Murdered Cop, Civilian Gets the Killer

Why are stories like this not more widely reported?

Official Info from Officer Down Memorial Page

Actual video of the incident (not graphic)

I can tell you why this story did not get media coverage.

Quote:

---

A civilian witnessed the incident and pulled his vehicle between the suspect's vehicle and Corporal McKay, in an effort to shield him. The civilian, a former United States Marine, then exited his vehicle and rushed to the officer's aid. He grabbed Corporal McKay's gun, while his son called for help on Corporal McKay's radio. The civilian then ordered the suspect to drop his weapon. When the suspect refused, the civilian shot and killed the suspect.

---

The media hates stories where a civilian uses a gun responsibly and to good effect. The killer's gun was illegal - therefore no gun law would have prevented him from having it.

Quote:

---

Corporal McKay had served with the Franconia Police Department for 12 years. He is survived by his daughter and sister..

---

Since they did not say wife or ex-wife, I can only assume she was already dead or long out of the picture. So now the daughter is an orphan.

As cynical as i am about the media, I can see a good reason for not making a big deal out of the story. Civilians getting involved in situations like that is dangerous. In this case the guy who got involved is an ex-Marine, so he knew how to handle a weapon. I'm not sure I'd trust the average Joe to do what he did.

That being said, I think the story should be widely reported with emphasis on the fact that this guy's military training played a big part in his ability to aid in the situation.

Quote:

---

As cynical as i am about the media, I can see a good reason for not making a big deal out of the story. Civilians getting involved in situations like that is dangerous. In this case the guy who got involved is an ex-Marine, so he knew how to handle a weapon. I'm not sure I'd trust the average Joe to do what he did.

---

The thing is, the average Joe didnt' show up that day - an ex-Marine did. Most people would say exactly what you said, provided that what actually happened didn't actually happen.

It's always sad to hear about an officer dieing in the line of duty; however, one thing stood out in the video to me: Why in the hell did Mckay turn his BACK to the suspect?!

After he sprays the suspect, he turns his back to him and WALKS towards his patrol car. Isn't that police thinking 101? Never turn your back on a suspect? If he didn't turn his back, perhaps he would have been able to duck, dodge or SOMETHING He would have had a better chance of getting out of the line of fire, and being able to draw his own gun in the meantime. Instead he gets shot in the back by a coward for something like speeding.

I just can't get over the fact that he turned his back on the suspect...

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Darion
The thing is, the average Joe didnt' show up that day - an ex-Marine did. Most people would say exactly what you said, provided that what actually happened didn't actually happen.

---

That's sort of the point I was trying to make in my second paragraph...the media should hype up the ex-Marine part and not the "civilian" part.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Aristotle
The media hates stories where a civilian uses a gun responsibly and to good effect. The killer's gun was illegal - therefore no gun law would have prevented him from having it.

---

This is the real point of this thread that is being missed. Anti-gun nuts and the media never present a balanced picture on guns. Tougher gun laws only work against honest citizens (like me), because gang members and the criminal element never own a gun legally or go through the hoops required to get one (they are not in the system). Banning drugs has not eliminated their availability. Banning guns will not eliminate their availability. Please consider.

Gun control: The right of a 90-pound woman to have a fist fight with a 210-pound rapist. There are real reasons for owning firearms. I think back to Katrina and the all the shit that went on afterwards. Law and order are not constants that can be depended on, so here is a nice article for anyone here that disagrees with guns. Please read it and maybe give it some consideration when deciding to support tougher gun laws: http://www.gunsandammomag.com/gun_co...706/index.html

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Gadiantor
In this case the guy who got involved is an ex-Marine, so he knew how to handle a weapon. I'm not sure I'd trust the average Joe to do what he did.

---

You write like the average joe is just some kind of sheep that isn't capable of using a firearm responsibly or properly. You don't need military training to learn how to operate a firearm responsibly. Would you rather a citizen just keep driving on as you've been shot and somebody is robbing you or worse, simply because you wouldn't trust them to use a firearm?

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Gadiantor
As cynical as i am about the media, I can see a good reason for not making a big deal out of the story. Civilians getting involved in situations like that is dangerous. In this case the guy who got involved is an ex-Marine, so he knew how to handle a weapon. I'm not sure I'd trust the average Joe to do what he did.

That being said, I think the story should be widely reported with emphasis on the fact that this guy's military training played a big part in his ability to aid in the situation.

---

Initially I thought as you did. You can make a lot of arguments against writing stories about promoting civilians using deadly force or things like vigilante justice, etc. etc. There are a lot of people out there that would've gotten the idea to do something heroic and just flat out made it worse. Even this story could've ended up a lot worse. The man was unarmed initially and had his son with him against a guy armed with a gun.

But on the other hand, how often have you noted the media for being responsible? I've seen news clips that showed in great detail how easy it is to steal certain cars. Or take the exposure that school shootings get? Seems like its happening more and more, lately. If I was suicidal and desperate for attention the first couple definitely would've given me ideas.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Savaric
Law and order are not constants that can be depended on, so here is a nice article for anyone here that disagrees with guns. Please read it and maybe give it some consideration when deciding to support tougher gun laws

---

For some reason, Savaric, this reminded me of a quote I especially like on the subject of firearm ownership:

"The right to own a gun is the difference between being a citizen and a subject."

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Khirmint
Initially I thought as you did. You can make a lot of arguments against writing stories about promoting civilians using deadly force or things like vigilante justice, etc. etc. There are a lot of people out there that would've gotten the idea to do something heroic and just flat out made it worse. Even this story could've ended up a lot worse. The man was unarmed initially and had his son with him against a guy armed with a gun.

But on the other hand, how often have you noted the media for being responsible? I've seen news clips that showed in great detail how easy it is to steal certain cars. Or take the exposure that school shootings get? Seems like its happening more and more, lately. If I was suicidal and desperate for attention the first couple definitely would've given me ideas.

---

First, thank you for making my point more clearly than I did in the first paragraph.

Yes, but the media should be responsible. The responsible thing in this case would be to present the story in a way that doesn't encourage vigilante justice.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Savaric
You write like the average joe is just some kind of sheep that isn't capable of using a firearm responsibly or properly. You don't need military training to learn how to operate a firearm responsibly. Would you rather a citizen just keep driving on as you've been shot and somebody is robbing you or worse, simply because you wouldn't trust them to use a firearm?

---

I don't trust the average Joe with a weapon. Most people I know outside of the military and law enforcement haven't handled a weapon, and even fewer have actual training on using deadly force. I don't trust the average Joe to pay attention to what is behind the target or to even hit the target. That's why the important part of the story is that the training this guy had was important.

What would I want the average Joe to do in that situation? It would all depend on the exact circumstance. In this case it is unclear if the guy who killed the cop would have killed anyone else. Calling the cops may have been enough to get him caught and taken into custody eventually, or he may have killed others. We don't know, so debating what the average Joe should have done is a bit pointless. That's why military and law enforcement have rules of engagement and get training in the use of deadly force. That way you don't have to think about what to do, you act in accordance with the rules and training you've received.

There are some interesting parts to this story. Apparently the suspect and the officer had a history together, including a previous physical altercation.

The officer spraying the mace (or whatever) into the car and then calmly turning around and walking away also has me a bit puzzled. To be honest, when I first saw the video, it seemed to me like the officer was just being an asshole. Maybe it would make more sense if the video included whatever other events led up to it.

The ex-marine in this case, Floyd, is also a convicted felon and had himself been guilty of assaulting an officer, and had also been in trouble with local police for firearm offenses. His quick decision to shoot the suspect would have me concerned, even if it turned out to be justified in this case. It is unclear if Floyd offered any warning to the suspect before shooting him, since apparently his statements changed over the course of his police interview. Even more odd:

"And Floyd told the police that after the shootings, he waited for the police to arrive before placing the guns in his hands, McKay's and Kenney's, on the grass. The police officer who first saw Floyd after the shootings recalled their interaction very differently.

The police officer said he had to tell Floyd several times to lower the guns. The officer said when Floyd finally did put the guns down, he told the officer, "Easy son, I'm quicker than you." " (source here)

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Aristotle
The killer's gun was illegal - therefore no gun law would have prevented him from having it.

---

I haven't been able to find any information stating that the suspect's gun was illegal.

The media behaving responsibly? Not likely. Everyone has their own ideas, and people who are in the news publishing business have an excellent platform for espousing them. What this world needs is a return to independant newspapers - instead of these media giants, have every local newspaper with its own editor and therefore his own views. Each one would still be biased, of course, but there'd be a reasonable probability that some of them would be biased different ways - there'd be a pro-gun paper as well as an anti-gun paper.

As to gun laws - I think there should be some kind of licencing, in the same way that cars are registered and drivers need to be licenced, but the right to own a gun should be based on your ability to use it well and wisely, not on some bureaucrat's idea of "needing" to own one. That is to say, anyone should be allowed to choose to take a standard course in gun handling (which could cover such things as checking what's behind the target - relying on such as Gad here as I'm no gun expert) and then purchase a gun.

Check a Box


Gun owner X

Victim







I live in an "open carry " state and do
( along with my Blue card)

why??? Cause I have the right to,
I was out one time and a woman pointed at me as I
walked passed her table at a restraunt and said,
" he has a Gun"
I said back, " you should worry about the ones that have them you don't see"

Sorry I would rather have it and not need it
than need it and not have it.


The suspect had previously been convicted of assaulting Corporal McKay during a vehicle stop in 2003.

it seems these two had history, and who knows what would
have happened if the civilan would have had his own firearm
instead of having to get the downed officers.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Rosuav
As to gun laws - I think there should be some kind of licencing, in the same way that cars are registered and drivers need to be licenced, but the right to own a gun should be based on your ability to use it well and wisely, not on some bureaucrat's idea of "needing" to own one. That is to say, anyone should be allowed to choose to take a standard course in gun handling (which could cover such things as checking what's behind the target - relying on such as Gad here as I'm no gun expert) and then purchase a gun.

---

I have no problem with it being required that you take a firearm safety course befor you can purchase one. However we don't have the right to bear arms because of some bureaucrats idea of "needing" to own one.

It was picking up a weapon and shooting the current governing body that created the US. Our countries creators created this country through the use of firearms. They were also wise enough to realize there might be a time in the future where, as happens to all governments, they become too strong. Our country was created "for the people" and they gave us a right the government shall not infringe upon to own a firearm. So if needed we have them to use against the government.

As Levastire stated, firearms are the difference between subject and citizen.

Quote:

---

"And Floyd told the police that after the shootings, he waited for the police to arrive before placing the guns in his hands, McKay's and Kenney's, on the grass. The police officer who first saw Floyd after the shootings recalled their interaction very differently.

The police officer said he had to tell Floyd several times to lower the guns. The officer said when Floyd finally did put the guns down, he told the officer, "Easy son, I'm quicker than you."

---

So, what if the police were just rolling up hard in response to an officer down call where a non-law enforcement civilian had an unrestrained, noncooperative subject and wanted to keep his hands on all the hardware? I can tell someone to do something "several times" in the span of about two seconds - there's not really enough information to make an educated guess as to what went on in the aftermath as everyone's accounts differ.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by xaxer
Check a Box


Gun owner X

Victim

I live in an "open carry " state and do
( along with my Blue card)

why??? Cause I have the right to,
I was out one time and a woman pointed at me as I
walked passed her table at a restraunt and said,
" he has a Gun"
I said back, " you should worry about the ones that have them you don't see"

Sorry I would rather have it and not need it
than need it and not have it.

---

Just as an aside, could you fit any more NRA slogans in that short of a paragraph? My vote is a tentative "no".

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Snrrub
I haven't been able to find any information stating that the suspect's gun was illegal.

---

Felons are not able to legally purchase firearms.