• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Another fatal shooting in St. Louis

Bodhisattva said:
In this case the Tueller Drill is irrelevant as the weapon was already drawn and yes, anything can be a lethal threat. Anything. Of course, one has to maintain common sense and context because we are obviously not talking about using a flower as a weapon. There is a basic common sense aspect to this argument that is literally being ignored... and that is that the cops have other means of subduing a person and if they do not like it they should not be front line cops... period.
Click to expand...

And what do you know about being a cop?


Oh, thats right, nothing.

ngv9ybl.jpg
 
Caine said:
And what do you know about being a cop?


Oh, thats right, nothing.

http://i.l[/QUOTE]

Right, and as an educator I have people telling me how teachers are failing and how education should be run all the time... deal with it.

...all I know is that it does not take a cop to understand time, distance and violence any more than it takes a lawyer to prepare an affidavit.
Click to expand...
 
Bodhisattva said:
Right, and as an educator I have people telling me how teachers are failing and how education should be run all the time... deal with it.

...all I know is that it does not take a cop to understand time, distance and violence any more than it takes a lawyer to prepare an affidavit.
Click to expand...

Have you been in a violent, life-threatening situation?
 
Bodhisattva said:
There are other options... why you condone police violence is beyond me...
Click to expand...

I've told you many times that they can only use lethal force when there are no other options....unless it is to stop a fleeing suspect they believe is a threat to public safety.
 
Bodhisattva said:
In this case the Tueller Drill is irrelevant as the weapon was already drawn and yes, anything can be a lethal threat. Anything. Of course, one has to maintain common sense and context because we are obviously not talking about using a flower as a weapon. There is a basic common sense aspect to this argument that is literally being ignored... and that is that the cops have other means of subduing a person and if they do not like it they should not be front line cops... period.
Click to expand...

Lursa said:
So here's a very good article that explains the policies and law that guide the police's interactions with the public and their use of force.

From a friend of mine. He is a cop and his wife is a detective in rural WA St. Not liberals :mrgreen: I am. And dang it if we arent friends anyway.
How cops can help citizens better understand police use of force

From the article:

Force Options
When an officer meets resistance, officers are trained to use a level of force justified by the specific threat, or resistance they are presented with. For example, if a person pulls away from an officer making an arrest and snaps, “Don’t you touch me,” the officer can choose to apply a compliance hold to that person.

These holds are designed to convince the person to comply.
When a suspect is actively resisting, the officer can also choose to disengage and deploy a TASER or utilize pepper spray to overcome that resistance.

It might surprise some people to discover that when a suspect strikes an officer, or even acts as if he or she is about to strike an officer, that officer can legally deliver impacts with what we call personal body weapons.

Officers can punch, kick, or strike with elbows and/or knees to defend themselves and/or make an arrest.

Officers can also choose to deliver baton impacts to targeted areas on the body. Officers can even strike a suspect more than once if once does not stop the suspect’s threat. If a suspect tries to hit an officer, don’t be surprised when that officer hits back.

Use of Deadly Force
I’ve never heard an officer say at the beginning of a shift, “I hope I get to shoot someone today.”

While the vast majority of officers never fire their weapons in the line of duty, some have to. When an officer is faced with the threat of death or great bodily injury — or someone they are sworn to protect is faced with that same imminent threat — an officer is justified in using deadly force.

There are three generally held misconceptions about deadly force that continually arise and need to be addressed:

1. An officer can shoot an unarmed man under certain conditions.

An officer may have to use deadly force on an unarmed man who is larger, stronger, and/or attempting to disarm the officer, for example. In the case of a suspect, who is battering an officer to the point that he or she may suffer death or great bodily harm, the use of deadly force is defensible. Police officers do not have to sustain a severe beating in the line of duty.

Other factors that could justify an officer’s choice to utilize deadly force are the extent of that officer’s injury, exhaustion, or the number of assaultive adversaries the officer is confronted with.

2. An officer can, in certain conditions, shoot someone in the back.

You see if a suspect is fleeing and their escape presents an imminent threat of death or great bodily harm to the community at large, the use of deadly force can be justified. On some occasions a round might enter through the back, because of the dynamics of the circumstance.

3. Officers are not — and never will be — trained to shoot to wound or shoot weapons out of subjects’ hands.

These are not realistic options. Handguns are not accurate enough to deliberately attempt such things when lives are on the line.
Click to expand...

....................
 
Gladiator said:
How long does it take to fire a taser? Maybe there should be a rule that any police officer should have his taser drawn when going to a knife report. A taser can go 16 Feet.

Before a policeman kills someone, there should be a duty to at least attempt to taser the individual

Many police are trained to go for the kill with little provocation. The training should be improved to include non-lethal attempts to subdue a belligerent individual.

Some branches of Aiklido teach protecting oneself, while discharging anger from the individual. "Why are you upset?" "Why are you angry?" Get the guy talking, working out his anger or fears.


When a policeman is asked, "Why did you use lethal force on this individual?"

The Officer should be able to explain how he tried to use a taser at first.


//
Click to expand...

let me get your suggestion straight

suppose I am a cop

50 feet away from me some mope is pointing what appears to be a Colt semi automatic handgun at me screaming DIE YOU MF PIG!

my proper response is to

1) immediately take cover, draw my pistol and shoot the guy before he can shoot me

2) run at him and try to get within taser range

3) run away

scenario # 2. I am investigating a B&E when I see a guy lurking in another room. I should

1) draw my taser and hope he isn't armed
2) run away
3) draw my weapon and challenge the intruder to stand down


scenario #3

I am investigating an assault. I am in the hallway of an apartment building when someone matching the description of the rapist starts running at me with a tire iron in his hand

should I

1) run away

2) try to tase the guy

3) shoot him as fast as I can with my Glock 17?
 
Bodhisattva said:
Right, and as an educator I have people telling me how teachers are failing and how education should be run all the time... deal with it.

...all I know is that it does not take a cop to understand time, distance and violence any more than it takes a lawyer to prepare an affidavit.
Click to expand...

Oh... okay.... so YOU are the guy they used for the meme below...
52984259.jpg
 
contrapositive said:
Have you been in a violent, life-threatening situation?
Click to expand...

Yes... many many life threatening situations, many violent situations and one that was a violent and life threatening situation.

Lursa said:
I've told you many times that they can only use lethal force when there are no other options....unless it is to stop a fleeing suspect they believe is a threat to public safety.
Click to expand...

When have I disagreed with that?

Lursa said:
[COLOR="#AFEEOLOR]
Click to expand...

Thanks... although irrelevant.
 
contrapositive said:
And how have you typically responded?
Click to expand...

By saving, or helping to save, people's lives... as well as my own. (at least 12)

I am not sure where you are going with this.
 
A thug was shot dead, good riddance. I'm not sure why people are upset that a thug is no longer a part of this world?
 
Bodhisattva said:
By saving, or helping to save, people's lives... as well as my own. (at least 12)

I am not sure where you are going with this.
Click to expand...

How did you save those lives? Did they involve other people assaulting you and continuing to assault you, or were they situations that did not involve a human aggressor?
 
contrapositive said:
How did you save those lives? Did they involve other people assaulting you and continuing to assault you, or were they situations that did not involve a human aggressor?
Click to expand...

You asked if I had been in a violent, life threatening situation and I clarified the three types of situations that I have been in.

As a fire fighter I helped to save around 8-10 people and as a surfer I saved a couple more. I saved my mother's life and on another occasion my daughter's. I never saved a life during a violent interaction and fail to see how any of this relates to my view that many cops use lethal force when they could first use non-lethal force. I have had a gun pulled on me and a knife... have you? Have you saved lives or been in any life threatening situations? I have been in riot/protest situations, around gangs, had a moose charge me, been out in 30 foot waves and caught rattlesnakes with sticks, among other things. My point was that I do not need to be a cop to understand life threatening situations, how to assess said situations or how people can handle themselves. Split second situations are not unique to cops.
 
Bodhisattva said:
Yes... many many life threatening situations, many violent situations and one that was a violent and life threatening situation.



When have I disagreed with that?



Thanks... although irrelevant.
Click to expand...

We have discussed nothing that is outside of those laws, policies, and guidelines. Yet you continue to claim there needs to be more training and that cops need to consider *other* methods besides lethal when handling situations.

It's all spelled out there for you, why they can, and do, and why they cannot and do not.
 
Bodhisattva said:
I never saved a life during a violent interaction and fail to see how any of this relates to my view that many cops use lethal force when they could first use non-lethal force.
Click to expand...

I've had a knife pulled on me, but have never been attacked (I complied and gave him the contents of my wallet).

If someone charges at me with a knife from a close distance, and I am armed - I will shoot him. I won't hesitate. I will not regret it. However, looking back, I could have run away, because I am a very fast runner, but that's an instance of me determining a possible course of action without the immediate threat of danger. It's easy to criticize someone's decision looking back, but that doesn't mean your criticism is valid. Of course, when officers look back and reflect on the decisions they have made, they speculate endlessly on what they could have done. For example, back in high school, my best friend was being bullied by an older kid in my grade outside of school. I threw him off and shoved him to the floor. Could I have been more gentle? Perhaps. That doesn't mean my actions were unjustified. Just because there were other possible courses of action, does not mean they were reasonable or the correct action in that split second.

Bodhisattva said:
My point was that I do not need to be a cop to understand life threatening situations, how to assess said situations or how people can handle themselves. Split second situations are not unique to cops.
Click to expand...

Obviously not. But you are a fire fighter. Police officers are trained to respond to criminals (not fires) who are violent and more than willing to use lethal force.

I'm curious. How did you respond to a gun being pulled on you?

I digress. I don't like many law enforcement officers. I especially despise TSA agents, as an international student. I have rarely had a nice encounter. They are rude and very hostile towards international kids. I don't like their attitudes. One TSA agent was very vague in his directions and then told me to "sit down" in a very rude manner, in front of ~30 international students. I told him to "do not talk to me like that" I despise LEO's who are like that. But again, I understand why police officers respond with lethal force. I'd absolutely want my campus security officers to use lethal force if some madman decides to bring a gun on campus on shoot at them, my friends or I. I'd probably be angry if a security officer hesitated and used a taser, risking the lives of other people.

It's imperative to remember that these kinds of moments require strong, decisive and resolute action from law enforcement officers.
 
Lursa said:
We have discussed nothing that is outside of those laws, policies, and guidelines. Yet you continue to claim there needs to be more training and that cops need to consider *other* methods besides lethal when handling situations.

It's all spelled out there for you, why they can, and do, and why they cannot and do not.
Click to expand...

There is no training that is needed. It is common sense. A guy is there with a knife against two cops. One attempts to use a tazer and the other backs him up with a gun. There is more too... the closer cop could have backed around the car much sooner creating space and a barrier. There is a lot that can be done PRIOR to pulling a pistol and just shooting away...
 
Bodhisattva said:
There is no training that is needed. It is common sense. A guy is there with a knife against two cops. One attempts to use a tazer and the other backs him up with a gun. There is more too... the closer cop could have backed around the car much sooner creating space and a barrier. There is a lot that can be done PRIOR to pulling a pistol and just shooting away...
Click to expand...

How do you know they dont attempt that? Or many other strategies?

The cop that was killed by the naked guy...what do you think he tried? He certainly didnt kill what ended up being a lethal threat.

I dont understand your assumptions at all. You have no idea what actually happens in most encounters....

The point is, when it's your life....or theirs....on the line...the final decision in self defense is based on all the guidelines I posted....and then up to that individual alone. It's not your decision to make for anyone else....it's not your life at risk.
 
contrapositive said:
I've had a knife pulled on me, but have never been attacked (I complied and gave him the contents of my wallet).

If someone charges at me with a knife from a close distance, and I am armed - I will shoot him. I won't hesitate. I will not regret it. However, looking back, I could have run away, because I am a very fast runner, but that's an instance of me determining a possible course of action without the immediate threat of danger. It's easy to criticize someone's decision looking back, but that doesn't mean your criticism is valid. Of course, when officers look back and reflect on the decisions they have made, they speculate endlessly on what they could have done. For example, back in high school, my best friend was being bullied by an older kid in my grade outside of school. I threw him off and shoved him to the floor. Could I have been more gentle? Perhaps. That doesn't mean my actions were unjustified. Just because there were other possible courses of action, does not mean they were reasonable or the correct action in that split second.



Obviously not. But you are a fire fighter. Police officers are trained to respond to criminals (not fires) who are violent and more than willing to use lethal force.

I'm curious. How did you respond to a gun being pulled on you?

I digress. I don't like many law enforcement officers. I especially despise TSA agents, as an international student. I have rarely had a nice encounter. They are rude and very hostile towards international kids. I don't like their attitudes. One TSA agent was very vague in his directions and then told me to "sit down" in a very rude manner, in front of ~30 international students. I told him to "do not talk to me like that" I despise LEO's who are like that. But again, I understand why police officers respond with lethal force. I'd absolutely want my campus security officers to use lethal force if some madman decides to bring a gun on campus on shoot at them, my friends or I. I'd probably be angry if a security officer hesitated and used a taser, risking the lives of other people.

It's imperative to remember that these kinds of moments require strong, decisive and resolute action from law enforcement officers.
Click to expand...

I responded by backing away and getting in my car. The guy was not robbing me or anything and I think that he thought my friend was a threat to him...

I am now a teacher, just to be clear... The knife was by a female student. I was so close that my first reaction was to grab her wrist and disarm her... luckily nobody was hurt.

My point was not that cops are unjustified in using deadly force, just that they should attempt to use non-lethal force whenever possible and many times it is possible yet they do not do it. Shooting is the first option for many cops and it should not be. When I said that I was challenged that I could not make that determination since I was not a cop and never faced dangerous situations when I have. My comparisons, even being a fire fighter, were to show that people can think and react during dangerous situations that are not cops. It is not a cop owned trait, thinking under life threatening situations... not by a long shot.

TSA bug the crap out of me. I travel internationally at least once a year (generally back to the USA) and they are chumps.

Most cops are fine. It is the trigger happy ones and the jerks that I have a problem with...
 
Lursa said:
How do you know they dont attempt that? Or many other strategies?

The cop that was killed by the naked guy...what do you think he tried? He certainly didnt kill what ended up being a lethal threat.

I dont understand your assumptions at all. You have no idea what actually happens in most encounters....

The point is, when it's your life....or theirs....on the line...the final decision in self defense is based on all the guidelines I posted....and then up to that individual alone. It's not your decision to make for anyone else....it's not your life at risk.
Click to expand...

I have no idea what your problem is or why you refuse to accept that many cops shoot when not necessary...

Law enforcement officers in Harris County have shot 65 unarmed people since 1999, killing 17. These incidents represent more than a third of all local police shootings, but experts call them the most preventable.

One in three police shootings involve unarmed people - Houston Chronicle

... and if I am watching an encounter on TV then I know what is happening in that encounter. Do you think that I am bashing cops about stuff that I have no idea about, or something? :roll:
 
Bodhisattva said:
I have no idea what your problem is or why you refuse to accept that many cops shoot when not necessary...

Law enforcement officers in Harris County have shot 65 unarmed people since 1999, killing 17. These incidents represent more than a third of all local police shootings, but experts call them the most preventable.

One in three police shootings involve unarmed people - Houston Chronicle

... and if I am watching an encounter on TV then I know what is happening in that encounter. Do you think that I am bashing cops about stuff that I have no idea about, or something? :roll:
Click to expand...

Unless convicted of homicide in those shooting, how are you claiming they are unnecessary?

Yes, there are some bad shoots...no doubt. Cops do make mistakes....did you miss where I posted about the ones that broke into a house and shot the wrong guy 16 times? So there's no way I deny cops dont make mistakes.

Edit: And I have no idea what you are watching on TV but as a general statement about this issue, I dont believe you know what you are talking about.
 
Lursa said:
Unless convicted of homicide in those shooting, how are you claiming they are unnecessary?

Yes, there are some bad shoots...no doubt. Cops do make mistakes....did you miss where I posted about the ones that broke into a house and shot the wrong guy 16 times? So there's no way I deny cops dont make mistakes.

Edit: And I have no idea what you are watching on TV but as a general statement about this issue, I dont believe you know what you are talking about.
Click to expand...

What specifically do I not know what I am talking about? You post something that is irrelevant to my point and seem to refuse to accept that cops are given non-lethal methods of subduing a person but that many times use lethal force instead. My post that I just gave you said that the experts are saying that many of these shootings are preventable... and homicide is a Red Herring and a totally different can of worms.

...and I am watching the videos posted that everybody can see and just about all the cops shows that are on TV. As I live outside the USA I get far more that you would and see the difference between American cops and cops in Australia, New Zealand, South Africa and Great Britain.
 
Bodhisattva said:
What specifically do I not know what I am talking about? You post something that is irrelevant to my point and seem to refuse to accept that cops are given non-lethal methods of subduing a person but that many times use lethal force instead. My post that I just gave you said that the experts are saying that many of these shootings are preventable... and homicide is a Red Herring and a totally different can of worms.

...and I am watching the videos posted that everybody can see and just about all the cops shows that are on TV. As I live outside the USA I get far more that you would and see the difference between American cops and cops in Australia, New Zealand, South Africa and Great Britain.
Click to expand...

And you continue to ignore that that final decision is left up to them...the ones that determine that they themselves need to use lethal force.

Just because they are provided those other methods dont mean they are required to use them at the risk of their own lives.

And since the countries you name have seriously curtailed the firearms...commonly used by criminals here... it's not remotely a parallel.

And TV.....you use cop shows as a basis for your opinions??????
 
Lursa said:
And you continue to ignore that that final decision is left up to them...the ones that determine that they themselves need to use lethal force.

Just because they are provided those other methods dont mean they are required to use them at the risk of their own lives.

And since the countries you name have seriously curtailed the firearms...commonly used by criminals here... it's not remotely a parallel.

And TV.....you use cop shows as a basis for your opinions??????
Click to expand...

As part of my basis... sure. Who wouldn't? It is simply another source. I just mentioned some cop shows though but I have obviously provided other sources too. I get my facts from sources like I provided you and from reading about incidents as well as watching them.

... and no, I have not once ignored that the final decision is up to them. I have specifically stated that it is up to them but that they have other options than lethal force. Of course they are not required to use them. That is the damn problem. From what I glean, people like you that defend a shoot first attitude and police forces that justify deadly force when there are other options.

...and when you watch a few shows from outside the USA and compare how cops treat an unarmed guy smoking weed in the USA to a guy in New Zealand or Great Britain you will see not only that your argument is a Straw Man but how rude and aggressive USA cops are and how much they lie and go for the arrest over everything else.
 
Bodhisattva said:
As part of my basis... sure. Who wouldn't? It is simply another source. I just mentioned some cop shows though but I have obviously provided other sources too. I get my facts from sources like I provided you and from reading about incidents as well as watching them.

... and no, I have not once ignored that the final decision is up to them. I have specifically stated that it is up to them but that they have other options than lethal force. Of course they are not required to use them. That is the damn problem. From what I glean, people like you that defend a shoot first attitude and police forces that justify deadly force when there are other options.

...and when you watch a few shows from outside the USA and compare how cops treat an unarmed guy smoking weed in the USA to a guy in New Zealand or Great Britain you will see not only that your argument is a Straw Man but how rude and aggressive USA cops are and how much they lie and go for the arrest over everything else.
Click to expand...

Then why do you continue to claim that they dont use them appropriately? Again...the final decision is up to them...only they are the ones in a position to decide that terminal risk. But you continue to claim that they should *try harder.* Or arent using them 'enough.'

The point is....you dont know but dont like it. I'm sorry you find American cops arrogant and aggressive...you DO watch way too much TV. I know alot of cops. And I've had to deal with cops that stopped me. Some are assholes....most are not. NONE of the ones I know are.

and I watch lots of BBC and British TV.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom