This security footage shows how legal carry, courage, and quick actions of an off-duty Baltimore police officer, deemed life saving.
For most of us, when Friday afternoon hits we leave work behind and get ready for the weekend. Unfortunately police officers, especially those who live within the jurisdiction they are sworn to protect, never leave the metaphorical office. They mentally and physically always have to be prepared to work.
This off-duty police officer in Baltimore City, was seen here attempting to make a purchase at a local liquor store. He was interrupted when a man came through the door wielding a knife and a gun, later found to be a replica, stating his actions to rob the Baltimore police officer. The officer quickly drew his service weapon and fired shots, hitting the man. The man was rushed to the hospital where he was pronounced dead.
Many claim that Maryland is next to impossible to be able to obtain a wear and carry permit. The states’s website for their application process reads one must have a “good and substantial reason to carry” which allows the state to deny most applications according to several applicants. Luckily for this Baltimore police officer, officers are required to carry their weapon while both on and off duty.
Nearly one year earlier the death of Freddie Gray occurred in Baltimore causing a national and international spotlight reflecting relationships between police and the public. As news media outlets began to arrive on the scene, interviews of supposed witnesses occurred.
One person claiming to be a witness told The Baltimore Sun that, “[the man] ran into the store for safety.” He continued to tell WBAL that, “As he was running in the store the police shot him, boom. When he got in the store, the police (officer) got over top of him. But once he seen us run up there, he tried to pause and say, ‘Stay right there, don’t move,’ and then he called for the ambulance.”
This claimed witness was seen on local television that evening making these statements. Since the release of the surveillance videos, those interviews have since been removed. Both the uploaded videos as well as the written articles on their websites, have removed the statements. Some websites removed the entire video, like the video here from the WBAL article.
Whether the intentions of the media was to try to prevent uproar or remove falsity from their original work, this security footage shows the truth as to what really occurred that evening.