Ski tame fame) cousin.

Ya, and I found myself asking what the relevance of that was to the story. I don't think it should have been mentioned since Bodie Miller didn't have any bearing on the shooting from what I can tell. The only reason to bring Bodie's name into the story is to create a "celebrity" factor, but that's kind of a tabloid style of journalism.

CaramonLS · 05-13-2007, 05:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ford Prefect

And yes, it was the right thing to do. However, in Canada, I suspect our messed up legal system would punish citizens for such acts of vigilantism, no matter how appropriate it might seem. At the very least, I think a person would at least get charged. They might not get convicted, but I think they would get charged and have to defend themselves in court. It seems to me that Canada's legal creed is guilty until proven innocent.

The wording of our criminal code is very questionable, there is a clause I believe in there about using "as much force as necessary", which lets be honest, is very unspecific.

There is also equal force laws, where if someone charges you with a knife, and you shoot him, you're likely going to jail.

FlamingLonghorn · 05-13-2007, 05:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Displaced Flames fan

BTW...the cop killer is Bodie Miller's (he of US Ski tame fame) cousin.

Not to derail the thread but it should say "(he of exUS ski team fame)" Bode quit this week...

Ford Prefect · 05-13-2007, 06:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clever_Iggy

What basis do you have for this?

Purely empirical. I don't have legal cases to support my statement, but in following the news for 30-odd years, it certainly seems to me that all shootings in Canada at least have to go before the courts. About the only shootings I can think of that don't go before the courts are when a police officer shoots someone in the course of their police work. Even then they go through an internal review. If you are aware of shootings by citizens that don't result in charges, please feel free to correct me. I just can't think of any such incidents off hand.

RougeUnderoos · 05-13-2007, 06:01 PM

I know I know, we have a "messed up legal system", especially compared to the Americans, but I don't think a guy who tries to help an injured police officer would be charged with anything in Canada either.

Ford Prefect · 05-13-2007, 06:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clever_Iggy

Very interesting legal hypothetical here. The marine had every right to defend the fallen officer as if he was defending himself. The facts are a little light to make a definite decision. Did the marine feel as though the shooter was still a threat, to himself, the officer or his son in the vehicle? If so, then it's a good shooting. About stopping and getting involved... again, too light on the facts.

I dont think this is vigilanty justice - too little time between the first shooting and the marine shooting.

Im surprised more liberal, gun fearing groups arent up in arms about this... the guy was a scumbag and the situation was so specific, the risk of a slippery slope into wide spread vigilanty justice, is minimal.

That's a good point that I hadn't considered. Acts of vigilantism tend to be more premeditated. This was more an act of Samaritism ... the marine just happened to be in the right place at the right time to do something.

Clever_Iggy · 05-13-2007, 06:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ford Prefect

Purely empirical. I don't have legal cases to support my statement, but in following the news for 30-odd years, it certainly seems to me that all shootings in Canada at least have to go before the courts. About the only shootings I can think of that don't go before the courts are when a police officer shoots someone in the course of their police work. Even then they go through an internal review. If you are aware of shootings by citizens that don't result in charges, please feel free to correct me. I just can't think of any such incidents off hand.

Ya, go through the court systems, but any lawyer worth his salt would cry to the public and what jury is going to convict a citizen who defended a police officer? The fact that you have to go through the courts is crazy... even if it would be thrown out.