Father ‘utterly terrified’ after trooper points gun at his 7-year-old during traffic stop


At first, Kenneth Walton thought the Arizona state trooper following him and his 7-year-old daughter wanted to warn him of a broken taillight.

They were in a rental car, on a stretch of Interstate 40 between Las Vegas and Flagstaff, Ariz., on what was supposed to be a fun Grand Canyon vacation. It was dark, and Walton knew he hadn’t been speeding, so — not thinking much of it — he pulled over on an off-ramp, rolled down his driver’s side window and waited.

“Tonight, I was arrested at gunpoint by an Arizona highway patrol officer who threatened to shoot me in the back (twice) in front of my 7-year-old daughter,” Walton wrote on Facebook, hours after the incident. “For a moment, I was certain he was going to kill me for no reason. I’m alive, and I need to share the story.”

Can’t believe that AZ DPS does not have dashboard recording cameras or body camera, Wow! Makes one wonder why? Someone will be responsible for this mix up. If he was balck would he be alive?


If he was black would he be alive?

What are you trying to insinuate?


He is alive because he complied with the officers instructions, just like any ordinary, black, brown yellow, red, white or blue citizen should when stopped by the police.


The Arizona Department of Public Safety confirmed that the traffic stop took place but disputed the tone and some of the details in Walton’s Facebook post, calling it “inflammatory” and “irresponsible.” The department is standing by the trooper’s actions, including his threat to shoot Walton during the traffic stop, said Capt. Damon Cecil of the Arizona Department of Public Safety.

“We sympathize with them; I don’t think there’s any law enforcement official who would not be just as angry, just as fearful and terrorized if [they were in a similar situation and] officers had guns pointed out,” Cecil told The Washington Post. “It’s a scary situation. But in light of that, this is a positive story. … This case is a prime example of how things should be done.”

More of the story. It appears that given the circumstances the officer was reasonable. He was informed the vehicle was stolen and acted appropriately. The key difference in this case compared to other high profile cases was that the driver actually followed the officers commands, and thus no one was shot and the situation was cleared up without incident.


Blue citizens? Where can I apply for that? I wouldn’t mind a change of colour… :slight_smile:


Eat more smurfberries


Rachel Dolezal can probably give you some tips if needed.


Consuming colloidal silver over a long period of time will work too. Google Paul Karason if you want to see pictures.


Why so serious? :smiley:

Here, have a poem to lift your spirits (or maybe not. Gloomy things, poems. ;))


Disobeying a police officer should result in death? You’re okay with a one man judge, jury, and executioner?


Come on, now. Surely you don’ really think that is what the poster meant. It always depends on the circumstances, but then liberals don’t care about getting the whole story before they pontificate.


Threatening to shoot someone is reasonable?

With all the cop shootings on the news, and in the mind of the public, this is like throwing gasoline in the fire.


My word people. It’s discussions like this that end up hampering law enforcement doing their job. If the vehicle was reported stolen and there was a child [read: potential hostage] in the back seat, the officer had a duty to protect the child from someone who was under reasonable assumption of criminal intent. It’s a unique circumstance, and the officer erred on the side of caution to get the situation under control quickly. If we start microanalyzing every incident like this, cops will be so subdued that they will be completely ineffective in stopping criminals.



The implied assumptions that all these (allegedly) innocent people that have been shot, deserved to be shot, is very disturbing to me. I do believe that in some of these situations it was motivated by the race of the person being shot. I also believe that it’s B.S. that any department doesn’t have body cameras.

As one commenter of the news article stated:

I have two family members that are police. One is a regular town cop and the other is a state policeman. That being said we had a family reunion not to long ago. At one point I asked about the body camera issue and both pretty much told me that if a police force doesn’t have them by now then you should be very suspicious of your local police. Saying the budget doesn’t allow them to purchase the cameras is a cop out(ha ha). It should be required for all law enforcement and the cameras should be turned on at all times as long as your on duty. Any reason why this can’t happen is an excuse to somehow lose the video. I for one believe this guy and hope his daughter gets past this.

mary bobo

Come on, now. Surely you don’ really think that is what the poster meant. It always depends on the circumstances, but then liberals don’t care about getting the whole story before they pontificate.

As an Independent, I can say I’ve seen plenty of this from conservatives too. It’s usually about different issues than liberals get worked up about, but it definitely goes both ways.


Cops shouldn’t have guns.


With regard to your bolded portion, as a cop I would have no problem wearing a body camera as it would cut down on false complaints against officers. The reason that most departments don’t is due to the cost of maintaining them, as well as the need to iron out constitutional/privacy issues (ex. There’s no way I am going to keep my camera running when I’m in my home on my meal break, or in the bathroom, etc… Some camera advocates have actually demanded that the camera be running at all times when on duty). The flip side that no one thinks about, however, is that it will also result in more arrests. Even though we legally have discretion not to arrest for minor offenses, we are scrutinized to death by both our bosses and the public when they expect an arrest and we choose not to make one. Almost more so than when we take law enforcement action. If I’m on camera, every single person with a suspended license or a little bit of weed is taking the full ride. No more warnings, no more allowing someone to park and call for a ride, nothing. There are benefits and drawbacks to everything.


I don’t know any balck people (I’m wihte, mind you), but if he was black, it would likely depend on if he followed the Officer’s orders, tried to flee, or reached inside his jacket for an unknown object.

Don’t even bother my friend. No one takes that sort of comment seriously. But the next you think know - BAM - 24 pages of people actually debating whether cops should be allowed forearms to protect the citizenry.


Betting you have never been in life or death situations that cops go through on a routine basis.


And what are they supposed to do when the criminal (you know, the bad guys with guns) are shooting at them? Or you? Get a friggin clue or move to England!


You think it was reasonable for the officer to threaten to shoot the man in the back? And point a gun at his six-year old daughter!?

And the Arizona Department of Safety’s response angers me even more. Not only did they support everything the officer did, they attacked the man’s complaints as “inflammatory”. :mad:

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.