Jump to content
ants

Police - a thin blue line, a wad of cash and scary guns

Recommended Posts

On 10/14/2019 at 4:18 PM, Tywin et al. said:

Part of the problem is the low standards. If all you have to do is say you felt threatened, why not shoot first and ask questions later? Furthermore, if you know you'll get the benefit of the doubt, why not shoot to kill rather than put a slug in someone's leg, allowing them to give their side of the story. Shoot quickly and to kill is a terrible standard for the agents of the state that are sworn to protect us...

It is low standards, both in recruiting and training, however this idea that you can shoot someone to subdue them is ridiculous.  First of all, the leg, arm, shoulder, whatever you think is a "less lethal" alternative target are very hard to hit under stress conditions in a dynamic situation.  Secondly there are many places in the leg/arm/whatever you think is a better option as a target, which can cause you to bleed out in a minute or less (brachial, radial, femoral, etc, arteries) if struck my common handgun ammunition.  It's difficult enough to get police to hit the center mass (the largest aiming area, as well as the most  likely to stop a threat), and now you want them to be shooting weapons out of hands, and only cause light wounds so that the threat/suspect/whatever has a chance to "tell his story" after the fact?  Over 85%, some studies say over 90%, of all police and law enforcement rounds fired in engagements miss their intended target (this is FBI data, so it's unlikely to be false since it paints the police as incompetent).  This is similar to battlefield statistics, typically under combat/stress conditions less than 10% (some say under 1%) of infantry fired weapons hit their target, and they are typically using rifles, which are a shoulder supported weapon and many times more accurate than any handgun typically used by police.  I've spent 18 months in combat zones in 2 different countries, and have also shot competitively with and against the US Army marksmanship unit and other highly skilled civilians, and I'm telling you that trying to get police to just "wound" people is a non starter from an accuracy under stress standpoint.

The better idea is to change the mentality of those recruiting and training police, and the law enforcement at large in the USA, so that their weapons leave their holsters and car mounts in a far less frequent manner.  Much of this can be attributed to having a mindset of both aggression and fear combined.  Some of that is warranted - most is not IMO.  I also believe that sometimes the media is wrong about LE shootings.  The Michael Brown thing was ridiculous, Brown had just pulled a robbery, then attacked the cop, got a hold of his weapon, and shot rounds through the floor of his vehicle. WTF does anything expect to happen when the cop/suspect are in a life and death struggle for the cops weapon, and it's already been shot (twice) at the cop - someone is going to be lit up, one or the other.  That said, the last video I saw of the officer shooting the unarmed African American guy in the back, and then claiming he "went for his taser" (Walter Scott shooting), is absolutely insane.  Every time  I watch it I become more angry.  That cop was convicted, and so should he be. 

 

On 10/13/2019 at 9:10 AM, BigFatCoward said:

That is just not believable. I've literally never even had to pull out my CS or Baton. Why does every scenario seem to involve pulling your gun out? 

Are you an officer in the UK?  You should throw that baton in the river, nothing is more useless in a fight than a collapsing baton.  They are used for punishment here in North America mostly, it's VERY difficult to find video evidence of the baton making a combative suspect comply, but tons of them being beaten with it after they've already surrendered.  Many YT videos regarding this subject.  I do understand your sentiment/statement however, LE in the UK take a much different approach, much of that is mindset and training, but some of it is attributable IMO to the threat level.  You have far fewer firearm threats out there compared to the USA, and to some extent here in Canada.  Canada is odd, as we have very high firearm ownership levels, here in the West it's at least 2 firearms in every 2nd home according to RCMP firearms stats, and there are between 10-20 million firearms in a country with 35 million people.  A lot of firearms, yet comparatively few police shootings compared to the USA per capita.  IMO that's down to handguns being restricted use, while in the USA they are easier to both gain access to and keep on ones person or in a vehicle.   Also perhaps it's mindset and training - here in Calgary of the 1500 or so CPS officers and support, there are nearly 100 officers from the UK and other European countries who have a similar outlook to law enforcement that the UK does.  That seeps into the blood chemistry of a department, and has had a positive effect over time.  I've never once had a CPS officer draw a weapon on me when I've been pulled over (we own an LC500 and a Nissan GTR, so I get picked off a lot for driving too fast).  Every time I've been pulled over in California at our US home, the hands is on their weapon, and sometimes it's drawn at night. 

Edited by SerHaHa

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.kvia.com/news/us-world/officer-who-shot-atatiana-jefferson-wasnt-sent-on-welfare-check/1132934921

I don't know how much difference it makes but this article says that while the neighbor did call police for a welfare check the dispatcher relayed the message to police as a "possibly burglary" or "open structure" call

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think a good illustration of how police could act when thinking a dead shooting victim is better than a live one isn't shooting for the leg, which is rebutted as per the post a couple above me. Instead its standing there conversing with your boyfriend about how to handle the shooting while the person you shot bleeds to death without you doing anything to attempt to save their life.

We don't need to use hypothetical examples when the recent major case demonstrates it perfectly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cops chase a shoplifter into an innocent man's house, blow up the house while trying to capture him, and leave the homeowner hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt. Court judges that the cops don't owe the guy anything. Unfuckingbelievable.

https://www.npr.org/2019/10/30/774788611/police-owe-nothing-to-man-whose-home-they-blew-up-appeals-court-says

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, DanteGabriel said:

Court judges that the cops don't owe the guy anything. Unfuckingbelievable.

America:  Fuck Yeah.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You'd think some of the piles of money from civil forfeiture could be used to repay people whose houses they blew up

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seems a proportionate response for a shoplifter to be honest, don't know what the fuss is about.  Why would his insurance not cover it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, BigFatCoward said:

Seems a proportionate response for a shoplifter to be honest, don't know what the fuss is about.  Why would his insurance not cover it?

It wasn't the shoplifters house that got messed up. He ran into someone else's house. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, A True Kaniggit said:

2 belts and a shirt.

Thats what he shoplifted from Walmart. 

I know most people are focusing on the house, and understandably so, but another aspect of this story that jumped out to me was that prior to the house seige, the shoplifting led to a high-speed car chase. That also seems drastically disproprtionate to the loss of 2 belts and a shirt. Car chases are inherently dangerous - to the pursuers, to the pursued, to the public. They definitely shouldn't be used to catch a petty thief.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It did seem totally out of proportion at first look. But then I read that the guy ran into someone else’s house, pretty much hostage situation, and started shooting at the police. That kind of changes the dynamic from ‘just a shoplifter who stole a couple of belts’

Doesn’t mean that the police are entitled to blow up that house and they especially should be liable for the damage caused.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This was my initial reaction as well, but to be fair to the cops, when I read "armed" shoplifter - as opposed to just, ya know, shoplifting which I'm sure many here including myself are guilty of - that does change things a bit.  Not an excuse, but important context.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Heartofice said:

It did seem totally out of proportion at first look. But then I read that the guy ran into someone else’s house, pretty much hostage situation, and started shooting at the police. That kind of changes the dynamic from ‘just a shoplifter who stole a couple of belts’

Doesn’t mean that the police are entitled to blow up that house and they especially should be liable for the damage caused.

You don't go blowing holes in the walls in a hostage situation. Even him firing his weapon doesn't warrant that, he had a handgun, so between SWAT body armour and his limited ammo a solution that didn't involve explosives should have been able to be found. This is less restraint than I would expect out of soldiers in active war zones.

Edited by TrueMetis

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, TrueMetis said:

You don't go blowing holes in the walls in a hostage situation. Even him firing his weapon doesn't warrant that, he had a handgun, so between SWAT body armour and his limited ammo a solution that didn't involve explosives should have been able to be found. This is less restraint than I would expect out of soldiers in active war zones.

Yeah totally agree. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Liffguard said:

I know most people are focusing on the house, and understandably so, but another aspect of this story that jumped out to me was that prior to the house seige, the shoplifting led to a high-speed car chase. That also seems drastically disproprtionate to the loss of 2 belts and a shirt. Car chases are inherently dangerous - to the pursuers, to the pursued, to the public. They definitely shouldn't be used to catch a petty thief.

Seems common for cops to use negligible property crime as an excuse to go Rambo. Witness the story of the Arizona cops who kicked and beat a cuffed father, pulled guns and threatened the life of a pregnant woman with little kids in the car, and tried to rip a baby out of the mother's arms. Over a doll and a pair of underwear from a dollar store.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/after-4-year-old-took-doll-dollar-store-video-shows-n1017601

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Lyanna<3Rhaegar said:

It wasn't the shoplifters house that got messed up. He ran into someone else's house. 

I know. Why would the homeowners insurance not cover the police blowing it up to fuck. And I was being sarcastic about it being proportionate. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why did they need over 100 officers? That just seems cowardly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

Why did they need over 100 officers? That just seems cowardly.

Team bonding... BBQ... few beers... blow up a house... drive a tank through the rubble

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Which Tyler said:

Team bonding... BBQ... few beers... blow up a house... drive a tank through the rubble

But did they have a Medal of Honor winning hero dog with a dopey look on its face? These things matter!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×