Sheriff Deems San Antonio Creek-Area Shooting “Tragic”

Whatphotosb- perhaps it's easy for you to oversimplify situations with which you are unfamiliar and uninformed. I'd hope that others would get the facts and understand that there are people whose lives that have been unimaginably altered. I hope that you never have to feel what the family and friends of this poor victim do at this time. And if you ever do, I hope strangers will afford you more compassion and thought than you have shown with your post.

3 deputies with a total of 3 years experience between them? Yikes. I do feel sorry for them. I also hope they leave the Sheriff's department. They are dangerous fellows.

I certainly understand that officers need to and should defend themselves when they are threatened with a gun. However, at 8am in a residential neighborhood where there is no evidence of serious felonious behavior is not a great time to shoot someone to death with 11 shots.

Couldn't the deputies have taken cover and talked to the guy? I know I'm second guessing, but goodness, a person was shot to death with 11 shots. Some second guessing is proper.

Well, the deputies have made me good and afraid of them. I don't have a gun. I don't threaten people. I just hope they don't shoot me to death for looking scared of them.

I am probably the wrong individual to ask if the police acted correctly. When an individual is not acting rational do to extenuating reasons, is killing/shooting that individual OK? I am going to say NEVER!

This seems to be another one of those instances that shows the intense short-comings in the education of our law enforcement in how to understand a individual who is distressed.

Four years ago, having recently been discharged from the hospital due to a sever head injury; two individuals who were in charge of my home-visits, proceeded to antagonize me to the point I decided to leave my own home to return to the rehabilitation home I was staying in. So the two individuals called the police who handcuffed me and then escorted me to the rehabilitation home.

Was I a threat to myself or any other individual? No, I had only walked across my street to a neighbor's home looking for a ride. But our law enforcement's lack of understanding in how to deal with common human shortcomings used force. Even over the objections of concerned neighbors who tried to explain what was happening, to no avail.

The Saturday morning quarterbacks around here are really amazing.....to hear you tell it, these three deputies started their shift anxious to manufacture a situation in which a man with a loaded gun and a lot of anger who engendered enough fear in his wife and neighbors to call 911 would give them reason to shoot him. You are so far removed from reality.

sbsleuth99, calm down. I for one explicitly said the deputies have a right to defend themselves. I don't think anybody manufactured anything.

But those deputies didn't have much experience between them either, and 11 shots is a lot to fire in a residential area at 8am. That is reality.

I think the deputies lost their cool, and I bet if they had had a more senior officer with them, nobody would be dead right now.

I'm not comfortable with the thought of inexperienced deputies shooting 11 shots in residential neighborhoods at 8am. I think they'd do better in a different profession. I don't think they are malicious. Just unprofessional. And if they stay with the force, they won't get that they might have done something wrong.

Get off your soap boxes. I don't see how time of day has any relevance as to whether those deputies lives were threatened. What would you say to those deputies' families had the gunman fired first and the result been "gunman kills deputy".

Those men and women put their lives on the line each and every day they go to work. Preparing that entire time and hoping never to face a day like Thursday.

Second guess the situation all you want. Until you have been in that situation analyse but try not to judge and spread falsehoods and insult to the men and women who would show up to your house to protect you if you dailed 911.

I get that the readership of the independent is a liberal audience and you are each entitled to your opinion.

But let's get realistic. Police show up, man points gun at police, police fear for their lives and the lives of others, they have no choice but to fire.

The backstory will always have emotional aspects. The circumstances are tragic and unfortunate however that doesn't negate that a gun was held to officers.

People don't get shot by walking across the yard unless they present deadly force.

At least make educated comments.

Yes, let's make educated comments, ASDFGH. And SBSLEUTH99- how far removed from reality do you think you are? Were you two there? Have you read the formal police reports? Have you spoken with the wife of the victim or the neighbors who actually witnessed the police response? My guess would be NO, since the investigation has barely begun, and the family has yet to share their side of the story on this. It seems you've barely even read the article above since, sbsleuth99, you're saying that his wife and neighbors feared him- his wife for one feared for HIS life, not hers. And when were his neighbors fearful? We're barely even able, as outsiders, to get the gist of the story correct (look at the huge factual error about George's gun being loded v. unloaded in this article alone!). So, how can we sit here at our computers and judge one party or another? Stop making up what you want to make up for the sake of having an argument. It's absolutely insane.

sevendolphins-
of all the ridiculous comments on here, yours really sums up the liberal a-holes who live in this city. Next time you have a gun pointed at you, go ahead and take cover and try and talk to the person instead of defending yourself.
And all deputies receive the same training regardless of how long ago they graduated from the academy. 5 months or 15 years on duty, if someone points a gun at them, they're gonna do what they are trained to do. Bottom line.

Binnsb4tyrs...
With regards to your opinionated post...If you are the wrong individual to ask if police did the right thing then why do you feel the need to share? If you want to just use this platform to tell other readers that you had a bad experience with officers, ok so be it. I don't quite see the parrallels between your experience and the shooting. I get that you feel the officers who you encountered were not understanding enough but this is a pretty specific tactical scenario and not quite the same as a use of force with handcuffs.

Now sevendolphins....
Since you are presenting yourself as the expert here on this blog will you please clarify a few omissions and presuppositions in your posts?

"But those deputies didn't have much experience between them either"...How long does it take for a Deputy to have enough experience in your mind to use deadly force?

"and 11 shots is a lot to fire in a residential area at 8am. That is reality."...11 shots is only three shots for one officer and four shots for the other two, assuming all fired. How many shots are appropriate? Are you a watcher of Walker Texas Ranger and perhaps you beleive the officers could just have kicked it out of his hand? What difference does the time have? If you are concerned about the neighborhood because of who could have been in the line of fire, then doesn't it speak of the Deputies training that no one other than the person presenting a deadly threat was hurt? No wild overspray of bullets, no other injuries, they (Deputies) saw the threat responded to that specific threat and it (the threat) was neutralized. And no doubt this is overall a horrible tradgedy and one person lost their life, his widow must live with that loss, and three deputies and their families must deal with the grief of being forced to kill another person.

continued due to word count...

...continued...

So lets get back to police tactics since that is what you seem to question the most.

"I think the deputies lost their cool, and I bet if they had had a more senior officer with them, nobody would be dead right now."...Which part of their actions lead you to believe they lost their cool? Was it the amount of shots fired? Ok I can see how a novice would think that, but then lets call it what it is in your post. My novice opinion...my amateur assumption is...they lost their cool. Even if you had been in the military the rules of engagement for soldiers vs. law enforcement are different and so this (incident) should be viewed as if we were/are officers (putting ourselves in their shoes).

I"'m not comfortable with the thought of inexperienced deputies shooting 11 shots in residential neighborhoods at 8am. I think they'd do better in a different profession."...Which profession do seem the suited for? Are you willing to take their place and put yourself in harms way?

" I don't think they are malicious. Just unprofessional. And if they stay with the force, they won't get that they might have done something wrong."...Isn't the rightness and wrongness of their actions up to the DA and the Sheriff's Department? Yet you seem to be willing to judge them in this court of public opinion.

Here is a slightly different perspective. How horrible is it that a man was overcome with an illness that caused him to loose bearing and the only outlet he felt he had was to contemplate suicide. His pain was so bad that ending his life equated ending his pain yet he couldn't do it himself. So he knows enough that officers could use deadly force if compelled to do so. And in complete desperation he forces the officers to shoot him, end his pain, ending his life. Now he puts these officers through an emotional ringer. They must process what they have done, what he forced them to do, they must deal with the insensitive opinions of non expert commentators, they have to deal with the nightmares, the emotional withdrawl from their own wives, girlfriends, significant others, children, etc....

This may or may not be how it actually went down but it is a different viewpoint.

I have not read all the post here. The first couple were ignorant enough. To people that think that when someone arms themselves with a gun and then goes outside of their home is thinking correctly should do some reflection on our current society. Have you forgotten Jennifer San Marcos and the Goleta post office shooting? You have the luxury to formulate an opinion after mulling over this incident, unfortunatly those deputies were not given such a luxury. Law enforcements actions are often dictated by other peoples actions, as was this case.

We'll we will never know all the facts, never. 11 shots at 8am in a residential area at a crazed old man is enough for me.

The deputies should have gotten under cover the moment they saw the gun, and they should have called in SWAT and negotiators with bullhorns. The deputies lives were so valuable that they should not have been anywhere open to shooting by the crazed old man.

The deputies should move on to jobs where they will never carry a gun. There are millions of jobs out there.

Remember David Gosselin? SB City Policeman who killed Kevin Moran in 1970, a conservative UCSB student who was actually putting out a fire in the temporary Bank of America in Isla Vista. Said it was an accident. Guess what... Gosselin shot someone else by accident while a peace officer in a different department a few years later.

I surely do appreciate the job that our sworn officers do for us. In fact, that is why I think those 3 deputies will be way happier in the long run in a different job. They'll be second guessed for the rest of their careers as peace officers, and they'll be way happier in a different line of work. And all of us simple taxpayers can rest easier not having to worry if we'll be accidently shot and killed.

I guess some of you would just like taxpayers to fork over 50% of their earned income (all taxes considered) and then shut the F up. Well, that is not america. I pay I say, and if you don't like it, well, feel free to pay my taxes for me.

Sevendolphins, you are an idiot. If they had done what you suggest and then if he killed someone you would be the first one calling for them to be fired for "not acting sooner". And what if they waited and the SWAT team shot him, you would be saying boy the SWAT team was wrong, if he was such a threat then the first three deputies should have shot him first. He wasn't "accidentally shot and killed". He was armed with a gun. And what does paying taxes qualify you for anything. Why don't you dictate to the fire department on how you think is the best way to put out a fire. Or go tell Caltrans on how to build a freeway. You are just as qualified at trying to determine those things as you are in this subject matter. And how does bringing up an incident that happened 40 years ago relevant, even tho you are wrong about your facts? I'm surprised you didn't throw in a reference to slavery or something else so far off. There is an old saying, that you can't argue with the village's idiot. Somehow I think this logic is wasted on you.

Guess my thouhgtful comments were wasited. Clearly you are the expert on all. I won't spend as much time crafting my response since it seems waisted.

"The deputies lives were so valuable that they should not have been anywhere open to shooting by the crazed old man."

Could you imagine if patrol deputies and police officers around the nation hid everytime there was a "crazed old man" with a gun??? That is just a silly silly remark, actually I find solice because now you have lost credibility in any of your opinion.

Like I said previously, why don't you do the job? Not sure you'd pass the psych eval.

"They'll be second guessed for the rest of their careers as peace officers, and they'll be way happier in a different line of work. "

Second guessed by who? I won't give it a second thought and neither will their peers. The only people second guessing are those that at one time or another will need them and be glad they were there.

I am certain these deputies could find jobs elsewhere, probably ones that pay 2x as much. The problem is they are deputies, it is a calling and takes an extraordinary man or woman to do the job.

Always nice to be called an idiot, have words put in my mouth, and credibility attacked, and psyche evaluations made, but hey, this is just the blogosphere.

If the Sheriffs or Fire Department don't want my taxes, I'm glad to take them back. As long as they want them, they are entitled to my opinion. And if they or anyone else doesn't like that, get my money back.

I don't think the deputies should have *hid*, but they should have gotten under cover and watched from a safer position. Seems to me the man's wife was safe and the main problem was to contain the old man. I think the deputies should have gotten under cover and waited for SWAT/psych help. Hard to predict what would happen next, and yes, SWAT might have shot him.

Let these guys go find 2X salaries, good for them. While they may well be extraordinary, I don't think they are extraordinary enough for this job. Hey, no disgrace, I'm glad they served for a while.

Sevendolphins-
I'm still not understanding why you feel these deputies need to get new jobs...do you believe that every officer who has ever been involved in a shooting needs to re-think their career? That makes no sense.
A pedophile who works as a 2nd grade teacher, yeah he needs a new job. A theif with a gambling addiction who works in a bank, yeah he needs a new job. An officer who is trained to use force only.when.absolutely.neccessary and then does so in fear of his, his partners, and other bystanders safety...in need of a new job? Not hardly.

"Seems to me the man's wife was safe and the main problem was to contain the old man"....
if his wife wasn't afraid if him she wouldn't have called 9-1-1. Duh. Re-read the article.

"Upon arrival at the scene, George’s wife was removed from the house for her own safety."

After the wife was removed, the old guy started waving a pistol. Time to get behind cover for the deputies and start talking over a bullhorn.

The deputies, it seems, stayed in full view while he went back inside and got bullets and loaded. Then he came out. He was now waving a loaded gun, and there weren't a whole lot of other options for the deputies, because they had not taken cover. I can understand why they shot at that point.

But they really should have gone for cover immediately after seeing the unloaded gun the first time. They knew the wife was safe, and the old man was a danger to only himself and to themselves, and they were trained personnel who knew to get the h-ll out of that space.

Sure I'm second guessing. No doubt lots of folks have and will knee-jerk their view that I've got no knowledge or standing to second guess. I simply disagree. This could have been handled better, and if we do not hold our public employees to high standards, they won't feel pressure to uphold high standards.

Mistakes need to be punished. Sorry if that oftens all of you touchy-feely anything-goes liberals. The deputies need to step up to the plate and take responsibility. Moving on to a higher paying profession seems to me to be a good way to do so.

sevendolphins,
Hmmmm...not quite sure how to respond since yours seems to be the only opinion that matters and you aren't willing to have a dialogue about this matter. True I can't argue about opinions and if those are your opinions you are very much entitled to them. However, if we were to dispute facts like one of your previous posts wanted to do, then I think you are mistaken on a few points.

You mention that the man was only a threat to himself by waiving the gun around once the wife was safe. If a person wants to kill themselves who do you think gets called first? Especially if their desired method is to shoot themselves? Medics, Fire, MHAT, SAFETY, or any other organization is not going to be the first to contact a suicidal subject with a gun. MHAT doesn't even take people that have been drinking let alone speak to a person holding a gun.

You asked other posters if they were there and how do they know (as to the events that transpired) yet you state that the Deputies stood in full view. Were YOU there? How do you know they were in full view? Do you know the difference between "cover" and "concealment?" Do you know if there was anything that constitutes "cover" in the backyard of their home?

And this was great...You said the Deputies should have gone for cover when they saw the gun was unloaded. How could anyone have seen that the gun was unloaded? Do you know what kind of gun it was? How do you tell if a magazine is loaded unless you can see inside the magazine. Not to mention if a gun is unloaded why would they go for cover since it cannot fire? Why would they have then used less than lethal force? Point being...YOU DON'T KNOW.

Knowing and opinions are two different things and if you think cops are the worst thing ever then so be it. It is your right (courtesy of the military). You comments go further than just being opinions you are trying to present facts. State your opinions as such "It is my opinion....I think....I believe....If I were to do it I would try this..."

Please stop. He was not a "crazed old man with a gun". He was a human being who had just undergone extensive brain surgery. No one knows if he pointed his weapon at the officers - the only witnesses to that fact are the officers themselves. The officers did what they believed needed to be done at the time. There was no malintent. The point is - where were the proper procedures to handle a situation like this one? Could there have been any alternative actions taken prior to the officers putting themselves in harms way?
It is easy to blame "the old man" and it is easy to blame "inexperienced officers", but the truth is, the blame is on the system and its failure to help a woman who called 911 to save her husband and instead resulted in his death.

good points, getfactsfirst.... asdfgh you have a bit of a persecution hair trigger.

The main fact is 11 shots were shot at 8am in a residential area and killed a resident. Don't think anybody had contradicted that one. That is enough for me, frankly. Something wrong happened here.

I have quite a bit of respect for peace officers. But they make mistakes too, and like everyone in the world, they need to understand that their mistakes can not be rewarded or ignored.

Just to clarify the term "crazed old man" was one used by sevendolphins in post dated March 9. It has since been used in quotes.

I too agree that regardless of circumstances this man was a human being and his medical condition was unfortunate as were the actions he took.

I am glad that you can determine that deputies made a "mistake" before the DA or the department has finalized their investigation.

Maybe you should call them and tell them you can save them the trouble of an investigation.

"Persecution hair trigger"...interesting since you have already drawn your own persecutory opinions about the deputies' mistakes.

well, it is a bit strong, my comment `crazed old man'. It may bug you. But you know, it is pretty accurate, albeit insulting.

Now that by no means implies that the man deserved to be shot 11 times by anybody. But frankly, if you go in to your home and load a pistol with 3 deputies outside who warned you to drop it, you are crazed. Mabye you are crazed because of a good medical reason. But crazed you are, my friends.

I'm not persecuting anyone; the deputies who shot 11 times in a residential area at 8am deserve the full scrutiny of the taxpayers who supply their salaries. That is not persecution, it is good common sense and good government.

7dolphins, you seem to be so interested by the time and amount of shots fired. Why are you such a narrow minded person that you take one miniscule fact in a large event and make a sweeping assessment? You keep repeating it throughout your posts and tout it as being some hugely important fact that proves your point. There were three deputies, which could mean each fired 3 or 4 shots. Not an unrealistic occurrence in an officer involved shooting. But then again that doesn’t matter to you. You also seem fascinated about the time, 8AM, like a child at Disneyland. What would you have liked them to do when the wife called 911 at 8AM, “Oh sorry it is to early for any trouble, please call back after 3PM, thank you”. Your arguments are moronic and seem to lack any base of intelligent comprehension. And you are PERSECUTING those deputies. When you start off by saying they should quit that is pretty much summing up that you have already passed judgment merely based on what you read online. But then again you pay taxes!!! Good for you!!!

You betcha, InTheKnow, we need to hold our public employees to high standards. While you may view that as moronic, I don't.

8am in a residential neighborhood is a peaceful time. 11 shots is 10 more than needed to stop a person. OK, maybe you need 2 more back up shots. So 11 is 8 more shots than were needed.

Why didn't the deputies seek cover the first time they saw the man had a gun? A lot of time elapsed between their first sighting and when they mowed him down. That was time the deputies should have gathered their wits and prepared not to kill a taxpayer, unless absolutely necessary.

The do-what-feels-good anything-goes no-responsibility crowd just wants us to fugeddabout it. Kill a guy? No problem, people die all the time, they say. Well that is not acceptable. Someone must step up to the plate and take responsibility. If no-one in the Sheriff's department can be an adult and do so that is despicable.

Sevendolphins what country do you live in? Because here in the United States we wait for an investigation and trial before we come to a conclusion, something that you jumped to a long time ago based on two numbers, the time of day and the amount of shots. So the deputies were supposed to confer with each other a little something like this..."Ok Bob who is going to shoot? Just shoot 1 time ok because old sevendolphins pays taxes and he doesn’t want any of his bullets wasted." If you knew anything about guns, military, or law enforcement training it is not like the movies. You shoot until the threat is stopped. Unfortunately you have educated yourself on TV; you have proved your ignorance. Now I’m not calling you ignorant as an insult, it is simply because you don’t know any better and you are trying to speak intelligently on a subject matter that you know nothing about. But I predict you will continue you same argument….

Why didn't the deputies get under cover when they saw the gun? The man went back into his house and then came out again, that takes a long time.

Why would anyone ever trust an investigation of Sherriff's deputies conducted by the Sheriff's department itself? Is there any motivation for the Sherrif's department to do anything but conclude that the dead man was wrong and the deputies was right?

In a whole lot of countries this investigation would be passed to higher authorities. Even in California the State DA could take it over.

What makes you think that they did not take cover? Were you there? All indications point that they did. But cover does not keep you free from harm; again your ignorance is blatant. Then you make a prejudiced statement that the Sheriff’s department will automatically cover it up… hmm I guess they have never arrested one of their own or fired one of their deputies after an internal investigation. Opps, wrong again you are, I guess they didn’t know back then that they should cover things up. And we are not in any other country, we are here in the United States, a fact you keep ignoring. And somehow I think our system is better then “a whole lot of countries” where corruption and cover up are the norm. There is no such thing as a State DA, it is the Attorney General’s office, and again you prove you do not know what you are talking about. The investigation is reviewed by the district attorney’s office and they determine if any criminal wrong doing has been done. You really should educate yourself before you make yourself look any worse…

Great, turn it over to the State Attorney General's office.

Uh, corruption and coverup are not the norm here? Ever heard of the Sherriff's Council?

Who would ever believe a single statement made by the Sheriff's Department? They have absolutely zero interest in an accurate investigation. I doubt that trustable facts will ever come out in this case, other than non-Sheriffs accounts. Unfortunately those are only from neighbors and people out of view of the shooting.

If the deputies had good cover, they'd not have needed to shoot 11 shots at the man with the gun. There were no other people around that he was threatening.

sevendolphins....

Yeah and you should stomp your feet and hold your breath until the world can all just get along. Corruption, greed, scandal isn't that what all government officials are really about. I think the Attorney General is in it with the SBSO and would probably cover it up also. (Dripping in sarcasm)...

Perhaps with your insight and tactical superiority you would offer to teach at the local academies. Perhaps submit your theories to POST and change the curriculum all together.

By the way, you have shared a lot about the Deputies and their roles and responsibilities. Do you have any thoughts on the obligations of the man who was shot? (And I phrase it that way out of respect for his family).

A citizen panel with investigatory powers is what we've needed for a long time here. I agree with you, as..., that would be better than the AG.

The man who was shot should have put the gun down when the deputies ordered him to do so. He was not abusing his wife, but she was concerned about his mental state. Seems to me the SBSO has implied he was an abuser, which fits with the idea that they are not appropriate to investigate themselves.

The man did not deserve a death sentence for his actions. It is understandable that in the situation they got themselves into the deputies would shoot. They should have been shielded behind cover where a man with a pistol could not have seriously injured them.

Your attidude, as..., is that taxpayers should have no ability to influence the capital punishments undertaken by the SBSO. I simply disagree with you.

I have observed a progression to these opinions. It involves 7dolphins uneducated ranting with someone else correcting him and then him retorting with a slightly changed variation (sometimes changing his stance or thought). I think instead of educating yourself about anything, you choose to spew here and let others correct you. Like when you commented about a State District Attorney. Obviously you have no concept of our legal system, but good job on now calling it the Attorney General, it is proof that you can learn. There is a “civilian” review board in Santa Barbara County; it has been present here since the early years of Statehood and is still in use today. Their investigations cover any facet of government. They are selected from civilians who serve for a one year period. What you “call for” already exists… do you have any idea what that group is called? I refuse to EDUCATE you any longer.

And way to point out that deputies have been arrested in the past and discipline mitigated. A point I fed you awhile ago. But do you know that kind of goes against your whole, “cover up” theory? Doesn’t that prove that they seek justice when they arrest one of their own? And the Sheriff council incident that you tout so heavily wasn’t that why Jim Anderson was not reelected? Wasn’t that blamed on him, not the current Sheriff? You are prejudiced 7; you take a past series of events regarding a different group of people involved in the same work class and jump to a conclusion. Once again your ignorance is blatant; you have educated yourself with TV and movies.

What have you done to gather any information about what happened that day besides what you read here? Where did you read that they did not take cover? You keep spewing that… but where are you getting that? I know you are right now thinking that “well if they took cover then they would not have had to shoot him”. Well I purpose a little experiment. It involves you and me and paintball guns or air soft guns, something that won’t hurt you too bad so you can still pay taxes. We go out somewhere and you can take cover, or what you think is cover. I guarantee you that I will still be able to hit you. And do you know what the definition of cover is? I know you don’t, what you keep ranting about is concealment and that does nothing to protect you from a gun shot. Cover is something completely different. PLEASE EDUCATE YOURSELF BEFORE YOU RANT MORE IGNORANCE!!!!

Oh and 7 you are wrong (again) because of a misprint by the Independent. Each deputy has had 3 years experience (9 years combined), not three total combined as you spewed before. Just another example of how you jump to a conclusion.

Perhaps the Grand Jury will investigate this incident, but they do not have a potent staff who can subpoena, etc.

No institution that investigates itself will reach a fair conclusion. Nice to enjoy all of your name calling over this issue, but you know, at your insistence I did a careful investigation of myself and found ITK that you are wrong. That should satisfy *you*.

If the deputies were behind cover and shot 11 shots, I'm sorry, that is enough for them to move on to a more lucrative profession.

We need a citizen's oversight board with full investigative powers to monitor the SBSO. The graft and corruption of the Sheriff's council and now 11 shots at 8am in a residential neighborhood prove it.

Referring the all the law-abiding and taxpaying citizens as `Village Idiots' pretty much sums up the attitude of SBSO... they want taxpayer's money but no responsibility, they want to retire at 50, and they want to refer to the taxpayers as idiots, or as opposing football players that they can tackle and rough up.

How refreshing it would have been for Bill Brown or ITK or any other pro-SBSO folks to say, `We get it. We work for the taxpayers, and we respect them. Something may have gone wrong with Donald George, and that is why we've asked the Attorney General and the Grand Jury to investigate. No innocent and peaceful citizens in this County should feel unsafe due to actions of Sheriff's Deputies, but everyone should realize that the Deputies are doing a tough job and things sometimes go wrong.'

You won't hear that though; the SBSO arrogantly views citizens as obstacles and annoyances who should shut up and fork over their tax money. I've seen it over and over again.

7D your instant judgement on the situation with out showing any prudence is what is most disheartneing. You started with your first comment condeming the Sheriff department and have since continued. It is obvious that you have a hatred for them for an unknown reason there by scewing your point of view. The fact that everyone that has posted here finds your comments off base does not clue you in that you might be wrong.

My, ITK, you are one sensitive fellow. I went back and read my first post, and it expressed neither condemnation nor hatred. I have no problem being the single voice standing up for scrutiny of a public agency that shoots a taxpayer to death with 11 shots at 8am in the morning in a calm residential neighborhood.

I sure hope our Sheriff's department has tougher folks than you, who don't flinch and panic at a little healthy scrutiny.

Here are your statements that prove my point “3 deputies with a total of 3 years experience between them? Yikes. I do feel sorry for them. I also hope they leave the Sheriff's department. They are dangerous fellows. Well, the deputies have made me good and afraid of them. I just hope they don't shoot me to death for looking scared of them. I think the deputies lost their cool”

“Everyone knows that the Sheriff's department views taxpayers as the opposing team that they are playing football against. There has been so much corruption in the Sherriffs in this County”

Hmmm guess you didn't read your comments well enough...

ITK, you are so sensitive. There is no hatred or condemnation in those remarks, and a substantial amount of telling it like it is. There has been a lot of corruption here... the Sheriff's Council was one source, and then there was good old Honey. Now maybe a whole lot less than some other places, and also, there have been and always will be a lot of good deputies here too.

Then there is this whole phrase `Monday Morning Quaterbacking', which implies that the sheriffs view the taxpayer as an opposing team. The taxpayers and the sheriff are on the same team, my friend, and the critic of the sheriff's department is their best friend, because the critic helps the department get better and not diverge into worse corruption and violence.

So 7dolphins you change your screen name to snugspot and pretend to be someone else???? That seems pathetic. All one has to do is view the stories that you have posted on in the past and see the same style and text you use are the same. Plus the idiom “Monday Morning Quarterbacking” has nothing to do with “an opposing team”. It has already been explained to you (again how I know you are the same person), but you seem not to listen so here it is AGAIN another definition (taken from a dictionary of idioms) for you. Boy you are a moron…

a Monday morning quarterback (American)
someone who says how an event or problem should have been dealt with, after other people have already dealt with it. A person who criticizes or passes judgment with benefit of hindsight. Example: "It's easy to be a Monday morning quarterback when you see the kids' low test scores, but there are no easy answers to improving education."