Can we talk about cops shooting people?

[Christobal]

In a rational manner? I feel cops are shooting way to many people but I don't think they are evil assholes.

I also don't think they are basically bad people. I will admit there are some very bad ones but look at any large group you support, aren't there some very bad people involved with it? You may disagree but do you stand up to stop every problem and deal with the shit storm that will happen to you from the system? I know many of you will say you have. I have too but I pick my battles. I honestly don't believe you if you say I right every wrong.

Back to cops-

They are currently being to taught to contain any threat. Stop any perceived threat.

Perceived threat is the key word. You don't actual have to be under threat you just have to think you are. A guy didn't have a gun in his hands but you lost sight of his hands so you are threatened so shoot.

Second. Deescalation of situation. Maybe because the perp is ignoring your authority he needs a beat down. Maybe he is just freaked out.

When a person is upset and just reacts maybe it is time to take a step back and deescalate.

Again I will say I don't think most cops are bad. I think it is their training.

Edited for clarity.

 

[LadyVer]

It looks to me like too many cops don't understand the concept of de-escalation. I had a family member who was a cop, and he and other cops, both black and white, were indicted for racial discrimination. They liked to taunt and beat up non-whites. Meanwhile, my family thinks the nation decided into hell with Obama. They hold to the belief of see no evil, hear no evil,speak no evil. So in ten years, the family secret of a cop who went bad is still not discussed, and cops are being targeted unreasonably.

 

[Christobal]

It looks to me like too many cops don't understand the concept of de-escalation. I had a family member who was a cop, and he and other cops, both black and white, were indicted for racial discrimination. They liked to taunt and beat up non-whites. Meanwhile, my family thinks the nation decided into hell with Obama. They hold to the belief of see no evil, hear no evil,speak no evil. So in ten years, the family secret of a cop who went bad is still not discussed, and cops are being targeted unreasonably.

De-escalation seems to me to be the key component that is missed.

 

[LincolnDuncan]

Too many people carrying tin who don't have the courage necessary to do the job properly.

 

[clistenovena]

I think it'll be difficult for this to stay as a rational conversation. I appreciate you starting it out as one, though. If more people tried for rational, the situation might change. But I'm an optimist, so there's that.

With many of these shootings, I can't help but believe that there was another way than using deadly force. However, in talking to the law enforcement folks in my world, it literally comes down to a few seconds of reaction time. Not enough time to think, "Is that a gun?" or "Are they reaching for a weapon?" The split-second thought comes unbidden- kill or be killed. No place anyone wants to be.

There are bad people on both sides. Their intent is to cause harm. Nothing to do about it except to watch them get away with it or go to prison. That said, there are many more good people (optimist, remember?). Your idea about training is a valid one. Effective training would go a long way in giving well-intentioned law enforcement officials options in those crisis situations. People on both sides would benefit from such.

Still, no matter the training, if anyone pulls a gun on police, that one is going to get shot. At least, at. At most, dead. That shouldn't be a shock to anyone. Even though it is.

All that said, it's a mess. Obviously.

 

[Christobal]

Too many people carrying tin who don't have the courage necessary to do the job properly.

I am not following you. Please expand.

 

[LincolnDuncan]

I am not following you. Please expand.

I know a lot of people who should never have become cops for different reasons. It takes courage to do the job properly. Doing the job properly means that you don't shoot unless your life is in danger.

 

[hashtag45]

I don't live in the States but this topic made headlines and ignited debates everywhere.

Does anyone know how the US compares to other countries where cops are armed, and have comparable crime rates?

That might give even more insight into some of the reasons behind this.

 

[Christobal]

I don't live in the States but this topic made headlines and ignited debates everywhere.

Does anyone know how the US compares to other countries where cops are armed, and have comparable crime rates?

That might give even more insight into some of the reasons behind this.

What is like where you live. Do they even keep statistics?

Can't keep the high ground if your country keeps messy records.

 

[hashtag45]

What is like where you live. Do they even keep statistics?

Can't keep the high ground if your country keeps messy records.

I live in Australia; prior to that - NZ. No, here it's quite the opposite from what's been happening in the US from both pov's.

In saying that, I don't believe that cops are too different over here (or anywhere else, for that matter) from the US.
I had some interactions with them -work related- and I met mostly good people who were in it for the right reasons, but also a few not so nice people (which confirmed to me the popular myth that Police force is also a magnet for psycopaths. Like someone told me once, tongue in cheek of course: "When they graduate, those people have two options: either join a gang, or join the Police".)

 

[sr71plt]

They are currently being to taught to contain any threat. Stop any perceived threat.

Perceived threat is the key word. You don't actual have to be under threat you just have to think you are. A guy didn't have a gun in his hands but you lost sight of his hands so you are threatened so shoot.

You can't have it both ways. If you insist that anyone has a right to have and carry around an Uzzi, and lots of people are doing it, you've going to have policemen who assume that's what they are facing in any encounter.

Also, we've been in a run of years of professional soldiers fighting wars abroad. They aren't temporary soldier draftees. They are volunteers who mostly are going to keep to their skills when they muster out--ergo become police officers (which is an easy job to get now. Just the other night I was at a meeting where our police chief said it was nice, but meaningless, to be funding new police officer slots in our county, because he has seventeen jobs he can't fill. It's become a war zone out there because so many people have guns--and use them. It's more of a risky career than it ever was before.) Soldiers just coming out of combat and becoming policemen tend not to stop being soldiers who are in combat.

You can't have it both ways. At some point common sense has to set in.

 

[BotanyBoy]

You can't have it both ways. If you insist that anyone has a right to have and carry around an Uzzi, and lots of people are doing it.

There is only one z in Uzi, also along with most machine guns, SMG's and other class III NFA regulated weapons they are quite rare and VERY difficult to get.

With all the lies you've been called out for on this topic you would think you might at least try to stop looking like you're totally ignorant.

 

[Bookishleigh]

I live in Australia; prior to that - NZ. No, here it's quite the opposite from what's been happening in the US from both pov's.

Australia realized there was an issue that needed to be addressed after the Port Arthur massacre instead of the United States where every time there is a massacre both sides of the fence get all riled up, accomplishing nothing. Our Constitution protects the right to bear arms so I can't see the United States government ever truly going the same route that Australia did.

To answer the OP, I think the climate here is so hostile on both ends (the community perspective and the police perspective) that the growing trend seems to be err on the side of "caution" or as some say shoot first, ask later.

 

[Christobal]

Australia realized there was an issue that needed to be addressed after the Port Arthur massacre instead of the United States where every time there is a massacre both sides of the fence get all riled up, accomplishing nothing. Our Constitution protects the right to bear arms so I can't see the United States government ever truly going the same route that Australia did.

To answer the OP, I think the climate here is so hostile on both ends (the community perspective and the police perspective) that the growing trend seems to be err on the side of "caution" or as some say shoot first, ask later.

I agree.

 

[Hypoxia]

When the populace is increasingly armed, police must necessarily assume they're at risk. The more firearms everyone has, the more people will be shot. From any direction.

As to the "right to bear arms" -- consider the context. British law prohibited some groups (mainly Catholics and religious nonconformists) from military service. The 2nd Amendment said that any American was eligible to bear arms for the national defense in a well-regulated militia. One sloppy comma in the 2nd allows the interpretation that we can all haul iron wherever we go. It's bullshit, and it's suicidal.

Until USA gets serious about firearms (not likely) we'll have continuing massacres, and shot-because-black, and infants accidentally shooting parents, and the usual insanity. Yow.

 

[domroger]

What is like where you live. Do they even keep statistics?

Can't keep the high ground if your country keeps messy records.

The US does not keep complete statistics on police shootings and deaths in custody .The Guardian newspaper is running the ones it has found and they are approximately 120% higher than the reported shootings by the police .

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

re: the OP (before I go pee pee from the coffee)

Are they shooting more or has a local issue been nationalized to further certain narratives of those who fancy themselves Social Justice Warriors...



... at least, in certain national news sources, we are getting the same treatment when the police are shot in the line of duty. Others, not so much.

Maybe a Fairness Doctrine?

 

[NOIRTRASH]

I worked with cops (and teachers). From 1986 to 2006. I wasn't a cop per se but worked for the department of health & rehab that administered significant chunks of state law. There's criminal law and all kinds of law. Like, if a kid was sick and ma refused medical attention, the law authorized me to take custody of the child and get her treated. I had authority to enter any home without search warrant to assess the welfare of kids or old people. Much of the time cops were with me. Most of us are ignorant of the laws. On one occasion we arrested and cuffed a school principal who stubbornly refused access to one of her students. It was sex abuse, and she insisted that ma be called first. YOU CANNOT RESIST OR OPPOSE POLICE AUTHORITY.

So I worked with 1000s of cops.

I was involved with 1000s of blacks.

I was involved with 1000s of teachers.

I was involved with 1000s of trailer trash.

Blacks are loud and noisy and whine all the time. Teachers are mother fuckers. Trailer trash are dangerous. Gimme a black anytime. Most of the time theyre docile and cooperate. But their mouths unhinge cops. I learned early not to shove dum cops too hard, and I had some real brawls with cop brass about law. Cops hate NO. Cops hate NO. Cops hate NO. If you just gotta do NO with a cop get ready for trouble.

 

[Christobal]

The US does not keep complete statistics on police shootings and deaths in custody .The Guardian newspaper is running the ones it has found and they are approximately 120% higher than the reported shootings by the police .

I agree that the US does not keep good records. That doesn't excuse anyone else.

 

[NOIRTRASH]

America has always been fulla gun toting folks.

My great grandfather got his degree from Harvard and taught school at Vanita, Indian Territory circa 1890s where he kept a Colt 45 atop his desk, for parent management.a

 

[imalickin]

Cops. Cops have always shot people, mostly in self-defense, but sometimes not. The reason you are hearing more about it, is now, over the past decade, almost everyone has a camera. Back in the day, the only people with cameras were TV stations and newspaper reporters and they couldn't be everywhere.

So you most likely have the same number of criminals being shot by police, but now all this video, most of the time edited to show the cops in a bad light, popping up on YouTube.

As for deescalation, when a criminal is pointing a gun at you, it's pretty hard to deescalate. After all the criminal has taken the last step in the process and pointed a deadly weapon at the police office. If he doesn't do as he's told, the officers have the right, just as you, a private citizen do, to defend himself, plus they have the duty to protect other citizens who may be are in the line of fire.

I have a lot of respect for cops, although I have seen some who are complete assholes. But they didn't pull a gun on me. I have also met and seen some really descent cops, just trying to do their job and not getting any respect from the citizens.

Deescalation, has to be a two way street. The police are there to not only up hold the law, but to protect you and other citizens. They don't get up in the morning thinking they will just go out a kill a bad guy. I didn't when I was a cop.

Now your going to ask, did I shoot anyone. I did. I didn't kill him. He was running away after knifing my partner, so he got a round in his ass. I couldn't chase him because my partner was down, but the K-9 unit that was patrolling with us, caught him not two minutes later.

 

[Christobal]

I would like a license to kill anyone that I feel threaten by.

No that's a lie. My " Dirty Harry" just spoke up but I will admit that is a small part of my nature.

As a civilian I know I am not allowed to act on that.

 

[RobDownSouth]

There has been a great role-reversal in the past 20 or so years:

We expect the general populace to remain absolutely calm and still with a gun pointed directly at them, yet routinely excuse the itchy-trigger-finger mentality of a certain subset of law enforcement who panic and fire at threats real and imagined.

"De-escalation" is a lost art at police academies nowadays.

"To Protect (myself) and To Serve (up 'summary justice')"

 

[SgtSpiderMan]

I would like a license to kill anyone that I feel threaten by.

No that's a lie. My " Dirty Harry" just spoke up but I will admit that is a small part of my nature.

As a civilian I know I am not allowed to act on that.

We live in Florida, legally you are allowed to act on that.

 

[Raziel83]

The police in L.A. study de-escalating a conflict but they only get one day for those lessons. They train using a gun for several weeks.

This is one of the reasons why they rather shoot than talk.

Another is that if they try to talk with a suspect and are injured they risk losing their job because the insurance company will tell the department that if they have to pay the medical bills of a severely injured officer (who wasn't in a high publicity case) then the insurance bills are going to go up for everyone in the department.

They simply can't afford the risk of getting hurt.

Third reason is that a sizeable portion of the police in USA are white supremacist.