Cops shoot at jaywalker, miss and hit passers by. Charge jaywalker with assault

[Genx87]

True. However, had this person turned out to be armed and shot/killed innocent people many in this thread would be wailing/crying and condemning the police for not acting fast enough. A regular catch 22 - damned if you do, damn if you don't

If this guy pulled out a gun then the cops could try to shoot. I say try because it appears cops are terrible shots. But under your litmus test for the use of deadly force. The cops can justify shooting innocent bystanders all day long. We thought he was dangerous and thus our actions to shoot were justified. And because we cant hit the broad side of the barn. We will charge our percieved threat with assault from our horrible shots as icing on the cake.

 

[bshole]

If this guy pulled out a gun then the cops could try to shoot. I say try because it appears cops are terrible shots. But under your litmus test for the use of deadly force. The cops can justify shooting innocent bystanders all day long. We thought he was dangerous and thus our actions to shoot were justified. And because we cant hit the broad side of the barn. We will charge our percieved threat with assault from our horrible shots as icing on the cake.

ROFLMFAO!!! Epic. Thanx Genx. Couldn't agree more.

 

[Londo_Jowo]

If this guy pulled out a gun then the cops could try to shoot. I say try because it appears cops are terrible shots. But under your litmus test for the use of deadly force. The cops can justify shooting innocent bystanders all day long. We thought he was dangerous and thus our actions to shoot were justified. And because we cant hit the broad side of the barn. We will charge our percieved threat with assault from our horrible shots as icing on the cake.

So they must wait until the perp pulls a gun and possibly shoots someone, gotcha.

 

[wholesalestunna]

So they must wait until the perp pulls a gun and possibly shoots someone, gotcha.

And that's why nobody in here has the balls to work as law enforcement. You get crapped on by the suspects, the administration, and by the people you're protecting.

 

[ch33zw1z]

And that's why nobody in here has the balls to work as law enforcement. You get crapped on by the suspects, the administration, and by the people you're protecting.

damn straight. join the club. No one is forced into being a LEO, it's a choice. Don't like it? find another job.

 

[ch33zw1z]

So they must wait until the perp pulls a gun and possibly shoots someone, gotcha.

So your defense is that the two people shot by the officers would've been shot anyways, so fuck it. gotcha.

 

[wholesalestunna]

damn straight. join the club. No one is forced into being a LEO, it's a choice. Don't like it? find another job.

Yes, it is a choice. But it's also your choice for condemning them for protecting themselves and others. All you see in the media now is the public criticizing actions police take and screaming excessive force.

How much force would you use against someone if you reasonably thought they would kill you if you didn't do anything?

 

[dank69]

Video of jaywalker

 

[ch33zw1z]

Yes, it is a choice. But it's also your choice for condemning them for protecting themselves and others. All you see in the media now is the public criticizing actions police take and screaming excessive force.

How much force would you use against someone if you reasonably thought they would kill you if you didn't do anything?

This is why officers are receiving more criticism, because this is what it's about now.

If I fired at someone who I thought was going to kill me, missed, and hit two innocent bystanders...you can rest assured that the person I was firing at wouldn't be charged with my reckless actions.

officers, above the law they are sworn to protect. "but it's so hard out here, we get shit on by everyone"....then find a new career.

 

[Londo_Jowo]

So your defense is that the two people shot by the officers would've been shot anyways, so fuck it. gotcha.

I could see your reaction had the perp shot several people......WTF were those MFin cops thinking, allow that perp to get to his gun and shoot grandma and little billy.

 

[ch33zw1z]

I could see your reaction had the perp shot several people......WTF were those MFin cops thinking, allow that perp to get to his gun and shoot grandma and little billy.

are you would be wrong. you expect criminals to do reckless things, that's the way it is..especially if they're high on crack/meth.... when the LEO's start doing it, and then blaming others for their reckless actions...that's when I have a problem. Maybe we should drug test LEO's every time they discharge a weapon in the line of duty.

 

[Genx87]

So they must wait until the perp pulls a gun and possibly shoots someone, gotcha.

That would be the logical conclusion wouldnt it? Confirm he has a deadly weapon before opening fire on a crowd.

 

[Genx87]

Yes, it is a choice. But it's also your choice for condemning them for protecting themselves and others. All you see in the media now is the public criticizing actions police take and screaming excessive force.

How much force would you use against someone if you reasonably thought they would kill you if you didn't do anything?

Who did they protect in this instance? Seems to me they put the public in danger by shooting two of them.

 

[dank69]

I could see your reaction had the perp shot several people......WTF were those MFin cops thinking, allow that perp to get to his gun and shoot grandma and little billy.

I'd like to see one story anywhere on the internet where people are upset that cops didn't kill someone fast enough. Where cops are blamed for the damage done by a perp. Just one.

 

[Londo_Jowo]

I'd like to see one story anywhere on the internet where people are upset that cops didn't kill someone fast enough. Where cops are blamed for the damage done by a perp. Just one.

Why would I need to search the internet to back up a prediction of what would posted in this all too obvious anti-police forum?

 

[mikeymikec]

Why would I need to search the internet to back up a prediction of what would posted in this all too obvious anti-police forum?

To back up what your argument, obviously.

I think this is your argument so far:
The police only had two choices: Shoot straight away, or cower in fear.

If so, IMO your argument isn't completely and utterly absurd yet, but it's getting there. Perhaps if you work something in there like, "but a police officer's gun is meant to be a tool that can fix all problems!", then the absurdity of your argument will have reached critical mass.

As a side note, is this forum unanimously pro or anti anything?

 

[wholesalestunna]

To back up what your argument, obviously.

I think this is your argument so far:
The police only had two choices: Shoot straight away, or cower in fear.

If so, IMO your argument isn't completely and utterly absurd yet, but it's getting there. Perhaps if you work something in there like, "but a police officer's gun is meant to be a tool that can fix all problems!", then the absurdity of your argument will have reached critical mass.

As a side note, is this forum unanimously pro or anti anything?

So you're saying that had you been in the officers shoes you would do what? How could they have resolved this while meeting your requirements for being good officers? I bet they couldn't.

 

[bshole]

However, had this person turned out to be armed and shot/killed innocent people many in this thread would be wailing/crying and condemning the police for not acting fast enough

They have recordings of the incident...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/09/16/gleen-broadnax_n_3934132.html

Photos and video taken by onlookers showed a chaotic scene. Several officers tried to contain the man as he moved through an intersection, and he was finally brought down as people in the crowd yelled at police not to shoot him.

So the cops open up as the bystanders ask them not to... wounding two innocents in the process.

Why these buffoons still have a job is beyond me. FIRE THEM NOW!

So you're saying that had you been in the officers shoes you would do what? How could they have resolved this while meeting your requirements for being good officers? I bet they couldn't.

Well I would start shooting innocent people just like they did. You are right, we need more cops that shoot innocents while trying to subdue unarmed people. You are correct, police need only know how to pull the trigger, their accuracy is completely irrelevant to their ability to do their job.

 

[wholesalestunna]

They have recordings of the incident...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/09/16/gleen-broadnax_n_3934132.html



So the cops open as the bystanders ask them not to... wounding two innocents in the process.

Why these buffoons still have a job is beyond me. FIRE THEM NOW!



Well I would start shooting innocent people just like they did. You are right, we need more cops that shoot innocents while trying to subdue unarmed people.

I'm not saying that they were correct in this, but I'm not sure it wouldn't happen to me given the same situation. How do you know it wouldn't happen to you?

Have you ever been on a simulator or anything that puts you in a situation like that and gets your adrenaline going? I bet you'd do some crazy things.

 

[destey]

I feel like I stand a greater chance of being killed by police than a thug or terrorist (and I've never done anything worse than a speeding ticket). Anyone have any data to disprove this?

 

[Genx87]

I feel like I stand a greater chance of being killed by police than a thug or terrorist (and I've never done anything worse than a speeding ticket). Anyone have any data to disprove this?

I seem to remember a thread maybe a year ago that had a study that showed such information.

 

[mikeymikec]

So you're saying that had you been in the officers shoes you would do what? How could they have resolved this while meeting your requirements for being good officers? I bet they couldn't.

Actually verify that the guy in question has a weapon, and if so, what weapon... seems like a good start.

I'm not saying that they were correct in this, but I'm not sure it wouldn't happen to me given the same situation. How do you know it wouldn't happen to you?

Have you ever been on a simulator or anything that puts you in a situation like that and gets your adrenaline going? I bet you'd do some crazy things.

I would hope that someone who is a trained police officer has had training to ensure that they don't do crazy things in stressful situations.

 

[destey]

I would hope that someone who is a trained police officer has had training to ensure that they don't do crazy things in stressful situations.

The poster could be wrong, but I remember a cop from ar15.com said pretty much the police acadamies teach police to survive to make it home safely as objective #1, and everything else can be dealt with somehow (with the laywers etc).

This cop killing is what led to that mentality. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Kyle_Dinkheller

 

[Lithium381]

See: Christopher Dorner. Shoot first and try and figure out what you just shot later.

 

[mikeymikec]

The poster could be wrong, but I remember a cop from ar15.com said pretty much the police acadamies teach police to survive to make it home safely as objective #1, and everything else can be dealt with somehow (with the laywers etc).

This cop killing is what led to that mentality. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Kyle_Dinkheller

If I presented my opinion as "this method will never result in anything going wrong", then saying "but that method might go wrong, here's an example" would be a valid opposing argument.

There's no perfect method of law enforcement that always results in the bad guys losing and the good guys winning, but I would prefer the idea of police officers who know that they're there to serve a community and not to shoot it as well as one where such police officers die in the line of duty rather than an apparent system of "shoot first; ask questions later" which implies that a police officer's life should be protected more than the community they're supposed to serve.