Off Duty Cop Shoots At Kids; Kids Get Arrested, Off Duty Cop Does Not

An off-duty LAPD officer attempts to physically detain via assault a 13-year-old and one of the kid's pals tackles the officer; the officer pulls out a gun and shoots. Kids arrested; shooter is not.

|

The police are different from you and me: when they physically assault a 13-year-old and kidnap them and refuse to let go because they thought they heard a verbal threat, and then draw and fire a gun while surrounded by a bunch of kids, it is the bunch of kids who are questioned, some arrested, while nothing happens to the man who did the assaulting, kidnapping, and firing of the gun (so far, at least).

See this video of most of the incident, which happened Tuesday in Anaheim. More description and commentary below.

We see the off-duty officer reportedly with the Los Angeles police department, unnamed in any news account I've seen [UPDATE: He has now been publicly identified since original posting as Kevin Ferguson], assaulting and beginning to drag around 13-year-old Christian Dorscht. From their dialogue, what seems to have led up to this scene is the officer insisting that Dorscht threatened to shoot him. (Exactly what defensive end-game the officer saw in grabbing hold of and refusing to let go the kid is unclear.) Dorscht insists he merely threatened to "sue" the off-duty cop, and was verbally engaging him to begin with because he alleges the off-duty officer had yelled at a young girl on his lawn, calling her a "cunt."

[UPDATE: Here's more video, which I had seen and which fed into my understanding of the incident, starting before the one above does, showing that the off-duty officer's capturing of Dorscht began before the action of this video, though who said what to who is still from prior to this videoed account.]

Starting at around 2:05 in the version of the video embedded above, after minutes of the off-duty officer grappling with and dragging Dorscht around, one of the other kids watching the scene tries to tackle the off-duty officer. A few seconds after that the officer pulls out his gun and fires it. Amazingly, no one is hurt. There are a lot of kids milling about the whole situation.

Even after firing his gun, the officer continues to physically detain Dorscht, though the video is now understandably being shot from farther away, what with the gun being fired by the maniac.

Around five minutes in to the video more police arrive, and all the kids in the area are forced to sit down, see around 5:45 in the video.

When the police begin interacting with Dorscht, it is the 13-year-old who appears to be forced to the ground by police, see starting around 7:45 in the video.

The man doing the assaulting, kidnapping, and firing of a gun is never seen to be manhandled or detained at all, merely carrying on a conversation with a uniformed officer after a very perfunctory pat around 6:45 in the video.

As OC Weekly reports:

Anaheim police finally arrived to detain Christian and his friends. He was booked at Orange County Juvenile Hall for criminal threats and battery. Police arrested a 15-year-old for assault and battery before releasing him to his parents….

As for the off-duty cop? Anaheim's finest declined to arrest him. The LAPD is conducting an internal affairs investigation into his conduct. APD's Homicide Unit is looking into the circumstances surrounding the single gunshot.

According to later reporting from local CBS-TV 8, the unnamed LAPD officer is on administrative leave now.

That report also says that Anaheim cops found no evidence that the guy who had assaulted and kidnapped a 13-year-old and shot a gun near a crowd of kids had done anything worth an arrest, although the kidnapped and assaulted kid who they were told by the assaulting kidnapper who fired a gun had threatened him verbally was arrested. (The Anaheim cops had not seen the video yet, they claim. Nor have they arrested the shooter since, as of this posting.)

Dorscht has since been released from custody.

The unnamed shooter's union, the Los Angeles Police Protective League, CBS-TV 8 reports:

defended the off-duty officer, saying he acted in self-defense.

"The publicly available cell phone video shows that our officer was physically assaulted by multiple individuals and the officer sustained injuries," according to the union.

"There is no question, however, that when a police officer is attacked, they have a right and a duty to protect themselves, no matter the age of the offender," according to the LAPPL.

Since the release of the video of yesterday's incident, protests have occurred in Anaheim. More on the protests and Anaheim city government reaction. Dorscht's family is already threatening to sue.

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

87 responses to “Off Duty Cop Shoots At Kids; Kids Get Arrested, Off Duty Cop Does Not

  1. I don’t give a fuck about this but weren’t “the kids” attacking a man on his own property? I saw a clip on the news and, with no other context, thought the homeowner showed great restraint, or poor marksmanship, in not actually shooting his attackers.

    1. On his own property? The guy is a public official, but that doesn’t mean the public sidewalks are his.

      1. I don’t know the particular circumstances but “public” means the sidewalk in front of his house is as much, or more, “his” as they are everyone else’s. Especially if they are an easement and the homeowner is taxed right up to the curb.

      2. If the sidewalks are “public property”, why am I personally responsible for any maintenence required –the city sends a bill if they decide you didn’t do it fast enough – and I can be thrown in jail and/or sued if I don’t shovel the snow off of it and someone falls? Sounds like the the powers that be thinks it’s mine.

        You can send me $10 for the last time I paid some enterprising yoot to do it for me, since you are the “public”.

        1. Or, is this another one of those “social contract” things that progtards love?

        2. Because you allow it?

          I don’t know of any place that requires the *homeowner* to pay for sidewalk maintenance. Though I’m sure they exist – states gotta state after all.

          But I don’t pay dick, directly, for the sidewalk around my home.

          1. Lewiston Idaho.

            1. Minneapolis, Minnesota.

          2. Illinois for sure. California too IIRC.

    2. The kids were attacking a man who was physically restraining one of their friends during a verbal altercation that escalated was escalated by that man to a physical one.

      I’d hope my friends would have my back.

      And while, *technically*, a sidewalk is owned by the property owner in most jurisdictions, property owners are forced to give an easement to the city that specifies that sidewalks are public areas. So the sidewalk in front of his house is as much *theirs* as it is his.

      1. I’d hope my friends would have my back

        So would I. If I told the little shits to “get off my lawn” and they retreat to the sidewalk and my 20 friends march down the sidewalk shoulder to shoulder towards them while saying “Excuse me, coming through.”- who is at fault if one of them step onto my property not part of the “easement” after I said “Trespassers will be shot”?

        Fair gane, right?

        1. Except they weren’t ‘on your lawn’.

          Look, you hate kids, you hate kids. But the ‘adult’ in this picture is far more fucked up.

          1. yea he was like 2 houses away from his and dragged the kid to his property wtf!

      2. I was amazed at the fact that they didn’t leave their friend and at the restraint they showed. Even though it got physical, it was obviously just an attempt with the least force possible to get their friend safely away.

        1. kids were pretty mature i would say.

  2. I almost never defend these shootings but I must’ve watched a completely different video. The fucking teen charges at the guy and then another one does. He was absolutely within his right to fire on them. Further, where is there a “kidnapping”? Please also don’t use “kid” to describe the male who tried to tackle the cop either. That is a grown male not a kid.

    1. Did you not see where he grabbed a kid and wouldn’t let go of him? A kid who had been on the public sidewalk? He committed the first crime, he did not have the right to self defense when the other kid tried to free his friend.

      1. Pretty sure you’re not guilty of a crime if you grab and hold onto someone who has just threatened to shoot you until the police arrive.

        1. Pretty sure you are. True threats doctrine and all that.

          In any case, if you can prove the statement (something more than ‘well, he said!’) then fine. If not, well – you’ve committed kidnapping.

          1. This. It has to be a reasonable true threat that anyone would believe. The cop is full of shit from the video.

            1. also grabbing and dragging the kid to your property? That’s tots not legal.

      2. There isn’t video of what lead up to that, as far as I can see. Also, try using the defense of “oh well I assaulted the person because I thought my friend needed help”. While I doubt the arrested dudes will be charged with anything, they don’t have a legal excuse to assault someone. Especially considering he hadn’t pulled his concealed weapon or threatened at that point. If he had pulled it, sure, there could be an argument made for eminent threat of harm resulting in the need for immediate action.

        1. What about the guy’s assault of the kid? I’m pretty sure it’s not legal to grab and detain people against their will, and I don’t think it’s illegal to separate your friend from someone doing that to them.

          1. It is battery. Touching someone is battery not assault. Assault is words. Battery is psychical contact.

            So the officer committed aggravated battery/battery with a deadly weapon and false imprisonment. Depending on State and federal law.

        2. You are legally allowed to defend someone. The kid protecting his friend is 100% legal.

    2. I’m with you. This is a ridiculous example of Libertarian-bias. Don’t believe there is a thing? This guy did nothing more than restrain a kid until on-duty cops arrived, he didn’t drag the kid inside and/or beat the kid. The other kids in the neighborhood surrounded him, but he didn’t panic. It wasn’t until he was assaulted by two of them that I fired a warning shot (come on, if he wanted to hit one of them, it wouldn’t have been hard).

      Then he continued to restrain the kid until the police showed up. Now, was in he the right to respond to what he perceived as a threat? Or perhaps he misperceived the kids’ words like the kid claimed. I don’t know. But there’s no way to blame that cop for protecting himself from physical assault by multiple hostile youths.

      1. We actually don’t know the kid made a threat. Cops are not what you would call honest people as a group and lying to cover your own temper and bad behavior is covered on page 2 of the manual.

        1. “Cops are not what you would call honest people as a group”

          Do you have evidence this is true or is is just collectivist bullshit that you believe because of your dislike of an entire group of people?

          1. It is a generalization that I find to be quite accurate both from personal experience as well as what is frequently reported. Is every cop a lying shitbag? No but in any individual case that is the way to bet.

          2. Do you have counter evidence because cops are legally allowed to lie, hae a large track record of lying. Like when the cop shot his partner and murdered the kid on the ground to cover it up?

            https://tinyurl.com/hwhb7fk

        2. I don’t see how this is relevant to the larger point. I’ve already said we don’t know if the cop was correct in his initial judgment that a threat to shoot him was made. The larger point is that when he asserted his authority, he didn’t do so in an over-the-top manner. He merely restrained the kid.

          What followed after was indvidual vs. mob physical hostility. And you folks are supporting the mob because cop, amirite?

      2. He could have better protected himself by letting go of the kid. If he genuinely felt threatened, that would have been a reasonable course of action.

        Certainly better then drawing your weapon with your off hand while a flailing person is in your grasp, and subsequently accidentally discharging the firearm.

        1. Yea grabbing the kid was retarded. A proper response would be to draw your weapon at the ready and assert your right to self defense.

          Why grab the supposed attacker and drag them to your property? I would much rather gain cover and be at the ready with my pistol.

          I call 100% on the cops story. It lasts any credibility with proof and basic rational thinking in a defensive sense.

          sure looks like he was trying to manufacture a story so he could cap the kid.

        2. Again, that’s an irrelevancy. Whether you support his initial judgment of being threatened and his actions as a police officer, what he did in response was very measured. He captured and restrained the offender to wait patiently for other police officers to arrive. It was the neighborhood mob that was out of control. I see no reason to expect that police officer to leave in handcuffs.

          Of course, if I’m the off duty cop, I would also be more than a little concerned regarding those other kids that actually assaulted me. As they live in the neighborhood, they may cause mischief.

        3. Again, that’s an irrelevancy. Whether you support his initial judgment of being threatened and his actions as a police officer, what he did in response was very measured. He captured and restrained the offender to wait patiently for other police officers to arrive. It was the neighborhood mob that was out of control. I see no reason to expect that police officer to leave in handcuffs.

          Of course, if I’m the off duty cop, I would also be more than a little concerned regarding those other kids that actually assaulted me. As they live in the neighborhood, they may cause mischief.

  3. Dorscht insists he merely threatened to “sue” the off-duty cop

    I blame the public school civics curriculum, for not teaching these disrespectful hooligans about “sovereign immunity”.

  4. What can you say about this sort of crap? What possible efforts can change it?
    It’s sort of like reading about an airliner crash; oh, OK. What now?

    1. Eat my words, with some crow.
      Collect a gang to threaten someone, expect push-back.

  5. I’m open to the case that the citizen might have used excessive force disproportionate to the threat at hand. It seems like a hard, if not impossible case to make. Particularly by Doherty who seems to have recently contracted the occupational illness running rampant through reason.

  6. Should the guy have been arrested? I don’t know about that. Discharging a firearm is a very serious matter, but things were clearly starting to get out of control. Assuming he was on his own property, and not knowing exactly what happened before, I can’t say he should definitely have been arrested on the spot. HOWEVER, of course he would have been arrested if he was just a “citizen” and not a cop. There’s little question that a double standard exists.

    1. An off-duty cop is a “citizen”. If a non-cop citizen shouldn’t have been arrested for his actions under the circumstances I’m not going to fault the cops for not arresting one of their own.

      1. Technically you are correct, which is why I put it in “quotes.” But many cops draw a dividing line between cops and “citizens.” That line may not be based on any legal principle, but it’s very real.

    2. It was out of control because his dumbass grabbed the “supposed attacker”.

  7. What’s the difference between Reason and the National Enquirer?
    Occasionally the National Enquirer publishes things that are true.

    1. Oh, what an example of Shinin’ Pete’s wit.

      Or at least half of it.

      1. So like a quarter?

  8. Lefty wonderfulness in wonderful Marin County of wonderful ‘hate Trump’ Nor Cal full of wonderful, tolerant people!

    “Why is Marin County so white?”
    […]
    “According to the most recent U.S. Census data, a huge majority ? as in 72 percent ? of people who live in Marin County identify their race as white. And that doesn’t include Hispanic/Latino folks who also identify as white.”
    http://www.sfgate.com/news/art…..954440.php

    Try building housing there that is affordable to anyone making less than $300-400/yr, or even finding ‘un-protected’ land to do so.
    Marinites tend to be very vocal in supporting diversity. So long as those with diverse opinions live somewhere else. And those with dark skin colors live in the San Rafael flatlands or Marin City.
    Something, something, peacock feather, something.

    1. Doesn’t nearly everyone make more than $300-400/yr? I make more than that in a month and I’m dirt poor.

  9. Hey Brian,

    David’s article above yours says we should stop talking about Nazis whenever someone mentions Mexican and police in the same sentence. For shame.

  10. Huh, the video I saw was a homeowner judiciously exercising his 2nd amendment rights to defend himself from an encroaching violent mob.

  11. Who thinks that reason’s editorial position would remain the same had it been a pack of skin head neo-Nazi Yates confronting an elderly Hispanic veteran?

  12. This post did a great job of smoking out the Federalist commenter nutjobs who lurk here.

  13. I saw that clip pop up on facebook earlier in the morning. I’m not sure how the incident started, so it’s hard to frame it accurately.

    It certainly looked like the guy tried to disengage from the onlookers several times and only drew once he had been pushed back into a corner.

  14. As much as I despise cops, I’m on the fence as to whether or not what this guy did was excessive or not. If I was surrounded by a pack of rabid teenagers I might reasonably fear for my life. Though no one will know the truth about what happened leading up to the video being taken.

    However it is a fact that had any non-cop done the same thing they would have been arrested and charged with multiple felonies, possibly including hate-crimes, and still be sitting in jail because the bail would be impossible to meet.

    1. As I see it he had no right to be dragging the kid around to begin with. I would have no right to restrain that kid and neither were you. Yes the kids reacted but imagine he was dragging around your wife like that at a family reunion. The scene would have been the same except it would have been a bunch of adults trying to free a woman instead of kids doing the same. Alternatively imagine it was your kid he was dragging around like that and you came home. He would have been picking up his teeth from the driveway and rightfully so. I see a lunatic not someone acting with restraint.

      1. We don’t have the power of arrest. A cop does, regardless of if he is in uniform or on duty.

        1. off duty and out of his jurisdiction? I doubt it.

          1. Anyone can make a citizens arrest.

      2. Sure you would, if he had just threatened to shoot you. Which is what the cop said he did.

      3. “imagine he was dragging around your wife like that”

        Context is everything. What if my wife was drunk and berating and getting into his face. Physical restraint could definitely be in order. Same thing with my kid. If my kid was a punk and acting like an asshole, I wouldn’t mind at all if someone restrained him until I got there.

        1. thats not legal in anyway…….

  15. I think of this video as kind of a Rorschach test. I would love to do a blind test and show this video to all the Reason writers and commenters. Half would know he’s a cop and half wouldn’t. Each person would write down their initial apprasal of what’s going on.

    When I first saw the video without much context, I thought, this is a homeowner surrounded by angry teenagers on his own property. He fires a warning shot to scare them away. Isn’t that a classic case of the 2nd Amendment in action? But another first reaction is, asshole cop shoots at kids. Cops are assholes!

    But more info and context are always necessary, and I think a case can be made that the guy was reckless with his gun. I really hope he doesn’t get special treatment because he’s a cop, but since things are fucked up, he probably will. But that shouldn’t cause us to lose our fair mindedness in dealing with these issues. Doherty’s post was pretty lacking in that department.

    1. Doesn’t matter if a cop or citizen..you cant grab and detain someone like that.

      I am 100% cool with killing someone if justified and there was 0 justification here for grabbing the kid. It was also a stupid idea.

      The only option he has is to draw his weapon and tell them to stay back and after he draws his weapon and gives a verbal warning he will shoot anyone who rushes him he has a right to shoot them.

      Anything else like his actions are purely illegal.

  16. This article is the exact sensationalist garbage Stossel was talking about a few days ago. Come on Reason I expect better from you.

  17. several of these kids clearly assaulted this off duty cop which to me plays no part in this whole thing the fact that he’s an off-duty cop it could have been an old woman out there asking these kids not to go onto their property and several of these kids clearly assaulted this person…to all the parents who seem to have plenty of time to pick it this incident but not enough time to discipline your own kids need to rethink the way you raise your kids if that was my kid I would have drug their ass home and beat their ass good and they would have never done this again not that I think they would have done this to begin with instead of condoning their behavior by picketing the incident won’t you be a f****** real parent and raise your kids to respect their elders and their neighbors you are shitbags also in my book just like your kids are and to the chief of police who commented on the news you are a big pussy for bending over for the public when they protested this incident even though they were dead-ass wrong you should have stuck up for your officer not put him on administrative leave and left a little bastards that assaulted him booked and sitting in juvenile hall where they belong..what kind of kid does that to a neighbor to an elder take your picket signs and shove them up your dysfunctional asses because you are dead-ass wrong and so are your kids

  18. and just for the record I am one of the biggest Advocates against police brutality you will ever run into but also the biggest advocate for what is right and what is wrong and these kids were clearly dead-ass wrong and so are their parents for condoning their behavior by picketing the incident if you don’t want your kids to get drug around somebody’s yard then you should teach them to respect people and stay off of people’s property when they are asked instead of assaulting people…if that had been me and those little bastards were trying to throw punches at me I would have beat their ass good and when their parents came to say something about it I would have beat their ass too

  19. what if I came to your yard with 10 of my friends and started hanging out and when you came outside to ask me to leave I told you no and all 10 of us started you jump on you who the f*** would be wrong then
    ..everybody so quick to comment on s*** and everybody is so one-sided but wait till something like that happens to you I bet you’ll change your tune I bet if me and 10 of my friends were punching you in the face you would have called the cops with the quickness you’re all a bunch of shitbag hypocrites

    1. Youth these days are taught they can do whatever because they are youth. They are not taught responsibility and respect for property or others. They are protected from natural consequences. They think they can just waltz over people’s lawns and do whatever they want.

      I would take a hefty bet that these kids are hit or beat at home. Beating your kid really isn’t effective. It might make them watch themselves around the one who beats but when alone or emboldened by their imbecile peers that school forces them to be in contact with then they will act stupid. This is what happens when parents outsource parenting to the state and by extension to moronic teachers and peers who can often come from very toxic home environments.

      You hear the boy say it “we are kids, you are a man”. You being a kid means jack shit. You respect people andproperty. I do not find this to be something innate like educators will say. It was because I went to school, was raised by peers, and raised by parents who instilled a “go to school and get good grades” mentality.

      I side with the cop. The kid was upset he couldn’t just walk where he wanted, he threatened the guy, the guy detained him and all his buddies felt that the kid should be left alone because “hey man we’re kids!”

      You fuckers are 13. Biologically grown, in less coddling cultures you’d be working your ass off. In the past you could handle being on your own or being a source of income for the family. I am sick of this infantilizing of youth.

  20. I found it remarkable all those phones, no (other) 911 phone calls made

  21. bottom line is If the parents were any kind of parents at alland had taught their kids to respect your elders and their neighbors and be respectable human beings none of this would have ever happened nothing would have ever escalated the way it did and I have no doubt in my mind that one of those little bastards did threaten to shoot that cop…it all comes back to the parents the same s*** bags that were out there with picket signs making a fuss when they are the cause of the whole problem essentially like I said you’re all a bunch of shitbag hypocrites discipline your f****** kids instead of spending time picketing s*** that should have never happened in the first place

    1. Shorter Mark R: “Git off mah lawn! You bunch of greasy messicans!”

      1. I have nothing against Mexicans my girlfriend is Latina I look at everybody in this world the same just as I look at right and wrong that applies to everybody the same save it

        1. I don’t care what Creed color nationality or Planet those kids came from they were dead-ass wrong and they all should have got an ass whippin

        2. So barring any other evidence than these videos…It’s OK to physically detain a child on public property (the sidewalk) and then forcibly drag him back onto your property? All while allowing a situation to escalate out of control. Then when the kid’s friends (naturally) attempt to rescue him, you pull out your gun and fire a shot?

          You’re blinded by the fact that your prejudices automatically think these kids were no good and the man was in the right. Most of the kids were just watching and doing nothing else, and the ones who attempted to free the detained kid started out without violence at all.

          Your rambling prejudiced narrative above shows that you are blind to any objectivity in this case.

  22. The teens were indeed violating private property.

    1. It looks to me like the officer violated the private property of his neighbors by dragging the kid across their properties.

  23. a good ass whooping IS what these little shitbags needed…that’s the problem with this country now nobody disciplines their kids with a good ass whooping if I had done that I would have caught the belt and you know what I don’t have any issues from getting an ass whooping when I did bad shit when I was a kid and I always respected my elders and my neighbors…sometimes a good ass whooping is what they need it’s worked for hundreds of years maybe thousands leave it to all the bleeding-heart Liberals to raise a nation full of pussies disrespectful pussies

  24. WTF happened to these comments? Are you all taking crazy pills? The guy grabbed a kid and dragged him onto his property and somehow he’s the victim defending himself and his property? From reading the comments, I was expecting a mob of kids attacking the guy. Instead, his friends stand around for minutes as a strange man is holding onto their friend and dragging him, refusing to let him go, and only after several minutes of this do a few of them shove him to try to get him off their friend. This idiot then draws a gun and (apparently) accidentally and negligently fires a shot. How the fuck is he the victim of assault here? Even assuming he is right that the kid did say “I’m going to shoot you” that’s a pretty damn weak justification for grabbing and holding onto the kid. Does that pass the true threat test? This country would be a nightmare if cops got called every time a kid said something stupid like that. And if the kid did say “sue” that removes any justification he’d have. I couldn’t listen with sound, does the guy ever identify himself as a cop? Even if he did, these kids have no way of knowing whether it’s true or not (not to mention he was off-duty and out of jurisdiction). I seriously wonder what you all would have done if some stranger grabbed your friend and refused to let him go like that. The kids showed quite a bit of restraint waiting that long to do anything, and their physicality was pretty modest when they did finally try to get him off the kid.

    1. I know people here have gone full fucking derp.

  25. The thing is, none of the cops on the scene had seen this video. They talked to the off-duty cop, and maybe to some of the kids and that old guy with white hair (it’s not really clear). So they had the two conflicting stories of the parties involved, and they also probably knew the guy had fired his gun. They then believed the story of one party (the off-duty cop) and arrested the kids.

    1. which is wrong.

      30 witnesses and a cop and you believe the cop who fired a gun…right.

      Real world with none cops all of them would be arrested until tings were sorted out.

  26. The whole incident started when the shitbag off duty told a girl that strayed onto his grass to “get the fuck off my lawn you cunt”. The kid Dorscht told him “You don’t talk to a lady like that” and things escalated. The kids by then were well away from his property and walking on a public sidewalk. Apparently Mr Roidrage followed them and Dorscht told him “I’ll sue you”. Fuckstick Blue Goon claims its “I’ll shoot you”, which makes me wonder if the line from The Running Man was right “What’s the matter, steroids make you deaf?” He then grabs Dorscht, claiming he was threatened and proceeds to drag him across the property of 2 neighbors to his house. The fact he was armed and then discharged his sidearm should be a clear charge of Aggravated Kidnapping and Attempted Murder. Tresspass is a ticketable offense. If he was that honked off, he should have taken down their descriptions and called the cops. What’s funny is that it was the kids themselves who called the cops, not the shitbag Off Duty. However, we know for certain that he won’t face a goddamn minute of jail, let alone prison time. The DA will refuse to prosecute and Mr Roidrage can continue being a shitbag blue goon. However, I’d bet dollars to donuts he’s going to lose hard in civil court. Naturally, he won’t actually lose his pension, house or anything, but the taxpayers will have to fork out the money. Plus ?a change, plus c’est la m?me chose.

    1. You nailed this pretty well but the charges would have aggravated battery as well and reckless endangerment and a few others.

      It is amazing what cops get away with. I am one of the most vocal people here for the right to self defense and killing someone and i would never have done what the cop did because it was illogical and highly illegal.

      Also infringed several peoples rights.

  27. This piece makes the same mistake as everyone else makes whenever they see an incendiary video. They assume they have all the information they need to draw their conclusions based solely on events that transpire after witnesses hit “record”. Brian Doherty refers to a completely legal detainment as “kidnapping”. No Brian, that wasn’t kidnapping. If, as alleged, the minor threatened to shoot Ferguson that constitutes assaulting an officer. Ferguson called the police and detained Dorscht. That’s not kidnapping Brian. Did you know that Ferguson and called the police, and was detaining the suspect until they arrived? No, it does not look like you are aware of that. Perhaps a bit of research and reading would have been in order?

    Brian Doherty, the author of this atrocious piece, refers to Ferguson as a “maniac” (a completely unfounded and inappropriate ad hom) and doesn’t seem to have the faintest idea about the law, police procedure, use-of-force statutes, or really anything that would be helpful to achieving a better understanding of this incident. Instead, he is basing is confusion on nothing more than his own prejudice and bias. Why, in the name of all things decent, his this person writing for a website called “Reason”?

    Has “Reason” decided to abandon reason and go with incendiary click bait?

  28. You call yourselves REASON and you have a disgusting slanderous title like “Off Duty Cop Shoots At Kids; Kids Get Arrested, Off Duty Cop Does Not”

    You should be ASHAMED. Seriously, in this social climate of stoked up resentment and rage, of cops being KILLED while trying to PROTECT the very communities who are turning against them, you completely misrepresent reality in the most CALCULATED, MANIPULATIVE and INACCURATE MANNER POSSIBLE to generate MORE rage?!?

    You are propagandist scum-bags with no honor at all.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.