D.C. police officer shouted 'I'm gonna kill you,' shot into car

[Tejas]

D.C. police officer shouted 'I'm gonna kill you,' shot into car

http://www.wtop.com/?nid=41&sid=2514785

WASHINGTON - An off-duty D.C. police officer who is in jail for shooting at members of the transgender community stood on the hood of the car while firing his Glock 9, according to court records.

As he was standing on the hood of the car, court records say Furr shouted "I'm gonna kill you."

Furr blew a .15 breath test, according to court records.






Luckily he did not have a machinegun!

[MrModerate]

1. Crazy drunk, wearing a badge . . .

Police officers do sometimes flip out for approximately the same reasons as other members of the community (and because they have jobs that are simultaneously mind-numbingly boring and often downright dangerous — which means high stress).

One hopes that departments regularly assess the mental state of their employees to whom they issue firearms to make sure they remain fit to carry.

[iverglas]

2. you left out a bit

with emphasis to assist:

WASHINGTON - An off-duty D.C. police officer who is in jail for shooting at members of the transgender community stood on the hood of the car while firing his Glock 9, according to court records.

You've never heard me saying that cops should have handguns, let alone carry them around, when they are not on duty.

Looks like I have the right idea.

Furr -- a 20-year-veteran of the Metropolitan Police Department -- has been charged with driving while intoxicated and assault with a dangerous weapon. Police say he was on restricted duty due to a medical condition at the time of the shooting. His service weapon had been turned in to the department, and police say he was not authorized to carry a firearm.

Furr also previously had been fired but was later reinstated by MPD.

Looks like that public oversight business was working fairly well.

Problem was, he had access to a handgun ...

[rl6214]

7. Every law enforcement officer from

local PD, sheriff's dept, border patrol, fbi and secret service has been REQUIRED to carry their firearms while off duty. Each and every one of them considers their officers to be on call at all times.

[iverglas]

13. now try reading what I posted

It's pretty short and doesn't seem to contain any overly big words.

The individual in question was not only not REQUIRED to carry his firearm, he was NOT AUTHORIZED to carry a firearm.

He wasn't really an "off-duty cop", he was a cop who had been relieved of duties.

For the rest, I'm sure that you know my answer is what it always is when faced with the "well that's how we duz it" "argument".

I don't give a shit.

I consider it to be extremely bad public policy to allow widespread access to handguns by the general public -- which is the only reasonable way to regard off-duty cops.

The wisdom of my position is evident in both the extremely low rates of handgun crime in countries like Canada and the fact that you'd have to look long and hard to find a cop behaving like this in those countries.

Argument from "well that's how we duz it" is not argument. If there is an argument for doing things that way, I'm sure you'll present it. Meanwhile, there seem to be some damned good arguments for not doing it that way.

[rl6214]

24. I was simply making a comment, just like you were

I was not trying to rebut what you were saying or take offense or say you were wrong or anything like that. I was simply making a comment.

No need to be snippy.

"The wisdom of my position"

Is only your opinion and we all know what opinions are like.

And your arguement "cuz that's how canada does it" is not an arguement.

[iverglas]

28. oh, hey, guess what

And your arguement "cuz that's how canada does it" is not an arguement.

You're right.

Now if you can find someone who said it is, you'll have yourself a point.

Forgive me for getting all snippy when somebody publicly misrepresents me as having said something really stupid that I didn't say.

[rl6214]

32. About par for the course since you threw this one at me

""well that's how we duz it" "argument".

[iverglas]

34. did you say something else I should have noticed?

I didn't. Notice.

I, on the other hand, did say something else -- something very different from what you pretended I said -- and I did not say what you pretended I said.

Why can't you just admit what was actually said and reply to it?

Or say nothing at all. That's always an option.

[rl6214]

38. "Or say nothing at all"

Again about par for the course. You say an aweful lot to say nothing at all.

[rl6214]

39. Try reading it again

he wasn't "relieved of his duties" he was place on restricted duty due to a medical condition.

Reading is fundamental

[iverglas]

43. he ws not authorized to carry a firearm

Pretty plain.

[rl6214]

45. You were wrong

not relieved of duty, admit it.

[iverglas]

49. I was right

He was relieved of his duties as a "law enforcement officer".

Sitting at a desk is not them.

[Tejas]

50. Get your story straight.

iverglas quote: he was on restricted duty

iverglas late at night: He was relieved of his duties

[iverglas]

51. pay attention

His service weapon had been turned in to the department, and police say he was not authorized to carry a firearm.

He DID NOT fall within the class of police who carry firearms and are subject to public oversight.

That oversight had in fact been exercised -- he had been required to turn in his gun.

No member of the public would have been required to turn in their guns in the circumstances in which he was. So unfortunately, it seems there was nothing to prevent him from possessing or acquiring guns as an individual.

This case PROVES my entire point, for fuck's sake.

He was acting as an individual member of the public when he went on his rampage, NOT as a member of the police service.

[Tejas]

58. He was still employed as a certified LEO, your fantasy can't change that.

And your 'point' has nothing to do with the conversation at hand, but you know that. He was still on the payroll, your pointless fantasy can't change that.

[iverglas]

63. fucking jesus christ almighty, there is an actual ISSUE here

The ISSUE is access to firearms and particularly handguns.

The REASON why it is proposed that handgun access be restricted to police on duty is that they are SUBJECT TO PUBLIC OVERSIGHT in their possession and use of firearms (or any force, or in anything else they do).

You people are offering up a cop who was PROHIBITED from having firearms while on duty as some kind of argument against the proposition that handgun possession (or handgun carrying in public, or whatever it is you don't like) be restricted to police.

You are making yourself look like a fool.

Your stupid word games are a waste of your food intake.

[rl6214]

70. Word games?

YOU are the one CONSTANTLY playing word games.

Try coming up with another strawman.

[Common Sense Party]

73. CONSTANTLY. Same schtick, different day.

[rl6214]

69. Moving those goalposts again

He was not relieved of duty, he was on restricted duty, for fucks sake (whatever that means).

[ProgressiveProfessor]

33. It sounds like he was assigned to the rubber gun squad at the time

[Kpdpipes]

76. Off-duty

Sorry but you are incorrect. SOME departments require their officers to be armed at all times, MOST however specifically instruct their Officers not to be armed if they are going to be drinking. EVERE Deartment in my state for example save 3 have that caveat in their Rules and Regulations. Off-Duty carry is "Reccomended", but NOT Mandated.

[Tejas]

8. You're in Canada, I could care less

what somebody "never heard you say". Sorry, this thread isn't about "you", it's about someone else that is sworn to uphold the law.

[iverglas]

14. and you're spewing crap

so hey, guess what. I could NOT care less.

There. We're even now, I guess.

[Tejas]

17. Ignoring egomaniacs is not crap, it's actually healthy.

And I feel very healthy.

[rl6214]

3. But, but, but,

only the cops should have guns.

Fire his ass for being a bigot, being drunk in public and dangerous use of a firearm, then throw him in jail until his trial.

[Logical]

5. You are fight but It will never happen. Cops defend other Cops.

[iverglas]

18. but, but, but

whom are you quoting?

Or was that stupid statement your own:

only the cops should have guns.

?

[Tejas]

21. "whom are you quoting?" stolen from the antis

Thanks for stating that antis have posted stupid statements ("only the cops should have guns) here in the Gungeon. By the way, besides water being wet, antis have also stated the military are the only ones that should have guns.

It's for the children you know.

yup!

[iverglas]

25. link please

[rl6214]

40. Link here

defendandprotect (1000+ posts) Sat Nov-07-09 12:18 PM
Response to Reply #32
44. I'd say only law officials should have guns . . . and our police should be de-militarized . . .
And, btw, just look at this military guy -- Hasan? -- not sure of the name --

obviously in high emotional distress . . . undetected by our own military?

And the gun shop dealer is going to recognize that?

The GOP has pushed this violence thru the NRA -- and any thinking person has to

see that this the NRA isn't about protection, it's about creating violence to protect

yourself from!!!

http://sync.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x4136999#4137125

[rl6214]

27. Did you see quotation marks around any of that?

Reading is fundamental.

You know you've seen that exact same thing here many times before. I know you know how to use google, I'm not going to do your work for you. Look it up, that stupid statement belongs to one of your friends.

[iverglas]

30. then I was right

The stupid statement was your own. How embarrassing for you.

[rl6214]

41. No, the statement was not my own

See the link further down the thread, you are the one that is embarrassing.

[rl6214]

35. Quick google search this one came up first

defendandprotect (1000+ posts) Sat Nov-07-09 12:18 PM
Response to Reply #32
44. I'd say only law officials should have guns . . . and our police should be de-militarized . . .
And, btw, just look at this military guy -- Hasan? -- not sure of the name --

obviously in high emotional distress . . . undetected by our own military?

And the gun shop dealer is going to recognize that?

The GOP has pushed this violence thru the NRA -- and any thinking person has to

see that this the NRA isn't about protection, it's about creating violence to protect

yourself from!!!


http://sync.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x4136999#4137125

[iverglas]

42. and did that person say

that off-duty cops, let alone cops who have been relieved of their duties, should have guns?

It's not looking that way to me.

Has anyone ever said that? If you need clarification on that point, you should ask for it. Although two years on may be a little late.

[rl6214]

46. this was your statement

"iverglas (1000+ posts) Sun Aug-28-11 09:09 PM
Response to Reply #3
18. but, but, but
whom are you quoting?

Or was that stupid statement your own:

only the cops should have guns."

You were proven to be wrong, quit moving the goalposts. You wanted it, I found it.

[Tejas]

54. Come back over here where the goal posts are.

[Union Scribe]

66. Wow, you're bad at this. nt

[Logical]

4. The Chief Of Police is now trying to figure out how to justify this shooting.

[iverglas]

15. and you made this false statement because ... ?

No, it doesn't count as sarcasm or satire any other thing you might have had in your head, because there is no subject matter for sarcasm or satire. You're just spewing crap.

[Logical]

36. I can guarantee I have followed 100 times the police misconduct cases you have....

So read more and get back to me!

[iverglas]

44. and I can guarantee you

that you're blowing shit out your nose when you make the statement to which I replied.

[rl6214]

47. No, I think that's your snork

:rofl:

[Logical]

61. Good one!

[SteveM]

67. God, the unavoidable imagery. Glad I don't do things like that. nt

[Logical]

62. Like most of your posts! You help the pro-gun cause more than any other anti!

[iverglas]

64. I know

I help gun militants show themselves for what they are.

And they drop like flies.

I'm pleased to be of service in their efforts to expose their agenda and their true colours to the public.

[SteveM]

68. "drop like flies?" Around all that flying shit, they should be rejuvenated! nt

[Logical]

72. Good one! :-)

[Hoopla Phil]

6. More reason why only cops should have guns. No wait. . .

[Tejas]

9. yes, because CCW's are ticking time bombs.

At least that's the BS spewed forth at times here in the Gungeon.

[MyrnaLoy]

11. well

said! sometimes they are: Bustamante was issued a concealed weapons permit through the Latah County Sheriff's Office on March 28, expiring in 2016.....Police found the apparent murder weapon and five other guns in the hotel room.

Read more: http://www.idahostatesman.com/2011/08/26/1773987/autops...

Issued the permit at the end of March and used it to murder 5 months later.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=118x454506

[Tejas]

16. ah, spam for your thread, how quaint.

Now if only you were at least half as passionate when it came to drunk driving fatalities.

[MyrnaLoy]

19. believe me

after being left almost cripple by a drunk driver when I was young I am just as passionate. Problem is there is no forum for that here.

[Tejas]

60. Then it would stand to reason you don't vilify law-abiding drivers,

so what's with vilifying law-abiding firearms owners?

[friendly_iconoclast]

74. Our movie star has a blatant double standard? Say it ain't so! n/t

[Hoopla Phil]

12. Ok Ok, then maybe only military should have guns. No wait. . .

Fort Hood shooting
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fort_Hood_shooting

[iverglas]

20. oh wait

Was that a shooting by an on-duty member of the military? Did he use a military weapon issued to him in the use of which he was subject to military oversight?

Oh, dear, no to all of the above.

He went out like the member of the public he was and got himself a gun.

Too bad, so sad for you.

[Name removed]

22. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[iverglas]

23. no, you wait

This seems to be a famous person who has said this only cops should have guns.

Am I the only one who doesn't know the name?

When you refer me to the source, I may be able to tell whether the person in question was saying that cops should carry guns when they are not on duty, i.e. not on a shift during which they have assigned duties in the performance of which they are subject to oversight.

Thanks in advance.

[Tejas]

26. John Wilson had a gun.

[iverglas]

29. I'm sure John Smith did too

I'm sure a lot of John Wilsons had guns.

Nice to see a post that doesn't consist of pig-ignorant personal commentary, though. Congrats.

[Tejas]

31. John Smith wasn't a Royal Mounted Policeman.

[iverglas]

37. nobody is a Royal Mounted Policeman

Yeesh.

I assume you're not referring to this John Wilson:

http://www.preventcrime.ca/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=34:crime-prevention-honoured&catid=18:media-a-publications&Itemid=9

Const. John Wilson – Surrey RCMP – Surrey

Const. John Wilson is a true asset to the Surrey RCMP, the City of Surrey, the Surrey Wrap Project, and to at-risk youth in the area. While working with the Surrey Wrap Program (a partnership between the RCMP and the Surrey School District), Wilson has dedicated tremendous amounts of time and energy to disadvantaged youth. His strong commitment to at-risk youth has had a profound impact on youth-police relationships, as previously disenfranchised youth are now reaching out to the Surrey RCMP for support and resources.
Crime Prevention & Community Safety Award – Community/Group/Organization –recognizes exemplary leadership through developing innovative projects, key activities or initiatives to promote safe communities.

So it must be this one:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blaine_Lake_No._434,_Saskatchewan

The story of Sgt John Wilson: One of Canada’s most sensational murders took place close to Blaine Lake in 1917. The only Royal Canadian Mounted Police officer ever to be hanged for murder, Sgt John Wilson killed his wife, Polly Wilson, and his unborn child, to marry Jessie Patterson of Blaine Lake. They wed two days after his wife's murder. Polly Wilson had traveled to Canada from Scotland, leaving behind two children, and was pregnant with a third when she was killed. Her body was discovered in a culvert near Waldheim.

My goodness. Well, I suppose it's possible that sometime since 1917 some other member of the RCMP has committed murder and just not been hanged for it.

I'll save you the trouble: those guys at Vancouver airport who should have got what they deserved in the Taser death of that immigrant fellow in this century ...

[Tejas]

52. "The only Royal Canadian Mounted Police officer" (from your quote)

Define "is"...

[iverglas]

55. wtf?

You: Royal Mounted Policeman.

There is no such creature.

The force is the Royal Canadian Mounted Police.

Its ranks start at Corporal, then Sergeant, etc.

They are all members of the RCMP.

The passage I quoted incorrectly called the individual a Royal Canadian Mounted Police officer. "Officer" is incorrect for both the RCMP and municipal police services in Canada, and a sergeant is not an officer.

It's a very common mistake, of course. It's one that I have to know and avoid in my work.

There is still no such thing as a Royal Mounted Policeman, ffs.

And you did have to go back to 1917 to find a peace officer in Canada who committed a murder.

[Tejas]

56. Canadian LEO murdered his wife, get over it.

Go beat your dog or something.

[iverglas]

57. a joke

not a funny one, you, sadly.

[Tejas]

59. LEO's murdering spouses may be a joking matter to you, but not here in the US.

[iverglas]

65. ah, if only I'd been talking about "LEO"s doing anything

and not about you.

But I wouldn't want this to be a content-free post.

Your assertion that law enforcement officers murdering their spouses may be a joking matter to me is an ugly falsehood that you know to be an ugly falsehood. What is wrong with you?

Hm, still bordering on content-free ...

It's unfortunate that your law enforcement officers have such a tendency to murder their spouses.

Have you considered some kind of, oh, I dunno, controls on access to firearms that might interfere in their ability to engage in cold-blooded homicide-from-a-distance, or make them less likely to plot homicide-suicides, knowing they would have to find a bridge to jump off after suffocating their spouses?

Just a thought, but you might want to take it on board.

You know, if you don't actually consider it a laughing matter that so many law enforcement officers seem to be killing their spouses down there ... when they aren't doing it in England or Australia or New Zealand or Canada or western Europe ...

[rl6214]

71. Who's playing word games?

[DeSwiss]

10. K&R

- When the random cop-killings start, don't be surprised......

[Kennah]

48. He'll transfer to Canton, Ohio

[Tejas]

53. I saw what you did there.

:rofl:

[Berner]

75. same story

We have the same stories in Canton, OH, recently discussed in local forum.

Gunsmithing Schools