Some Answers To Why Police Shootings Are The Way They Are

[mneumann02]

There are a lot of questions concerning police shootings such as "Why didn't the police shoot to wound the person?" or "Why did they have to shoot him so many times?" I know I won't change anyone's mind with a simple post here, but my experience might help temper some views.

A few years ago, I was fortunate to be chosen for an FBI Citizen Training Course. There were 25 of us in the 10 week class. Participant citizens ranged from Black activists to far right conservatives. Subjects covered in the 4 1/2 hour weekly sessions included terrorism, white collar crime, kidnapping, violent crimes and "When and How to Use a Firearm."

The FBI trained us that if someone is life-threatening (to you or someone else) and you decide you to shoot, you shoot until the threat is ended. Only in Wild West movies does someone shoot to knock the gun out of the bad guy's hand or shoot to wound. To prove this important point, the FBI set up a very life-like full scale video on a wall with a very real looking and feeling fake gun that interacted with what was being shown. We each took turns as an FBI agent deciding if, when and whom to shoot. It was so real many of us were shaking during our turn as the video was played. Our first guy up shot the bad guy one time, and as the bad guy fell, he turned to us and smiled as he blew the imagined smoke from his gun barrel. Unfortunately for our "pretend" FBI agent, as the bad guy fell, he emptied his revolver into the back of the "agent."

At first the Black activist refused to role-play, but eventually did. He was shaking as he kept yelling, "FBI, drop the weapon!" When he finally decided to shoot, he not only emptied the gun's 8 round capacity, he reloaded and shot a couple more times. (They still talk about this in that FBI office.)

I asked a question. How do you know when to shoot? The FBI agent handed me the fake gun and said I was an FBI agent and I just caught a bad guy (him) robbing a bank. As the bad guy, he walked across the room away from me and put a fake gun to his head. I yelled, "FBI, drop the gun." He started yelling he was going to kill himself and walked toward me with the gun at his head. In less than the blink of an eye, as he got 10 feet away, he turned the gun on me, shot me, and said "You're dead." I had been ready to pull the trigger the moment he made a move. But I am now a dead FBI agent.

I am not arguing that all shootings are justified by any means. I'm just saying that those 25 citizens, who went through that training exercise, developed a lot more empathy for understanding how extremely tense those situations are- how life and death decisions have to be made in split seconds that will have ramifications for the rest of people's lives.

[Stu from NYC]

There are a lot of questions concerning police shootings such as "Why didn't the police shoot to wound the person?" or "Why did they have to shoot him so many times?" I know I won't change anyone's mind with a simple post here, but my experience might help temper some views.

A few years ago, I was fortunate to be chosen for an FBI Citizen Training Course. There were 25 of us in the 10 week class. Participant citizens ranged from Black activists to far right conservatives. Subjects covered in the 4 1/2 hour weekly sessions included terrorism, white collar crime, kidnapping, violent crimes and "When and How to Use a Firearm."

The FBI trained us that if someone is life-threatening (to you or someone else) and you decide you to shoot, you shoot until the threat is ended. Only in Wild West movies does someone shoot to knock the gun out of the bad guy's hand or shoot to wound. To prove this important point, the FBI set up a very life-like full scale video on a wall with a very real looking and feeling fake gun that interacted with what was being shown. We each took turns as an FBI agent deciding if, when and whom to shoot. It was so real many of us were shaking during our turn as the video was played. Our first guy up shot the bad guy one time, and as the bad guy fell, he turned to us and smiled as he blew the imagined smoke from his gun barrel. Unfortunately for our "pretend" FBI agent, as the bad guy fell, he emptied his revolver into the back of the "agent."

At first the Black activist refused to role-play, but eventually did. He was shaking as he kept yelling, "FBI, drop the weapon!" When he finally decided to shoot, he not only emptied the gun's 8 round capacity, he reloaded and shot a couple more times. (They still talk about this in that FBI office.)

I asked a question. How do you know when to shoot? The FBI agent handed me the fake gun and said I was an FBI agent and I just caught a bad guy (him) robbing a bank. As the bad guy, he walked across the room away from me and put a fake gun to his head. I yelled, "FBI, drop the gun." He started yelling he was going to kill himself and walked toward me with the gun at his head. In less than the blink of an eye, as he got 10 feet away, he turned the gun on me, shot me, and said "You're dead." I had been ready to pull the trigger the moment he made a move. But I am now a dead FBI agent.

I am not arguing that all shootings are justified by any means. I'm just saying that those 25 citizens, who went through that training exercise, developed a lot more empathy for understanding how extremely tense those situations are- how life and death decisions have to be made in split seconds that will have ramifications for the rest of people's lives.

Had a similar experience.

Roanoke Va has a citizen police academy and took both the city and the county version.

One had us clear a room after a burglary. Bad guy got behind us and my partner saw him and turned around. The "bad guy" had a fake gun that was pointing at us.

Are the police supposed to wait to be shot? Sorry you shoot until the threat is neutralized.

The other had an electronic version where you are in a patrol car chasing a suspect. He stops gets out of his car. You do to and get behind him.

He turns around with a gun in his hand. Do you wait to get shot? I did and was shot.

One more point. Very difficult to shoot straight when you are in danger. Most police will not hit their target if more than 7 ft away. Adrenaline supposedly causes this.

This is also why elite military train constantly and shoot thousands of rounds a month.

Think of this when you ask why they do not shoot to wound their target.

[8notes]

Why don't police carry tasers? They are a weapon, can be used at a distance, like pepper spray, and are less lethal than guns. Through the end of September 2020, over 700 people have been shot and killed by police, an increasing trend.

[retiredguy123]

Why don't police carry tasers? They are a weapon, can be used at a distance, like pepper spray, and are less lethal than guns. Through the end of September 2020, over 700 people have been shot and killed by police, an increasing trend.
Probably the same reason criminals don't carry tasers.

[Jima64]

maybe bad guys should not threaten civilians or police officers. tasers are also very unreliable as to affect on a person that is stoned or high on drugs, or wearing thick clothing.

[Funkman]

Why don't police carry tasers? They are a weapon, can be used at a distance, like pepper spray, and are less lethal than guns. Through the end of September 2020, over 700 people have been shot and killed by police, an increasing trend.Many do carry tasers but tasers aren't always effective (lots of videos of people getting tased and it having no effect)

[kcrazorbackfan]

I was in two shootings as a State Trooper, the first as a sniper on a hijacking/hostage situation, the second on a stolen vehicle with an escapee whose car I did the pit maneuver on and he got out firing; this was immediately after he riddled the front of my cruiser with automatic weapon fire.

My point is, everyday I was going to do whatever it took to come home to my family every night. No LEO ever goes to work looking for a fire fight but it sometimes happens and they have to make the decision to end the threat that will keep them from going home.

[CWGUY]

I was in two shootings as a State Trooper, the first as a sniper on a hijacking/hostage situation, the second on a stolen vehicle with an escapee whose car I did the pit maneuver on and he got out firing; this was immediately after he riddled the front of my cruiser with automatic weapon fire.

My point is, everyday I was going to do whatever it took to come home to my family every night. No LEO ever goes to work looking for a fire fight but it sometimes happens and they have to make the decision to end the threat that will keep them from going home.

OP wrote "Some Answers To Why Police Shootings Are The Way They Are" Thank you for the answer that counts...... so they can go home at the end of their shift. :ho:

[Stu from NYC]

OP wrote "Some Answers To Why Police Shootings Are The Way They Are" Thank you for the answer that counts...... so they can go home at the end of their shift. :ho:

That is the best answer

[rjm1cc]

Why don't police carry tasers? They are a weapon, can be used at a distance, like pepper spray, and are less lethal than guns. Through the end of September 2020, over 700 people have been shot and killed by police, an increasing trend.

Tasers do not always stop a bad guy but I will agree if you can this should be the first line of defense if the other person is not holding a gun.

[rjm1cc]

I took a firearms training class from the local Schieffer. The subject of shooting to wound a person was discussed and examples shown. The basic rule if you have to draw your gun and fire you fire to kill. I think the professionals have to reevaluate this and maybe we have only one officer firing at first or maybe a qualified sniper shoot to wound any suspect that has a gun. The professionals who decide are those that have been in the situation.

[8notes]

Tasers do not always stop a bad guy but I will agree if you can this should be the first line of defense if the other person is not holding a gun.

I agree. The most recent shooting comes to mind, when the person with mental illness was wielding a kitchen knife. Wouldn't it be nice if that person had been able to come home to his family.

[Joe V.]

I took a firearms training class from the local Schieffer. The subject of shooting to wound a person was discussed and examples shown. The basic rule if you have to draw your gun and fire you fire to kill. I think the professionals have to reevaluate this and maybe we have only one officer firing at first or maybe a qualified sniper shoot to wound any suspect that has a gun. The professionals who decide are those that have been in the situation.

After a lifetime in law enforcement and the military the main preamble to firing at a deadly threat is shoot until the threat is neutralized. That means totally neutralized. BTW: Who decides in a nano second of reaction time which officer should shoot first?

[JGVillages]

Why don't police carry tasers? They are a weapon, can be used at a distance, like pepper spray, and are less lethal than guns. Through the end of September 2020, over 700 people have been shot and killed by police, an increasing trend.

Why don’t local governments stop defunding law enforcement, then possibly they can provide LEO’s with the non lethal alternatives.

[Stu from NYC]

I agree. The most recent shooting comes to mind, when the person with mental illness was wielding a kitchen knife. Wouldn't it be nice if that person had been able to come home to his family.

And the cost of that might have been the police officer does not get to come home to his or her family.

[New Englander]

I agree. The most recent shooting comes to mind, when the person with mental illness was wielding a kitchen knife. Wouldn't it be nice if that person had been able to come home to his family.

What would you do if you were the officer and a crazed man with a knife is coming at you? I know I would shoot to kill.

[golfing eagles]

Why don't police carry tasers? They are a weapon, can be used at a distance, like pepper spray, and are less lethal than guns. Through the end of September 2020, over 700 people have been shot and killed by police, an increasing trend.

Why don't these "victims" of police shootings stop breaking the law, and then when they are apprehended comply with the instructions of the LEO? The common theme of most of the recent shootings was an encounter with police after committing a crime and then resisting arrest

[oldtimes]

I agree. The most recent shooting comes to mind, when the person with mental illness was wielding a kitchen knife. Wouldn't it be nice if that person had been able to come home to his family.

When it comes to a choice of saving a criminal or a law enforcement officer I would choose the LEO every time.

[Number 10 GI]

Why don't police carry tasers? They are a weapon, can be used at a distance, like pepper spray, and are less lethal than guns. Through the end of September 2020, over 700 people have been shot and killed by police, an increasing trend.

That is a question for the city mayor and city council who oversee and fund the police department. The chief of police can only ask for the funding for needed equipment, the city council decides if he gets it.

[Number 10 GI]

I agree. The most recent shooting comes to mind, when the person with mental illness was wielding a kitchen knife. Wouldn't it be nice if that person had been able to come home to his family.

Yes it would be nice if he was able to go home to his family but he chose not to follow instructions to drop the knife. Actions have consequences.

[Number 10 GI]

Why don’t local governments stop defunding law enforcement, then possibly they can provide LEO’s with the non lethal alternatives.

Good question. Police departments don't set policy, the mayor and city council are supposed to control and work with the PD instead of against it.

[Dr Winston O Boogie jr]

I took a firearms training class from the local Schieffer. The subject of shooting to wound a person was discussed and examples shown. The basic rule if you have to draw your gun and fire you fire to kill. I think the professionals have to reevaluate this and maybe we have only one officer firing at first or maybe a qualified sniper shoot to wound any suspect that has a gun. The professionals who decide are those that have been in the situation.

So these officers have time to have a meeting and make decisions about how and why to shoot.

Too Late You're Dead Blue Bloods - YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1DHUPtWTuJk)

[Bogie Shooter]

Yes it would be nice if he was able to go home to his family but he chose not to follow instructions to drop the knife. Actions have consequences.

Did you miss the mental illness part?

[Garwood1]

And not protect you that is under threat of harm -defunding is a street I wish not to live

[HoosierPa]

Parents need to train their kids not to be outlaws.

Retraining the police is not the answer.

Look in the mirror

[Bellavita]

If you have a gun you shoot to kill. They are trained to shoot to kill when you take a gun class or get concealed carry you are taught shoot to kill so keeping that in mind if you pull your gun it is for one purpose...kill.

You are not supposed to wave your gun to warn.

That is why we need to give police more tools and resources I am not saying abolish police help them. Retool their department

[DrBrutyle109]

Why don't police carry tasers? They are a weapon, can be used at a distance, like pepper spray, and are less lethal than guns. Through the end of September 2020, over 700 people have been shot and killed by police, an increasing trend.
I have a possible solution to a lot of the police shootings...
When they tell you to stop, don’t keep running. That might work.

[maggie1]

Why don't police carry tasers? They are a weapon, can be used at a distance, like pepper spray, and are less lethal than guns. Through the end of September 2020, over 700 people have been shot and killed by police, an increasing trend.

Depending on the type and quality of the taser unit, they can cost upwards of $1000, but most are around half that. Using a taser on a suspect who is under the influence of meth, and/or other drugs of abuse is a crapshoot as to whether or not it will be effective. Here's a video of two PA state troopers trying to affect an arrest of a man stopped for suspected impaired driving. They eventually had to use a taser, but as you'll see, it had limited effect, and the guy ended up shooting both troopers.

PA TROOPERS SHOOTING 2017 - YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dmROcAX7AGg)

The two posters who went through the police and FBI training programs provide a good description of why police shoot to kill. There is no shoot to wound - when faced with deadly force, it's your life, or the life of the assailent.

[WesMan]

So true!!!!!!!!

[WesMan]

Totally correct!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[WesMan]

Good question. Police departments don't set policy, the mayor and city council are supposed to control and work with the PD instead of against it.
Look at the 3 who run Philly and you will know why the police are not supported!!!!! The police chief said she did not have a budget for tasers!!!!!! The poor Philly cops are always put down by the Mayor!!!!

[TheMoyers]

If we continue to play "Monday morning quarterback" by second guessing what a LEO does in that split second, thin k about who we are going to get as LEOs in the future. I tip my hat to those who have spent their lives in law enforcement. And please don't ask me about the few bad cops you may have seen on videos. There are bad clergy, teachers, doctors, lawyers, cooks, etc. I am attaching a video named "THAT IS HOW FAST IT CAN HAPPEN". It is 6 seconds long. That cop could have died in those6 seconds. Those of you who were not in LE, think about how much time he had to react. It is scary, and God bless whoever trained him.
If we don't support our police, the ONLY people who will become police are trigger happy people who look forward to shooting someone. The adage "Be careful what you ask for" certainly applies here, and defunding police is one very stupid idea.
Watch the video.

[Art cov]

When I got training in the military, silhouettes did not have arms or legs. The crazy folks haven’t woke up yet, but they will chime in. It’s been a great thread! Thanks to all of you with common sense!

[moe1212]

From the data I was easily able to gather it is not an increasing trend. Since 2013 it has been pretty much the same number every year. Press would have you believe otherwise.

[Girlcopper]

Why don't police carry tasers? They are a weapon, can be used at a distance, like pepper spray, and are less lethal than guns. Through the end of September 2020, over 700 people have been shot and killed by police, an increasing trend.
Because you dont bring a knife to a gun fight as the saying goes. The taser has to hit the person just right from a distance. If they havve heavy clothes on, the prongs wont go through. If they are drugged up, the taser wont affect them. Would you shoot someone who points a gun at you with just a taser? If you say yes, then I hope you have made things right with God because youre heading his way.

[Dr Winston O Boogie jr]

Did you miss the mental illness part?

True this guy had mental illness and the police knew it as they had been to his house several times. But does that mean that they should allow him to kill or injure one of them?

When faced with a death threat it's either him or me. What would you have done?

[greenflash245]

they are shooting to kill. period.

[RanTrac713]

When I got training in the military, silhouettes did not have arms or legs. The crazy folks haven’t woke up yet, but they will chime in. It’s been a great thread! Thanks to all of you with common sense!
Always aim for center mass.

[cwhitecat]

I agree. The most recent shooting comes to mind, when the person with mental illness was wielding a kitchen knife. Wouldn't it be nice if that person had been able to come home to his family.

And if he killed an officer with that knife how nice would that feel.
Should the officer have asked him first if he was mentally ill and then let him stab him with the knife.

[TomPerry]

EVERY shooting that started “peaceful demonstrations”, riots, looting and murders have two things in common....1) the person shot by LEO was on drugs, and 2) the person shot by LEO did not obey the commands of the LEO. Even if there was a disputed issue with the LEO, if they followed the LEO commands the would be alive and would have a opportunity to resolve the dispute. Follow the commands of the LEO!!!!!! You will have time to talk it out, get legal representation, and live!!!!!

[PugMom]

I was in two shootings as a State Trooper, the first as a sniper on a hijacking/hostage situation, the second on a stolen vehicle with an escapee whose car I did the pit maneuver on and he got out firing; this was immediately after he riddled the front of my cruiser with automatic weapon fire.

My point is, everyday I was going to do whatever it took to come home to my family every night. No LEO ever goes to work looking for a fire fight but it sometimes happens and they have to make the decision to end the threat that will keep them from going home.

with your vast experience, i'd like to ask you what you think of the policies the authorities are using? do we need more or less?

[EviesGP]

And law enforcement training will also show that a knife wielding man can charge and kill someone within 50ft, EVEN while being shot himself, as adrenaline could keep him alive for that amount of time.

Secondly, the man in Philly was walking around with the knife, so not only were the officers a threat, so was the general public, as he was walking all around, and completely ignoring their commands. If they had not acted, and he harmed or killed someone else.....well, you know the rest of the story.

[DIver0258]

In most cases LEO took the proper course of action. If you don't want to be shot, obey the officers commands. Repeat them back to them to make sure you understand what they are requesting you to do. Stay calm and comply. Not all of the recent events were justified. LEO are just like any occupation, some are good at what they do, some are not, and some do not have the proper mental aptitude for the job. Regardless of LEO's response to an event, if you comply you will come out ok. When they roll up they do not know you or your intentions. Especially with the attitude and environment today, they must be ever vigilant. Cities discussing defunding law enforcement are asking for mayhem and increased crime. LEO are always welcome in our home.

[sooziesoul]

Thank you for sharing your experience .

[sooziesoul]

Tasers do not always eliminate the threat or the danger.

[Wisenano]

Excellent! Thank you.

[Saluce]

I took a firearms training class from the local Schieffer. The subject of shooting to wound a person was discussed and examples shown. The basic rule if you have to draw your gun and fire you fire to kill. I think the professionals have to reevaluate this and maybe we have only one officer firing at first or maybe a qualified sniper shoot to wound any suspect that has a gun. The professionals who decide are those that have been in the situation.

So your example is to designate one officer to pull their weapon in a situation where there is a armed threat?!?!?! What like enie meany miney Mo you get to shoot?!?!?
If only situations were that well planned out in real life situations. It only takes one second and your dead!!!
I get what your saying, but that would be an impossible scenario In a real life situation.

[Tom2172]

Why don’t criminals drop their weapons? That the easiest and simplest solution!
Surrender don’t be a threat, get your day in court!
If cops and public are not being threaten there is no need for shooting!

All these people that after the fact from their couch say the police should of done this or that - they should next time be the first responders let them handle the armed criminal the next time! See how they do

[shueburruss]

Did you miss the mental illness part?

Tell that to the family of a fallen police officer in my home town whose throat was slit while responding to a situation where the assailant, with mental illness had a knife. The police office tried "talking him down"...

[Saluce]

And law enforcement training will also show that a knife wielding man can charge and kill someone within 50ft, EVEN while being shot himself, as adrenaline could keep him alive for that amount of time.

Secondly, the man in Philly was walking around with the knife, so not only were the officers a threat, so was the general public, as he was walking all around, and completely ignoring their commands. If they had not acted, and he harmed or killed someone else.....well, you know the rest of the story.

Exactly!!!!
Of course when the media mentions “kitchen knife”, does everyone think it’s a butter knife?!?!? I own some pretty wicked “kitchen” type knives.
The call started out that the suspect was chasing & threatening to his family with the knife!!!
I have a LEO friend that was stabbed with a screw driver while trying to talk to the suspect. Thank God it didn’t kill him & yes my friend ended up shooting the screw driver welding suspect!!!
My LEO friend hesitated and got stabbed!!! Thankfully he was able to go home to his family!!!
All you keyboard Warriors need to physically put yourself in an officers shoes before questioning & saying what you would do.
The criminals don’t care and compliance isn’t a choice they go with.

[jbrown132]

Why don't police carry tasers? They are a weapon, can be used at a distance, like pepper spray, and are less lethal than guns. Through the end of September 2020, over 700 people have been shot and killed by police, an increasing trend.

Tasers are fine for subduing an unarmed person who may be resisting arrest but not an armed individual. Your a police officer. You have an armed individual fifteen feet away. You pull out your taser and shoot the individual. You hit him and get what they refer to as a clothing disconnect. You as the police officer are dead. Same scenario wit an individual carrying a knife. You miss with the taser and guess what. Chances are as the officer you are dead or seriously wounded. I just love you people who sit in your cozy homes who have never in your lives been in a life threatening situation Monday morning quarterbacking these officers. Just once put yourself in their shoes where you have less than a second to make a decision as to putting that threat down or you not going home. What would you choose to do?

[Mrprez]

On Live PD you often heard officers being directed to go to less lethal weapons. One or more would maintain high levels while others would go to tasers.

[NFRicaS]

There are a lot of questions concerning police shootings such as "Why didn't the police shoot to wound the person?" or "Why did they have to shoot him so many times?" I know I won't change anyone's mind with a simple post here, but my experience might help temper some views.

A few years ago, I was fortunate to be chosen for an FBI Citizen Training Course. There were 25 of us in the 10 week class. Participant citizens ranged from Black activists to far right conservatives. Subjects covered in the 4 1/2 hour weekly sessions included terrorism, white collar crime, kidnapping, violent crimes and "When and How to Use a Firearm."

The FBI trained us that if someone is life-threatening (to you or someone else) and you decide you to shoot, you shoot until the threat is ended. Only in Wild West movies does someone shoot to knock the gun out of the bad guy's hand or shoot to wound. To prove this important point, the FBI set up a very life-like full scale video on a wall with a very real looking and feeling fake gun that interacted with what was being shown. We each took turns as an FBI agent deciding if, when and whom to shoot. It was so real many of us were shaking during our turn as the video was played. Our first guy up shot the bad guy one time, and as the bad guy fell, he turned to us and smiled as he blew the imagined smoke from his gun barrel. Unfortunately for our "pretend" FBI agent, as the bad guy fell, he emptied his revolver into the back of the "agent."

At first the Black activist refused to role-play, but eventually did. He was shaking as he kept yelling, "FBI, drop the weapon!" When he finally decided to shoot, he not only emptied the gun's 8 round capacity, he reloaded and shot a couple more times. (They still talk about this in that FBI office.)

I asked a question. How do you know when to shoot? The FBI agent handed me the fake gun and said I was an FBI agent and I just caught a bad guy (him) robbing a bank. As the bad guy, he walked across the room away from me and put a fake gun to his head. I yelled, "FBI, drop the gun." He started yelling he was going to kill himself and walked toward me with the gun at his head. In less than the blink of an eye, as he got 10 feet away, he turned the gun on me, shot me, and said "You're dead." I had been ready to pull the trigger the moment he made a move. But I am now a dead FBI agent.

I am not arguing that all shootings are justified by any means. I'm just saying that those 25 citizens, who went through that training exercise, developed a lot more empathy for understanding how extremely tense those situations are- how life and death decisions have to be made in split seconds that will have ramifications for the rest of people's lives.
But if there are 4+ officers and the one with the mental issues has only a knife? Come on, NO EXCUSE for a shooting death...shoot in knee, use a taser, swing a billy club...whatever...and for God’s sake, have social workers in police departments...

[Bogie Shooter]

On Live PD you often heard officers being directed to go to less lethal weapons. One or more would maintain high levels while others would go to tasers.

did you realize that show was scripted and edited?

[jleonard]

And kill one of his family members?! Remember; the police were already called to his home several times that day.

[Linnberg]

Excellent! Thank you.

This was the best, logical, educational discussion I have ever seen on this site. Wish all could be like this, non-insulting, non-sarcastic, not
Political or judgement also.
I learned so much about why LEO (learned even acronym) do not always use or carry lasers and why they have
To shoot (sometimes) to kill.
Does not change my politics or empathy for the mental ill but it does change my feelings on why some
Police should not be tried for any reason after they kill someone that I thought could be handled in another way.
And yes while I do believe in peaceful protests, I certainly will never condone rioting,
Looting or non-peaceful demonstrations whether from the radical left or right
Thanks again all of you who
Posted on this subject.

[Art cov]

Children are not taught to even obey their parents or grandparents. THE FIRST TIME. It’s pitiful! I taught once and made sure they heard me. If near a road, near a snake that they didn’t see or a number of dangers. Today mother’s are so stressed for the kids not listening. Not the kids fault for they are being trained to not obey parents, teachers and police just to mention a few. Child training is an everyday event. How many times do we hear ( these kids are driving me crazy)! If they don’t obey mom n dad, then they won’t have respect for authorities. It’s getting worse n worse. Yelling and screaming at kids don’t work. Lovingly teaching them works! I always said, train and correct them so the police don’t have to deal with them later in life. It’s work but it pays off.

[Mrprez]

did you realize that show was scripted and edited?

Yeah right. Proof?

[RockyGeans]

Amen

[cb1972]

If you have a gun you shoot to kill. They are trained to shoot to kill when you take a gun class or get concealed carry you are taught shoot to kill so keeping that in mind if you pull your gun it is for one purpose...kill.

You are not supposed to wave your gun to warn.

That is why we need to give police more tools and resources I am not saying abolish police help them. Retool their department

LEOs are not taught to "Shoot to Kill", they are taught to stop the action, or in other words, stop the "deadly physical force" that is imminent

[camaguey48]

Tasers are fine for subduing an unarmed person who may be resisting arrest but not an armed individual. Your a police officer. You have an armed individual fifteen feet away. You pull out your taser and shoot the individual. You hit him and get what they refer to as a clothing disconnect. You as the police officer are dead. Same scenario wit an individual carrying a knife. You miss with the taser and guess what. Chances are as the officer you are dead or seriously wounded. I just love you people who sit in your cozy homes who have never in your lives been in a life threatening situation Monday morning quarterbacking these officers. Just once put yourself in their shoes where you have less than a second to make a decision as to putting that threat down or you not going home. What would you choose to do?
I want to see social workers respond to a disturbance....in three to four working days. Make sure they bring their clipboards.

[bilcon]

Would you trust a taser against a person with a gun or knife threatening you? Not me. No one ever seems to blame the bad guy. If you don't break the law, you probably won't have a problem.

[dadoiron]

There are a lot of questions concerning police shootings such as "Why didn't the police shoot to wound the person?" or "Why did they have to shoot him so many times?" I know I won't change anyone's mind with a simple post here, but my experience might help temper some views.

A few years ago, I was fortunate to be chosen for an FBI Citizen Training Course. There were 25 of us in the 10 week class. Participant citizens ranged from Black activists to far right conservatives. Subjects covered in the 4 1/2 hour weekly sessions included terrorism, white collar crime, kidnapping, violent crimes and "When and How to Use a Firearm."

The FBI trained us that if someone is life-threatening (to you or someone else) and you decide you to shoot, you shoot until the threat is ended. Only in Wild West movies does someone shoot to knock the gun out of the bad guy's hand or shoot to wound. To prove this important point, the FBI set up a very life-like full scale video on a wall with a very real looking and feeling fake gun that interacted with what was being shown. We each took turns as an FBI agent deciding if, when and whom to shoot. It was so real many of us were shaking during our turn as the video was played. Our first guy up shot the bad guy one time, and as the bad guy fell, he turned to us and smiled as he blew the imagined smoke from his gun barrel. Unfortunately for our "pretend" FBI agent, as the bad guy fell, he emptied his revolver into the back of the "agent."

At first the Black activist refused to role-play, but eventually did. He was shaking as he kept yelling, "FBI, drop the weapon!" When he finally decided to shoot, he not only emptied the gun's 8 round capacity, he reloaded and shot a couple more times. (They still talk about this in that FBI office.)

I asked a question. How do you know when to shoot? The FBI agent handed me the fake gun and said I was an FBI agent and I just caught a bad guy (him) robbing a bank. As the bad guy, he walked across the room away from me and put a fake gun to his head. I yelled, "FBI, drop the gun." He started yelling he was going to kill himself and walked toward me with the gun at his head. In less than the blink of an eye, as he got 10 feet away, he turned the gun on me, shot me, and said "You're dead." I had been ready to pull the trigger the moment he made a move. But I am now a dead FBI agent.

I am not arguing that all shootings are justified by any means. I'm just saying that those 25 citizens, who went through that training exercise, developed a lot more empathy for understanding how extremely tense those situations are- how life and death decisions have to be made in split seconds that will have ramifications for the rest of people's lives.
Yes

[nick demis]

I agree. The most recent shooting comes to mind, when the person with mental illness was wielding a kitchen knife. Wouldn't it be nice if that person had been able to come home to his family.

Why didn't the family commit him? I guess you could blame the family instead of the police for his death.

[dadoiron]

I took a firearms training class from the local Schieffer. The subject of shooting to wound a person was discussed and examples shown. The basic rule if you have to draw your gun and fire you fire to kill. I think the professionals have to reevaluate this and maybe we have only one officer firing at first or maybe a qualified sniper shoot to wound any suspect that has a gun. The professionals who decide are those that have been in the situation.

These confrontations happen quickly. So what has been trained works best. Until a star trek stung ray is developed that works immediately. Also non-lethals DO NOT WORK on those on certain drugs and multiple shots are required to get a stop.

[airstreamingypsy]

So, if someone is running away from the police, and won't stop when told to, and they get shot in the back, by the police...... just wonder what exactly the "threat" is. If someone is unarmed, what exactly is the "threat"? While I'm asking questions, when will some of you be able to grasp the concept that "defunding" means reallocating funds where it can be better used. It does not mean not paying and not providing police with everything they need.

[kanoa1kale2]

If you have a gun you shoot to kill. They are trained to shoot to kill when you take a gun class or get concealed carry you are taught shoot to kill so keeping that in mind if you pull your gun it is for one purpose...kill.

You are not supposed to wave your gun to warn.

That is why we need to give police more tools and resources I am not saying abolish police help them. Retool their department

This is incorrect. The conceal carry classes and leos are trained to shoot till the threat is neutralized. They are trained to shoot for center mass in order to minimize the danger of shots missing and to maximize the impact on the system of the criminal. When the threat is neutralized, leos will administer care to the criminal till the EMT's get there. The general rule is if a suspect is within 21 feet of the leo, that suspect can cross the distance to do harm before the officer can draw and fire from his holster.

[Number 10 GI]

Did you miss the mental illness part?

Nope, didn't miss it at all. Are you less dead if killed by a mentally ill person than by a sane one?

[SUENRAN]

So, if someone is running away from the police, and won't stop when told to, and they get shot in the back, by the police...... just wonder what exactly the "threat" is. If someone is unarmed, what exactly is the "threat"? While I'm asking questions, when will some of you be able to grasp the concept that "defunding" means reallocating funds where it can be better used. It does not mean not paying and not providing police with everything they need.

Let me get this straight...you just turn around and run and the bad guy goes free? Splendid!

[Mrprez]

So, if someone is running away from the police, and won't stop when told to, and they get shot in the back, by the police...... just wonder what exactly the "threat" is. If someone is unarmed, what exactly is the "threat"? While I'm asking questions, when will some of you be able to grasp the concept that "defunding" means reallocating funds where it can be better used. It does not mean not paying and not providing police with everything they need.

And then the guy runs around the corner and stabs you to death. No problem there right?

[Number 10 GI]

But if there are 4+ officers and the one with the mental issues has only a knife? Come on, NO EXCUSE for a shooting death...shoot in knee, use a taser, swing a billy club...whatever...and for God’s sake, have social workers in police departments...

You totally ignored the reasoned and understandable explanations why your suggested actions will not work. Willful ignorance.

[Indydealmaker]

I agree. The most recent shooting comes to mind, when the person with mental illness was wielding a kitchen knife. Wouldn't it be nice if that person had been able to come home to his family.

Why didn't his family keep the public safe in the first place?

[kcrazorbackfan]

with your vast experience, i'd like to ask you what you think of the policies the authorities are using? do we need more or less?

More policies are just a hindrance to LEO’s making those split second decisions; less policies can be a hindrance to making rational decisions.

Look, many of you say that if put in a split second decision, you would pull the trigger. You really have no idea what goes through your head in that split second time you know that you’re going to take a life or after you’ve pulled that trigger.

Your life will be forever changed.

[mark100]

Your writings are spot on. "Shoot Don't Shoot" is a reality citizens understand only after the participate in the live demonstration.

[Number 10 GI]

And then the guy runs around the corner and stabs you to death. No problem there right?

Or they kill or injure an innocent person later.
Isn't it amazing that when an innocent child is killed by thugs there is no outcry of indignation or condemnation of the murderer. One day on the news and totally forgotten forever but the drumbeat of murderer cops never ends. But when the police kill the thug, with a violent criminal record a yard long, who killed the innocent child, and the hypocrites come out of the sewers screaming about how the police murdered a good person. Disgusting!

[mtlee024]

Why don't police carry tasers? They are a weapon, can be used at a distance, like pepper spray, and are less lethal than guns. Through the end of September 2020, over 700 people have been shot and killed by police, an increasing trend.

You might want to go back an read the articles from several of the latest high profile shooting. I think you will find that Tasers were used and ineffective.

The real questions in my mind are:

1, Why don't we see news when a white man is shot by police. Far more white men are shot by police then black men.

2. What would have happened if the black man shot would have just done what the police told him to do. I would be willing to bet a lot that he would not have been shot, which begs the question:

3, How many black men are stopped by police, do what the police say and don't get shot, and why isn't that news.

I know the answers to these questions and I bet I will get a lot of negative comments because these question don't follow the current narrative of the liberal media.

[Bogie Shooter]

Nope, didn't miss it at all. Are you less dead if killed by a mentally ill person than by a sane one?

Never mind......

[Bogie Shooter]

Yeah right. Proof?

Here is a start.
Is Live PD Fake? Getting The Truth About The A&E TV Show | Empty Lighthouse Magazine (https://www.emptylighthouse.com/live-pd-fake-getting-truth-about-ae-tv-show-281277925)

[Mrprez]

Here is a start.
Is Live PD Fake? Getting The Truth About The A&E TV Show | Empty Lighthouse Magazine (https://www.emptylighthouse.com/live-pd-fake-getting-truth-about-ae-tv-show-281277925)

Not good enough. Faces are not blurred nor need to be blurred on a live news program. Watch your oval news reporting, are all the faces blurred?

Cameras? There are plenty of problems with the video and audio.

Captions? I don’t know what the issue is with captions.

Your cite is rejected as a poorly written article.

[Justus]

I agree. The most recent shooting comes to mind, when the person with mental illness was wielding a kitchen knife. Wouldn't it be nice if that person had been able to come home to his family.

Probably not.

[kenoc7]

maybe bad guys should not threaten civilians or police officers. tasers are also very unreliable as to affect on a person that is stoned or high on drugs, or wearing thick clothing.
A lot of the people, especially black people, who have been shot/killed by police weren';t threatening anyone. In fact, some of them were running away from the police.

[Justus]

An eye-opening solution to those people who don't understand the life-threatening situations every LEO faces every day would be a ride-along in the inner city with an LEO. Mind you, as a passenger, you are required to be weaponless, merely a spectator to events. What you will see as a captive audience may change the way you view this issue. Your life depends on the decisions made by the officer or officers at the scene. In a split second you could be the victim. If the officer doesn't shoot to kill within the 3 seconds he has to react, you are next in line...a lame duck sitting in a squad car, waiting for the drugged up or mentally ill person with the knife to decide your fate.

[rjm1cc]

After a lifetime in law enforcement and the military the main preamble to firing at a deadly threat is shoot until the threat is neutralized. That means totally neutralized. BTW: Who decides in a nano second of reaction time which officer should shoot first?

Yes and that is why I think people with experience have to set the policy. But remember the bullets that are fired have to go someplace and do present a risk to anyone in the area. Thus as a layman I would lean toward less firing when possible.

[rjm1cc]

True this guy had mental illness and the police knew it as they had been to his house several times. But does that mean that they should allow him to kill or injure one of them?

When faced with a death threat it's either him or me. What would you have done?

The fact that they knew he had mental illness could mean the risk to the police was higher as he could not be reasoned with easily.

[rjm1cc]

So your example is to designate one officer to pull their weapon in a situation where there is a armed threat?!?!?! What like enie meany miney Mo you get to shoot?!?!?
If only situations were that well planned out in real life situations. It only takes one second and your dead!!!
I get what your saying, but that would be an impossible scenario In a real life situation.
It would have to be a situation where they were trying to talk down the person. The sniper would have his gun drawn and aimed during the confirmation and would be providing protection to the other officers. Should reduce the number of bullets being fired and the risk to by standards.

[jimjamuser]

Why don't police carry tasers? They are a weapon, can be used at a distance, like pepper spray, and are less lethal than guns. Through the end of September 2020, over 700 people have been shot and killed by police, an increasing trend.
The answer my friend is robotic police (robocops). They will be crude at first and will be like bomb finding robots that are guided by operators. But, with ALL the problems that society is having recently with police over-reaction, some SOLUTION needs to be found. The Federal Government could devote a lot of grant money to universities and industry to increase the rate of adoption of robotics to crime prevention. A robot has NO fear of being killed, so they could be more likely to use non-lethal force on a criminal than a human would. The problem of overly protective unions would be eliminated. Industry HAS already eliminated many boring, repetitive jobs and substituted technology, A.I., and robotics for improved results at less costs. It has already happened! The future is closer than most people realize. Many will believe that this opinion is "pie in the sky". I just put it out there as a possible solution. It will require maximum Government commitment.

[Kdixon1260]

That guy with “a mental Illness “ had a violent rap sheet”. And continued to advance on officers! Maybe you heard about the knife wielding Muslim that killed three people in the French church the other day. A knife is just as deadly as a gun! Until we are in the shoes of a police officer paid to protect us, don’t question his life saving decisions of returning to his family!

[jimjamuser]

What would you do if you were the officer and a crazed man with a knife is coming at you? I know I would shoot to kill.
Depends on how much TIME before he got to me and could I run to get more time. If I could NOT retreat, I would fire a warning shot 1st and if he kept coming I would try to hit a leg. If there was no TIME and no possible backing away, then I would shoot for the chest. So it depends!

[jimjamuser]

Depending on the type and quality of the taser unit, they can cost upwards of $1000, but most are around half that. Using a taser on a suspect who is under the influence of meth, and/or other drugs of abuse is a crapshoot as to whether or not it will be effective. Here's a video of two PA state troopers trying to affect an arrest of a man stopped for suspected impaired driving. They eventually had to use a taser, but as you'll see, it had limited effect, and the guy ended up shooting both troopers.

PA TROOPERS SHOOTING 2017 - YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dmROcAX7AGg)

The two posters who went through the police and FBI training programs provide a good description of why police shoot to kill. There is no shoot to wound - when faced with deadly force, it's your life, or the life of the assailent.
If attacked with a knife (not talking a gun), you MAY? have enough time to run away, if you are fast enough. Fight OR flight, sometimes you have options.

[Bjeanj]

Depends on how much TIME before he got to me and could I run to get more time. If I could NOT retreat, I would fire a warning shot 1st and if he kept coming I would try to hit a leg. If there was no TIME and no possible backing away, then I would shoot for the chest. So it depends!

And exactly where would you fire that warning shot? That bullet will go somewhere, probably hitting someone else.

[AJ32162]

Depends on how much TIME before he got to me and could I run to get more time. If I could NOT retreat, I would fire a warning shot 1st and if he kept coming I would try to hit a leg. If there was no TIME and no possible backing away, then I would shoot for the chest. So it depends!

Serious? You obviously know NOTHING of police policy regarding confrontations with armed assailants. If I (as a police officer) ran from an armed assailant I would be severely reprimanded if not outright fired. Leaving the scene and allowing an armed assailant to threaten, injure, or perhaps kill an unarmed civilian is not part of police policy.

Shoot him in the leg? Serious? Why not just shoot the knife out of the perps hand?

Oh, by the way, warning shots are not permitted under police policy.
.

[Daddymac]

It’s Easy......
👇👇👇👇👇👇👇👇👇
Chris Rock - How not to get your ass kicked by the police! - YouTube (https://youtu.be/uj0mtxXEGE8)

[Bridget Staunton]

If I was in a fight for my life and I had a gun & knew how to use it I would fire. Feel very sorry for the cops they are trying to protect themselves (that being said I know there is a very small % of bad cops). If a criminal is out shooting at a cop the cop needs to take action to protect himself. He has a family to think about

[jimjamuser]

Why didn't the family commit him? I guess you could blame the family instead of the police for his death.
Or better still, you could blame society and government for NOT providing the budget for mental hospitals and mental health. Oh, but then the upper 10% would HAVE to PAY their FAIR share! We wouldn't want that, would we ????

[golfing eagles]

But if there are 4+ officers and the one with the mental issues has only a knife? Come on, NO EXCUSE for a shooting death...shoot in knee, use a taser, swing a billy club...whatever...and for God’s sake, have social workers in police departments...

So it's OK if only one or two of the officers get stabbed??????? When someone, mentally ill or not, is assaulting me with a knife, I DON'T WANT A SOCIAL WORKER!!!

[golfing eagles]

So, if someone is running away from the police, and won't stop when told to, and they get shot in the back, by the police...... just wonder what exactly the "threat" is. If someone is unarmed, what exactly is the "threat"? While I'm asking questions, when will some of you be able to grasp the concept that "defunding" means reallocating funds where it can be better used. It does not mean not paying and not providing police with everything they need.

The threat is that they will get away and harm someone if armed. If unarmed, there is less danger of that, but not zero. How about the perp obeys the commands of the LEO instead of running away??????

[golfing eagles]

A lot of the people, especially black people, who have been shot/killed by police weren';t threatening anyone. In fact, some of them were running away from the police.

After doing WHAT?

[jimjamuser]

This is incorrect. The conceal carry classes and leos are trained to shoot till the threat is neutralized. They are trained to shoot for center mass in order to minimize the danger of shots missing and to maximize the impact on the system of the criminal. When the threat is neutralized, leos will administer care to the criminal till the EMT's get there. The general rule is if a suspect is within 21 feet of the leo, that suspect can cross the distance to do harm before the officer can draw and fire from his holster.
Then, by that same logic, if the person or officer ran away they COULD? keep a 22-foot separation from that attacker. Thus, buying time and maybe some back-up to defuse the situation.

[golfing eagles]

Or better still, you could blame society and government for NOT providing the budget for mental hospitals and mental health. Oh, but then the upper 10% would HAVE to PAY their FAIR share! We wouldn't want that, would we ????

Let's see----
The top 1% of earners pay 38.5% of all taxes
The top 10% pay 70.1%
The top 50% pay 97%

(from taxfoundation.org)

Now, do you want mention the word "fair" again???????

[jimjamuser]

Serious? You obviously know NOTHING of police policy regarding confrontations with armed assailants. If I (as a police offer) ran from an armed assailant I would be severely reprimanded if not outright fired. Leaving the scene and allowing an armed assailant to threaten, injure, or perhaps kill an unarmed civilian is not part of police policy.

Shoot him in the leg? Serious? Why not just shoot the knife out of the perps hand?

Oh, by the way, warning shots are not permitted under police policy.
.
Policies are man-made. So they CAN be changed. I understand that you have to go by the policy. The policy could be changed to run to keep a 22-foot distance and then re-evaluate. Maybe a rubber bullet gun would be nice to have. And use your radio for back-up. Maybe the attacker would get exhausted or be on drugs and just get bored or confused. If you see him reach to kill or take a hostage - then you have to shoot. But, if it is only him and you and plenty of room and no crowd near - then why not just try evasion. The military does not always hold ground just to hold ground, sometimes that do a strategic retreat. I am sure there are occasions where Police could and should retreat. I am saying that retreat is just ONE other possible strategy!

[Marine1974]

Would be interesting to know how many law enforcement have been shot or injured from bricks thrown at them during the same
period . Unfortunately mental health issues and
poverty are on the rise . People have increased
access to weapons illegally. Our society is increasingly violent. When I was discharged from the Marine Corps I didn’t have any motivation to own a weapon .

[jimjamuser]

Let's see----
The top 1% of earners pay 38.5% of all taxes
The top 10% pay 70.1%
The top 50% pay 97%

(from taxfoundation.org)

Now, do you want mention the word "fair" again???????
Yes, the tax system was fair in the 1950s, when it was actually progressive. Today it is practically a flat tax. And the wealth gap has increased so dramatically in recent years that a conservative Wall ST. hedge fund expert says that he expects some type of revolution by 2027. I can look up his name if you ask me. You KNOW deep down that this wealth disparity can't continue. You are a smart man, I can tell. A wealth disparity nation was not how the US was intended to be. WE have drifted there unconsciously. If you are around until 2027, might that affect yourself and your family? I hope not. It all revolves around the tax system. There, I told you more about "FAIR". I could go on and on and write a book on that subject.

[AJ32162]

Policies are man-made. So they CAN be changed. I understand that you have to go by the policy. The policy could be changed to run to keep a 22-foot distance and then re-evaluate. Maybe a rubber bullet gun would be nice to have. And use your radio for back-up. Maybe the attacker would get exhausted or be on drugs and just get bored or confused. If you see him reach to kill or take a hostage - then you have to shoot. But, if it is only him and you and plenty of room and no crowd near - then why not just try evasion. The military does not always hold ground just to hold ground, sometimes that do a strategic retreat. I am sure there are occasions where Police could and should retreat. I am saying that retreat is just ONE other possible strategy!

We (and you most of all) are very fortunate that you never became a law enforcement officer, you would have likely been killed in the line of duty in short order. I don't mean this as a personal attack, but your 'philosophy' on law enforcement would likely get you or someone else killed.

[golfing eagles]

Yes, the tax system was fair in the 1950s, when it was actually progressive. Today it is practically a flat tax. And the wealth gap has increased so dramatically in recent years that a conservative Wall ST. hedge fund expert says that he expects some type of revolution by 2027. I can look up his name if you ask me. You KNOW deep down that this wealth disparity can't continue. You are a smart man, I can tell. A wealth disparity nation was not how the US was intended to be. WE have drifted there unconsciously. If you are around until 2027, might that affect yourself and your family? I hope not. It all revolves around the tax system. There, I told you more about "FAIR". I could go on and on and write a book on that subject.

So can I assume proposing a flat 17% income tax would be wasting my time with you????

[Fredster]

After reading through this thread, to me it appears obvious, that no matter
how many facts or actual experiences are shared, some readers will only get a
distorted understanding because of the biased lenses
they view through!
I might add that in my concealed carry training It was stressed that to fire my weapon was a last resort to neutralize a threat, and it would only be seconds to make a decision.If I had to shoot, I don’t recall being told to wing’em or shoot ‘em in the leg, but I do remember “Shoot for center of body mass”.
Now in rifle training in the service, I can recall it being said that in times of combat it might be wise to shoot to injure an enemy combatant, since it might take two out of action the one you wounded and the one that carries him off the front lines!

[amdubuc]

How many big cities have a death count over 700 from people killing people?

[maggie1]

Amen, brother

[New Englander]

Depends on how much TIME before he got to me and could I run to get more time. If I could NOT retreat, I would fire a warning shot 1st and if he kept coming I would try to hit a leg. If there was no TIME and no possible backing away, then I would shoot for the chest. So it depends!

Police do not fire warning shots.

[New Englander]

Policies are man-made. So they CAN be changed. I understand that you have to go by the policy. The policy could be changed to run to keep a 22-foot distance and then re-evaluate. Maybe a rubber bullet gun would be nice to have. And use your radio for back-up. Maybe the attacker would get exhausted or be on drugs and just get bored or confused. If you see him reach to kill or take a hostage - then you have to shoot. But, if it is only him and you and plenty of room and no crowd near - then why not just try evasion. The military does not always hold ground just to hold ground, sometimes that do a strategic retreat. I am sure there are occasions where Police could and should retreat. I am saying that retreat is just ONE other possible strategy!

You are SO out of touch with the reality of what the police go through dealing with violent people.

[Jean G]

Thank you for this. It is easy to “armchair quarterback” about what police should do. Remember, they are in life-or-death situations for themselves.

[Number 10 GI]

A lot of the people, especially black people, who have been shot/killed by police weren';t threatening anyone. In fact, some of them were running away from the police.

Name them.

[Going My Way]

Why don't police carry tasers? They are a weapon, can be used at a distance, like pepper spray, and are less lethal than guns. Through the end of September 2020, over 700 people have been shot and killed by police, an increasing trend.

Your giving us FALSE INFORMATION by saying "increasing trend".
2017 - 987 killed by Police
2018 - 997
2019 - 1,004
2020 - 718
So actually the trend is decreasing....
Wonder why your post got a few Thumbs-Up for miss information?

[Stu from NYC]

Your giving us FALSE INFORMATION by saying "increasing trend".
2017 - 987 killed by Police
2018 - 997
2019 - 1,004
2020 - 718
So actually the trend is decreasing....
Wonder why your post got a few Thumbs-Up for miss information?

It sounded good to some people? Why confuse them with the facts?

[Going My Way]

Your giving us FALSE INFORMATION by saying "increasing trend".
2017 - 987 killed by Police
2018 - 997
2019 - 1,004
2020 - 718
So actually the trend is decreasing....
Wonder why your post got a few Thumbs-Up for miss information?

. . . . And >>>------------> My Backup....

[jimbomaybe]

Why don't police carry tasers? They are a weapon, can be used at a distance, like pepper spray, and are less lethal than guns. Through the end of September 2020, over 700 people have been shot and killed by police, an increasing trend. How many shots do you get with a taser? is it as certain as a bullit ? if you life was on the line would you reach for your Taser or a 9MM

[jimbomaybe]

We (and you most of all) are very fortunate that you never became a law enforcement officer, you would have likely been killed in the line of duty in short order. I don't mean this as a personal attack, but your 'philosophy' on law enforcement would likely get you or someone else killed. I disagree after dealing with the real life situations on the street his attitude would change dramatically,, of course he would have great difficulty finding someone who would work with him

[Andyb]

That being said, I’m guessing that Biden’s comment to “shoot them in the knee cap” is showing ignorance and setting a dangerous narrative.

[BillY41]

Of course it would be nice to have an ending as that. The man had a mental problem. What has his family done for him for his problem? Call 911?

[diamond2005]

I agree. The most recent shooting comes to mind, when the person with mental illness was wielding a kitchen knife. Wouldn't it be nice if that person had been able to come home to his family.

Another bleeding heart liberal!

[Heyitsrick]

Look, many of you say that if put in a split second decision, you would pull the trigger. You really have no idea what goes through your head in that split second time you know that you’re going to take a life or after you’ve pulled that trigger.

Your life will be forever changed.

I have no doubt whatsoever that there can be very serious personal repercussions to an LEO who has to take the step to fire their weapon.

But your own words - "Your life will be forever changed" - are true in more than one respect. You'll be alive.

[Rsenholzi]

Perhaps we need to start sending the rioters and BLM members to these citizen classes. Maybe then then would get an idea of what the police are up against. I have seen the posts about tasers here. You obviously haven’t researched any of the people being killed. Many were tased and kept on coming due to the drugs that they were on. There were very few people killed who didn’t do anything . The majority had been arrested multiple times for anything from raped , domestic violence to burglary . The majority had wielded knives, guns and other lethal weapons yet you never heard about those. Even in the case of the young woman recently where was the “news” that her boyfriend had attacked the police with a weapon. Most of these people had been on drugs which makes them stronger and more apt to keep on coming regardless of the guns the police have. Many are mental impaired but why should that stop a police officer who is in the direct line of fire from coming home to his/her family. They should and need to protect themselves and the public should be backing them not attacking them. If it was you they were protecting from the violent criminal, I am sure you would want them riddle them with bullets. It’s time to stand up for the police and let them know they are supported. Do your research of each and every citizen that was killed. After going through 75 myself , I found every last one of them had a criminal record of violent crime. I found the majority were on drugs at the time and Most were wielding a weapon. Go BLUE

[maggie1]

Why didn't the family commit him? I guess you could blame the family instead of the police for his death.

In many ways I'm guessing the family predicted this outcome at some point. Expecting the family to control a mentally ill member is like trying to herd cats, especially if there is a history of violent behavior. Unless I am mistaken, the courts must make a decision on institutional committment. If the person is on medication, who is supposed to monitor their taking of it. Nope, it's a no-win situation, and a very sad one for the family. And let us not forget the impact on the police officers at having to take a life. They'll need counselling, and will have some pretty sleepless nights second guessing if they had made the best decision. I'd say they did, but others will disagree.

[noslices1]

There are a lot of questions concerning police shootings such as "Why didn't the police shoot to wound the person?" or "Why did they have to shoot him so many times?" I know I won't change anyone's mind with a simple post here, but my experience might help temper some views.

A few years ago, I was fortunate to be chosen for an FBI Citizen Training Course. There were 25 of us in the 10 week class. Participant citizens ranged from Black activists to far right conservatives. Subjects covered in the 4 1/2 hour weekly sessions included terrorism, white collar crime, kidnapping, violent crimes and "When and How to Use a Firearm."

The FBI trained us that if someone is life-threatening (to you or someone else) and you decide you to shoot, you shoot until the threat is ended. Only in Wild West movies does someone shoot to knock the gun out of the bad guy's hand or shoot to wound. To prove this important point, the FBI set up a very life-like full scale video on a wall with a very real looking and feeling fake gun that interacted with what was being shown. We each took turns as an FBI agent deciding if, when and whom to shoot. It was so real many of us were shaking during our turn as the video was played. Our first guy up shot the bad guy one time, and as the bad guy fell, he turned to us and smiled as he blew the imagined smoke from his gun barrel. Unfortunately for our "pretend" FBI agent, as the bad guy fell, he emptied his revolver into the back of the "agent."

At first the Black activist refused to role-play, but eventually did. He was shaking as he kept yelling, "FBI, drop the weapon!" When he finally decided to shoot, he not only emptied the gun's 8 round capacity, he reloaded and shot a couple more times. (They still talk about this in that FBI office.)

I asked a question. How do you know when to shoot? The FBI agent handed me the fake gun and said I was an FBI agent and I just caught a bad guy (him) robbing a bank. As the bad guy, he walked across the room away from me and put a fake gun to his head. I yelled, "FBI, drop the gun." He started yelling he was going to kill himself and walked toward me with the gun at his head. In less than the blink of an eye, as he got 10 feet away, he turned the gun on me, shot me, and said "You're dead." I had been ready to pull the trigger the moment he made a move. But I am now a dead FBI agent.

I am not arguing that all shootings are justified by any means. I'm just saying that those 25 citizens, who went through that training exercise, developed a lot more empathy for understanding how extremely tense those situations are- how life and death decisions have to be made in split seconds that will have ramifications for the rest of people's lives.

Here’s an idea. Give all the police “Tranquilizer guns”. Shoot the perp and let him/her wake up in a cell.

[bilcon]

So, if someone is running away from the police, and won't stop when told to, and they get shot in the back, by the police...... just wonder what exactly the "threat" is. If someone is unarmed, what exactly is the "threat"? While I'm asking questions, when will some of you be able to grasp the concept that "defunding" means reallocating funds where it can be better used. It does not mean not paying and not providing police with everything they need.

You are assuming the person is not a "threat" if he is running away. How do you know he is unarmed? How do you know he/she will not be a threat if he gets away. It was mentioned that some cities would reallocate police funds to use Social Workers instead of police. Good luck with that. Most of these law breakers run for a reason, and must be stopped before they do more harm. Don't Run, Don't get shot. Very simple rule.

[mydavid]

There are a lot of questions concerning police shootings such as "Why didn't the police shoot to wound the person?" or "Why did they have to shoot him so many times?" I know I won't change anyone's mind with a simple post here, but my experience might help temper some views.

A few years ago, I was fortunate to be chosen for an FBI Citizen Training Course. There were 25 of us in the 10 week class. Participant citizens ranged from Black activists to far right conservatives. Subjects covered in the 4 1/2 hour weekly sessions included terrorism, white collar crime, kidnapping, violent crimes and "When and How to Use a Firearm."

The FBI trained us that if someone is life-threatening (to you or someone else) and you decide you to shoot, you shoot until the threat is ended. Only in Wild West movies does someone shoot to knock the gun out of the bad guy's hand or shoot to wound. To prove this important point, the FBI set up a very life-like full scale video on a wall with a very real looking and feeling fake gun that interacted with what was being shown. We each took turns as an FBI agent deciding if, when and whom to shoot. It was so real many of us were shaking during our turn as the video was played. Our first guy up shot the bad guy one time, and as the bad guy fell, he turned to us and smiled as he blew the imagined smoke from his gun barrel. Unfortunately for our "pretend" FBI agent, as the bad guy fell, he emptied his revolver into the back of the "agent."

At first the Black activist refused to role-play, but eventually did. He was shaking as he kept yelling, "FBI, drop the weapon!" When he finally decided to shoot, he not only emptied the gun's 8 round capacity, he reloaded and shot a couple more times. (They still talk about this in that FBI office.)

I asked a question. How do you know when to shoot? The FBI agent handed me the fake gun and said I was an FBI agent and I just caught a bad guy (him) robbing a bank. As the bad guy, he walked across the room away from me and put a fake gun to his head. I yelled, "FBI, drop the gun." He started yelling he was going to kill himself and walked toward me with the gun at his head. In less than the blink of an eye, as he got 10 feet away, he turned the gun on me, shot me, and said "You're dead." I had been ready to pull the trigger the moment he made a move. But I am now a dead FBI agent.

I am not arguing that all shootings are justified by any means. I'm just saying that those 25 citizens, who went through that training exercise, developed a lot more empathy for understanding how extremely tense those situations are- how life and death decisions have to be made in split seconds that will have ramifications for the rest of people's lives. This still don't answer the question why they shoot an un-armed suspect running away. :shocked:

[HoosierPa]

People need to re-Train their disrespectful kids. Problem solved

[Tooltime]

I agree. The most recent shooting comes to mind, when the person with mental illness was wielding a kitchen knife. Wouldn't it be nice if that person had been able to come home to his family.
Why didn’t the now mourning family members stop the knife wielding man ?
I can guess........ they didn’t want to be killed. So they called 911, what did they expect ??
We can stop all police shooting by following this.
1. Don’t commit a crime
2. If you commit a crime and the police close in on you DO AS THEY COMMAND.

[Stu from NYC]

Why didn’t the now mourning family members stop the knife wielding man ?
I can guess........ they didn’t want to be killed. So they called 911, what did they expect ??
We can stop all police shooting by following this.
1. Don’t commit a crime
2. If you commit a crime and the police close in on you DO AS THEY COMMAND.

You got it.

Amazing how these crooks and thugs are held up as role models.

[AJ32162]

Here’s an idea. Give all the police “Tranquilizer guns”. Shoot the perp and let him/her wake up in a cell.

Yeah, and then wait 10 to 15 minutes for the tranquilizer to take effect. How many people will the prep kill or injure in the meantime? Great plan.

[kanoa1kale2]

Then, by that same logic, if the person or officer ran away they COULD? keep a 22-foot separation from that attacker. Thus, buying time and maybe some back-up to defuse the situation.

Leos do not run from dangerous situations - period! They are there to protect the public. The 21 foot designation is not written in stone. It is a guideline. Running away, warning shots, targeted body part shots are not acceptable actions. It's quite obvious you have never had training in life threatening situations. Decisions are made in a split second and you have to live with the choices after the action is over. These officers want to go home at the end of their shift like the rest of us. The criminals action dictates the outcome.

[OhioBuckeye]

There are a lot of questions concerning police shootings such as "Why didn't the police shoot to wound the person?" or "Why did they have to shoot him so many times?" I know I won't change anyone's mind with a simple post here, but my experience might help temper some views.

A few years ago, I was fortunate to be chosen for an FBI Citizen Training Course. There were 25 of us in the 10 week class. Participant citizens ranged from Black activists to far right conservatives. Subjects covered in the 4 1/2 hour weekly sessions included terrorism, white collar crime, kidnapping, violent crimes and "When and How to Use a Firearm."

The FBI trained us that if someone is life-threatening (to you or someone else) and you decide you to shoot, you shoot until the threat is ended. Only in Wild West movies does someone shoot to knock the gun out of the bad guy's hand or shoot to wound. To prove this important point, the FBI set up a very life-like full scale video on a wall with a very real looking and feeling fake gun that interacted with what was being shown. We each took turns as an FBI agent deciding if, when and whom to shoot. It was so real many of us were shaking during our turn as the video was played. Our first guy up shot the bad guy one time, and as the bad guy fell, he turned to us and smiled as he blew the imagined smoke from his gun barrel. Unfortunately for our "pretend" FBI agent, as the bad guy fell, he emptied his revolver into the back of the "agent."

At first the Black activist refused to role-play, but eventually did. He was shaking as he kept yelling, "FBI, drop the weapon!" When he finally decided to shoot, he not only emptied the gun's 8 round capacity, he reloaded and shot a couple more times. (They still talk about this in that FBI office.)

I asked a question. How do you know when to shoot? The FBI agent handed me the fake gun and said I was an FBI agent and I just caught a bad guy (him) robbing a bank. As the bad guy, he walked across the room away from me and put a fake gun to his head. I yelled, "FBI, drop the gun." He started yelling he was going to kill himself and walked toward me with the gun at his head. In less than the blink of an eye, as he got 10 feet away, he turned the gun on me, shot me, and said "You're dead." I had been ready to pull the trigger the moment he made a move. But I am now a dead FBI agent.

I am not arguing that all shootings are justified by any means. I'm just saying that those 25 citizens, who went through that training exercise, developed a lot more empathy for understanding how extremely tense those situations are- how life and death decisions have to be made in split seconds that will have ramifications for the rest of people's lives.

Someone is running from police, they’re running from them because they did something they knew they were going to get locked up. Did the FBI train you to be a sniper so you could put a bullet in a spot the size of Nickel. Police shoot to stop someone. You should be thinking why didn’t the person stop, be polite & answer questions they were asked! Police aren’t NAZI’S. I do understand what your saying but if you never ever been a police & have to do what they have to do & sometimes in a split sec. you would see why there’s so many shootings. All people have to do is be a good citizen & maybe some of these people would see how nice the police really are. You should ask yourself, how are you going to protect yourself if they do defund the police? Just saying people only remember the couple of bad things some bad police do & they never remember the one wonderful thing they did to save a family with 5 or 6 children. So how are people going to protect themselves if we don’t have Peace Officers? I’m guessing you can’t & I can’t either & I own 15 guns! You made a great point though.

[Janlindsey4@gmail.com]

This has been the most intelligent and useful information I have read on this site. When dealing with life and death scenarios, sarcasm and joking are unnecessary. Thank all of you for your intelligent and “real, experience” responses. We appreciate what you have been through.

[santiagobob]

And the cost of that might have been the police officer does not get to come home to his or her family.

If several police officers cannot disarm a mentally challenged person armed only with a knife and resort to shooting him several times, they should not be on the force. All of these replies indicate that the subject is armed with a automatic weapon of some sort, what about the number of mostly unarmed black men shot? many in the back. I don't feel threatened when someone is going away from me or laying face down on the ground.Also , I saw a video of a man approaching some police officers with a machete in his hand and he was not shot but he was disarmed. Oh did I point out that the man with the machete was WHITE

[New Englander]

Here’s an idea. Give all the police “Tranquilizer guns”. Shoot the perp and let him/her wake up in a cell.

That's too violent! I say the police carry guns that only shoot cotton balls. So nobody gets hurt.

[Joe V.]

If several police officers cannot disarm a mentally challenged person armed only with a knife and resort to shooting him several times, they should not be on the force. All of these replies indicate that the subject is armed with a automatic weapon of some sort, what about the number of mostly unarmed black men shot? many in the back. I don't feel threatened when someone is going away from me or laying face down on the ground.Also , I saw a video of a man approaching some police officers with a machete in his hand and he was not shot but he was disarmed. Oh did I point out that the man with the machete was WHITE

One blistering hot Friday evening in July, 1979, at the 3rd Precinct of the Metropolitan Police Department in DC I witnessed a one armed man, in a wheel chair, loaded on PCP take down 4 other cops and did 25K damage to the desk area. It took over 5 minutes to get him under control. You know nothing about law enforcement.

[Stu from NYC]

If several police officers cannot disarm a mentally challenged person armed only with a knife and resort to shooting him several times, they should not be on the force. All of these replies indicate that the subject is armed with a automatic weapon of some sort, what about the number of mostly unarmed black men shot? many in the back. I don't feel threatened when someone is going away from me or laying face down on the ground.Also , I saw a video of a man approaching some police officers with a machete in his hand and he was not shot but he was disarmed. Oh did I point out that the man with the machete was WHITE

If you knew more about these situations do think you would have a different opinion.

BTW do you really believe only blacks are shot by police officers? Not true at all despite what the media would want you to believe.

[jimjamuser]

So can I assume proposing a flat 17% income tax would be wasting my time with you????
That is a flat yes - a waste of time. Did you miss the part about the revolution?

[jimjamuser]

We (and you most of all) are very fortunate that you never became a law enforcement officer, you would have likely been killed in the line of duty in short order. I don't mean this as a personal attack, but your 'philosophy' on law enforcement would likely get you or someone else killed.
Thanks for the concern. You are correct. Personally, I might let some empathy get in my way. I did NOT even function well in even a low key Dictatorial, top-down, command environment like the US Air Farce. I prefer social and business situations where creativity is valued - where seniority and rank are meaningless. Where ideas are generated freely and solutions are voted on equally by everyone. It is an idealistic expression of freedom of thought.

It does NOT exist in practice, only in principle. It involves non-acceptance of the status quo - and embodies attempts at improving society.

I see the problem of Policing to be partially solvable by technology - cameras and robocops developed by A.I. research. A robot does NOT die, so is braver and makes better decisions than an adrenaline-infused beat cop. The future will happen sooner than most people believe. Science fiction becomes science fact.

[Byte1]

I agree. The most recent shooting comes to mind, when the person with mental illness was wielding a kitchen knife. Wouldn't it be nice if that person had been able to come home to his family.

Nope

[Number 10 GI]

If several police officers cannot disarm a mentally challenged person armed only with a knife and resort to shooting him several times, they should not be on the force. All of these replies indicate that the subject is armed with a automatic weapon of some sort, what about the number of mostly unarmed black men shot? many in the back. I don't feel threatened when someone is going away from me or laying face down on the ground.Also , I saw a video of a man approaching some police officers with a machete in his hand and he was not shot but he was disarmed. Oh did I point out that the man with the machete was WHITE

If you have never had to disarm and subdue a violent person you have no idea what it takes. What is mostly unarmed?

[Number 10 GI]

The suggestion of tranquilizers could be used in very limited scenarios but the problem with a tranquilizer as has been pointed out is that it can take several minutes to take effect. Also, depending on the size of the person being tranquilized it could be very easy to overdose and kill a person. It requires more tranquilizer to knock out a larger person vs a small person. Then depending on what drugs or level of alcohol in the person's system the tranquilizer could easily kill them regardless of their size. If the individual who is overdosed dies, the cop will then be criticized for killing the individual.

[Byte1]

So, if someone is running away from the police, and won't stop when told to, and they get shot in the back, by the police...... just wonder what exactly the "threat" is. If someone is unarmed, what exactly is the "threat"? While I'm asking questions, when will some of you be able to grasp the concept that "defunding" means reallocating funds where it can be better used. It does not mean not paying and not providing police with everything they need.

Yes, in certain circumstances a fleeing felon may be shot. One instance is when he is a future threat of violence to someone else.
Defunding by "reallocating funds" is a stupid political answer when the truth is that it's the same as reallocating education funding to pay for infrastructure or medicaid, etc. It is still DEFUNDING of money that should go to the police for manpower, overtime, equipment, and training. If one thinks that it does not mean stealing money from the law enforcement budget, then they are ignoring the truth.
And before someone says it, NO social services is NOT a law enforcement agency. They are neither equipped or trained to handle police duties.
Leave the COPs alone. Yes, every once in a while you may have a bad cop or one that just had a bad day and made a poor choice. But, most COPs are honorable and decent and deserve our support, not our disrespect and threats of "defunding" them. Shame on those that insult those that are in harms way EVERY day.

[Byte1]

The answer my friend is robotic police (robocops). They will be crude at first and will be like bomb finding robots that are guided by operators. But, with ALL the problems that society is having recently with police over-reaction, some SOLUTION needs to be found. The Federal Government could devote a lot of grant money to universities and industry to increase the rate of adoption of robotics to crime prevention. A robot has NO fear of being killed, so they could be more likely to use non-lethal force on a criminal than a human would. The problem of overly protective unions would be eliminated. Industry HAS already eliminated many boring, repetitive jobs and substituted technology, A.I., and robotics for improved results at less costs. It has already happened! The future is closer than most people realize. Many will believe that this opinion is "pie in the sky". I just put it out there as a possible solution. It will require maximum Government commitment.

Somebody has been watching too much SciFi

[Byte1]

Or better still, you could blame society and government for NOT providing the budget for mental hospitals and mental health. Oh, but then the upper 10% would HAVE to PAY their FAIR share! We wouldn't want that, would we ????

10% pay their fair share and probably your FAIR share. I wonder how folks would feel if we had a REAL fair tax rate, where everyone paid the same percentage of their income. I guess the 50% that pay no taxes would be screaming bloody murder.

[Byte1]

After reading through this thread, to me it appears obvious, that no matter
how many facts or actual experiences are shared, some readers will only get a
distorted understanding because of the biased lenses
they view through!
I might add that in my concealed carry training It was stressed that to fire my weapon was a last resort to neutralize a threat, and it would only be seconds to make a decision.If I had to shoot, I don’t recall being told to wing’em or shoot ‘em in the leg, but I do remember “Shoot for center of body mass”.
Now in rifle training in the service, I can recall it being said that in times of combat it might be wise to shoot to injure an enemy combatant, since it might take two out of action the one you wounded and the one that carries him off the front lines!

Even though I have been to police academies and subsequent law enforcement courses, I still took the mandatory CCW class in a state that I retired in, originally. In that class, the instructor taught to "double tap" meaning two shots, starting low in the groin and naturally having the next shot follow as the run rises after the recoil. I have taken that further and practiced a triple tap. I do not plan to be sued and feel that the perp is one less witness if I have to go to court to defend myself for my action. And yes, the groin for the first shot. As the instructor stated, many folks do not even realize they are shot due to the shock of the confrontation, but the shot in the groin will be noticed almost always. As a former police officer, I have never ever wished to have to use my gun other than at the range. That is the way I still feel, but better to be prepared to protect my family and friends than to not have the ability when it is needed. A COP does not wish to shoot anyone. Taking a life is not an easy matter for the law abiding citizen. And a cop is a law abiding citizen.

[sail33or]

I will KILL anyone approaching me with knife, stick, rock, tire iron, etc. if I have a Gun. Period.

I will Kill anyone that even yells they will kill me if I have a gun.

I will Kill any intruder in my house regardless if they say Please don't shoot me. Period.

I am from Texas and I know how to , well you know.

[mtlee024]

This still don't answer the question why they shoot an un-armed suspect running away. :shocked:

So tell me how the police would know if the perp may hurt and kill other people. Be realistic. Police police "Protect and Serve". Tell me how you would feel if you let an armed man go and he killed kids, women and men.

[Byte1]

If several police officers cannot disarm a mentally challenged person armed only with a knife and resort to shooting him several times, they should not be on the force. All of these replies indicate that the subject is armed with a automatic weapon of some sort, what about the number of mostly unarmed black men shot? many in the back. I don't feel threatened when someone is going away from me or laying face down on the ground.Also , I saw a video of a man approaching some police officers with a machete in his hand and he was not shot but he was disarmed. Oh did I point out that the man with the machete was WHITE

Thousands of civilians were killed by a couple of men wielding box cutters on 9/11. Police officers are not trained to take a knife away from a perp. They are no good to the Dept. if they get wounded or killed. Sure, they are taught self defense, but rather than fist fight a suspect, they will likely resort to a flashlight or baton strike to neutralize the situation. They are allowed to use the force necessary to neutralize the threat. If a person is fist fighting, a flashlight or baton is used. If they have a knife, bat or ax a gun may be used. Equal terms is not an option. Like the man said "don't bring a knife to a gun fight."

[jimjamuser]

I will KILL anyone approaching me with knife, stick, rock, tire iron, etc. if I have a Gun. Period.

I will Kill anyone that even yells they will kill me if I have a gun.

I will Kill any intruder in my house regardless if they say Please don't shoot me. Period.

I am from Texas and I know how to , well you know.
And if a drunk Villager mistakes your house for their house and comes in an open door - then what? - suddenly your "one size fits all" aggressive gun philosophy falls apart. And YOU are going to jail. Your quick, decisive action backfires! Be careful what your trigger finger wishes for.

[Bogie Shooter]

I will KILL anyone approaching me with knife, stick, rock, tire iron, etc. if I have a Gun. Period.

I will Kill anyone that even yells they will kill me if I have a gun.

I will Kill any intruder in my house regardless if they say Please don't shoot me. Period.

I am from Texas and I know how to , well you know.

And if a drunk Villager mistakes your house for their house and comes in an open door - then what? - suddenly your "one size fits all" aggressive gun philosophy falls apart. And YOU are going to jail. Your quick, decisive action backfires! Be careful what your trigger finger wishes for.

:boom:

[sail33or]

I will even tell you what the drunk Villager will die of. A 38 hollow point bullet that will blow a giant hole in them. If I can get off a second shot before they fall then there will be two giant holes in them. However I will call 911 so they get treated as fast as possible.

[Bogie Shooter]

I will even tell you what the drunk Villager will die of. A 38 hollow point bullet that will blow a giant hole in them. If I can get off a second shot before they fall then there will be two giant holes in them. However I will call 911 so they get treated as fast as possible.
Really impressive.

[Stu from NYC]

Thousands of civilians were killed by a couple of men wielding box cutters on 9/11. Police officers are not trained to take a knife away from a perp. They are no good to the Dept. if they get wounded or killed. Sure, they are taught self defense, but rather than fist fight a suspect, they will likely resort to a flashlight or baton strike to neutralize the situation. They are allowed to use the force necessary to neutralize the threat. If a person is fist fighting, a flashlight or baton is used. If they have a knife, bat or ax a gun may be used. Equal terms is not an option. Like the man said "don't bring a knife to a gun fight."

Very well said

[Get real]

When I look at the highly publicized violent police incidents, it's obvious why some of them result in death. Whether it's the George Floyd "I can't breathe" situation in Minneapolis; the Michael Brown shooting death in Ferguson, Missouri; the choke-hold death of Eric Garner in New York City; or numerous other law-enforcement actions, one thing is clear: they all resisted arrest. They might all be alive today if they had simply obeyed the lawful orders of the police. That's what decent people do when confronted by those who represent the system of laws by which civilized people live. We have many "rights" in this constitutional republic, but one of them is not the right to disobey the law, or those entrusted to enforce it.
During my 20 years as a cop in NYC, violent episodes during arrest situations were probably as common as they are today. The difference is, we didn't have the internet, iPhones, and social media to broadcast every unsavory moment dealing with civilian-police encounters. Now that everyone has a camera, we have millions of wannabe producers, directors, and editors, all of whom have opportunities to become instantly famous by virtue of selected video clips that can distort the "news" as cleverly as the N.Y. Times distorts stories about President Trump. What the Times editors write is the slant they want you to read. Similarly, what you view on those videos is often the slant the videographer wants you to see.
Inasmuch as there seems to be no limit to what can be posted on social media, and no penalties for distortions that incite people to riot, we have entered a phase in our history in which the potential for violent insurrection has been placed in the hands of the most malevolent purveyors of hatred for our country and for those who have a natural disdain for authority. Being an active cop for two decades provided me with an education about people that few "civilians" would understand. I learned that people intuitively understand the need for a system of laws, as well as the need for officers entrusted to enforce them. Yet, intuitive, or not, people don't like getting arrested.
During a serious criminal incident involving an apprehension and arrest, the offender often becomes a violent adversary with one goal: do anything necessary to get away. He may be on probation for another crime, meaning that a new arrest may result in several years' incarceration.
Think about the position of the cop when he stops a man for questioning under suspicious circumstances. The man may be wanted for murder, robbery, rape, or any number of other felonies that would put him in a cell for long time. With that in mind, he might be desperate enough to use a weapon on the cop to get away. Up to that point, the cop hasn't determined the potential menace he's facing, since he's only doing a preliminary investigation. In this scenario, the offender has an advantage on the cop because he knows what he's going to do if the handcuffs come out. Faced with losing years of his life in prison, the felon is not likely to be taken easily.
The following is often the way the situation unfolds. The cop determines he has enough evidence to effect an arrest and informs the offender of the charges. "Hey, man, I didn't do anything, and you're not taking me!" the guy says. In this instance, the cop has no other options. He's facing a man who broke the law, and it's his job to bring the guy in, period. He can't walk away. He can't tell the guy he's forgiven. He can't call his superior and ask for instructions. He must do what he was trained to do — otherwise, turn in the badge and gun.
Okay, now comes the part about getting cuffs on the guy and putting him in the patrol car. Please trust me on this: even with a partner helping you, it's very difficult and dangerous to take someone who doesn't want to go. A 110-pound woman can put up a ferocious battle to keep you from manacling her wrists together and dragging her into the car. Now imagine a 6'3", 220-pound, muscular antagonist who defies your lawful order to put his hands behind his back. The moment he refuses, the justice system is being tested. Either we enforce our laws or we turn the country over to barbarians.
This brings me to the reason for the title of this column. Cops are just people who go to work at a job and look forward to returning home to their families. They know that the work is dangerous, so their adrenal glands are on high alert during physical confrontations. Being human, they may get scared, but they must respond when a crime occurs and the offender is within their grasp. Deadly force is always the last resort. Still, if they get scared enough, they will do what it takes to ensure that they go home to family that night. Hence, when deadly force is used, it's not because the cop is brutal; it's because he was trying to do his job against an offender who left him no choice.

[rmd2]

I will even tell you what the drunk Villager will die of. A 38 hollow point bullet that will blow a giant hole in them. If I can get off a second shot before they fall then there will be two giant holes in them. However I will call 911 so they get treated as fast as possible.

Same here in my house. I don't care why he's there. If he is there, he is gone!
I always keep my doors locked.

[Byte1]

And if a drunk Villager mistakes your house for their house and comes in an open door - then what? - suddenly your "one size fits all" aggressive gun philosophy falls apart. And YOU are going to jail. Your quick, decisive action backfires! Be careful what your trigger finger wishes for.

You leave your door open? I don't, so if anyone forces their way into my home I sincerely hope they are right with their maker.
My only hesitation will be which weapon to use and if I use it, will it make more mess to clean up or less and which one will be the most effective. Decision, decisions.

[jimjamuser]

I will even tell you what the drunk Villager will die of. A 38 hollow point bullet that will blow a giant hole in them. If I can get off a second shot before they fall then there will be two giant holes in them. However I will call 911 so they get treated as fast as possible.
Nice final humanitarian gesture. Will you also give them last rites? That would be SO nice of you.

[davem4616]

so the latest person shot by police was someone outside Vancouver, WA....early reports are that he ran from the police while they were investigating an incident, they went after him, he turned on them and reportedly fired his pistol at three police officers

hello...so how do you think this is going to turn out...the number one objective of any police officer is to be alive at the end of their shift so they can go home to their family

so now the city is automatically dealing with demonstrations and destruction of property

Why aren't the leaders in the black community and the parents educating these young men to not commit crimes and the danger of giving the police any reason to draw their fire arms if they are seen as potential suspects / being sought for comments

this is not that difficult of a concept to comprehend

I'm not a racist....I had this very conversation with my kids....respect the police, do what they ask and you'll get a fair shake

[jimjamuser]

so the latest person shot by police was someone outside Vancouver, WA....early reports are that he ran from the police while they were investigating an incident, they went after him, he turned on them and reportedly fired his pistol at three police officers

hello...so how do you think this is going to turn out...the number one objective of any police officer is to be alive at the end of their shift so they can go home to their family

so now the city is automatically dealing with demonstrations and destruction of property

Why aren't the leaders in the black community and the parents educating these young men to not commit crimes and the danger of giving the police any reason to draw their fire arms if they are seen as potential suspects / being sought for comments

this is not that difficult of a concept to comprehend

I'm not a racist....I had this very conversation with my kids....respect the police, do what they ask and you'll get a fair shake
It DID sound a little on the racist side. White criminals run away from the Police also.

[davem4616]

It DID sound a little on the racist side. White criminals run away from the Police also.

I was talking about one specific incident that just occurred and sparked yet another demonstration with burning and chaos.....odd that you read it as my being racist and played the race card

So I will ask the question.....do you honestly not believe that the black community leaders and the parents of these youngsters have no obligation to step up and play an active role in helping to educate young people on how to prevent this from happening time and time again?

[Stu from NYC]

That was VERY well written and it was interesting and convincing. So Kudos for that. However,........I find it a little off-putting - the extreme vented hatred of LIBERAL. It is as if LIBERALS are thought of by many Police Officers as 2nd class citizens. I just wonder, "would all LIBERAL haters prefer to live in a fascist country?" Would most Police Officers want to ticket a person with an Elizabeth Warren bumper sticker much more than one with a GOP sticker? And how did the NY Times become SO HATED? The Villages paper is pretty dull and stupid but, I do not HATE on it! A Police Officer is supposed to bring peace and harmony to a situation. Hence the title PEACE officer.

How could a PEACE Officer go to work and put on a Badge of peace every day, while hating 50% of all the people that they encounter during their day? I doubt that most criminals are liberals. I would REALLY like to know from ALL the Police Officers on this forum - how many hate LIBERALS and how did that come about? Liberals are not communists. Does hatred of liberals, socialists, and communists drive an individual toward Fascism? Are a lot of Police Officers REALLY closet Fascists? I'd like to know those answers.

I do not hate the NY times but have a large dislike for it.

I find it very slanted and their opinions are not just in the editorial pages but all over the paper.

[kcrazorbackfan]

People need to re-Train their disrespectful kids. Problem solved

S#%t, that’ll never happen. Remember, most of the time when a black kid is shot and killed by the Police, his mom (rarely is there a dad present) is on TV crying about “how good a boy he was and never did anything wrong” or “he was just running with the wrong crowd”.

Remember Michael Brown and Ferguson, MO and how his mother went on and on about how he was a “gentle giant”? Yeah, right.....

[jimjamuser]

I was talking about one specific incident that just occurred and sparked yet another demonstration with burning and chaos.....odd that you read it as my being racist and played the race card

So I will ask the question.....do you honestly not believe that the black community leaders and the parents of these youngsters have no obligation to step up and play an active role in helping to educate young people on how to prevent this from happening time and time again?
If the white man had Jim Crow laws forced on him, then they would be the ones living in poverty and ghettos. They would be the ones getting killed by bad Police Officers. Whites would be afraid of the police. The whites would be the ones shoplifting and having juvenile records. And not being able to land a good job. The whites would be the janitors and the Blacks and browns would be calling the whites lazy. After a 200 year history of being put down by society, the white race would be unambitious, not own homes, and have bad health outcomes.

As a matter of History, white Europeans settled North America. They were technologically ahead of the Native Americans. So, they pushed them out. If the Spanish had settled N. America 1st, then they would be at the top of US society. All the whites in the US reap the benefits of this History. They are NOT special. Just lucky.

[Going My Way]

So, nothing about the post answers any of the questions that I hoped would have been answered in a serious manner. I guess that was too much to hope for?
Actually by you disliking his response just shows you fall into that group... :1rotfl::1rotfl:

[Moderator]

Political posts have been removed. Any further posts of a political nature will cause this thread to be closed.

Moderator.

[Stu from NYC]

If the white man had Jim Crow laws forced on him, then they would be the ones living in poverty and ghettos. They would be the ones getting killed by bad Police Officers. Whites would be afraid of the police. The whites would be the ones shoplifting and having juvenile records. And not being able to land a good job. The whites would be the janitors and the Blacks and browns would be calling the whites lazy. After a 200 year history of being put down by society, the white race would be unambitious, not own homes, and have bad health outcomes.

As a matter of History, white Europeans settled North America. They were technologically ahead of the Native Americans. So, they pushed them out. If the Spanish had settled N. America 1st, then they would be at the top of US society. All the whites in the US reap the benefits of this History. They are NOT special. Just lucky.

How do you account for all the minority groups that came here within the last 100 years were discriminated against and have managed to be successful?

[John41]

If the white man had Jim Crow laws forced on him, then they would be the ones living in poverty and ghettos. They would be the ones getting killed by bad Police Officers. Whites would be afraid of the police. The whites would be the ones shoplifting and having juvenile records. And not being able to land a good job. The whites would be the janitors and the Blacks and browns would be calling the whites lazy. After a 200 year history of being put down by society, the white race would be unambitious, not own homes, and have bad health outcomes.

As a matter of History, white Europeans settled North America. They were technologically ahead of the Native Americans. So, they pushed them out. If the Spanish had settled N. America 1st, then they would be at the top of US society. All the whites in the US reap the benefits of this History. They are NOT special. Just lucky.

By your own words whites are technologically superior, not LUCKY

[AJ32162]

If the white man had Jim Crow laws forced on him, then they would be the ones living in poverty and ghettos. They would be the ones getting killed by bad Police Officers. Whites would be afraid of the police. The whites would be the ones shoplifting and having juvenile records. And not being able to land a good job. The whites would be the janitors and the Blacks and browns would be calling the whites lazy. After a 200 year history of being put down by society, the white race would be unambitious, not own homes, and have bad health outcomes.

As a matter of History, white Europeans settled North America. They were technologically ahead of the Native Americans. So, they pushed them out. If the Spanish had settled N. America 1st, then they would be at the top of US society. All the whites in the US reap the benefits of this History. They are NOT special. Just lucky.

Contrary to your "theory", South Africa which has been ruled by the black majority since the end of apartheid 30 years ago has been in steady decline with rampant corruption and poverty. Name just one black governed country where you would like to live...even as a black person.

[noslices1]

Maybe the police could use Tranquilizer guns. Shoot the suspect if he won’t cooperate and let him/her wake up, alive, in a jail cell.

[AJ32162]

Maybe the police could use Tranquilizer guns. Shoot the suspect if he won’t cooperate and let him/her wake up, alive, in a jail cell.

This option have already been discussed. Have you read the previous posts and counter arguments pertaining to the use of tranquilizers?

[WesMan]

When I look at the highly publicized violent police incidents, it's obvious why some of them result in death. Whether it's the George Floyd "I can't breathe" situation in Minneapolis; the Michael Brown shooting death in Ferguson, Missouri; the choke-hold death of Eric Garner in New York City; or numerous other law-enforcement actions, one thing is clear: they all resisted arrest. They might all be alive today if they had simply obeyed the lawful orders of the police. That's what decent people do when confronted by those who represent the system of laws by which civilized people live. We have many "rights" in this constitutional republic, but one of them is not the right to disobey the law, or those entrusted to enforce it.
During my 20 years as a cop in NYC, violent episodes during arrest situations were probably as common as they are today. The difference is, we didn't have the internet, iPhones, and social media to broadcast every unsavory moment dealing with civilian-police encounters. Now that everyone has a camera, we have millions of wannabe producers, directors, and editors, all of whom have opportunities to become instantly famous by virtue of selected video clips that can distort the "news" as cleverly as the N.Y. Times distorts stories about President Trump. What the Times editors write is the slant they want you to read. Similarly, what you view on those videos is often the slant the videographer wants you to see.
Inasmuch as there seems to be no limit to what can be posted on social media, and no penalties for distortions that incite people to riot, we have entered a phase in our history in which the potential for violent insurrection has been placed in the hands of the most malevolent purveyors of hatred for our country and for those who have a natural disdain for authority. Being an active cop for two decades provided me with an education about people that few "civilians" would understand. I learned that people intuitively understand the need for a system of laws, as well as the need for officers entrusted to enforce them. Yet, intuitive, or not, people don't like getting arrested.
During a serious criminal incident involving an apprehension and arrest, the offender often becomes a violent adversary with one goal: do anything necessary to get away. He may be on probation for another crime, meaning that a new arrest may result in several years' incarceration.
Think about the position of the cop when he stops a man for questioning under suspicious circumstances. The man may be wanted for murder, robbery, rape, or any number of other felonies that would put him in a cell for long time. With that in mind, he might be desperate enough to use a weapon on the cop to get away. Up to that point, the cop hasn't determined the potential menace he's facing, since he's only doing a preliminary investigation. In this scenario, the offender has an advantage on the cop because he knows what he's going to do if the handcuffs come out. Faced with losing years of his life in prison, the felon is not likely to be taken easily.
The following is often the way the situation unfolds. The cop determines he has enough evidence to effect an arrest and informs the offender of the charges. "Hey, man, I didn't do anything, and you're not taking me!" the guy says. In this instance, the cop has no other options. He's facing a man who broke the law, and it's his job to bring the guy in, period. He can't walk away. He can't tell the guy he's forgiven. He can't call his superior and ask for instructions. He must do what he was trained to do — otherwise, turn in the badge and gun.
Okay, now comes the part about getting cuffs on the guy and putting him in the patrol car. Please trust me on this: even with a partner helping you, it's very difficult and dangerous to take someone who doesn't want to go. A 110-pound woman can put up a ferocious battle to keep you from manacling her wrists together and dragging her into the car. Now imagine a 6'3", 220-pound, muscular antagonist who defies your lawful order to put his hands behind his back. The moment he refuses, the justice system is being tested. Either we enforce our laws or we turn the country over to barbarians.
This brings me to the reason for the title of this column. Cops are just people who go to work at a job and look forward to returning home to their families. They know that the work is dangerous, so their adrenal glands are on high alert during physical confrontations. Being human, they may get scared, but they must respond when a crime occurs and the offender is within their grasp. Deadly force is always the last resort. Still, if they get scared enough, they will do what it takes to ensure that they go home to family that night. Hence, when deadly force is used, it's not because the cop is brutal; it's because he was trying to do his job against an offender who left him no choice.
Thank you for your service!!! Blue lives matter!!!!!!!!!!

[WesMan]

I will even tell you what the drunk Villager will die of. A 38 hollow point bullet that will blow a giant hole in them. If I can get off a second shot before they fall then there will be two giant holes in them. However I will call 911 so they get treated as fast as possible.
crazy talk!!!!

[Neils]

Why don't police carry tasers? They are a weapon, can be used at a distance, like pepper spray, and are less lethal than guns. Through the end of September 2020, over 700 people have been shot and killed by police, an increasing trend.

Remember the old saying - Never a good idea to take a taser to a gun fight. Lol

[Neils]

How many big cities have a death count over 700 from people killing people?

Starting with Chicago the home of the strictest gun control laws in the country.

[Bogie Shooter]

Starting with Chicago the home of the strictest gun control laws in the country.

Easy, just drive outside the city and buy your gun. Google is your friend.....

[AJ32162]

Easy, just drive outside the city and buy your gun. Google is your friend.....

So, what you seem to be confirming is that gun control laws are nearly worthless and people find ways of getting around them.

[John41]

Originally Posted by sail33or View Post
I will even tell you what the drunk Villager will die of. A 38 hollow point bullet that will blow a giant hole in them. If I can get off a second shot before they fall then there will be two giant holes in them. However I will call 911 so they get treated as fast as possible.

crazy talk!!!!

yes 9mm is preferable

[John41]

Originally Posted by Neils View Post
Starting with Chicago the home of the strictest gun control laws in the country.

Easy, just drive outside the city and buy your gun. Google is your friend.....

Or buy one illegally right inside the city. You do know criminals don’t obey the law?

[Justus]

If the white man had Jim Crow laws forced on him, then they would be the ones living in poverty and ghettos. They would be the ones getting killed by bad Police Officers. Whites would be afraid of the police. The whites would be the ones shoplifting and having juvenile records. And not being able to land a good job. The whites would be the janitors and the Blacks and browns would be calling the whites lazy. After a 200 year history of being put down by society, the white race would be unambitious, not own homes, and have bad health outcomes.

As a matter of History, white Europeans settled North America. They were technologically ahead of the Native Americans. So, they pushed them out. If the Spanish had settled N. America 1st, then they would be at the top of US society. All the whites in the US reap the benefits of this History. They are NOT special. Just lucky.

It occurs that, in openly sharing your low opinion of Law Enforcement and Whites in general, it seems you assume all LEOs are white. Do you have the same opinion of Law Enforcement Officers who are Black, Latino, and of other ethnicities, many of whom have had to kill felons in the line of duty? Just asking...

[New Englander]

I do not hate the NY times but have a large dislike for it.

I find it very slanted and their opinions are not just in the editorial pages but all over the paper.

They lie a lot too.

[Number 10 GI]

Easy, just drive outside the city and buy your gun. Google is your friend.....

What does going outside of the city have to do with purchasing a firearm? In Illinois, not just Chicago, you must have a FOID card (Firearm Owner Identification Card) issued by the state after a background check has been performed. This process is supposed to be completed in 10 days but can stretch to 4 months. When a person purchases a firearm the dealer is required to perform another background type check called a Firearm Transfer Inquiry and you cannot take possession until this check has been completed. Then after all this background checking you have to wait 72 hours before you can take the firearm home. In Chicago a resident must in addition to all this attend a 5 hour firearm safety instruction course. A Chicago resident must apply for a Chicago firearm permit. When the Chicago resident goes to buy a firearm he HAS TO GO outside the city as gun sales are prohibited in the city. This does not mean the gun buyer is prohibited from owning a gun in the city of Chicago. Then the gun must be registered with the city government.
Now the criminal element doesn't comply with these laws at all, they just buy the gun illegally from other criminals that supply guns or steal them. Maybe you need a better search engine than google.

[jimjamuser]

How do you account for all the minority groups that came here within the last 100 years were discriminated against and have managed to be successful?
Not much understanding about the POINT of my post. Which was like the expression, "the shoe on the other foot". I tried to point out that a person needs to look at today from the view of the History of the other person - in this case, our Black and brown citizens. They basically got "seriously mistreated" for 200 years.

As to immigrant groups for the last 75 years - rich people always want slaves, whether they pay them only room and board and whip them - or they pay them minimum wages to maintain their profits and just put them in hard labor or use them to clean hotels and casinos - it is all the same / same!

[jimjamuser]

By your own words whites are technologically superior, not LUCKY
They were lucky that they were technologically superior. BUT, they did NOT have to take advantage of it. They could have been REAL Christians and NOT taken advantage of their fellow human beings. They could have co-existed and held out a hand to help them up. Survival of the fittest may work best for humans when they form co-operative groups. And to this very day, that can be seen.

[jimjamuser]

Contrary to your "theory", South Africa which has been ruled by the black majority since the end of apartheid 30 years ago has been in steady decline with rampant corruption and poverty. Name just one black governed country where you would like to live...even as a black person.
The US experience and experiment has much to be justifiably proud of. But, much of its accomplishment is owed to the fortunate luck in GEOGRAPHY of having, probably, the world's greatest amount of navigatable rivers and lakes in addition to almost unlimited natural resources. So corruption would naturally be less. Also, 2 large oceans kept enemies and wars away for part of US History. More of the pie - so less need to fight over it compared with countries with less natural resources.

[jimjamuser]

So, what you seem to be confirming is that gun control laws are nearly worthless and people find ways of getting around them.
The opposite point, more states should have laws keeping guns out of the hands of criminals. We are NOT the wild West anymore.

[jimjamuser]

It occurs that, in openly sharing your low opinion of Law Enforcement and Whites in general, it seems you assume all LEOs are white. Do you have the same opinion of Law Enforcement Officers who are Black, Latino, and of other ethnicities, many of whom have had to kill felons in the line of duty? Just asking...
No such LOW opinion of anyone. It was just a thought experiment to INCREASE the opinions of people on this forum toward Black and Brown people! That seemed to me to be needed very much.

[Byte1]

The US experience and experiment has much to be justifiably proud of. But, much of its accomplishment is owed to the fortunate luck in GEOGRAPHY of having, probably, the world's greatest amount of navigatable rivers and lakes in addition to almost unlimited natural resources. So corruption would naturally be less. Also, 2 large oceans kept enemies and wars away for part of US History. More of the pie - so less need to fight over it compared with countries with less natural resources.

Sounds like some folks like to make a lot of excuses for plain old bad behavior.
I get it. You are saying they don't have the ability to think for themselves and discern the difference between right and wrong. I don't agree. I do not believe that the history of my predecessors should influence how I conduct myself. I believe that we are all taught right from wrong, either by the easy way of parental training, or by our education system or just by experience of finding out what the repercussions are when you break the rules. A person's color has not been an excuse for bad behavior for decades. Every charity imagined has been offered to minorities, to include job preference (front of the line privilege) or affirmative action, welfare, housing, etc. Being from a multi-ethnicity family, we do not allow bad behavior based on perception of not being treated fairly. Most Americans are color blind UNTIL one draws attention to their ethnicity in an effort to manipulate the system.

[Kenswing]

The opposite point, more states should have laws keeping guns out of the hands of criminals. We are NOT the wild West anymore.

ALL states ALREADY have laws to keep guns out of the hands of criminals. The problem is by definition criminals are criminals because they don't follow the laws.

[Byte1]

The opposite point, more states should have laws keeping guns out of the hands of criminals. We are NOT the wild West anymore.

I do not know of any states that allow criminals to own firearms. Just because the law prohibits them from possessing firearms does not mean that a criminal will honor that law. That is why they are called "criminals."

Edited: Must have been posting at the same time as Kenswing. Like minds, like thoughts.

[Justus]

No such LOW opinion of anyone. It was just a thought experiment to INCREASE the opinions of people on this forum toward Black and Brown people! That seemed to me to be needed very much.

Since you strongly imply that the TOTV posters herein are essentially bigoted and unenlightened, please tell me...As an apparent recent student of American History, whose intent is only to educate those of us less knowledgeable, you truly must know what NINA was to Irish immigrants, and WOP was to Italians at the turn of the 20th century for decades. But to paraphrase the celebrated Toni Morrison, "And Still, They Rise"...

My original question, to which you have not responded, still stands...your opinion would be appreciated in light, especially, of the recent conviction of a Black police officer in Minneapolis, in the cold-blooded murder of an unarmed white woman who had called 911 asking for help.

[amexsbow]

Why don't police carry tasers? They are a weapon, can be used at a distance, like pepper spray, and are less lethal than guns. Through the end of September 2020, over 700 people have been shot and killed by police, an increasing trend.

As far as the above suggestion let us be practical. A police officer carries, a gun&holster/ extra clips of ammo&holster, handcuffs&holster, radio&holster, and in addition you want him to carry a taser&holster and pepperspray&holster.

Do people really believe any person is capable of carrying all of this equipment on his person and being able to function? In addition at night he has to carry a flashlight.

In addition to being required to carry a specific amount of equipment the law enforcement agencies today have been inundated with lawsuits to be "inclusive" as a result physical standards have been reduced to a point of ridiculousness. You now have officers who are not physically able to restrain an average criminal. Add to this the lack of personnel and the rise of "one-person" cars responding to calls has shown an increase in officer injuries and officer shootings.

Speaking from experience as a retired L.E.O. commander I can attest to the fact that physically incapable officers who get into dangerous situations are more likely to use their weapon or have their weapon taken away from them and injured or killed with their own weapon.

Just as in sports, it is always easier to play the game from the sidelines and second guess the actions by others after the fact.

[jimjamuser]

Sounds like some folks like to make a lot of excuses for plain old bad behavior.
I get it. You are saying they don't have the ability to think for themselves and discern the difference between right and wrong. I don't agree. I do not believe that the history of my predecessors should influence how I conduct myself. I believe that we are all taught right from wrong, either by the easy way of parental training, or by our education system or just by experience of finding out what the repercussions are when you break the rules. A person's color has not been an excuse for bad behavior for decades. Every charity imagined has been offered to minorities, to include job preference (front of the line privilege) or affirmative action, welfare, housing, etc. Being from a multi-ethnicity family, we do not allow bad behavior based on perception of not being treated fairly. Most Americans are color blind UNTIL one draws attention to their ethnicity in an effort to manipulate the system.
I appreciate your comments on this matter. You are giving voice to, probably, the majority opinion here in TV Land. It is basically a law and order platform, while also noting White grievances about affirmative action and Welfare (which has long stirred too much emotions). I find the Welfare issue a little strange because many whites end up needing welfare and it has had many success stories of lifting up people by their "bootstraps". Of course, there are abuses. But, the abuses of one upper-level con-man like Bernie Madoff are MUCH greater than the Welfare abuses of hundreds of people lower on the economic ladder. And the IRS does NOT catch every Bernie Madoff type. They probably miss 10 for each one they catch. The so-called "Welfare Queens" are a propaganda ploy by the rich to direct attention away from themselves. Also, it gets used to sway voters.

Also, you may consider History to be inconsequential. People do tend to think that History begins with their particular era - but I think otherwise. It is especially important in this discussion about race and Police action. That is why I wrote a scenario where Blacks and Whites switched their Historic role as to who was on top. You can also look at the plight of the Native Americans, which are much worse off than Blacks or Browns - and again you MUST talk History to understand that. A problem will never get a solution until it is 1st admitted to be a problem. A Police Force is at the intersection of it all - crime, punishment, tax system, the prison system, wealth disparity, global warming, and health care. I believe that the US makes MANY mistakes and WILL NOT take the time to look to other counties that better solve these problems. Part of the problem goes back to the HISTORY of the US frontier and frontier philosophies.

[jimjamuser]

ALL states ALREADY have laws to keep guns out of the hands of criminals. The problem is by definition criminals are criminals because they don't follow the laws.
True, but where are your solutions?

[jimjamuser]

Since you strongly imply that the TOTV posters herein are essentially bigoted and unenlightened, please tell me...As an apparent recent student of American History, whose intent is only to educate those of us less knowledgeable, you truly must know what NINA was to Irish immigrants, and WOP was to Italians at the turn of the 20th century for decades. But to paraphrase the celebrated Toni Morrison, "And Still, They Rise"...

My original question, to which you have not responded, still stands...your opinion would be appreciated in light, especially, of the recent conviction of a Black police officer in Minneapolis, in the cold-blooded murder of an unarmed white woman who had called 911 asking for help.
The statistic exception proves the rule.

[Bogie Shooter]

What does going outside of the city have to do with purchasing a firearm? In Illinois, not just Chicago, you must have a FOID card (Firearm Owner Identification Card) issued by the state after a background check has been performed. This process is supposed to be completed in 10 days but can stretch to 4 months. When a person purchases a firearm the dealer is required to perform another background type check called a Firearm Transfer Inquiry and you cannot take possession until this check has been completed. Then after all this background checking you have to wait 72 hours before you can take the firearm home. In Chicago a resident must in addition to all this attend a 5 hour firearm safety instruction course. A Chicago resident must apply for a Chicago firearm permit. When the Chicago resident goes to buy a firearm he HAS TO GO outside the city as gun sales are prohibited in the city. This does not mean the gun buyer is prohibited from owning a gun in the city of Chicago. Then the gun must be registered with the city government.
Now the criminal element doesn't comply with these laws at all, they just buy the gun illegally from other criminals that supply guns or steal them. Maybe you need a better search engine than google.

///

[jimjamuser]

As far as the above suggestion let us be practical. A police officer carries, a gun&holster/ extra clips of ammo&holster, handcuffs&holster, radio&holster, and in addition you want him to carry a taser&holster and pepperspray&holster.

Do people really believe any person is capable of carrying all of this equipment on his person and being able to function? In addition at night he has to carry a flashlight.

In addition to being required to carry a specific amount of equipment the law enforcement agencies today have been inundated with lawsuits to be "inclusive" as a result physical standards have been reduced to a point of ridiculousness. You now have officers who are not physically able to restrain an average criminal. Add to this the lack of personnel and the rise of "one-person" cars responding to calls has shown an increase in officer injuries and officer shootings.

Speaking from experience as a retired L.E.O. commander I can attest to the fact that physically incapable officers who get into dangerous situations are more likely to use their weapon or have their weapon taken away from them and injured or killed with their own weapon.

Just as in sports, it is always easier to play the game from the sidelines and second guess the actions by others after the fact.
I agree with most of what you are saying. I would add that it all comes back to Police budgets, which have been lowered through the years because of Federal and state taxes that have become more flat tax. Which are voted on by the upper 10% for the improvement of the upper 10%, not to improve the Police or America in general.

[John41]

They were lucky that they were technologically superior. BUT, they did NOT have to take advantage of it. They could have been REAL Christians and NOT taken advantage of their fellow human beings. They could have co-existed and held out a hand to help them up. Survival of the fittest may work best for humans when they form co-operative groups. And to this very day, that can be seen.

America fought a civil war to end slavery. Had they remained in Africa they would have remained illiterate slaves. Then the welfare state came and encouraged the breakup of black families which kept them in another, worse, form of slavery to this very day.

[Kenswing]

True, but where are your solutions?
Solutions to what? Why police shoot people that resist arrest and aim/brandish a weapon at them? Several solutions and in my opinion it's all on the people resisting and threatening law enforcement. Stop committing crimes. Quit resisting arrest. Stop posing a threat to officers. Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. Quit believing the media when they tell you it's all the problem of police policies. Raise kids to be good citizens instead of gang bangers. Actions have consequences.

Or the problem of keeping guns out of the hands of criminals? That lies in the lap of the criminal justice system. Impose meaningful punishments for offenders. Most of these criminals in possession of a firearm are repeat offenders..

[jimbomaybe]

But if there are 4+ officers and the one with the mental issues has only a knife? Come on, NO EXCUSE for a shooting death...shoot in knee, use a taser, swing a billy club...whatever...and for God’s sake, have social workers in police departments... There are none so blind as those who will not see

[Number 10 GI]

True, but where are your solutions?

There is no solution. People become criminals through their own free will. Nobody forces them to commit criminal acts.

[Get real]

You may judge a LEO only AFTER you have done the job. Before that, you have absolutely no idea what you are babbling about. A crime is a crime when there are facts to support that. Your opinion is like you know what.

[jimjamuser]

America fought a civil war to end slavery. Had they remained in Africa they would have remained illiterate slaves. Then the welfare state came and encouraged the breakup of black families which kept them in another, worse, form of slavery to this very day.
I agree with the last sentence from the point of, "encouraged the breakup of Black families". Sometimes a well-intentioned program is beset with UNINTENDED consequences. Government and outside experts have tried to fine-tune those consequences away. I am not sure HOW successful they really were?

[jimjamuser]

Solutions to what? Why police shoot people that resist arrest and aim/brandish a weapon at them? Several solutions and in my opinion it's all on the people resisting and threatening law enforcement. Stop committing crimes. Quit resisting arrest. Stop posing a threat to officers. Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. Quit believing the media when they tell you it's all the problem of police policies. Raise kids to be good citizens instead of gang bangers. Actions have consequences.

Or the problem of keeping guns out of the hands of criminals? That lies in the lap of the criminal justice system. Impose meaningful punishments for offenders. Most of these criminals in possession of a firearm are repeat offenders..
What about increasing the Police budgets? - more training - more weeding out of bad apples - Europe can do it - In Europe, a Policeperson is mentored for 3 years with constant evaluations and remains in a team (never alone). Then, they decide whether to make them permanent or not. Constant psychological evaluations. Much more rigorous than in the US., especially small cities.

[jimjamuser]

There is no solution. People become criminals through their own free will. Nobody forces them to commit criminal acts.
There are ALWAYS solutions. read what I said about Europe, please.

[jimjamuser]

You may judge a LEO only AFTER you have done the job. Before that, you have absolutely no idea what you are babbling about. A crime is a crime when there are facts to support that. Your opinion is like you know what.
I value my opinion!

[Justus]

Has it occurred to anyone but me that we have wasted 14 pages on an absolutely futile effort?