Yesterday morning’s fatal shooting of a knife-wielding man by Bellevue police at a Chevron gas station has this morning’s Seattle Times and on-line Seattle PI.com reader feedback pages jammed with comments reacting to the incident, which may have been captured on the store’s security video.
It is being reported by the Times that the 25-year-old man declared that he was “taking the gas station hostage.” He then reportedly went outside, confronted two officers with the knife raised over his head and several shots were fired. The man died at the scene.
This column has on many occasions discussed Washington State’s use-of-lethal force statutes, and my book, Washington State Gun Rights and Responsibilities – available at several gun stores in the Puget Sound region – discusses lethal self-defense, as did my book with Alan Gottlieb, America Fights Back: Armed Self-Defense in a Violent Age.
Based on available information, it appears that the police acted properly; that is, in the vernacular, this probably was a “righteous shoot,” which this column prefers to call a “clean shoot.”
There is no such thing as a “good shooting.” That much was made clear under by byline in an opinion piece I wrote that appeared in the Seattle Post-Intelligencer’s print edition about the shooting in 2000 of another knife-wielding suspect named David Walker by Seattle Police, an incident that was caught on video by a KING television news photographer.
But that piece explained why it is considered justifiable to shoot someone who is armed with a knife and is acting aggressively (and, no, this is not a clever attempt to explain Seattle’s “woodcarver shooting” from last fall).
Forget that the police shot this man in Bellevue. There were two employees and two customers in the store, and they had a chance to see this guy up close and personal.
The 25-year-old Bellevue man apparently told a clerk at a Chevron station in the 1600 block of Bellevue Way Southeast to call 911 because he was taking the gas station hostage, said Bellevue police spokeswoman Carla Iafrate.—Seattle Times
This column has recently noted the record number of Washingtonians with Concealed Pistol Licenses. It would have been entirely conceivable that one or more than one of the people inside that Chevron station’s convenience store might have been armed.
At the moment this young man pulled that knife and presented himself as a clear and present danger to any reasonable person caught in the situation, it would have been legal under this state’s superb lethal force statutes to use whatever force necessary to stop him. And, yes, that includes fatally shooting him where he stood, even under the “double standard” clearly written in the statute that applies to the use of lethal force by police.
Washington statute recognizes that a dual standard has been established by the Legislature with respect to the use of lethal force by police and private citizens (we don’t use the term “civilians” in separating police from citizens, because police are civilian law enforcement officers, not members of the military). The statutes also allow broader use of lethal force by private citizens than police. Here are the links to RCW 9A.16.040 and RCW 9A.16.050.
The Washington State Supreme Court has also repeatedly affirmed that in this state, there is no duty to retreat if attacked (or in this case, threatened with imminent and unavoidable grave bodily harm or death by someone clearly capable of immediately carrying out that threat) in a place where you have a right to be.
Homicide is also justifiable when committed either:
(1) In the lawful defense of the slayer, or his or her husband, wife, parent, child, brother, or sister, or of any other person in his presence or company, when there is reasonable ground to apprehend a design on the part of the person slain to commit a felony or to do some great personal injury to the slayer or to any such person, and there is imminent danger of such design being accomplished; or
(2) In the actual resistance of an attempt to commit a felony upon the slayer, in his presence, or upon or in a dwelling, or other place of abode, in which he is.—RCW 9A.16.050
Bottom line: There appears to be nothing illegal or even questionable about Thursday’s fatal shooting, with the possible exception of that always-nagging question: “What was your backstop?”
Years ago, when I was consulted “on background” by a trainer for a local sheriff’s department when he was putting together a training scenario based loosely on the David Walker incident, I told the guy to remind his colleagues that “A bullet that misses the target will hit something else.” The best shooting schools and training programs pound it into the heads of all students that they should avoid taking shots if there is not a safe backstop for missed bullet impact.
Legislative recognition: "The legislature recognizes that RCW 9A.16.040 establishes a dual standard with respect to the use of deadly force by peace officers and private citizens, and further recognizes that private citizens' permissible use of deadly force under the authority of RCW 9.01.200, 9A.16.020, or 9A.16.050 is not restricted and remains broader than the limitations imposed on peace officers."—RCW 9A.16.040
There is one more thing that must be considered by all of the Monday morning quarterbacks weighing in with reader comments at both newspaper websites. It is something Bellevue Police spokeswoman Carla Iafrate told the Seattle Times: “It all happened really fast.”
Violent criminal acts almost always unfold “really fast.” Split-second decisions must be made between life and death; decisions that the Peanut Gallery invariably analyzes from the cheap seats, always with the luxury of not having been there, done that or having the T-shirt.
A man is dead and there will be an investigation.
Ask yourselves this question: Faced with the same set of circumstances, knowing what those present knew at the time, what would you have done? Leave your comments below.
PLEASE FORWARD the link to this column and share with all of your chat lists and forums
PLEASE SUBSCRIBE by clicking on the link above
And Don’t forget to visit:
VISIT THESE GUN RIGHTS EXAMINERS ON-LINE:
Atlanta Ed Stone | Austin Howard Nemerov | Boston Ron Bokleman | Charlotte Paul Valone | Cheyenne Anthony Bouchard | Chicago Don Gwinn | Cleveland Daniel White | DC Mike Stollenwerk | Denver Dan Bidstrup | Des Moines Sean McClanahan |Detroit Rob Reed | Fort Smith Steve D. Jones | Knoxville Liston Matthews | Los Angeles John Longenecker | Minneapolis John Pierce | National David Codrea | Seattle Dave Workman | St. Louis Kurt Hofmann | Tucson Chris Woodard
ALSO VISIT:
‘Winning Firearms Freedom One Lawsuit at a Time’
CITIZENS COMMITTEE FOR THE RIGHT TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS
READ:
America Fights Back: Armed Self-Defense in a Violent Age
These Dogs Don’t Hunt: The Democrats’ War on Guns
Comments
Several things aren't clear, Dave.
This guy stood around a store with a brandished knife (for how long?), and when the police (ostensibly responding to 911 instructions) arrived this guy left the (relative safety of the) store and threatened them? Sounds like suicide by cop to me.
Otherwise, had I been in the store, I'd have triple-tapped the guy and called it a day. Some @$$hat witha knife has the low IQ to announce he's trying to take me hostage, he's toast... Kudos to the Bellevue PD officers involved for actually not hitting any of the innocent in the process. They must practice more than the average cop.
Clear case of Suicide By Cop (SBC). If I was in the store or any place I had a right to be and somebody threatens me or an innocent person with death or grievous bodily injury (and has the ability, opportunity and makes it clear they intend to carry out the threat), I will most likely use lethal force to stop the threat. Backstops, safety of innocent bystanders, etc., would certainly affect how and when I take the shot(s) but I will certainly take the action necessary to defend myself and others. There will be after effects, of course, for taking a life or seriously injuring an assailant (whatever it took to stop the threat) but that's better than being dead or maimed myself.
i will shoot him too, but alwas making sure to not hurt innocent bystanders, although is very had to do it in this kind o situation
I don't think you can compare the firearms of then to the firearms of today -- apples to oranges.
BNC:
.
Did you actually read the first poster's remarks?
.
Here, one more time: " ... refer them to Agincourt, or any other pre-gunpowder battle:"
.
The key term: Pre-gunpowder.
Just wondering if a possible tazer shot was available ??
That's an interesting thought. HOWEVER ...
.
The cops arrived at scene where hostages were under threat. Certainly they weren't going to hold a conference outside the store while some crazy idiot was wielding a knife.
.
And anyway, the idiot stepped outside the store, knife raised, and apparently in the 'attack mode.'
.
Points to recall:
.
[1] The cops had just arrived
.
[2] The idiot raised the knife just outside the store in what appeared to be a sign of impending attack.
.
[3] This isn't Hollywood. Tasers don't stop everyone.
.
[4] The Darwin award was issued to the dead attacker.
.
Any questions?
Human Energy, a Chevron Speciality!
Just think Dave, he could have read your gas price artilce?
http://www.chevron.com/
BNC, I suspect that you have never been in, or trained for, an armed confrontation.
I defer to others such as Dave for corroboration, but one wielding a knife within 3-4 meters can close in less time than it takes to draw, let alone switch out, a weapon. The police were, presumptaviely, responding to a hostage situation.
I once had to shoot a man to save my life. I thank God he didn't die, but if he had it would have been his own responsibility, not mine. He chose to attack.
This case seems quite clear. The police are human beings with the right to self defense (regardless of the abuse of that right by some) and seem to have done what they had to do this time.
It certainly needs careful assessment by objective people trained in the forensics and so forth. That's the part so often missing in this sort of thing.
Any shooting where innocent lives are saved is a GOOD SHOOTING, no matter how much political correctness or linguistic machinations you wish to apply.
From the available information, it appears a clean shoot.
I tend towards, were I a customer in the store under such circumstances, I suspect I would simply eliminate the threat and immediately call police...followed by an immediate call to the first lawyer to come to mind, BEFORE the nice officers arrived.
Being exceptionally polite and cooperative to the nice officers arriving would seem a prudent course as well.
I rescue spiders out of the sink - life is precious. My own is so precious that I carry 24/7. If the account is accurate I would have have fired and taken no pleasure in doing so. For a demonstration of how deadly a knife can be watch an instruction video by Escrima Grandmaster Mike Inay (1944-2000) about how to use a knife as a weapon. Then watch the police training video "Surviving Edged Weapons." There is no time for detached contemplation when confronted by a raised knife.
Darwin Award, idiot, low IQ, Fool, You would be heros, and wannabes would piss your pants then fire off a few rounds hitting anything but the subject. The truth is not out on this, and from many accounts the reports by the Front peron with the BPD are grossly inaccurate if not just ficticious.
The 25 yr old shot to death was a son, a father, a great worker, kind, gentle and very intelligent. He was depressed over the loss of a good friends death the previous weekend, but he did not have die, and he may not even said anything about taking anyone hostage, but may have asked for instead a 911 call for medics.
I have unlike most of you had someone attack me with a knife and I did shoot him, through the knee, then I walked over the 6 feet he was from me and kicked the knife aside.
Center mass..... nice if it isnt your kid, your father, your friend.co-worker, son in law. I pray none of you has to face any decisions, but I have seen too many fade when in the face of, not think clearly, decisivly.
Out of the 3 officers that showed, 2 shot, those with the least experience
My Guess is most of you support shooting running game or wolves from planes as well,,
"Forget that the police shot this man in Bellevue". Cool way to start a paragraph.
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!