"Victim" in the officer-involved shootout. The guy who turned a gun on the cops, shooting one of them before they could return fire, is a "victim."

Glad to see that Matt Davis won't be missed around here.

I don't know if Portland is aware of this, but cops carry guns, and sometimes they have to shoot people with them. That's kind of the whole point, remember? I mean, I don't want to live in a Texas-like state that practically executes people for breathing, but I don't want to live in the town with the sign that says "Welcome to Portland! Do whatever the fuck you want and when you get shot, we'll cry and protest for you!"

BTW, is it just me or has Sam Adams put on like 50 pounds?

@Polis.
Main Entry: vic·tim
Pronunciation: \ˈvik-təm\
Function: noun

1 : a living being sacrificed to a deity or in the performance of a religious rite
2 : one that is acted on and usually adversely affected by a force or agent : as a (1) : one that is injured, destroyed, or sacrificed under any of various conditions

I agree with both of you. Just asking - how would you formulate the headline? I feel the same way, but I probably would have referred to him as the 'shooting
victim' without worrying about what that might imply.

Would you have written 'Police Release Name of Dead Criminal'? Seems a little blunt. How should we refer to him?

Reymont -- the way the Medical Examiner worded it in the press release would have been just fine. And neutral.

'Name of Officer-Involved Shooting Subject Released' ?

Sure, that could work. But 'subject' makes him sound inhuman - like he was a paper target, or something. And I don't like how 'name' and 'released' are so far apart...hmmm....

'Police Release Name of Lloyd Shoot-Out Fatality'

THERE I'VE FIXED IT. :)

My point is this. The debate about Portland police in this community has become poisonous and non-productive. If anything is going to be accomplished, we're going to have to return to civility. Advocacy is fine, and there's nothing wrong with any element of the media serving as an advocate so long as it holds no pretense to neutrality. But there's a difference between advocacy and name-calling.

Words do matter. Characterizations such as executioners, killers, and murderers have become routine in some quarters. Those words are not only inaccurate, they're polarizing. As long as everyone's in their own castles lobbing mortars at each other, nothing's going to get done.

Hence the quibble with "victim." There were at least half a dozen alternate phrasings, and the one used was loaded with negative innuendo.

Mind you, I know there's no obligation on the part of the Mercury to change its path. Presumably the newspaper is happy with the work Matt Davis did. It just seems that with a new police commissioner, a new police chief, and a new police union president that perhaps there's a corner to be turned here. The continuation of the mortar-lobbing will only hinder that effort.

@Polis: "If anything is going to be accomplished, we're going to have to return to civility."

Well said. Lets start with the part where you don't immediately jump on people for their word choice, okay? Ohh, wait, no we have to start after that part because you are the sort of person that has to get the last word in. Huh, I think I see the problem here...

Way to lay the dictionary smack down, Humpy.