Brickbat: Shocking Mistake

A police officer in Windsor, Connecticut, faces charges of reckless endangerment and unlawful discharge of a firearm after he mistakenly fired his gun at a suspect when he intended to deploy his Taser.* During a chase, Officer Brandon Thomas told a fleeing suspect to stop, or he would tase him. He then drew his firearm and fired a single shot, which did not hit the suspect. Thomas could be heard on body camera footage saying "oh shit, I didn't mean to do that." A report by the Connecticut Office of the Inspector General concluded, "The discharge was not accidental; it was an error. Officer Thomas bears responsibility for that error."
*CORRECTION: This article originally misstated the underlying details of the shooting. Thomas' bullet did not strike the suspect, who was unarmed and fleeing.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments 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 and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
The officer, identified only as a 10-year veteran...
Arrested and charged but not named. Interesting.
If the victim was in fact advanced toward the cops with a knife, that situation might call for a gun instead of a taser.
Yeah, that's what I came here to say. The number of police videos I've seen where a suspect was 'advancing towards the cops with a knife' whom was ultimately literally (not figuratively, but literally) filled with bullets is too many to count. In fact, it puts me in mind of a local cop about 15 years ago who was murdered on the side of the road here because a naked, unarmed man 'advanced towards the officer' and the officer made the unfortunate choice of deploying his taser which... had no effect on the naked, unarmed man who ultimately killed the officer.
If I were on the jury, unless there were some extremely extenuating circs, I'd probably vote to acquit.
Depends on how far away he was.
But if Officer Bang Bang thought a taser was feasible, probably not very far. Which makes me suspect the suspect was not, in fact, advancing on anyone.
Nunchaku are never mistaken for guns. L.A. cops can flick a knife out of a hobo's hand quicker'n you can say Jackie Chan!
I'm a little confused. If a guy is charging at officers with a knife then he intends to inflict harm and the officer has every right to shoot him to stop the attack. Is the officer obligated to wait until the man stabs him before reacting?
Pro Tip: If you want to avoid being shot by a police officer do not head at them with a weapon in your hand.
"If a guy is charging at officers with a knife then he intends to inflict harm and the officer has every right to shoot him to stop the attack."
I think that police need to be held accountable for not only excessive force, but mistaken uses of force.
That said, taking the claim that the suspect was advancing (the article does not say charging) on the officers with a knife at face value, this would seem to be a justified shooting.
I agree with you on the excessive or mistaken use of force but this case, if what is being alleged is true, isn't one of those.
Pro Tip: If you want to avoid being shot by a police officer do not head at them with a weapon in your hand.
Call me an "EVIL KKKRISCHUN NASHUNALIST MISOGYNIST!" or whatever, while we're wishing in one hand and shitting in the other, might as well wish that people find a better way to handle domestic disturbances than picking up a knife in the first place. A husband or wife getting convicted of manslaughter for shooting someone approaching him/her with a knife isn't really any better.
But then I'm one of those insane "conservative" idiots that, when the cops show up to a call about a knife-wielding, 90 yr. old mental patient, blame the people who are directly, privately contracted to care for the person for failing to prevent the issue rather than faulting the public servants who cannot choose not to or fail to respond to such buck-passing incompetence.
In other words, you're not a conservative. You're a fascist bootlicker.
Remember this is Reason. The cop is automatically in the wrong.
It's not Reason saying the cop was wrong here. The officer has been charged with a criminal offense.
Right, maybe Reason is posting this because the officer was overcharged by a zealous prosecutor, using lawfare to attack an innocent man.
Over/under on that theory?
Over/under on that theory?
Presumably in... [scroll] Waterbury... we aren't talking about a Michael Jackson impersonator or a transgender sex "worker" with less than $100 to their name but, without even a definitive declaration to that effect, how are we to know?
That summary doesn't match up with the link.
It's not even the same date.
Or the same town. Windsor != Waterbury.
Damn. It probably could have said officer W Bush and I wouldn't have noticed.
Perhaps this article was written by ChatGPT.
Jesus, that makes it make sense. Thanks for clicking through and doing commenter research.
That isn't even close to what the author put up. Are you sure that is the same incident as it sounds like a different call.
Note to the author:
Double-check your link. This Brickbat is itself a shocking mistake.
The linked article and included body camera video clearly show that the cop shot at a fleeing suspect, then realized his mistake and switched to his taser, then denied having shot at the guy. It wasn't a domestic violence call, he was checking on a vehicle because it had the wrong plates, and the guy ran. The incident happened in January, the officer is named in the article, and a state IG investigation ruled that he wasn't justified in using his firearm.
I didn't watch the video. If what you say is true then the officer should be charged. That is nowhere near what the story by the author says, though.
Chaz isn't even reading his source articles anymore.
So sockpuppet habits wear off on writers. THAAAAAT's why youse Anon creeps come here inna first place, right?
Will ICE start issuing pistols that look like tasers?
Dupe-licate.