More proof the police will shoot anybody - all recent shootings

[rommelrommel]

Point is very few PC lose their lives, despite not having firearms. Rommelrommel was saying it work s til it doesn't.

Seemed like a long list with a lot of avoidable deaths.

 

[sdifox]

Seemed like a long list with a lot of avoidable deaths.

Most of which not related to not having guns. That list is for the last 117 years. Excludes terrorist attack and WWII

 

[Thebobo]

I don't get why you guys don't have indepedent police oversight that investigate police shootings.

I don't either. But I suspect it's the same reason why we have private prisons and private contract army's. Republicans.

 

[Darwin333]

Well. I am merely a tourist. As an australian though it is incomprehensible that justine damond was shot by the cops. A cop shot an unarmed woman through the closed door of a police car. Who had no criminal record, no criminal intent and was of exemplary character. How does that happen? and after it did happen why is the perpetrator protected? You guys have a serious problem.

Trust me brother, most of us are just as pissed off about that, and much more, as yall are. That sort of shit happens way too often for it to simply be an "outlier" and yes, the police, their unions, and often even the politicians are complicit in no justice ever being served.

 

[Darwin333]

That works great until it doesn't.

Right, much better a bunch of civilians who don't deserve to get dead, you know, get dead with virtually no accountability for the people making said civilians dead.

 

[Darwin333]

Not sure what point you are making. One thing that occurs to me is just how many pages it would take to list every US cop killed in the line of duty. The other thing is that list just reinforces my dislike of cars (huge numbers of those deaths involved motorised vehicles, rather than guns).

We count "line of duty" deaths a bit differently here in the US. If a cop is killed because he ran a stop sign on his way to lunch and gets T-boned while on duty, that is a line of duty death. In 2014 there were 27 LEO at the Federal, state and tribal level that were "feloniously" killed in the line of duty, in 2015 it was 51. Keep in mind that when you count all levels of government we have a metric fuckton of LEO which means that very few cops are actually getting murdered in the line of duty.

Edit: I see the UK counts motor vehicle accidents as line of duty deaths too, which I don't mind, I just wish they would always break out the "felonious" deaths as well.

 

[Darwin333]

I don't get why you guys don't have indepedent police oversight that investigate police shootings.

Two words: Police Unions

 

[sdifox]

Two words: Police Unions

We have police unions as well, they don't get to set policy though.

 

[urvile]

Trust me brother, most of us are just as pissed off about that, and much more, as yall are. That sort of shit happens way too often for it to simply be an "outlier" and yes, the police, their unions, and often even the politicians are complicit in no justice ever being served.

Obviously I cannot speak for all australians (although maybe I should be allowed too ) but it's bewildering. Our cops just aren't trained that way. They use a policy of containment and negotiation for armed offenders. Obviously if armed offenders don't comply and come at police they will get shot but the key word is armed.

Although that has been modified in certain circumstance where police can shoot to kill (terrorism) this changed after they botched a siege where an islamist terrorist took hostages in sydney but we are still talking about specialised weapons teams and only in one state. It is the australian defence forces function to use lethal force as their go too option and we have counter terrorism units that can operate domestically and are trained for that. It seems like the US policing culture has been militarised at all levels. Where lethal force becomes the preferred option regardless of context.

Anyways. Time to go to work.

 

[realibrad]

I don't get why you guys don't have indepedent police oversight that investigate police shootings.

I would like to see that. We do have a legal system and internal affairs but that is only for some situations.

 

[sdifox]

I would like to see that. We do have a legal system and internal affairs but that is only for some situations.

This is what we have. Not perfect, but better than nothing.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_Investigations_Unit

 

[Jaskalas]

• Police are trained that they could die at any second, from flick of a wrist to pull a gun or knife on them. Their training involves videos of when such events have occurred in the past. It is beat into their heads that death is coming for them.
• 21 foot rule.
• If they lose control of a physical altercation, they are trained that their gun is at risk. Makes them treat any contact as a life or death struggle. They are required to gain control, to use any threat or use of force to gain control.
• They are trained to pursue if someone flees, again, as part of maintaining control but in that case to protect third parties. To prevent their suspect from interacting with or harming anyone else.

 

[interchange]

I made a mistake once while working in the ER. I woke up a guy presenting with psychosis to interview him but didn't look deep enough to realize he was there for methamphetamine intoxication and was sleeping because he received a cocktail of medications to control his behavior. He looked at me with a stare that gave no indication he recognized that I was a person talking to him, shot out of bed, and began following me around the ward flailing his arms for about 10 paces before being overcome with drowsiness and crawling back in bed. I am not a person who is a fan of guns. If I had one on me and he persisted with this behavior, I would have shot him no question.

I do not know what this cop faced, and I think it was an errant decision to try to force a belligerent person from inside a vehicle when they are safe, particularly without waiting for backup to arrive. But keep in mind he hit the person with a stun gun which only pissed him off and led to tackling the officer.

 

[interchange]

I found this line rather enlightening.

At least they admit it now but it's a sad day when law enforcement need training to see the individuals they are protecting and serving as people...

This forum (including myself) needs training on seeing individuals we are conversing with as people.

 

[urvile]

I made a mistake once while working in the ER. I woke up a guy presenting with psychosis to interview him but didn't look deep enough to realize he was there for methamphetamine intoxication and was sleeping because he received a cocktail of medications to control his behavior. He looked at me with a stare that gave no indication he recognized that I was a person talking to him, shot out of bed, and began following me around the ward flailing his arms for about 10 paces before being overcome with drowsiness and crawling back in bed. I am not a person who is a fan of guns. If I had one on me and he persisted with this behavior, I would have shot him no question.

I do not know what this cop faced, and I think it was an errant decision to try to force a belligerent person from inside a vehicle when they are safe, particularly without waiting for backup to arrive. But keep in mind he hit the person with a stun gun which only pissed him off and led to tackling the officer.

It's a bad decision because it turns the situation confrontational for no real reason but if the cop tasered the guy and then the guy attacked him that's much more of a justification (I should read the article but hey this is the internet). Of course it's easy for me sitting behind my computer screen to make these calls.

It's more the differences in the way the US cops are trained that I see as problematic. There is a time and a place for lethal force but it's a matter of appropriate use of force within a given context and that comes down to type of training and good judgement.

 

[interchange]

It's a bad decision because it turns the situation confrontational for no real reason but if the cop tasered the guy and then the guy attacked him that's much more of a justification (I should read the article but hey this is the internet). Of course it's easy for me sitting behind my computer screen to make these calls.

It's more the differences in the way the US cops are trained that I see as problematic. There is a time and a place for lethal force but it's a matter of appropriate use of force within a given context and that comes down to type of training and good judgement.

Training and weapons play a role, for sure. But either the media has sensationalized the problem or it is getting much worse, and I don't think the presence of weapons or type of LEO training has changed over time in the US. It is sad that an everyday citizen not breaking the law sees a cop and becomes vigilant for confrontation rather than reassured by their presence. And in turn the cops are anticipating greatly the need to defend themselves in ordinary situations. I am not trying to argue a chicken-egg scenario. Merely stating that the divisions are growing stronger and reinforcing the likelihood of further deadly confrontations.

If a law officer's mission is to protect and serve, then this does not match the perception of the public. Even those supportive of law enforcement seem to want them to act even more inhumanely authoritarian and aggressive to bad-guys outside the law (see: Sheriff Arpaio and the like).

Perhaps there is opportunity for the community to value police presence and for police to represent the values they claim. If we can't get to a place where communities are at least hopeful that police will act in their interest, then I don't see anything improving.

 

[Darwin333]

This forum (including myself) needs training on seeing individuals we are conversing with as people.

1. It's a great thing that you recognize that.

2. At least said conversing doesn't end up with people shot and killed.

 

[interchange]

1. It's a great thing that you recognize that.

2. At least said conversing doesn't end up with people shot and killed.

Oh but if we had guns. That is perhaps the greatest tragedy of the internet.

 

[Puffnstuff]

Locally our cops are killing the citizenry as well.
http://www.firstcoastnews.com/news/...cer-who-shot-killed-vernell-bing-jr/476773255

 

[urvile]

Training and weapons play a role, for sure. But either the media has sensationalized the problem or it is getting much worse, and I don't think the presence of weapons or type of LEO training has changed over time in the US. It is sad that an everyday citizen not breaking the law sees a cop and becomes vigilant for confrontation rather than reassured by their presence. And in turn the cops are anticipating greatly the need to defend themselves in ordinary situations. I am not trying to argue a chicken-egg scenario. Merely stating that the divisions are growing stronger and reinforcing the likelihood of further deadly confrontations.

If a law officer's mission is to protect and serve, then this does not match the perception of the public. Even those supportive of law enforcement seem to want them to act even more inhumanely authoritarian and aggressive to bad-guys outside the law (see: Sheriff Arpaio and the like).

Perhaps there is opportunity for the community to value police presence and for police to represent the values they claim. If we can't get to a place where communities are at least hopeful that police will act in their interest, then I don't see anything improving.

I would certainly hope it has. Although if it hasn't that would explain a lot. Police training should constantly evolve. For example if police in the US are using lethal force as part of an aggressive and militaristic policing culture. Their training should be changed too reign that in. Because they are police officers and not the military it's a very important distinction for a liberal democracy.

 

[shortylickens]

I see you are spouting your typical BS.

You mean logic and facts?
You think logic and facts are BS?

Wow.

 

[interchange]

I would certainly hope it has. Although if it hasn't that would explain a lot. Police training should constantly evolve. For example if police in the US are using lethal force as part of an aggressive and militaristic policing culture. Their training should be changed too reign that in. Because they are police officers and not the military it's a very important distinction for a liberal democracy.

This is eminently fair, but I would defer to someone with LEO experience as to how it has evolved. Although, would you not expect the training to have moved in the direction of greater nuance and less automatic authoritarianism? If so, it seems to either be inadequate or counterproductive.

 

[urvile]

This is eminently fair, but I would defer to someone with LEO experience as to how it has evolved. Although, would you not expect the training to have moved in the direction of greater nuance and less automatic authoritarianism? If so, it seems to either be inadequate or counterproductive.

So you agree that police training in the US has changed then? I would expect nuance, deconfliction skills, good judgement and extensive training in the appropriate use of force. Clearly that's not actually happening though or you wouldn't have cops in the US shooting so many unarmed civilians. To be fair it's all a balancing act. It's not like we live in the safest of times but if an islamist takes hostages again (in NSW at least) the cops can just legally shoot him. Which they couldn't do during the actual incident. What they were supposed to do was call in the military (tactical assault group) but they didn't because it was a pissing contest. I would really like to see some research done between policing methods and training from different countries and see the different approaches and results.

I would think the US would be at the top of the pile when it comes to the cops shooting unarmed civilians. Then I wonder why that is and to me it suggests poor training which has an emphasis on using lethal force.

The US has got some serious problems.

I thought I should include this video for your reference. These guys are not the cops they are the military.

 

[pcgeek11]

Mental health and drug problem, not a police problem.

If he had not attacked the police officer the end results would have probably been quite different.

I can see you never actually took a probability class.

You have no idea what would have happened, you're just assuming and you've got no evidence or logic to back it up. Plenty of guys are shot by police who werent attacking them.

I see you are spouting your typical BS.

You mean logic and facts?
You think logic and facts are BS?

Wow.

I never said logic and facts are BS.

I said that IF he had not attacked the police the end results would have probably been quite different. My evidence is that uncountable people interact with the police every day and are NOT shot or molested in any way. I never claimed I knew with a certainty what the outcome would have been had he not attacked.

Where are your logic and facts? I see none. Only the opposite of my logic.

 

[rommelrommel]

Right, much better a bunch of civilians who don't deserve to get dead, you know, get dead with virtually no accountability for the people making said civilians dead.

There are lots of countries with armed police that rarely shoot anyone. Among the first would countries it's a uniquely US thing to have so many shootings. I don't think it's being armed thatbis the problem, it's a much larger systemic social problem.