What's new
By:

Tough Day To Be In Law Enforcement

Avery said:
Shots should not have been fired. Seems like other less lethal measures should have been used first.
Click to expand...

Meh, maybe, possibly. But like I said the cops lives are more important than the dangerous *** criminals. Don't care if they are jew, white, mexican, indian, black, gypsy. If you commit a violent crime with a gun all bets are off. Thats on you, the criminal.

Can't make cops wait to be shot before they can protect themselves and society. Thats idiotic and irrational.

Edit:
Sorry, I was referring to the mexican guy that got killed last week. Not this case.
 
Beer said:
Sure





And yes, I agree without the full video of George Floyd this would not have blown up like it did.
Click to expand...
I remember that first video. From what I recall it was pretty big news. (must have been for me to have seen it)

And those were both ****ed up situations too and I would have no problem with people protesting those incidents.

Sent from my ONEPLUS A6013 using JazzFanz mobile app
 
Archie Moses said:

This one makes my blood boil too.
Click to expand...


I really don't understand this one. It seems to me like a police officer should only use a firearm if there is a direct and immediate threat to the officer or another person. This lady was clearly suffering from a mental illness, and the officers should have shown more patience to allow the situation to deescalate. "The person is not complying" is not enough of a reason to shoot them. Holding a screwdriver and shouting nonsense does not require a potentially lethal response.
 
Beer said:
Shoot to kill. I dont think # of shots is even kind of relevant.

I just hate when the family comes out with the "He always put family first. He loved his nieces and nephews. He was a momma's boy."

Sure, but he was also a violent criminal putting the publics lives in danger and he has to be held accountable for being a pos. And he was a pos. Sorry that he was dead, but he was a pos.

Can't wait until he finally kills someone to decide to take action.
Click to expand...
Shoot to kill is not the policy. It never has been and it never will be.

Shoot to stop the threat. Center mass, easiest place to hit and most likely to stop the person from being a threat. That's the policy of any armed person in law enforcement. Period.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Red
Beer said:
Meh, maybe, possibly. But like I said the cops lives are more important than the dangerous *** criminals. Don't care if they are jew, white, mexican, indian, black, gypsy. If you commit a violent crime with a gun all bets are off. Thats on you, the criminal.

Can't make cops wait to be shot before they can protect themselves and society. Thats idiotic and irrational.

Edit:
Sorry, I was referring to the mexican guy that got killed last week. Not this case.
Click to expand...
If the person has a gun then yeah. There's a thing called the "ladder of force" and if you're armed and acting aggressive then you've reached the top floor.

But there are far too many cases where police shoot a person they think might possibly be reaching for a gun maybe. I think they need to see a gun before they start shooting. If their gun is drawn and pointing at the person they can shoot and stop them before the person gets the gun out of their waistband and pointed in the general direction of the police.
 
Archie Moses said:

This one pissed me off too. I can think of probably a dozen other police shootings of trigger happy cops.
Click to expand...


This one was hard to watch. As more of these videos get wider circulation, it's apparent that many (not all) of the victims of police brutality have a mental illness, or are under the influence. All the more reason that changes in policy and procedure need to occur. Killing someone that is not posing an immediate threat needs to stop. This video also shows how important body cameras are.
 
Scat said:
They tried the taser which did not work because of the heavy clothing. What else would you suggest?
Click to expand...
Waiting longer. Talking longer. Maybe only shoot the person if they are an actual threat. Pretty basic stuff imo.

Sent from my ONEPLUS A6013 using JazzFanz mobile app
 
Archie Moses said:

This one pissed me off too. I can think of probably a dozen other police shootings of trigger happy cops.
Click to expand...


I remember that, and was thinking of it earlier. Two of the officers were charged with second degree murder, and the trial ended in a hung jury in Oct., 2016, with the jury deadlocked 9-3 in favor of acquittal.
 
Gameface said:
If the person has a gun then yeah. There's a thing called the "ladder of force" and if you're armed and acting aggressive then you've reached the top floor.

But there are far too many cases where police shoot a person they think might possibly be reaching for a gun maybe. I think they need to see a gun before they start shooting. If their gun is drawn and pointing at the person they can shoot and stop them before the person gets the gun out of their waistband and pointed in the general direction of the police.
Click to expand...


Agreed, I dont think the excuse of "I thought he might have a gun." should let them off the hook for murder.
 
Gameface said:
Shoot to kill is not the policy. It never has been and it never will be.

Shoot to stop the threat. Center mass, easiest place to hit and most likely to stop the person from being a threat. That's the policy of any armed person in law enforcement. Period.
Click to expand...

Sure, and once the bullets start flying how impossible is it to know when the threat is actually stopped? Unless the person has stopped moving. So its basically shoot to kill. If you're being intellectually honest about it.
 
Beer said:
Sure, and once the bullets start flying how impossible is it to know when the threat is actually stopped? Unless the person has stopped moving. So its basically shoot to kill. If you're being intellectually honest about it.
Click to expand...
I think it's an extremely important distinction. A person "shooting to kill" is using a completely different and much more hostile mindset than a person shooting to "stop the threat." We are in a moment when we want to improve the policing in this country. This distinction is part of that.

Also, if you're shooting to kill you might aim for the head. That's bad tactics. Shoot center mass until the threat has been stopped. That's good tactics.
 
Beer said:
Meh, maybe, possibly. But like I said the cops lives are more important than the dangerous *** criminals. Don't care if they are jew, white, mexican, indian, black, gypsy. If you commit a violent crime with a gun all bets are off. Thats on you, the criminal.

Can't make cops wait to be shot before they can protect themselves and society. Thats idiotic and irrational.

Edit:
Sorry, I was referring to the mexican guy that got killed last week. Not this case.
Click to expand...

Keeping it simple makes it easier to understand I guess.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Watched copwatch this morning was interesting. Currently watching Stewart Lee's pear cider bit to raise my morale, well trying to watch it over the noise generated by my bird's snoring on the couch.
 
Avery said:
Shots should not have been fired. Seems like other less lethal measures should have been used first.
Click to expand...

Life is so precious and to take it so quickly for not following orders isn't dumb imo.

This is why officers need more training to learn how to de escalate situations like this, have patience and have everyone make it out not being traumatized by the shooting. Glad this person lived.
 
fishonjazz said:
What's "MLM"?

Sent from my ONEPLUS A6013 using JazzFanz mobile app
Click to expand...
Essentially a "legal" pyramid scheme, which traffic in questionable products to get past the fact that the only way to make money is to get people under you to sell for you so you can make money off their "sales", and to make more money, you need more people. In fact if you get enough people under you, your can become a double platinum diamond distributor. You can actually make a lot of money. Hell, the upline guy just bought a new Lexus...with CASH! Hey why don't I just come over and we can talk about it. I can show you a cool presentation. It will only take an hour or 3. I'm sure it's something you'd be interested in. Haven't you ever wanted to be your own boss and make a lot of money just using products you have to buy anyway? Wait till you try the toothpaste! You're going to love it. And it makes shopping so much easier on the mrs. When would you have an hour? I'll just come over on Saturday at 5? Mmmk?
 


This is another one where I think there could have been a different outcome with more training. When I first saw this I remember thinking it was justified - and I still think that to a certain extent but see it differently.

The cop does a great job explaining himself and why he's there up until the loses his cool and yes for the cop to leave. The cops tells him to calm down in an authoritative voice, closes the gap between them and then pushes/shoves the guy - worst ****ing time to do that.

I wonder what would have happened if the cop maintained some distance, tried to get the guy to calm down when his emotions got high - like simple, let's take a deep breath or everything is going to be ok etc.

Obviously, the shovel guy was up to no good, but if cops are trained how to de escalate situations and have more patients and use words longer than force, maybe more lives would be saved? I'm certainly not the expert.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top