Police abuse

19394969899101

Comments

  • oftenreadingoftenreading Victoria, BCPosts: 6,442
    A lengthy article but highly relevant and full of interesting information. 

    https://www.apmreports.org/story/2017/05/05/police-de-escalation-training

    34 states do not require police to have any training in de-escalation techniques. When a proposal requiring such training was put forward, police organizations opposed it, because they view it as unnecessary and a criticism of how they currently operate. 
    my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
  • rgambsrgambs Posts: 9,539
    pjhawks said:
    rgambs said:
    pjhawks said:
    rgambs said:
    pjhawks said:
    tbergs said:
    mace1229 said:
    pjhawks said:
    pjhawks said:
    tbergs said:

    The Student President Of Georgia Tech's Pride Alliance Was Shot And Killed By A Campus Police Officer





    No commentary, but yet you post this in the police abuse thread? Do you have an opinion? I don't see abuse here. It seems clear this is a suicide by cop. Nice hot topic headline though. That will get the clicks for buzzfeed.

    With that said, I am wondering what type of equipment those officers carry and if they have tasers. In situations like this, it's not uncommon to have a secondary officer with taser and the main contact with gun drawn. All of us could play what if here I guess. Maybe the officer could have done some more talking to try and dissuade the behavior.
    It shouldn't need to be said again, but I guess it does. There are significantly more effective ways for the police to deal with situations like this that don't end in death. They require better training and a totally different mindset, and its negligence that they aren't being employed. 
    My commentary is similar to the above poster. It's a shame that this person had to die. Where were the tasers? Where was common sense? Was this police officer seriously afraid of this particular person wielding a pocket knife? If so than maybe being a police officer isn't the right vocation for him.
    There has to be a way to change the situation to avoid the "suicide by cop".
    Better and different training could help along with a different mindset.
    but the original report said the person had a knife and a gun. they refused to drop the knife. do you want to let someone reportedly who has a gun to continue to come at you?  can you make that distinction when your in the line of fire?  
    My guess is that the officer could clearly see that this person did not have a gun. Reported or not. If he could not see this then maybe he needs to have his eyes examined.
    If the kid did indeed have a gun in his hand and was threatening people then I don't blame the office for the outcome.
    what with x-ray vision? how could they tell, after it was reported the person had a gun, that the gun wasn't concealed on the victim?   if someone told you someone had a gun that wasn't out in the open would you really trust that said person didn't have one?  come on your stretching it if you say yes
    What I thought too. Especially if they were reported to have a knife and a gun, and they are clearly wielding a knife, I wouldn't assume they isn't a gun just because I can't see it.
    But its all a mute point anyway. He had a knife. Knives are deadly.
    He was asked for over a minute on video to drop said knife (and who knows for how long before the video started).
    He approached the officers with the knife in his hand.

    And yet, the media titles are still going to spread this like a homophobic hate murder.
    I'll just come back to my point - properly trained police officers know how to deal with the situation, and it isn't just repeatedly commanding "drop the knife", and then shooting the guy. You think Canadian cops don't face individuals with knives or other potential weapons fairly frequently? They do; they just typically respond differently, and shoot fewer people. 
    According to WaPo there were 111 shootings by police of people armed with knives in 2016. The Guardian says the number is 159. A pretty big difference, but at least we have an idea of the statistics. Unfortunately I can't find anywhere in any data that indicates how many encounters police have with people wielding knives, which would at least provide some perspective to how frequently it ends in a fatal shooting. 

    Now for Canada, I found it virtually impossible to figure out what the numbers even are just for shootings in general. I'm sure it is lower because of the obvious fact of the general population difference, 320+ million in the US compared to 36+ million in Canada.

    https://news.vice.com/article/its-impossible-to-find-out-exactly-how-many-people-are-shot-by-cops-in-canada

    I do continue to agree with you on the training aspect because law enforcement definitely needs training, training and more training, but let's be a little less quick to call it abuse just because a cop shot somebody.
    I didn't call it abuse. I said that if the officers are not being trained appropriately in methods to deal with these situations then the departments are negligent, because there's no way to argue that there aren't well recognized methods out there to handle these situations, which are not particularly rare. 

    And for those who say "just don't do it and you won't be shot" - that's so totally ridiculous as to not even justify a response, but for the sake of it, most people who engage in these behaviours ("suicide by cop") are pretty desperate, aren't thinking particularly clearly, and may indeed have their own death as a goal. That doesn't mean that the police should be willing participants in that. Emergency services intervene in suicide attempts many times a day; this is just one form of that. 

    except most suicide attempts have little to no inherent danger to the emergency services personnel. this case did. the person had a knife and reportedly a gun and was approaching officers even after being warned several times to stop.  in this particular case what exactly do you think the police should have done?  nothing? retreat? buy the person a cup of coffee? 
    They did what they were trained to do.
    Shoot to kill.
    What they could have done is a different story.
    I've posted it several times (much to Thirty's chagrin I'm sure), but nobody has been interested.
    The Salt Lake City implemented a training program that runs through levels of force and de-escalation tactics.
    In this case, if talking to the citizen was not proving effective, they likely would have given ground and attempted to subdue with taser before resorting to firing a service pistol.
    were they equipped with tasers? if so i agree that would have been a better option. given ground i'm not sure was much of an option. it looked like a tight area.
    Why wouldn't they be equipped with tasers?
    What kind of smart policy and training would exclude the most effective non-lethal tool for controlling a threatening citizen??

    lack of funding maybe?  sure as hell not every cop carries a taser as far as i know.
    Yeah, that's my point.
    They should.
    Tasers and bodycams, it's the damn 21st century, we should act like it.
    Monkey Driven, Call this Living?
  • rgambsrgambs Posts: 9,539
    A lengthy article but highly relevant and full of interesting information. 

    https://www.apmreports.org/story/2017/05/05/police-de-escalation-training

    34 states do not require police to have any training in de-escalation techniques. When a proposal requiring such training was put forward, police organizations opposed it, because they view it as unnecessary and a criticism of how they currently operate. 
    Systemic failure in police culture and civilian oversight.

    Thanks Thirty! 
    I kid, of course, but I do think that we have issues in this country with blind devotion to authority.

    One CAN criticize and work to improve authority systems without rebellion against them.
    Monkey Driven, Call this Living?
  • rgambs said:
    pjhawks said:
    tbergs said:
    mace1229 said:
    pjhawks said:
    pjhawks said:
    tbergs said:

    The Student President Of Georgia Tech's Pride Alliance Was Shot And Killed By A Campus Police Officer





    No commentary, but yet you post this in the police abuse thread? Do you have an opinion? I don't see abuse here. It seems clear this is a suicide by cop. Nice hot topic headline though. That will get the clicks for buzzfeed.

    With that said, I am wondering what type of equipment those officers carry and if they have tasers. In situations like this, it's not uncommon to have a secondary officer with taser and the main contact with gun drawn. All of us could play what if here I guess. Maybe the officer could have done some more talking to try and dissuade the behavior.
    It shouldn't need to be said again, but I guess it does. There are significantly more effective ways for the police to deal with situations like this that don't end in death. They require better training and a totally different mindset, and its negligence that they aren't being employed. 
    My commentary is similar to the above poster. It's a shame that this person had to die. Where were the tasers? Where was common sense? Was this police officer seriously afraid of this particular person wielding a pocket knife? If so than maybe being a police officer isn't the right vocation for him.
    There has to be a way to change the situation to avoid the "suicide by cop".
    Better and different training could help along with a different mindset.
    but the original report said the person had a knife and a gun. they refused to drop the knife. do you want to let someone reportedly who has a gun to continue to come at you?  can you make that distinction when your in the line of fire?  
    My guess is that the officer could clearly see that this person did not have a gun. Reported or not. If he could not see this then maybe he needs to have his eyes examined.
    If the kid did indeed have a gun in his hand and was threatening people then I don't blame the office for the outcome.
    what with x-ray vision? how could they tell, after it was reported the person had a gun, that the gun wasn't concealed on the victim?   if someone told you someone had a gun that wasn't out in the open would you really trust that said person didn't have one?  come on your stretching it if you say yes
    What I thought too. Especially if they were reported to have a knife and a gun, and they are clearly wielding a knife, I wouldn't assume they isn't a gun just because I can't see it.
    But its all a mute point anyway. He had a knife. Knives are deadly.
    He was asked for over a minute on video to drop said knife (and who knows for how long before the video started).
    He approached the officers with the knife in his hand.

    And yet, the media titles are still going to spread this like a homophobic hate murder.
    I'll just come back to my point - properly trained police officers know how to deal with the situation, and it isn't just repeatedly commanding "drop the knife", and then shooting the guy. You think Canadian cops don't face individuals with knives or other potential weapons fairly frequently? They do; they just typically respond differently, and shoot fewer people. 
    According to WaPo there were 111 shootings by police of people armed with knives in 2016. The Guardian says the number is 159. A pretty big difference, but at least we have an idea of the statistics. Unfortunately I can't find anywhere in any data that indicates how many encounters police have with people wielding knives, which would at least provide some perspective to how frequently it ends in a fatal shooting. 

    Now for Canada, I found it virtually impossible to figure out what the numbers even are just for shootings in general. I'm sure it is lower because of the obvious fact of the general population difference, 320+ million in the US compared to 36+ million in Canada.

    https://news.vice.com/article/its-impossible-to-find-out-exactly-how-many-people-are-shot-by-cops-in-canada

    I do continue to agree with you on the training aspect because law enforcement definitely needs training, training and more training, but let's be a little less quick to call it abuse just because a cop shot somebody.
    I didn't call it abuse. I said that if the officers are not being trained appropriately in methods to deal with these situations then the departments are negligent, because there's no way to argue that there aren't well recognized methods out there to handle these situations, which are not particularly rare. 

    And for those who say "just don't do it and you won't be shot" - that's so totally ridiculous as to not even justify a response, but for the sake of it, most people who engage in these behaviours ("suicide by cop") are pretty desperate, aren't thinking particularly clearly, and may indeed have their own death as a goal. That doesn't mean that the police should be willing participants in that. Emergency services intervene in suicide attempts many times a day; this is just one form of that. 

    except most suicide attempts have little to no inherent danger to the emergency services personnel. this case did. the person had a knife and reportedly a gun and was approaching officers even after being warned several times to stop.  in this particular case what exactly do you think the police should have done?  nothing? retreat? buy the person a cup of coffee? 
    They did what they were trained to do.
    Shoot to kill.
    What they could have done is a different story.
    I've posted it several times (much to Thirty's chagrin I'm sure), but nobody has been interested.
    The Salt Lake City implemented a training program that runs through levels of force and de-escalation tactics.
    In this case, if talking to the citizen was not proving effective, they likely would have given ground and attempted to subdue with taser before resorting to firing a service pistol.
    "Much to my chagrin?" Implying I'm salivating for lethal cop force?

    To use your words: enough with the hysterics.

    (funny... eh... how one can exercise tactics that they also bemoan?)
    "My brain's a good brain!"
  • rgambsrgambs Posts: 9,539
    rgambs said:
    pjhawks said:
    tbergs said:
    mace1229 said:
    pjhawks said:
    pjhawks said:
    tbergs said:

    The Student President Of Georgia Tech's Pride Alliance Was Shot And Killed By A Campus Police Officer





    No commentary, but yet you post this in the police abuse thread? Do you have an opinion? I don't see abuse here. It seems clear this is a suicide by cop. Nice hot topic headline though. That will get the clicks for buzzfeed.

    With that said, I am wondering what type of equipment those officers carry and if they have tasers. In situations like this, it's not uncommon to have a secondary officer with taser and the main contact with gun drawn. All of us could play what if here I guess. Maybe the officer could have done some more talking to try and dissuade the behavior.
    It shouldn't need to be said again, but I guess it does. There are significantly more effective ways for the police to deal with situations like this that don't end in death. They require better training and a totally different mindset, and its negligence that they aren't being employed. 
    My commentary is similar to the above poster. It's a shame that this person had to die. Where were the tasers? Where was common sense? Was this police officer seriously afraid of this particular person wielding a pocket knife? If so than maybe being a police officer isn't the right vocation for him.
    There has to be a way to change the situation to avoid the "suicide by cop".
    Better and different training could help along with a different mindset.
    but the original report said the person had a knife and a gun. they refused to drop the knife. do you want to let someone reportedly who has a gun to continue to come at you?  can you make that distinction when your in the line of fire?  
    My guess is that the officer could clearly see that this person did not have a gun. Reported or not. If he could not see this then maybe he needs to have his eyes examined.
    If the kid did indeed have a gun in his hand and was threatening people then I don't blame the office for the outcome.
    what with x-ray vision? how could they tell, after it was reported the person had a gun, that the gun wasn't concealed on the victim?   if someone told you someone had a gun that wasn't out in the open would you really trust that said person didn't have one?  come on your stretching it if you say yes
    What I thought too. Especially if they were reported to have a knife and a gun, and they are clearly wielding a knife, I wouldn't assume they isn't a gun just because I can't see it.
    But its all a mute point anyway. He had a knife. Knives are deadly.
    He was asked for over a minute on video to drop said knife (and who knows for how long before the video started).
    He approached the officers with the knife in his hand.

    And yet, the media titles are still going to spread this like a homophobic hate murder.
    I'll just come back to my point - properly trained police officers know how to deal with the situation, and it isn't just repeatedly commanding "drop the knife", and then shooting the guy. You think Canadian cops don't face individuals with knives or other potential weapons fairly frequently? They do; they just typically respond differently, and shoot fewer people. 
    According to WaPo there were 111 shootings by police of people armed with knives in 2016. The Guardian says the number is 159. A pretty big difference, but at least we have an idea of the statistics. Unfortunately I can't find anywhere in any data that indicates how many encounters police have with people wielding knives, which would at least provide some perspective to how frequently it ends in a fatal shooting. 

    Now for Canada, I found it virtually impossible to figure out what the numbers even are just for shootings in general. I'm sure it is lower because of the obvious fact of the general population difference, 320+ million in the US compared to 36+ million in Canada.

    https://news.vice.com/article/its-impossible-to-find-out-exactly-how-many-people-are-shot-by-cops-in-canada

    I do continue to agree with you on the training aspect because law enforcement definitely needs training, training and more training, but let's be a little less quick to call it abuse just because a cop shot somebody.
    I didn't call it abuse. I said that if the officers are not being trained appropriately in methods to deal with these situations then the departments are negligent, because there's no way to argue that there aren't well recognized methods out there to handle these situations, which are not particularly rare. 

    And for those who say "just don't do it and you won't be shot" - that's so totally ridiculous as to not even justify a response, but for the sake of it, most people who engage in these behaviours ("suicide by cop") are pretty desperate, aren't thinking particularly clearly, and may indeed have their own death as a goal. That doesn't mean that the police should be willing participants in that. Emergency services intervene in suicide attempts many times a day; this is just one form of that. 

    except most suicide attempts have little to no inherent danger to the emergency services personnel. this case did. the person had a knife and reportedly a gun and was approaching officers even after being warned several times to stop.  in this particular case what exactly do you think the police should have done?  nothing? retreat? buy the person a cup of coffee? 
    They did what they were trained to do.
    Shoot to kill.
    What they could have done is a different story.
    I've posted it several times (much to Thirty's chagrin I'm sure), but nobody has been interested.
    The Salt Lake City implemented a training program that runs through levels of force and de-escalation tactics.
    In this case, if talking to the citizen was not proving effective, they likely would have given ground and attempted to subdue with taser before resorting to firing a service pistol.
    "Much to my chagrin?" Implying I'm salivating for lethal cop force?

    To use your words: enough with the hysterics.

    (funny... eh... how one can exercise tactics that they also bemoan?)
    No, implying that you are chagrined by seeing me post reference to police successfully using tactics that I have advocated for and you have ridiculed with extreme fervor.

    Monkey Driven, Call this Living?
  • PJ_SoulPJ_Soul Vancouver, BCPosts: 37,932
    edited September 18
    A lengthy article but highly relevant and full of interesting information. 

    https://www.apmreports.org/story/2017/05/05/police-de-escalation-training

    34 states do not require police to have any training in de-escalation techniques. When a proposal requiring such training was put forward, police organizations opposed it, because they view it as unnecessary and a criticism of how they currently operate. 
    Disgusting and shameful.
    With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
  • CM189191CM189191 Minneapolis via ChicagoPosts: 3,265
    mace1229 said:
    CM189191 said:
    old news but relevant:

    Cop fired for not shooting armed suicidal suspect
    "Such restraint should be praised not penalized. To tell a police officer -- when in doubt -- either shoot to kill or get fired, is a choice that no police officer should ever have to make and is a message that is wrong and should never be sent," said his attorney, Timothy O'Brien.

    Cops are no longer trained to protect and serve.  They are trained to view everything as a threat to be neutralized.  
    So you really want cops firing their weapon when they don't intend to kill? That seems like a whole new level of a can of worms to me.
    The whole point of shoot to kill (and yes, some will argue its shoot center mass, but thats basically the same thing) is two very simple reasons.
    1- Never fire your weapon unless you intend to kill someone
    2- Dont intend to kill someone unless you fear for your or someone else's safety

    And I guess you could add a third of
    3-if you are truly afraid for your life, I wouldnt want anything less than lethal force. Police have a right to protect themselves just like everyone else. Tasers dont always stop a guy with a knife. Especially someone on drugs, and they dont know the situation. 

    That's it. You bring in shoot to injure in the picture, then the next conversation is going to be "well I was aiming for his leg as he ran away, but missed and nailed him in the back. Sorry you're paralyzed for life now."
    The officer in the article didn't shoot at all. He was a former marine, facing someone holding a gun and managed to diffuse the situation without firing a shot. 

    But since you brought it up, yes I would like police to stop shooting people and asking questions later. Why can't the US figure this out? 

    US police kill more in days than other countries do in years

    https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/jun/09/the-counted-police-killings-us-vs-other-countries
    WI 6/27/98 WI 10/8/00 MO 10/11/00 IL 4/23/03 MN 6/26/06 MN 6/27/06 WI 6/30/06 IL 8/5/07 IL 8/21/08 (EV) IL 8/22/08 (EV) IL 8/23/09 IL 8/24/09 IN 5/7/10 IL 6/28/11 (EV) IL 6/29/11 (EV) WI 9/3/11 WI 9/4/11 IL 7/19/13 NE 10/09/14 IL 10/17/14 MN 10/19/14 FL 4/11/16 IL 8/20/16 IL 8/22/16
  • rgambs said:
    rgambs said:
    pjhawks said:
    tbergs said:
    mace1229 said:
    pjhawks said:
    pjhawks said:
    tbergs said:

    The Student President Of Georgia Tech's Pride Alliance Was Shot And Killed By A Campus Police Officer





    No commentary, but yet you post this in the police abuse thread? Do you have an opinion? I don't see abuse here. It seems clear this is a suicide by cop. Nice hot topic headline though. That will get the clicks for buzzfeed.

    With that said, I am wondering what type of equipment those officers carry and if they have tasers. In situations like this, it's not uncommon to have a secondary officer with taser and the main contact with gun drawn. All of us could play what if here I guess. Maybe the officer could have done some more talking to try and dissuade the behavior.
    It shouldn't need to be said again, but I guess it does. There are significantly more effective ways for the police to deal with situations like this that don't end in death. They require better training and a totally different mindset, and its negligence that they aren't being employed. 
    My commentary is similar to the above poster. It's a shame that this person had to die. Where were the tasers? Where was common sense? Was this police officer seriously afraid of this particular person wielding a pocket knife? If so than maybe being a police officer isn't the right vocation for him.
    There has to be a way to change the situation to avoid the "suicide by cop".
    Better and different training could help along with a different mindset.
    but the original report said the person had a knife and a gun. they refused to drop the knife. do you want to let someone reportedly who has a gun to continue to come at you?  can you make that distinction when your in the line of fire?  
    My guess is that the officer could clearly see that this person did not have a gun. Reported or not. If he could not see this then maybe he needs to have his eyes examined.
    If the kid did indeed have a gun in his hand and was threatening people then I don't blame the office for the outcome.
    what with x-ray vision? how could they tell, after it was reported the person had a gun, that the gun wasn't concealed on the victim?   if someone told you someone had a gun that wasn't out in the open would you really trust that said person didn't have one?  come on your stretching it if you say yes
    What I thought too. Especially if they were reported to have a knife and a gun, and they are clearly wielding a knife, I wouldn't assume they isn't a gun just because I can't see it.
    But its all a mute point anyway. He had a knife. Knives are deadly.
    He was asked for over a minute on video to drop said knife (and who knows for how long before the video started).
    He approached the officers with the knife in his hand.

    And yet, the media titles are still going to spread this like a homophobic hate murder.
    I'll just come back to my point - properly trained police officers know how to deal with the situation, and it isn't just repeatedly commanding "drop the knife", and then shooting the guy. You think Canadian cops don't face individuals with knives or other potential weapons fairly frequently? They do; they just typically respond differently, and shoot fewer people. 
    According to WaPo there were 111 shootings by police of people armed with knives in 2016. The Guardian says the number is 159. A pretty big difference, but at least we have an idea of the statistics. Unfortunately I can't find anywhere in any data that indicates how many encounters police have with people wielding knives, which would at least provide some perspective to how frequently it ends in a fatal shooting. 

    Now for Canada, I found it virtually impossible to figure out what the numbers even are just for shootings in general. I'm sure it is lower because of the obvious fact of the general population difference, 320+ million in the US compared to 36+ million in Canada.

    https://news.vice.com/article/its-impossible-to-find-out-exactly-how-many-people-are-shot-by-cops-in-canada

    I do continue to agree with you on the training aspect because law enforcement definitely needs training, training and more training, but let's be a little less quick to call it abuse just because a cop shot somebody.
    I didn't call it abuse. I said that if the officers are not being trained appropriately in methods to deal with these situations then the departments are negligent, because there's no way to argue that there aren't well recognized methods out there to handle these situations, which are not particularly rare. 

    And for those who say "just don't do it and you won't be shot" - that's so totally ridiculous as to not even justify a response, but for the sake of it, most people who engage in these behaviours ("suicide by cop") are pretty desperate, aren't thinking particularly clearly, and may indeed have their own death as a goal. That doesn't mean that the police should be willing participants in that. Emergency services intervene in suicide attempts many times a day; this is just one form of that. 

    except most suicide attempts have little to no inherent danger to the emergency services personnel. this case did. the person had a knife and reportedly a gun and was approaching officers even after being warned several times to stop.  in this particular case what exactly do you think the police should have done?  nothing? retreat? buy the person a cup of coffee? 
    They did what they were trained to do.
    Shoot to kill.
    What they could have done is a different story.
    I've posted it several times (much to Thirty's chagrin I'm sure), but nobody has been interested.
    The Salt Lake City implemented a training program that runs through levels of force and de-escalation tactics.
    In this case, if talking to the citizen was not proving effective, they likely would have given ground and attempted to subdue with taser before resorting to firing a service pistol.
    "Much to my chagrin?" Implying I'm salivating for lethal cop force?

    To use your words: enough with the hysterics.

    (funny... eh... how one can exercise tactics that they also bemoan?)
    No, implying that you are chagrined by seeing me post reference to police successfully using tactics that I have advocated for and you have ridiculed with extreme fervor.


    Lol. Well that's nicer at least.

    I'm not sure what this situation was going to amount to if the cops had tactfully retreated. It might have finished more peacefully... who knows?

    Regardless of any tactical models adopted by police at some point... cops will be placed in a position where they will need to defend themselves. We are debating where that line should be. I don't think it should be after they have unsuccessfully managed to unarm and detain someone after issuing commands and hand to hand combat fails.
    "My brain's a good brain!"
  • CM189191 said:
    mace1229 said:
    CM189191 said:
    old news but relevant:

    Cop fired for not shooting armed suicidal suspect
    "Such restraint should be praised not penalized. To tell a police officer -- when in doubt -- either shoot to kill or get fired, is a choice that no police officer should ever have to make and is a message that is wrong and should never be sent," said his attorney, Timothy O'Brien.

    Cops are no longer trained to protect and serve.  They are trained to view everything as a threat to be neutralized.  
    So you really want cops firing their weapon when they don't intend to kill? That seems like a whole new level of a can of worms to me.
    The whole point of shoot to kill (and yes, some will argue its shoot center mass, but thats basically the same thing) is two very simple reasons.
    1- Never fire your weapon unless you intend to kill someone
    2- Dont intend to kill someone unless you fear for your or someone else's safety

    And I guess you could add a third of
    3-if you are truly afraid for your life, I wouldnt want anything less than lethal force. Police have a right to protect themselves just like everyone else. Tasers dont always stop a guy with a knife. Especially someone on drugs, and they dont know the situation. 

    That's it. You bring in shoot to injure in the picture, then the next conversation is going to be "well I was aiming for his leg as he ran away, but missed and nailed him in the back. Sorry you're paralyzed for life now."
    The officer in the article didn't shoot at all. He was a former marine, facing someone holding a gun and managed to diffuse the situation without firing a shot. 

    But since you brought it up, yes I would like police to stop shooting people and asking questions later. Why can't the US figure this out? 

    US police kill more in days than other countries do in years

    https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/jun/09/the-counted-police-killings-us-vs-other-countries

    And what is this saying?

    Is it saying the US is fraught with bloodthirsty police that love shooting people? Or is it speaking to the 'tip' of the problem which is the manifestation of brutal behaviours- borne from a multitude of social issues- that result in police encounters?

    Again... we all like to point our fingers at the police, but we rarely point our fingers at ourselves. The US citizens are responsible for the inequities prevalent in their country that result in criminalized people encountering police.  Get behind solid social programming instead of things like military might and many of these situations will not present themselves. And I could go on, but won't.  

    Outside of the outliers... ultimately, police are just people like us: doing a job and wanting to come home after doing their job.
    "My brain's a good brain!"
  • rgambsrgambs Posts: 9,539
    CM189191 said:
    mace1229 said:
    CM189191 said:
    old news but relevant:

    Cop fired for not shooting armed suicidal suspect
    "Such restraint should be praised not penalized. To tell a police officer -- when in doubt -- either shoot to kill or get fired, is a choice that no police officer should ever have to make and is a message that is wrong and should never be sent," said his attorney, Timothy O'Brien.

    Cops are no longer trained to protect and serve.  They are trained to view everything as a threat to be neutralized.  
    So you really want cops firing their weapon when they don't intend to kill? That seems like a whole new level of a can of worms to me.
    The whole point of shoot to kill (and yes, some will argue its shoot center mass, but thats basically the same thing) is two very simple reasons.
    1- Never fire your weapon unless you intend to kill someone
    2- Dont intend to kill someone unless you fear for your or someone else's safety

    And I guess you could add a third of
    3-if you are truly afraid for your life, I wouldnt want anything less than lethal force. Police have a right to protect themselves just like everyone else. Tasers dont always stop a guy with a knife. Especially someone on drugs, and they dont know the situation. 

    That's it. You bring in shoot to injure in the picture, then the next conversation is going to be "well I was aiming for his leg as he ran away, but missed and nailed him in the back. Sorry you're paralyzed for life now."
    The officer in the article didn't shoot at all. He was a former marine, facing someone holding a gun and managed to diffuse the situation without firing a shot. 

    But since you brought it up, yes I would like police to stop shooting people and asking questions later. Why can't the US figure this out? 

    US police kill more in days than other countries do in years

    https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/jun/09/the-counted-police-killings-us-vs-other-countries

    And what is this saying?

    Is it saying the US is fraught with bloodthirsty police that love shooting people? Or is it speaking to the 'tip' of the problem which is the manifestation of brutal behaviours- borne from a multitude of social issues- that result in police encounters?

    Again... we all like to point our fingers at the police, but we rarely point our fingers at ourselves. The US citizens are responsible for the inequities prevalent in their country that result in criminalized people encountering police.  Get behind solid social programming instead of things like military might and many of these situations will not present themselves. And I could go on, but won't.  

    Outside of the outliers... ultimately, police are just people like us: doing a job and wanting to come home after doing their job.
    You're talking about fixing the biggest problem in human civilization as if it's easy, to avoid tackling a much smaller problem because dealing with that issue makes you uncomfortable.
    Everyone knows and agrees that poverty causes these issues, but poverty has never been eradicated in human history, while implementation of bodycams and increasing training are simple snap of the finger solutions that will cause immediate improvement.
    Monkey Driven, Call this Living?
  • rgambsrgambs Posts: 9,539
    edited September 19
    I wasn't going to watch the video because I'm growing tired of watching people die, but I watched it.
    The officers gave ground, they tried to reason with him, they didn't want to shoot him.
    It was clear he was trying to get himself killed.

    The officers tried, they didn't just blow him away at the first chance they got.
    Not abuse.  
    Still a failure.  4? Cops on scene with weapons drawn, why wasn't a taser deployed?  If they had used a taser everyone might have come away alive and well.  
    Post edited by rgambs on
    Monkey Driven, Call this Living?
  • tbergstbergs Posts: 3,040
    rgambs said:
    I wasn't going to watch the video because I'm growing tired of watching people die, but I watched it.
    The officers gave ground, they tried to reason with him, they didn't want to shoot him.
    It was clear he was trying to get himself killed.

    The officers tried, they didn't just blow him away at the first chance they got.
    Not abuse.  
    Still a failure.  4? Cops on scene with weapons drawn, why wasn't a taser deployed?  If they had used a taser everyone would have come away alive and well.  
    The taser was my first question to. From what I've heard, that department did not issue tasers to their officers. A huge failure IMO. Giving those officers a non lethal use of force measure would have made a huge difference. I would guess they will be getting them now. Funding for training, non lethal force equipment and technology is what would alleviate the problems demonstrated in encounters like this one.
    It's a hopeless situation...
  • CM189191CM189191 Minneapolis via ChicagoPosts: 3,265
    tbergs said:
    rgambs said:
    I wasn't going to watch the video because I'm growing tired of watching people die, but I watched it.
    The officers gave ground, they tried to reason with him, they didn't want to shoot him.
    It was clear he was trying to get himself killed.

    The officers tried, they didn't just blow him away at the first chance they got.
    Not abuse.  
    Still a failure.  4? Cops on scene with weapons drawn, why wasn't a taser deployed?  If they had used a taser everyone would have come away alive and well.  
    The taser was my first question to. From what I've heard, that department did not issue tasers to their officers. A huge failure IMO. Giving those officers a non lethal use of force measure would have made a huge difference. I would guess they will be getting them now. Funding for training, non lethal force equipment and technology is what would alleviate the problems demonstrated in encounters like this one.
    Unfortunately, they'll probably just end up buying an armored vehicle instead.  Trump Reverses Restrictions on Military Hardware for Police
    WI 6/27/98 WI 10/8/00 MO 10/11/00 IL 4/23/03 MN 6/26/06 MN 6/27/06 WI 6/30/06 IL 8/5/07 IL 8/21/08 (EV) IL 8/22/08 (EV) IL 8/23/09 IL 8/24/09 IN 5/7/10 IL 6/28/11 (EV) IL 6/29/11 (EV) WI 9/3/11 WI 9/4/11 IL 7/19/13 NE 10/09/14 IL 10/17/14 MN 10/19/14 FL 4/11/16 IL 8/20/16 IL 8/22/16
  • oftenreadingoftenreading Victoria, BCPosts: 6,442
    tbergs said:
    rgambs said:
    I wasn't going to watch the video because I'm growing tired of watching people die, but I watched it.
    The officers gave ground, they tried to reason with him, they didn't want to shoot him.
    It was clear he was trying to get himself killed.

    The officers tried, they didn't just blow him away at the first chance they got.
    Not abuse.  
    Still a failure.  4? Cops on scene with weapons drawn, why wasn't a taser deployed?  If they had used a taser everyone would have come away alive and well.  
    The taser was my first question to. From what I've heard, that department did not issue tasers to their officers. A huge failure IMO. Giving those officers a non lethal use of force measure would have made a huge difference. I would guess they will be getting them now. Funding for training, non lethal force equipment and technology is what would alleviate the problems demonstrated in encounters like this one.
    I agree with all of this, with the addition of the will and interest of those leading the police departments and organizations to adopt and champion this. As long as these methods are subtly or overtly dismissed by them, they'll go nowhere. 
    my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
  • rgambs said:
    CM189191 said:
    mace1229 said:
    CM189191 said:
    old news but relevant:

    Cop fired for not shooting armed suicidal suspect
    "Such restraint should be praised not penalized. To tell a police officer -- when in doubt -- either shoot to kill or get fired, is a choice that no police officer should ever have to make and is a message that is wrong and should never be sent," said his attorney, Timothy O'Brien.

    Cops are no longer trained to protect and serve.  They are trained to view everything as a threat to be neutralized.  
    So you really want cops firing their weapon when they don't intend to kill? That seems like a whole new level of a can of worms to me.
    The whole point of shoot to kill (and yes, some will argue its shoot center mass, but thats basically the same thing) is two very simple reasons.
    1- Never fire your weapon unless you intend to kill someone
    2- Dont intend to kill someone unless you fear for your or someone else's safety

    And I guess you could add a third of
    3-if you are truly afraid for your life, I wouldnt want anything less than lethal force. Police have a right to protect themselves just like everyone else. Tasers dont always stop a guy with a knife. Especially someone on drugs, and they dont know the situation. 

    That's it. You bring in shoot to injure in the picture, then the next conversation is going to be "well I was aiming for his leg as he ran away, but missed and nailed him in the back. Sorry you're paralyzed for life now."
    The officer in the article didn't shoot at all. He was a former marine, facing someone holding a gun and managed to diffuse the situation without firing a shot. 

    But since you brought it up, yes I would like police to stop shooting people and asking questions later. Why can't the US figure this out? 

    US police kill more in days than other countries do in years

    https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/jun/09/the-counted-police-killings-us-vs-other-countries

    And what is this saying?

    Is it saying the US is fraught with bloodthirsty police that love shooting people? Or is it speaking to the 'tip' of the problem which is the manifestation of brutal behaviours- borne from a multitude of social issues- that result in police encounters?

    Again... we all like to point our fingers at the police, but we rarely point our fingers at ourselves. The US citizens are responsible for the inequities prevalent in their country that result in criminalized people encountering police.  Get behind solid social programming instead of things like military might and many of these situations will not present themselves. And I could go on, but won't.  

    Outside of the outliers... ultimately, police are just people like us: doing a job and wanting to come home after doing their job.
    You're talking about fixing the biggest problem in human civilization as if it's easy, to avoid tackling a much smaller problem because dealing with that issue makes you uncomfortable.
    Everyone knows and agrees that poverty causes these issues, but poverty has never been eradicated in human history, while implementation of bodycams and increasing training are simple snap of the finger solutions that will cause immediate improvement.

    It doesn't make me uncomfortable. I speak as a realist.

    I'm not opposed to body cams, tasers, whatever... but the problem is not going to disappear- there will still be plenty of incidents where people are shot challenging authority. These 'band aids' you speak to are not going to make the problem go away like a snap of the fingers as you suggest.

    Earlier on this page, people (Often) spoke to the underlying cause of the behaviour (desperation) that led to the clash and shooting. Further, someone (might have been you) spoke to the need for decent discourse on this subject to assist with change efforts. I find your comment interesting following those comments. You seem to scoff at the notion of addressing the real root of the problem given its challenges- insisting the area of focus should be where the problem manifests itself (treating the symptoms versus the cause). I would say to you that narrow minded focus is not as helpful as you present it to be.
    "My brain's a good brain!"
  • rgambsrgambs Posts: 9,539
    rgambs said:
    CM189191 said:
    mace1229 said:
    CM189191 said:
    old news but relevant:

    Cop fired for not shooting armed suicidal suspect
    "Such restraint should be praised not penalized. To tell a police officer -- when in doubt -- either shoot to kill or get fired, is a choice that no police officer should ever have to make and is a message that is wrong and should never be sent," said his attorney, Timothy O'Brien.

    Cops are no longer trained to protect and serve.  They are trained to view everything as a threat to be neutralized.  
    So you really want cops firing their weapon when they don't intend to kill? That seems like a whole new level of a can of worms to me.
    The whole point of shoot to kill (and yes, some will argue its shoot center mass, but thats basically the same thing) is two very simple reasons.
    1- Never fire your weapon unless you intend to kill someone
    2- Dont intend to kill someone unless you fear for your or someone else's safety

    And I guess you could add a third of
    3-if you are truly afraid for your life, I wouldnt want anything less than lethal force. Police have a right to protect themselves just like everyone else. Tasers dont always stop a guy with a knife. Especially someone on drugs, and they dont know the situation. 

    That's it. You bring in shoot to injure in the picture, then the next conversation is going to be "well I was aiming for his leg as he ran away, but missed and nailed him in the back. Sorry you're paralyzed for life now."
    The officer in the article didn't shoot at all. He was a former marine, facing someone holding a gun and managed to diffuse the situation without firing a shot. 

    But since you brought it up, yes I would like police to stop shooting people and asking questions later. Why can't the US figure this out? 

    US police kill more in days than other countries do in years

    https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/jun/09/the-counted-police-killings-us-vs-other-countries

    And what is this saying?

    Is it saying the US is fraught with bloodthirsty police that love shooting people? Or is it speaking to the 'tip' of the problem which is the manifestation of brutal behaviours- borne from a multitude of social issues- that result in police encounters?

    Again... we all like to point our fingers at the police, but we rarely point our fingers at ourselves. The US citizens are responsible for the inequities prevalent in their country that result in criminalized people encountering police.  Get behind solid social programming instead of things like military might and many of these situations will not present themselves. And I could go on, but won't.  

    Outside of the outliers... ultimately, police are just people like us: doing a job and wanting to come home after doing their job.
    You're talking about fixing the biggest problem in human civilization as if it's easy, to avoid tackling a much smaller problem because dealing with that issue makes you uncomfortable.
    Everyone knows and agrees that poverty causes these issues, but poverty has never been eradicated in human history, while implementation of bodycams and increasing training are simple snap of the finger solutions that will cause immediate improvement.

    It doesn't make me uncomfortable. I speak as a realist.

    I'm not opposed to body cams, tasers, whatever... but the problem is not going to disappear- there will still be plenty of incidents where people are shot challenging authority. These 'band aids' you speak to are not going to make the problem go away like a snap of the fingers as you suggest.

    Earlier on this page, people (Often) spoke to the underlying cause of the behaviour (desperation) that led to the clash and shooting. Further, someone (might have been you) spoke to the need for decent discourse on this subject to assist with change efforts. I find your comment interesting following those comments. You seem to scoff at the notion of addressing the real root of the problem given its challenges- insisting the area of focus should be where the problem manifests itself (treating the symptoms versus the cause). I would say to you that narrow minded focus is not as helpful as you present it to be.
    I see what you're saying and you are not wrong, we just have a slight difference of opinion.
    Sometimes treating the symptoms is the only thing we can do, you can't cure a virus (generally) once you have it, you can only manage the symptoms to increase comfort.
    Poverty and mental health issues are like a nasty virus.  Yes, we have to work at creating anti-virals, but that's a long game, in the meantime let's get some relief.

    The other thing is that the bandaids won't make the wounds go away, but they will help keep away infection.
    Too much medical analogy lol

    What I'm saying is that if we implement these easy systemic changes, we can prevent some deaths and we can gain confidence in our police force that will allow them to feel less like they are under assault.
    This case, had taser been attempted, is a perfect example.
    We have an assailant posing a threat, but the threat is clearly directed mostly at himself. 
    The officers try to talk him down, they give ground within reason, when that failed they could have deployed tasers to subdue him.  Now, if the taser failed to eliminate the threat and they had to shoot him, there wouldn't be any second guessing.
    They would have done all that could possibly be expected of them in that situation.
    When that becomes the norm, the people who are just anti-police will be easily distinguished from the people who just want to see improvements for everybody's sake.
    Monkey Driven, Call this Living?
  • tbergstbergs Posts: 3,040
    I found this article today regarding the shooting a lot more informative and less slanted in it's byline than the initial buzzfeed article.

    http://www.campussafetymagazine.com/university/armed-georgia-tech-student-killed/?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=content&eid=350357778&bid=1870285
    It's a hopeless situation...
  • CM189191CM189191 Minneapolis via ChicagoPosts: 3,265
    Police in my hometown showing some unusual restraint !
    WI 6/27/98 WI 10/8/00 MO 10/11/00 IL 4/23/03 MN 6/26/06 MN 6/27/06 WI 6/30/06 IL 8/5/07 IL 8/21/08 (EV) IL 8/22/08 (EV) IL 8/23/09 IL 8/24/09 IN 5/7/10 IL 6/28/11 (EV) IL 6/29/11 (EV) WI 9/3/11 WI 9/4/11 IL 7/19/13 NE 10/09/14 IL 10/17/14 MN 10/19/14 FL 4/11/16 IL 8/20/16 IL 8/22/16
  • oftenreadingoftenreading Victoria, BCPosts: 6,442
    edited September 22
    How about this one? Police shoot deaf man who couldn't hear their demands to stop, despite the fact that he was on his own property and not engaged in any criminal activity.

    http://www.salon.com/2017/09/21/oklahoma-cops-shoot-kill-deaf-man-despite-pleas-from-neighbors/

    I imagine we'll still have people blaming him. After all, he should know he's at risk of being shot if he walks up to police officers coming onto his property.

    my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
  • BentleyspopBentleyspop Craft Beer Brewery, ColoradoPosts: 4,136
    How about this one? Police shoot deaf man who couldn't hear their demands to stop, despite the fact that he was on his own property and not engaged in any criminal activity.

    http://www.salon.com/2017/09/21/oklahoma-cops-shoot-kill-deaf-man-despite-pleas-from-neighbors/

    I imagine we'll still have people blaming him. After all, he should know he's at risk of being shot if he walks up to police officers coming onto his property.

    Don't forget the 2 foot long pipe he was waving around that looked like a weapon.

    Another example where different training and tasers might have created a different outcome.
  • oftenreadingoftenreading Victoria, BCPosts: 6,442
    How about this one? Police shoot deaf man who couldn't hear their demands to stop, despite the fact that he was on his own property and not engaged in any criminal activity.

    http://www.salon.com/2017/09/21/oklahoma-cops-shoot-kill-deaf-man-despite-pleas-from-neighbors/

    I imagine we'll still have people blaming him. After all, he should know he's at risk of being shot if he walks up to police officers coming onto his property.

    Don't forget the 2 foot long pipe he was waving around that looked like a weapon.

    Another example where different training and tasers might have created a different outcome.
    Different training, different equipment, but mostly different attitude. 

    Did none of them stop to think back to why they were at this guy's home in the first place? Not because of any allegation of any violent crime, but because of a single vehicle traffic accident. No one called in a complaint; in fact, the neighbourhood was trying to intervene on his behalf. 
     
    my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
  • In Winnipeg... a cop may have exercised too much patience with a guy wielding a knife. He's in critical condition.

    https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/world/man-shot-by-police-dies-officer-remains-in-unstable-condition/ar-AAsoG6z?li=AAggFp5&ocid=edgsp

    I just don't think taking risks that can result in physical harm to themselves should be part of a cop's job.
    "My brain's a good brain!"
  • CM189191CM189191 Minneapolis via ChicagoPosts: 3,265
    In Winnipeg... a cop may have exercised too much patience with a guy wielding a knife. He's in critical condition.

    https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/world/man-shot-by-police-dies-officer-remains-in-unstable-condition/ar-AAsoG6z?li=AAggFp5&ocid=edgsp

    I just don't think taking risks that can result in physical harm to themselves should be part of a cop's job.
    This is the mentality that encourages cops to shoot to kill at the first sign of danger. 

    Cops themselves tell us how they put they lives on the line the moment they put on their uniform. 

    People shouldn't suffer live altering injuries just for going to work. But everyday I see people mangled by machinery, body damaged from repetitive use, or killed in auto accidents; and they're not cops. 

    Besides, I don't see any restraint in that article. It sounds like they kicked the door in and went in after knifey. Maybe some restraint would have helped. 
    WI 6/27/98 WI 10/8/00 MO 10/11/00 IL 4/23/03 MN 6/26/06 MN 6/27/06 WI 6/30/06 IL 8/5/07 IL 8/21/08 (EV) IL 8/22/08 (EV) IL 8/23/09 IL 8/24/09 IN 5/7/10 IL 6/28/11 (EV) IL 6/29/11 (EV) WI 9/3/11 WI 9/4/11 IL 7/19/13 NE 10/09/14 IL 10/17/14 MN 10/19/14 FL 4/11/16 IL 8/20/16 IL 8/22/16
  • CM189191 said:
    In Winnipeg... a cop may have exercised too much patience with a guy wielding a knife. He's in critical condition.

    https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/world/man-shot-by-police-dies-officer-remains-in-unstable-condition/ar-AAsoG6z?li=AAggFp5&ocid=edgsp

    I just don't think taking risks that can result in physical harm to themselves should be part of a cop's job.
    This is the mentality that encourages cops to shoot to kill at the first sign of danger. 

    Cops themselves tell us how they put they lives on the line the moment they put on their uniform. 

    People shouldn't suffer live altering injuries just for going to work. But everyday I see people mangled by machinery, body damaged from repetitive use, or killed in auto accidents; and they're not cops. 

    Besides, I don't see any restraint in that article. It sounds like they kicked the door in and went in after knifey. Maybe some restraint would have helped. 

    If I read correctly... there was no restraint because there were people inside the house at risk. Are you suggesting they should have concerned themselves more with the knife wielding guy versus the people at risk from his behaviour?

    I'm not encouraging cops to shoot at the first sign of danger. I'm saying that we can all second guess their judgement from our couches and office cubicles. Without question... there has been poor judgement exercised where people have been unnecessarily hurt (both suspects and police for that matter). It's probably a lot more challenging being in the moment.
    "My brain's a good brain!"
  • rgambsrgambs Posts: 9,539
    Jeebus, just watched a video of a SLC black man being shot in the back, ridiculous.
    Monkey Driven, Call this Living?
  • unsungunsung Posts: 7,930
    I could solve this right now.
  • tbergstbergs Posts: 3,040
    unsung said:
    I could solve this right now.
    How's that?
    It's a hopeless situation...
  • unsungunsung Posts: 7,930
    These settlements should come out of their pension (group) fund.
  • rgambsrgambs Posts: 9,539
    unsung said:
    These settlements should come out of their pension (group) fund.
    Yep.  It would make a big difference!  
    Or some kind of insurance setup.
    Monkey Driven, Call this Living?
Sign In or Register to comment.