• 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

stonewall50 said:
If they saw the knife as the guy comes at them...kind of hard to consider that less lethal option. Especially when our cops don't wear stab proof vests (they do in the UK).




GOOD! That permitter has to allow for everything including the lead up to the shooting and beyond. Sorry but I have read enough sherlock novels to know that details are important. Even the little ones. Can't have people trampling them.
Click to expand...

Good points. I concede. :)
 
Caine said:
35 foot tasers are more ineffective. The taser probes spread apart as they go farther. While this creates a stronger effect on the subject, it also causes a hell of alot more misses because the probes spread to a point where they are landing on limbs which move around. I wouldn't trust them.
Click to expand...

So the 35 foot cartridge should be as accurate as the 17 foot cartridge, at 17 feet.

The 35 foot cartridge may be less reliable, the further from 17 feet, but the accuracy of the projectiles is just as good, closer up.

Did the Police Chief make the 35 foot cartridges available to the officers? Did the Chief request the 100 foot range tasers?

Were the officers trained to use non-lethal options first? Was there a reason why the officer decided not to apply their training in non-lthal approaches?





//
 
The Man said:
He had a knife in his hand, approaching police and was within 3 to 4 feet of police when they shot him. I would have shot him too. A stun gun is not reliable enough in that situation.

Is there a reason that the guy couldn't have dropped the knife when the police repeatedly asked him to?
Click to expand...

A man with a gun can kill a cop/person before they have time to draw, aim, and fire their weapon if they are within 21 feet. Tueller Drill, researched and admissable in court. It can take only 1.5 seconds for the attacker to reach the cop/person.

Within 3 or 4 feet? The person's momentum could kill before a taser stopped them, or was even drawn.
 
Fenton said:
Tazers are not always effective.

So, YOU have a highly agitated guy, brandishing a knife, refusing your commands, he may be on something ( you dont know ) and you have the choice of maybe pissing him off even more with a tazer and losing the 2 or 3 seconds needed to pull your pistol and stop the threat before he plunges that knife in your neck, or do you defend yourself properly ?

Cops deserve to go home to their families every night too.
Click to expand...

One gun shot may not even be enough. Unless perfectly placed, it takes more than one shot to 'instantly stop' any attacker, much less one amped up by mental illness, drugs, or adreneline.
 
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...

Can you please provide a source for that (bolded)? (No, you cant.) I can tell you what they are taught tho.

And if you are being attacked, you need to stop the threat as quickly as possible. Otherwise the attacker kills YOU. Or takes your weapon and kills other people....they are a danger to the public as well.

It is utterly ridiculous if you think that in most lethal confrontations, people always have the option of using non-lethal force. Do you have no idea at all how quickly life or death situations go down? If it wasnt so fast, most wouldnt be life-threatening. :doh
 
Gladiator said:
I am talking about the training of the officers.

Maybe the officers should be taught to shoot a taser with their left hand. What training have the officers had in diffusing Anger and Fear? Many people take cocaine and Crack. These drugs, and others, have comedowns, that makes people agitated.

What training did the officer have in quelling a disturbed person? What training did he have in disarming a person with a knife? Did the officer even think about shooting the taser first with his left hand? Had he target practices left hand with a taser?


//
Click to expand...

???? Do you have any idea what training with a firearm requires? And accurately aiming? Accurately aiming under the threat of dying and at a moving target??? And you want them to be drawing 2 weapons??

And you dont physically disarm someone with a knife. You order them to put it down. If they do not and become a lethal threat while holding it, they will get lethal force used against them. For the protection of the cop and the public.

You watch too much TV.
 
Gladiator said:
The exact facts of this case are not known with precision. The officer may have considered to use a taser, but did not have time.

What was his training?

When shooting a 9 MM pistol, it is often helpful to brace the right hand with the left hand. The left hand could be ready to shoot the Traser, drop the traser launcher, in one movement, while staring to pull the trigger with the right hand, if necessary. With practice. This could be practiced, fire the traser, then fire the pistol, in quick succession.

There could be more police shootings avoided, if police had better training.



//
Click to expand...

So you have weapons in 2 hands and are sighting and aiming down....which one?? You can only sight one at a time.

Not to mention that if someone is a lethal threat, you have no right to compel an officer to risk his life by a more time-consuming and risky process. He has a family too.
 
~SAL said:
Public safety is critical, I agree.

If you don't want to be shot by the police, don't do that, I agree.

Here's the addition to that though, if you are going to arm a group of people with big guns and ask them to protect the public, they had best be mentally and physically capable of that job with a higher than average IQ, fully trained, know how to negotiate and kill only as a last resort. And they have to be accountable for those deaths. And throw a camera on them so we know how each and every kill goes down. That protects the public and the cops.
Click to expand...

Well then maybe the public better pay them for that too. It's not like cops get rich being cops.

And the law and their procedures are only to kill as a last resort.
 
Gladiator said:
So there is some reason the police could not have tried a stun gun before using lethal force? Seems like poor police training.
Click to expand...
Are St Louis officers even issued stun guns? I have no idea.
 
Gladiator said:
Seattle Police are apparently trained how to use trasers, before shooting. Why can't St. Louis officer be trained to use a taser first?

There might be less riots if trasers were tried first.

If Brown was 30 feet away, what was the danger to the officer?

"On Tuesday, King County Sheriff's deputies tried to Tase a burglary suspect. That failed, and police shot him. He's now hospitalized.

Last month, a Taser had no effect on a suspect who stopped his pickup in the middle of traffic on the Ship Canal Bridge.

"A lot of deployments are done in split second timing with someone charging," Tuttle said. "You may have weapon and may be violent and you may have to hit a moving target and that may be in play here."

That may have been the case in Kitsap County when a suspect pulled a knife. When the Taser didn't stop him, officers fired multiple shots, killing the man."

Tasers ineffective in four recent officer-involved shootings | Local & Regional | Seattle News, Weather, Sports, Breaking News | KOMO News
Click to expand...

Soooo....you have just given us examples...4 examples....where tasers didnt work.

And yet you would still insist that cops MUST use that first in lethal confrontations? Risk their lives even more?

Did you realize you actually typed and posted that?
 
~SAL said:
And that may well be.

It is none the less, a shame when no other option appears to be available or police panic and shoot instead of using their head.
Click to expand...


It's a shame....but it's not the cops' fault that they had to defend themselves and the public. That's very disrespectful of their lives to claim they could have 'thought of something else' to save a criminal threatening them with a knife.
 
Gladiator said:
What is wrong with some more advanced training with a combination of Traser first, Shoot second?

What is wrong with having more training is asking nut jobs questions to get them thinking more rationally?

The training is not there. It is not about Never killing anyone. It is about TRYING to avoid death. Tasers are a step in avoiding deaths.
Click to expand...

Not in the four examples you gave. THey were failures.

Why should the cops be the ones to sacrifice their lives by taking higher risks? THey're not the ones breaking the law.
 
Gladiator said:
Sometimes they work.
Click to expand...

Feel free to risk your life on 'sometimes.'

It's incredibly arrogant and dismissive of someone else's life to ask them to.
 
Fenton said:
Tazers are not always effective.

So, YOU have a highly agitated guy, brandishing a knife, refusing your commands, he may be on something ( you dont know ) and you have the choice of maybe pissing him off even more with a tazer and losing the 2 or 3 seconds needed to pull your pistol and stop the threat before he plunges that knife in your neck, or do you defend yourself properly ?

Cops deserve to go home to their families every night too.
Click to expand...
Suppose the cop had used a tazer, and the guy still managed to stab him. A taze wears off fast, the cop bleeds out, the perp takes the cop's gun and then OP makes a thread "why do we arm police if they won't shoot".
 
Gladiator said:
Law enforcement injuries reduced 86% Arrestee injuries reduced 79%


//
Click to expand...

those statistics are for capturing and restraining criminals....not in self-defensive (lethal threat) situations.

And yes, it is safer for both than hitting them with fists, batons, etc. Less harm.

Tasers are not about stopping a lethal threat however...they are about restraint.
 
Bodhisattva said:
Red Herring. You are dodging the point... it is their job to use non-lethal means whenever they can. That is the point. They didn't even try here...

They did and nobody was shoving cameras anywhere... How far do you have to get back though? The cop was sending them to BFE 100 meters back.
Click to expand...


It's only their job to use non-lethal measures if there isnt a lethal threat present. By no means are they obligated to use non-lethal methods if they are facing a lethal threat. *Everyone* is allowed to self-defense with the *appropriate level* of force. And if the threat is lethal force, everyone, including cops, has the right to use commensurate force. Their job doesnt override their right to life.

They arent paid enough to risk their lives on 'maybe.' THey have families to go home to too.
 
Lursa said:
It's only their job to use non-lethal measures if there isnt a lethal threat present. By no means are they obligated to use non-lethal methods if they are facing a lethal threat. *Everyone* is allowed to self-defense with the *appropriate level* of force. And if the threat is lethal force, everyone, including cops, has the right to use commensurate force. Their job doesnt override their right to life.

They arent paid enough to risk their lives on 'maybe.' THey have families to go home to too.
Click to expand...

Police are not like "everyone" else... they have night sticks, batons, pepper spray and tazers... I feel that they are obligated to use non-lethal measures first in the instances of knives and such and I don't care if they are not paid enough... it is still their job. Don't be a cop if you don't like the risk. A life guard at a busy beach risks their lives, so do fire fighters and other jobs that don't make much. I did both of those by the way and when I went into a burning house, literally, or into huge surf to rescue a person I risked my life. Cops have a gun and seem to feel that they are special and that they are at more risk then "everybody"... they are not.
 
Bodhisattva said:
Police are not like "everyone" else... they have night sticks, batons, pepper spray and tazers... I feel that they are obligated to use non-lethal measures first in the instances of knives and such and I don't care if they are not paid enough... it is still their job. Don't be a cop if you don't like the risk. A life guard at a busy beach risks their lives, so do fire fighters and other jobs that don't make much. I did both of those by the way and when I went into a burning house, literally, or into huge surf to rescue a person I risked my life. Cops have a gun and seem to feel that they are special and that they are at more risk then "everybody"... they are not.
Click to expand...

A knife kills, so does shove or punch to the head. The police's job does not supersede their right to life.

Anytime an attacker can get hold of you, they have a chance of killing you, disabling you, taking your gun, etc. You never ever take that chance and certainly no one, esp. not an employer, has the right to ask you to ask you to intentionally do so.

They are already risking their lives, it's disappointing that you dont seem to recognize that. Anytime they go into a house or a store or a car stop or a situation where they have been called, they can be ambushed.

Again: Tueller Drill, researched and admissible in court....an attacker can reach and kill a cop/person from 21 feet in 1.5 seconds....that is before the cop can draw, aim, and fire (also timed).

Tueller Drill - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

(cops learn this in training, btw)
 
Lursa said:
A knife kills, so does shove or punch to the head. The police's job does not supersede their right to life.

Anytime an attacker can get hold of you, they have a chance of killing you, disabling you, taking your gun, etc. You never ever take that chance and certainly no one, esp. not an employer, has the right to ask you to ask you to intentionally do so.

They are already risking their lives, it's disappointing that you dont seem to recognize that. Anytime they go into a house or a store or a car stop or a situation where they have been called, they can be ambushed.

Again: Tueller Drill, researched and admissible in court....an attacker can reach and kill a cop/person from 21 feet in 1.5 seconds....that is before the cop can draw, aim, and fire (also timed).

Tueller Drill - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

(cops learn this in training, btw)
Click to expand...

I just said that they are risking their lives and that so do others... I just said that.

...and as to the rest... THAT IS WHY THEY HAVE NIGHT STICKS, PEPPER SPRAY AND TASERS.

What is disappointing is seeing people IGNORE that fact and justify deadly force when there are other options.

Cops that do what many of these cops do should be fired and/or charged with a crime.
 
Bodhisattva said:
I just said that they are risking their lives and that so do others... I just said that.

...and as to the rest... THAT IS WHY THEY HAVE NIGHT STICKS, PEPPER SPRAY AND TASERS.

What is disappointing is seeing people IGNORE that fact and justify deadly force when there are other options.

Cops that do what many of these cops do should be fired and/or charged with a crime.
Click to expand...

Well it sounded like you qualified it, like it wasnt 'enough.' No one forces firemen or anyone else to do those jobs and forcing guidelines on cops that demand they cant use lethal force unless they try all other alternatives first is not a decision for anyone else to make.

Only the person in the situation can determine the reality of the lethality of the threat. And we have science and experience that demonstrate it. Like Tueller.

I've posted this twice already on this subject: Near here in Bellevue, WA, several yrs ago now, a veteran cop was killed by a crazy naked guy. The naked buy got his gun and killed him. Yes, the cop made some mistakes...and one of them was letting that naked guy get within striking distance.

If that cop had even drawn his gun against a naked guy, much less shot him, he would have been crucified by the media. Just destroyed.

These crazy, drugged up, or amped on adreneline people walk right thru tasers and pepper spray sometimes. The cop would have been crucified if he had subdued him with his baton!

Edit: see note in next post.
 
Last edited:
Note: the law and police procedure already demand that lethal force can only be used to stop a lethal threat...or gross bodily harm/prevention of a forcible felony. For some depts, they can also use it to stop a fleeing suspect if they believe he is a threat to public safety.

How much more restrictive does it need to be?
 
Lursa said:
Well it sounded like you qualified it, like it wasnt 'enough.' No one forces firemen or anyone else to do those jobs and forcing guidelines on cops that demand they cant use lethal force unless they try all other alternatives first is not a decision for anyone else to make.

Only the person in the situation can determine the reality of the lethality of the threat. And we have science and experience that demonstrate it. Like Tueller.

I've posted this twice already on this subject: Near here in Bellevue, WA, several yrs ago now, a veteran cop was killed by a crazy naked guy. The naked buy got his gun and killed him. Yes, the cop made some mistakes...and one of them was letting that naked guy get within striking distance.

If that cop had even drawn his gun against a naked guy, much less shot him, he would have been crucified by the media. Just destroyed.

These crazy, drugged up, or amped on adreneline people walk right thru tasers and pepper spray sometimes. The cop would have been crucified if he had subdued him with his baton!

Edit: see note in next post.
Click to expand...

I have always said that instead of all cops pulling their guns first and as the only options at least one should attempt to use a non-lethal weapon. This kid with the knife had two cops... both did not need to draw pistols and open fire... one should have, not could have but SHOULD HAVE attempted to use a taser first.

Nobody forces a cop to be a cop either... they chose the job and the job should demand non-lethal force to be attempted prior to lethal force.
 
Bodhisattva said:
Nobody forces a cop to be a cop either... they chose the job and the job should demand non-lethal force to be attempted prior to lethal force.
Click to expand...

Thats dumb.

"Hey that dude has an AK-47 shootin' at us... we need to spray him with pepper spray from 100 feet first......"

:roll:
 
Caine said:
Thats dumb.

"Hey that dude has an AK-47 shootin' at us... we need to spray him with pepper spray from 100 feet first......"

:roll:
Click to expand...

We have been talking about guys with knives or that do not comply... not ISIS on a terror attack. :lol:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom