SIG Talk banner
1 - 20 of 87 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
40 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 · (Edited)
i am legit concern about our rights.

The whole thing is very unfortunate for all the parties involved.

But the NRA's silence instead of taking the side of the Legally Armed Citizen worries me....a lot.

isn't that why we have the right to bear arms to begin with? to protect ourselves against tyranny ?

i dont know...i am concerned about this whole thing....i had to express it.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
6,286 Posts
If the guy was actually high on MJ, then he was not legally armed, and the NRA is wise to stay clear of it. If they were to come out and state that he was not legally armed b/c he was high, can you imagine the backlash? There is no reasoning with this element of society, which is to say there are some people (red, yellow, black and white) who are just looking for something to be angry about, and they want a fight. Best to move on.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
6,286 Posts
the silence is deafening.
If Castile was under the influence of marijuana, he was not legally armed. Why then would the NRA come to his defense?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 34817

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,471 Posts
Was there an autopsy that revealed the quantity of THC in Castile's blood? Because that is the key thing to look at.

Second. When we debate legality of intoxication while armed, How many of the Former LEO's of this board can honestly say that they never partook of a intoxicant while armed?

Once again. We had a panicked ill trained cop who over reacted. He was guilty. And he will have to carry that in his mind for the rest of his life. We can scream about the verdict and the surround. But we had a case that needs to be remembered as a object lesson of what to do wrong.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Vanelrx

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,726 Posts
Lot's of issues to consider.
He declares he was armed.
He then reaches for his right hip.
How long should the officer wait to respond?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,957 Posts
the silence is deafening.
NRA was smart to stay out of this. Our State Level Gun Owners Civil Rights Alliance (MN-GOCRA), of which I am an active member, was condemning at first, then backed off as more info came out about Castile drug use. I'm still looking for a copy of the Tox Screen, but he was on video smoking pot in his girlfriends car with her 4 year old daughter inside two days prior to his death. Pretty clear he was Carrying Stoned at least once in a while. Toxicology should be able to measure THC level within a few hours of death. He was no angel, but sure didn't deserve to be shot. If he was stoned, it may have affected his reactions to the Officers orders.

TOXICOLOGY REPORT MAY PLAY KEY ROLE IN POLICE OFFICER?S UPCOMING TRIAL ? National Police Defense Foundation

At trial, the Toxicology report on Castile may be entered into evidence, most likely by the Defense. What Defense lawyers will want to know is if there was evidence of a drug or drugs in Castile’s blood that would make someone more likely to react to that situation by reaching for a gun as Officer Yanez believed.

2 days before Castile’s death, on the Fourth of July, Diamond Reynolds uploaded to YouTube via her cell phone a video showing herself and Castile smoking marijuana, this while their daughter was a foot behind them in their car. This was the same automobile in which Castile would soon die. Another video posted to YouTube shows Reynolds smoking a marijuana cigar, while Castile drives on the freeway through Minneapolis. At one point, the audio portion reveals that the child either coughs or sneezes, which the mother acknowledges.

According to the website of the National Institute on Drug Abuse, the effects of marijuana on an adult include “altered senses, changes in mood, impaired body movement, difficulty with thinking and problem-solving, temporary hallucinations, and temporary paranoia – extreme and unreasonable distrust of others.”

The effects of Castile’s marijuana abuse 2 days before his death should have worn off by the time he was shot. However, a toxicology report should indicate if Castile had ingested any drug or drugs within hours of his shooting, impairing and impacting on his decision-making processes when confronted by a Police Officer.

Also of significance regarding these YouTube videos is that they show Castile recklessly endangering the health of his young daughter by smoking marijuana in an enclosed space. Numerous medical studies have proven that second-hand smoke from marijuana has a greater negative impact on children than on adults. In 2014, the U. S. Surgeon General’s report on the dangers of second-hand tobacco smoke estimated that 34,000 premature deaths occur each year of non-smokers subjected to such smoke. Research has shown that marijuana smoke contains 50 percent more carcinogens than tobacco smoke.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
6,286 Posts
Was there an autopsy that revealed the quantity of THC in Castile's blood? Because that is the key thing to look at.

Second. When we debate legality of intoxication while armed, How many of the Former LEO's of this board can honestly say that they never partook of a intoxicant while armed?

Once again. We had a panicked ill trained cop who over reacted. He was guilty. And he will have to carry that in his mind for the rest of his life. We can scream about the verdict and the surround. But we had a case that needs to be remembered as a object lesson of what to do wrong.
To say that we had an ill-trained cop who overreacted, without knowing that for sure, is the same as saying Castile may or may not have been high if we didn't have an autopsy. My guess is the court had an autopsy that revealed there was THC in his system or the defense would not have been allowed to allege that.

What we do know is that when you do partake of any type of intoxicant you're subject to being scrutinized, and when you are in a situation like this, where it ultimately cost Castile his life, it is going to be looked at. Was he totally stoned? I don't know. Was he compliant with the officer's orders? Not according to the officer.

I can tell this as well. If a cop is involved in a shooting, on or off duty, and there is any type of intoxicant found to be in their system, it will be questioned in court. It will play a significant part of the case. Just the same, if anyone who is legally armed is found to have intoxicants in their system at the time of an altercation, that is going to play a major role, as it should.

What do we take away from this? One, the NRA really isn't concerned about the average citizen. Two, why should the NRA vouch for someone who they do not know, who was found to have toxicants in his system at the time of the altercation? Three, why would anyone waste their money on a NRA membership? It does not fight for the rights of the people to keep and bear arms. That is the premise of what they claim to do, but the truth is far from that.

It is a political organization like any other that is out for its best interests first and foremost. It also advocates for federal gun laws that are, according to the Second Amendment, illegal. How can one profess to fight for a right when it violates the amendment that is supposed to protect that right from an overreaching federal government? Anyway...this case is a tragedy, no doubt, but IF Castile was high then he was not legally armed. That does not mean he deserved to die, but it could have played a major role into why, and into why the NRA didn't say anything to support him.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
6,286 Posts
I don't know enough of the intimate details to form an educated opinion on this particular case, but I will say that in my opinion, 7 shots seems excessive. Especially considering there was a child in the back seat.
How many shots would you fire in a similar scenario?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,957 Posts
Defense Toxicolgy Expert witness says Castile stoned at time of death:

Yanez trial: Defense rests, closing arguments Mon. | KARE11.com

Defense toxicologist

A toxicology expert testified he believed Castile was under the influence of marijuana, at the time of his death.

Glenn Hardin, a former supervisor of Minnesota's state toxicology lab, testified Thursday as a witness for Yanez's defense.

Defense attorneys argued Castile was stoned at the time of the shooting, which happened in the seconds after he informed Yanez that he was carrying a gun. Hardin said he examined autopsy reports showing Castile's blood levels of THC, the substance in marijuana that gives a high.

Prosecutor Jeff Paulsen attacked Hardin's testimony by citing studies he said show there's no way to determine marijuana intoxication from blood samples, especially those taken after death.
And Yanez on the seat:

This was the first time we've heard from Yanez, since he was charged with manslaughter in the 32-year-old's death last July.

"I was scared to death," he said on the stand. "I thought I was going to die. My family popped into my head. My wife. My baby girl."

Yanez's voice broke several times as he recounted the series of events on that fateful day -- a day he said he felt he had no other choice than to fire his weapon during that traffic stop.

"I was forced to engage Mr. Castile," he said. "I did not want to shoot Mr. Castile. Those were not my intentions."

Yanez told the jury the reasons why he stopped Castile on that July 6 night -- that his description fit that of a robbery suspect, an incident he responded to on July 2. Four days later, during roll call, Yanez said he and his fellow officers were reminded again to be on the lookout for possible suspects in that case, as none had been found.

He said as Castile drove by his squad car, he locked eyes with him and remembered him having a "deer in the headlights" look.

Castile was roughly the same age, same race and had similar dreadlocks to the robbery suspect, Yanez testified.

So he stopped the vehicle. He said when he approached Castile's car, he "was hit with the odor of burnt marijuana from within the vehicle."

He said Castile's left hand was on the steering wheel and his right hand was below it.

When he told Castile not to reach for his weapon, Yanez said, "I was able to see his right hand, it was in a C-shape. And he continued to pull out the firearm."

"He had total disregard for my commands," Yanez said.

During the cross examination, Yanez was questioned why he didn't tell the BCA investigators a description of Castile's gun but instead, told an officer who drove him home afterwards.

Yanez said he had nothing to hide during his interview with the BCA.

He said he reached into the car to try and stop Castile but felt the use of force was necessary, reasonable but ultimately tragic.

KARE 11's Lou Raguse said during Yanez's testimony, Castile's family looked on, completely composed. The jury listened to Yanez's testimony intently, not showing emotion.

Later Friday, the defense rested its case. Closing arguments are set for Monday. The 15-member jury could begin deliberations as early as Monday. The jury includes three alternates, but it's not clear who the alternates are. Two of the 15 are black.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
851 Posts
How many shots would you fire in a similar scenario?
I would literally never be in that scenario, because I would never be a cop. The idea of a situation like that being something you might have to deal with at work makes me glad I work at an engineering firm. I have nothing but respect for the good cops who do their jobs well, but I wouldn't do their job for double what they make.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,663 Posts
Was there an autopsy that revealed the quantity of THC in Castile's blood? Because that is the key thing to look at.

Second. When we debate legality of intoxication while armed, How many of the Former LEO's of this board can honestly say that they never partook of a intoxicant while armed?

.
Just for the record there's at least one, and probably a lot more. During the 10 years I was a cop, I did not have a single drink and was never intoxicated on anything. Now I'll have one 5 ounce glass of red wine with dinner most days, but I won't drive afterwards even though doing so would be legal.

Edit to add: When I was a field training officer, I would have my rookie do a traffic stop on me on a dark, deserted street. I'd tell him in advance that during the stop I would try to kill him. I would unload my service weapon in front of him and we'd both acknowledge it was unloaded. Then he'd walk up to the car and approach me. The gun would be in the small of my back and I'd simply reach for my wallet - - I always managed to "kill" my rookie as I reached for my wallet.

Positioning in such a situation is everything - and even that does no assure the officer's safety. I did my level best to to demonstrate that to the rookie. I still lost one about 1.5 years after cutting him loose.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
6,286 Posts

·
Banned
Joined
·
6,286 Posts
I would literally never be in that scenario, because I would never be a cop. The idea of a situation like that being something you might have to deal with at work makes me glad I work at an engineering firm. I have nothing but respect for the good cops who do their jobs well, but I wouldn't do their job for double what they make.
I understand, but if you were confronted with a potentially life threatening situation similar to this, where you think someone may be reaching for a gun, how many shots would you fire?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
851 Posts
I understand, but if you were confronted with a potentially life threatening situation similar to this, where you think someone may be reaching for a gun, how many shots would you fire?
Since MN is a "duty to retreat" state, If I was for standing outside of someone else's car for whatever reason, and they were reaching for what I thought was a weapon, I would retreat. I would try to take cover and assess the situation. If I did anything else, I'd be going to jail.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
6,286 Posts
Since MN is a "duty to retreat" state, If I was for standing outside of someone else's car for whatever reason, and they were reaching for what I thought was a weapon, I would retreat. I would try to take cover and assess the situation. If I did anything else, I'd be going to jail.


In that case, I'd be hard pressed to even look for cover! LOL

But let's say in that scenario, you took cover and could retreat no further, and they came after you, how many shots would you fire?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
851 Posts
In that case, I'd be hard pressed to even look for cover! LOL

But let's say in that scenario, you took cover and could retreat no further, and they came after you, how many shots would you fire?


This is getting to be quite a different situation than what was initially being discussed, but since you asked, I'd fire 3 shots.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,957 Posts
Since MN is a "duty to retreat" state, If I was for standing outside of someone else's car for whatever reason, and they were reaching for what I thought was a weapon, I would retreat. I would try to take cover and assess the situation. If I did anything else, I'd be going to jail.
I don't think that applies to cops here...I guess Yanez agreed to quit Law Enforcement over this. Can't imagine a Department that would hire him now anyway. Panicky guys shouldn't work in LE...
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
6,286 Posts
In that case, I'd be hard pressed to even look for cover! LOL



But let's say in that scenario, you took cover and could retreat no further, and they came after you, how many shots would you fire?





This is getting to be quite a different situation than what was initially being discussed, but since you asked, I'd fire 3 shots.


Based on what?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
1 - 20 of 87 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top