Chicago police announce new limits in use of force.

joG said:

BLM seems to think it does. And Obama comments more on the tragic deaths of Blacks more often, it would seem.

Click to expand...

BLM and Obama are both a part of the greater "Race Grievance Industry"..... so of course they are going to comment on it.....

MaggieD said:

I think you are just being argumentative. If five cops can't handle a 90-year-old on a walker, they ought find another job. A rubber bullet from a shotgun at ten feet is ridiculous. Cops have a hazardous job. They, just like lumberjacks, are going to have injuries. Using a mattress to push an old man off his feet isn't a ploy. It is a creative way to manage what ended up being a deadly encounter for a very old and addled man.

Click to expand...

Sounds to me like they handled him just fine......

LOL....

Okay Maggie, I used to respect you on police matters... but you are starting to sound like the ignorant liberals who think police should die to prevent having to kill someone trying to kill them.

Sounds pretty ****in' ignorant to me.

Lutherf said:

My experience with police training is that we did it all the time. We played out all kinds of scenarios we made up ourselves and reviewed the hell out of scenarios we ran across in the line of duty. We always welcomed additional training because it was something else that could keep us from getting hurt. Contrary to what appears to be common belief, we were also taught that deadly force was a last resort so 99% of our training involved something other than pulling a trigger on a suspect. We trained procedure. We trained tactics. We trained strategy. We trained communications. What I saw in the training video was fairly common.

Seeing an immediate threat before using deadly force against a fleeing suspect shouldn't be anything new to any department but I have to ask, how would this policy be applied if the officer felt a gun on the suspect who ran instead of saw it? What if he was doing a pat down and felt a gun in the suspect's pocket then the suspect rabbitted? What if that pat down was happening in front of a store that had a history of getting robbed or if it was incident to a complaint about someone threatening a neighbor with a gun?

Click to expand...

so given your unique perspective, what recommendations would you make

Caine said:

Sounds to me like they handled him just fine......

LOL....

Okay Maggie, I used to respect you on police matters... but you are starting to sound like the ignorant liberals who think police should die to prevent having to kill someone trying to kill them.

Sounds pretty ****in' ignorant to me.

Click to expand...

Throwing rocks for opinions, Caine? See I, on the other hand, thank you for what you've done in your career to keep us safe. I have rarely seen you take the side of the public...proving to me that, although you aren't in LE anymore, your blue line mentality is firmly in place.

If you don't understand that a 90-year-old man with a dinner knife doesn't need to be hit with a rubber bullet to contain hum? Perhaps it was time for you to step down.

Cops are not always right. And calling my opinion ignorant? I can't begin to tell you how disappointed I am in you.

MaggieD said:

Throwing rocks for opinions, Caine? See I, on the other hand, thank you for what you've done in your career to keep us safe. I have rarely seen you take the side of the public...proving to me that, although you aren't in LE anymore, your blue line mentality is firmly in place.

If you don't understand that a 90-year-old man with a dinner knife doesn't need to be hit with a rubber bullet to contain hum? Perhaps it was time for you to step down.

Cops are not always right. And calling my opinion ignorant? I can't begin to tell you how disappointed I am in you.

Click to expand...

I do take the side of the public, when it is completely obvious that law enforcement are wrong. But at any point when you non law enforcement knowledgeable people state things like.....

MaggieD said:

If five cops can't handle a 90-year-old on a walker, they ought find another job.... snip...Cops have a hazardous job. They, just like lumberjacks, are going to have injuries.

Click to expand...

It makes it painfully obvious that you think police should not take a threat seriously because of arbitrary factors like age, race, and disability.

In policing, that is called complacency, and complacency gets officers killed.

Also, the whole thing about having a hazardous job and that they are going to have injuries suggests that you believe officers becoming injured is something we should accept and they should risk MORE in order to keep from having to harm the people trying to kill them.

These officers thought they were going to be cool and "disarm" the knife wielding subject.....

MaggieD said:

Throwing rocks for opinions, Caine? See I, on the other hand, thank you for what you've done in your career to keep us safe. I have rarely seen you take the side of the public...proving to me that, although you aren't in LE anymore, your blue line mentality is firmly in place.

If you don't understand that a 90-year-old man with a dinner knife doesn't need to be hit with a rubber bullet to contain hum? Perhaps it was time for you to step down.

Cops are not always right. And calling my opinion ignorant? I can't begin to tell you how disappointed I am in you.

Click to expand...

a generous and gracious response

a good lesson for me today

thanks

Caine said:

I do take the side of the public, when it is completely obvious that law enforcement are wrong. But at any point when you non law enforcement knowledgeable people state things like.....


It makes it painfully obvious that you think police should not take a threat seriously because of arbitrary factors like age, race, and disability.

In policing, that is called complacency, and complacency gets officers killed.

Also, the whole thing about having a hazardous job and that they are going to have injuries suggests that you believe officers becoming injured is something we should accept and they should risk MORE in order to keep from having to harm the people trying to kill them.

These officers thought they were going to be cool and "disarm" the knife wielding subject.....

Click to expand...

that 90 year old was strong...:shock:

_Sal said:

that 90 year old was strong...:shock:

Click to expand...

Take it from someone who has actually had to do the damned job.... Strength has virtually nothing to do with it.

Caine said:

Take it from someone who has actually had to do the damned job.... Strength has virtually nothing to do with it.

Click to expand...

I would have been willing to do exactly that until you proved yourself to be so disingenuous

when you got personal with her, you lost my support completely regardless of what your job is or was

_Sal said:

I would have been willing to do exactly that until you proved yourself to be so disingenuous

when you got personal with her, you lost my support completely regardless of what your job is or was

Click to expand...

Got personal? I just stated that we usually agree on alot of these issues but we don't on this one....

There was nothing "personal" about it.

You see, me and Maggie have been discussing these issues for quite a while... you should probably just butt out.

Caine said:

Got personal? I just stated that we usually agree on alot of these issues but we don't on this one....

There was nothing "personal" about it.

You see, me and Maggie have been discussing these issues for quite a while... you should probably just butt out.

Click to expand...

lol....got ya big time eh, my knife went deep and I hardly used any strength at all

:lamo

thanks good to know...

_Sal said:

so given your unique perspective, what recommendations would you make

Click to expand...

I think that the vast majority of use of force incidents are fine and that the "problem" people talk about so much is horribly overblown.

What I'd recommend is putting more cops on the street because the deterrent effect alone tends to keep the stupid down to a dull roar. I'd get the Obama DoJ out of the neighborhoods and replace them with real cops. Give the public a chance to talk to the men and women who actually do this stuff for a living and maybe we'll get some better understanding of what's going on in these problem areas.

Lutherf said:

I think that the vast majority of use of force incidents are fine and that the "problem" people talk about so much is horribly overblown.

What I'd recommend is putting more cops on the street because the deterrent effect alone tends to keep the stupid down to a dull roar. I'd get the Obama DoJ out of the neighborhoods and replace them with real cops. Give the public a chance to talk to the men and women who actually do this stuff for a living and maybe we'll get some better understanding of what's going on in these problem areas.

Click to expand...

thanks

Police forces definitely need reform in terms of how force is applied but IMO these policy adjustments are not enough to counter decades of hiring processes that use psychological profiling which can allow psychopathic individuals to get onto the force. The same psych profiles that look for uncompromising and enforcement type personalities among candidates also fits the profile of psychos and AFAIK there is no refined system in place to distinguish these two. Most psychos have a clean record and tidy personal history and are beyond detection because they are effective students of human behavior and human systems.

There's also the issue of white power type folks getting into positions of power, which includes the police forces. Limitations on force will not stop corruption. If a police veteran is psycho and harming people routinely, then they already have personal systems in place to not be discovered or to avoid accountability. White power types feel entitled to secure systems of power on behalf of their people and the police force is no exception.

Then on top of all this we have a police force that is becoming increasingly militarized and uncompromising, in ways which are blatantly encroaching on constitutional and human rights.

There has always been police violence but now the public has the means to record it and show the world just how real and frequent it is. It's time that we clean up this system from the bottom up.

Northern Light said:

Then on top of all this we have a police force that is becoming increasingly militarized and uncompromising, in ways which are blatantly encroaching on constitutional and human rights.

Click to expand...

There are cases when a "militarized" police force is needed. For example, the final shootout between the San Bernadino Islamic Terrorists and the police. If it wasn't for that armored vehicle they had at the scene, many of those cops probably would've been seriously hurt or worse.

Roadvirus said:

There are cases when a "militarized" police force is needed. For example, the final shootout between the San Bernadino Islamic Terrorists and the police. If it wasn't for that armored vehicle they had at the scene, many of those cops probably would've been seriously hurt or worse.

Click to expand...

The North Hollywood bank robbery changed a lot of thinking in how patrols should be equipped.

Roadvirus said:

There are cases when a "militarized" police force is needed. For example, the final shootout between the San Bernadino Islamic Terrorists and the police. If it wasn't for that armored vehicle they had at the scene, many of those cops probably would've been seriously hurt or worse.

Click to expand...

I think there should be armored units as part of special divisions, like SWAT. But what I'm talking about is every day police in situations that, statistically, do not require much violent intervention. Like protests.

_Sal said:

lol....got ya big time eh, my knife went deep and I hardly used any strength at all

:lamo

thanks good to know...

Click to expand...

Aww ****.... Well played..... :mrgreen:

Caine said:

Aww ****.... Well played..... :mrgreen:

Click to expand...

well ya have a good sense of humor anyway. :thumbs:

eace

Northern Light said:

Police forces definitely need reform in terms of how force is applied but IMO these policy adjustments are not enough to counter decades of hiring processes that use psychological profiling which can allow psychopathic individuals to get onto the force. The same psych profiles that look for uncompromising and enforcement type personalities among candidates also fits the profile of psychos and AFAIK there is no refined system in place to distinguish these two. Most psychos have a clean record and tidy personal history and are beyond detection because they are effective students of human behavior and human systems.

There's also the issue of white power type folks getting into positions of power, which includes the police forces. Limitations on force will not stop corruption. If a police veteran is psycho and harming people routinely, then they already have personal systems in place to not be discovered or to avoid accountability. White power types feel entitled to secure systems of power on behalf of their people and the police force is no exception.

Then on top of all this we have a police force that is becoming increasingly militarized and uncompromising, in ways which are blatantly encroaching on constitutional and human rights.

There has always been police violence but now the public has the means to record it and show the world just how real and frequent it is. It's time that we clean up this system from the bottom up.

Click to expand...

I disagree with your assessment that psychopathic individuals "get on the force".

Real talk here...

The effect on people of working in a hyper-vigilant field like law enforcement, coupled with the constant reminders in reality and in training of threats can warp the minds of SOME individuals.

Similar to how some people can see the horrors of war and not develop PTSD while others do.... some people working in policing allow the things they experience to change their outlook on "others".

Some people become cynical and uncaring....... some recover from this, some don't.

I noticed myself become extremely cynical about alot of the issues that police face...... its not that I didn't care about the people I served... I became an officer who didn't care about a large majority of the laws I was asked to enforce (drug laws, repeat domestic violence where people keep coming back to one another after the incident, drug related murders... etc).

The "White power" crap... is a non-issue when speaking of "the police" as an overall unit. May it come into play in certain areas? Sure, its a possibility.... but not something that needs to be discussed when talking about the overall topic of policing. Its a problem that occurs in either small pockets of areas, or individuals, but it is not a "systemic" police problem.

Caine said:

I disagree with your assessment that psychopathic individuals "get on the force".

Real talk here...

The effect on people of working in a hyper-vigilant field like law enforcement, coupled with the constant reminders in reality and in training of threats can warp the minds of SOME individuals.

Similar to how some people can see the horrors of war and not develop PTSD while others do.... some people working in policing allow the things they experience to change their outlook on "others".

Some people become cynical and uncaring....... some recover from this, some don't.

I noticed myself become extremely cynical about alot of the issues that police face...... its not that I didn't care about the people I served... I became an officer who didn't care about a large majority of the laws I was asked to enforce (drug laws, repeat domestic violence where people keep coming back to one another after the incident, drug related murders... etc).

The "White power" crap... is a non-issue when speaking of "the police" as an overall unit. May it come into play in certain areas? Sure, its a possibility.... but not something that needs to be discussed when talking about the overall topic of policing. Its a problem that occurs in either small pockets of areas, or individuals, but it is not a "systemic" police problem.

Click to expand...

Thanks for this... it sheds light on some stuff for me.

The white power thing is an issue that shouldn't be understated. Cynicism alone doesn't explain the racial differences in police violence we're seeing.

Northern Light said:

Thanks for this... it sheds light on some stuff for me.

The white power thing is an issue that shouldn't be understated. Cynicism alone doesn't explain the racial differences in police violence we're seeing.

Click to expand...

No, what explains the racial differences is actually admitting to yourself that black people commit a much higher than their share of the population percent of violent crime (police "violence" comes from dealing with the violent parts of society), constitute a higher percentage of calls for service that police have to respond to than is represented simply by their percentage of the population, and actually murder police at a much higher percentage than they represent as a percentage of the total population.

These three factors alone are why looking at this issue from a standpoint that "all things are equal" is a moot point. You can't view the 13% of the population black people represent and think that any disparity above that number represents racism without taking all the other more realistic factors into consideration. It takes knowledge of crime statistics and the realities of policing to understand.

The media that keeps you misinformed has an incentive not to address this.

Caine said:

The media that keeps you misinformed has an incentive not to address this.

Click to expand...

How is it misinformation to air first hand footage of cops blatantly shooting to kill black people who are innocently surrendering?

I realize that there is a court of public opinion to some degree but a lot of what we're seeing is so blatantly unjust that it can't really be seen another way. When someone is being shot multiple times who isn't even armed and has in fact already surrendered, what are we supposed to think? That the media is twisting the story???

And what incentive does the media have? Historically the media and everything connected to the government has supported the police no matter what they've done. Only recently have we seen actual charges being laid against police who commit acts of violence. Before recent uproars that was rare and the blue line protected these people. It has taken full scale riots for a shred of accountability to take place and even then it's not enough.

Northern Light said:

How is it misinformation to air first hand footage of cops blatantly shooting to kill black people who are innocently surrendering?

Click to expand...

One incident does not an entire trend make. Despite one incident here or there that may fit the narrative..... the VAST majority... don't.

I realize that there is a court of public opinion to some degree but a lot of what we're seeing is so blatantly unjust that it can't really be seen another way.

Click to expand...

WTF do you mean "It can't be seen another way". Black man gets shot... therefore racism? Thats a huge leap in logic when there are so many other factors, to including the individual officer (because yes police officers are individual people too) jumping to conclutions, not thinking things through, and being too damned scared.

When someone is being shot multiple times who isn't even armed and has in fact already surrendered, what are we supposed to think? That the media is twisting the story???

Click to expand...

I can only assume you are referring to the mental health care dude..... that was a very unfortunate event, but nowhere near the "standard" that you are trying to make it out to be.

And what incentive does the media have? Historically the media and everything connected to the government has supported the police no matter what they've done. Only recently have we seen actual charges being laid against police who commit acts of violence. Before recent uproars that was rare and the blue line protected these people. It has taken full scale riots for a shred of accountability to take place and even then it's not enough.

Click to expand...

What do you mean it is not enough? Again, go look through the list of shooting incidents on the link I provided.... I assure you there are plenty of incidents in both 2015 and 2016 in which officers were in fact charged... including many that you never even heard of before because the media didn't cover it.

We have evidence of NBC editing the Zimmerman 911 calls to make him sound racist, to stir the pot and piss people off so they can then cover that ****, and therefore increase ratings, and therefore increase the value of their advertising slots.

We have evidence, more recently, of CNN editing videos from the Charlotte shooting to take out the parts where officers were yelling for Scott to drop his weapon, to help spread misinformation and create riots which then they can cover 24hrs and get the famous members of the Race Grievance Industry to tell everyone how evil everything is to spread more distrust, so that when **** goes down they can.... cover it.... increase ratings.... and sell advertising slots.



The way people like yourself throw around the word "accountability", it almost insinuates that you believe Officers involved in any shooting should be charged first and then later set free after the evidence can't convict them. CMPD already did that to quell one riot, how many more Officers lives should be ruined because they encountered a violent subject that they had to defend themselves against? If they don't shoot, they die, if they do shoot, they lose their job, have to move, change names, etc to hide from the monsters out there that will do anything in the name of the RGI.