Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 33

Thread: Frequency of police shootings

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Kent
    Posts
    747

    Frequency of police shootings

    If there is one perceived truism that is discussed often here and elsewhere, it's the perception that LEO and their agencies are becoming increasingly more "militarized" vs. officer friendly, that force to include deadly force is overused etc. Radley Balko has done some good writing on this subject.


    But I notice the criticisms RARELY are supported with statistics. It's almost always anecdotal... e.g. mention incident X and say how #4((# up it is, and how it is an example of overuse of swat, occupying army mentality, etc.

    Now of course stuff varies agency to agency, but check out this article.

    Recently in 2010 over the course of entire year, NYPD officers (an agency of 35000 officers give or take few) had 33 instances where they shot at suspects.

    33

    Think about the thousands of felony arrests, arrests of armed dangerous felons, hot calls involving substantial violence, etc. and it's a major testament to restraint (and recognize that sometimes deciding NOT to shoot is a very BAD decision and can put the public and others in danger because you didnt take the perp out of commission, however these stats are being used to show the "increased militarization" meme is true in SOME respects and in some agencies, but clearly there are tons of examples such as I mention here, where police have gotten far more restrained in the use of force, etc.

    In 2010 they shot and killed 8 people and shot and wounded 16

    1/10th of 1 percent of NYPD Officers fired their handgun in the LOD in that year

    1/10 of 1 percent

    In the same year, they responded to almost 207,000 calls involving reports of weapons involved.

    These stats are profound, and for the cop haters and those who claim cops are OUT OF CONTROL, it offers realistic sobering statistics that one's assumptions may run counter to the real world if all one does is read reports of alleged "bad shoots" and excessive force, etc. without putting it in perspective, as this article does.

    Note also that the use of SWAT, decried by many (NYPD calls it the ESU iirc), is a substantial factor in many cases where the situation gets resolved without shots fired. Whether it's distraction device , use of robots, use of advanced tactics with weapons, etc. etc. SWAT can often get a peaceful resolution where patrol would have ended up with shots fired because they don't have the tools to deal with many encounters in an optimal manner. SWAT has absolutely been OVERUSED in the war oon drugs especially, and one can certainly point out examples of SWAT raids that were a tactical nightmare. Again, one can concentrate on the bad, but acknowledge that in the REAL world, it's not as bad as you think by a long shot

    And I guarantee these stats would be a surprise to the cop haters. I recall , in a thread about a (perceived as bad) shooting, the post after post decrying the NYPD specifically as blood thirsty and trigger happy thugs

    lol

    in an agency where they responded to 207 000 calls involving weapons, where there were thousands of felony arrests of violent felonious crimes, thousands of cases of disarming suspects through tactics and negotiation without firing a shot, and in an agency where sad to say a substantial # of calls involve EDP's and where good training and a good heart are necessary and help to avoid violent results, in that agency we see stats that certainly give pause to the "cops are becoming increasingly militarized and thuggish" people

    1971 was the first year in which NYPD began recording statistics of this nature. In that same year, cops shot and killed 93 people and shot and wounded 221 more.

    Compare and contrast. SURE, the streets are far less violent now than in 1971. But the decrease in shootings FAR FAR FAR outstrips the %age drop in violent crime. The stats show roughly 10% as many cop shootings in 2010 vs. 1971 and violent crime has NOT DROPPED ANYWHERE NEAR 10% of 1971 levels.

    It's through better trainijng, officer safety tactics, better recruiting, better use of psych etc tests on recruits, better accountability and review for police shooting, etc etc that this reality could come about.

    I'm sad to say my agency has a MUCH higher shooting/officer ratio and from what stats I've seen we also have a much greater %age of officers injured every year, attacked every year etc. New York is definitely a shining beacon, a large metropolis with a restrained professional police force and a diminished crime rate by a large margin.

    In my agency, we just did a debrief on an incident involving a homicidal man with multiple guns that happened a few weeks ago. In brief, we criticized ourselves for NOT shooting him at a point when he CLEARLY should have been shot in order to protect the lives of others. As a firearms instructor, etc. I am certainly aware that on the whole we exercise great restraint (to include our SWAT) and like in this case, sometimes much too much restraint.

    fortunately, in this incident the man did NOT succeed in harming anybody else after that critical point when patrol should have shot. THis is at least partially due to the heroic actions of my sgt and a couple of officers who placed themselves in the line of fire in order to run into the house he had just taken over and extract the hostages without any bloodshed. A story that will of course NEVER make the news, but it's quite common,

    So the next time some histrionic ninny criticizes the NYPD as a bunch of trigger happy violent thugs, throw some stats at them.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/25/ny...lows.html?_r=0

    p.s. one additional factor that imnsho helped decrease the shooting rate is... the Taser. Where in 1971 the only rational response to many armed threats was the handgun (in 1971 it was the revolver on the part of the cops), NOW when there are multiple officers on scene (and nYPD uses a lot of two man cars I might add) an officer can go "less lethal" with his taser while being protected a partner who is deploying lethal force (drawijng his handgun). Tasers definitely help improve resolutions of many violent encounters
    Last edited by PALO; 11-25-2013 at 07:46 PM.

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    idaho
    Posts
    760
    I didn't know New York City was the only city in America.

    You want some stats.....okay......

    http://www.presstelegram.com/general...-in-long-beach


    LONG BEACH >> No weapon was found at the scene of the latest officer-involved shooting in the city that resulted in the death of a 19-year-old Rialto man, Long Beach police confirmed Thursday. Tuesday’s shooting marked the city’s 20th officer-involved shooting of 2013, which is the highest since 2008.


    --Moderatort Note--
    That is not a statistic. It is one incident.
    Last edited by Grapeshot; 11-25-2013 at 08:35 PM. Reason: Cite not valid response to the OP

  3. #3
    Regular Member Primus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    4,216

    Tasers

    I'd have to agree that Tasers have helped alot on calming things down. It's defintely an great descalation tool even just by it being there. They see the green top (bright yellow handle depending what model you run) and they calm down, never mind when you take it out. We are still trying to get all of our guys taser, but lack the funding. We have close to 300 sworn officers, and most have them, but not all.

    On your topic of being involved in an incident where maybe someone SHOULD have shot someone, I've personally seen it as well. We had a person barricaded in a house and he was firing his pistol out of the window at our guys down stairs, while they were evacuating residents in the building. The guys on that side of the house returned fire a few times (missed him and the window by only a few inches) then disengaged. Sometimes it just isn't in guys to commit, not knocking them the least.

  4. #4
    Accomplished Advocate BB62's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    3,887
    I have no idea what the stats are, but just like self-defense stats, which when based on rounds fired or people killed understate the usage/display of firearms for that purpose, the number of incidents of LE firearm discharges naturally understates the property destruction and/or threat or overuse of force by LE.

  5. #5
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    NYC is noted for "fudging" their numbers .. so , consider the source....

  6. #6
    Regular Member Primus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    4,216
    Quote Originally Posted by BB62 View Post
    I have no idea what the stats are, but just like self-defense stats, which when based on rounds fired or people killed understate the usage/display of firearms for that purpose, the number of incidents of LE firearm discharges naturally understates the property destruction and/or threat or overuse of force by LE.
    How do you quantify the threat of force? Even the idea of quantifying "over use" of force is tough. Especially since force is everytime you put your hands on someone. But I understand the premise.

  7. #7
    Regular Member stealthyeliminator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    3,318
    Why don't you just ******* reply like everyone else?

    PALO - you need a tldr section

    Seriously though, I think that an "increased use of deadly force" and militarization of the police force are separate issues. I don't recall seeing them being combined by opponents to either or.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version. 

Name:	********.png 
Views:	59 
Size:	8.8 KB 
ID:	10993  
    Advocate freedom please

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    idaho
    Posts
    760
    I noticed PALO is from "Kent". When I read that it reminded me of Kent State.

  9. #9
    Regular Member stealthyeliminator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    3,318
    Quote Originally Posted by Primus View Post
    I'd have to agree that Tasers have helped alot on calming things down. It's defintely an great descalation tool even just by it being there. They see the green top (bright yellow handle depending what model you run) and they calm down, never mind when you take it out. We are still trying to get all of our guys taser, but lack the funding. We have close to 300 sworn officers, and most have them, but not all.

    On your topic of being involved in an incident where maybe someone SHOULD have shot someone, I've personally seen it as well. We had a person barricaded in a house and he was firing his pistol out of the window at our guys down stairs, while they were evacuating residents in the building. The guys on that side of the house returned fire a few times (missed him and the window by only a few inches) then disengaged. Sometimes it just isn't in guys to commit, not knocking them the least.
    I can't even imagine how difficult certain to-fire-or-not-to-fire scenarios must be. Must be a million things that rush through the officer's mind. I can see how it'd be a very hard and stressful call in some cases.
    Advocate freedom please

  10. #10
    Regular Member Primus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    4,216
    Quote Originally Posted by stealthyeliminator View Post
    I can't even imagine how difficult certain to-fire-or-not-to-fire scenarios must be. Must be a million things that rush through the officer's mind. I can see how it'd be a very hard and stressful call in some cases.
    Not sure if you compete, but I know some IDPA matches are held in low light scenarios. It puts a number on your head. I've yet to be involved in a shooting LOD, but I hope that the extra training/competing I do plus my military experience will keep others from getting hurt when it's a No-Shoot or drop the bad guy when it's a shoot. From experience, you just don't know what you'll do until it happens, anyone who says they do without experiencing it, is bluffing. That's why I never knock guys that get into situations where they could do something but didn't.

    This actually plays right into the OC topic. For those on here that carry but don't compete in something like IDPA or USPSA, you should really think about it. It hones your shooting skills and not just the 4 fundamentals you might practice at the range with a stationary target.

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    idaho
    Posts
    760
    http://articles.latimes.com/2011/sep...tings-20110923


    Almost half the people shot at by Los Angeles County sheriff's deputies after reaching toward their waistbands turned out to be unarmed, according to a study released Thursday.

  12. #12
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    -

    There are lies, damned lies and statistics- Mark Twain
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,154
    Quote Originally Posted by sudden valley gunner View Post
    - There are lies, damned lies and statistics- Mark Twain
    NORTH AMERICAN REVIEW, No. DCXVIII. JULY 5, 1907. CHAPTERS FROM MY AUTOBIOGRAPHY.—XX. BY MARK TWAIN.
    "I was deducing from the above that I have been slowing down steadily in these thirty-six years, but I perceive that my[Pg 471] statistics have a defect: three thousand words in the spring of 1868 when I was working seven or eight or nine hours at a sitting has little or no advantage over the sitting of to-day, covering half the time and producing half the output. Figures often beguile me, particularly when I have the arranging of them myself; in which case the remark attributed to Disraeli would often apply with justice and force:

    "There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics."
    http://www.gutenberg.org/files/19987...-h/19987-h.htm
    http://www.gutenberg.org/files/19987...-h/19987-h.htm

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lies,_...and_statistics
    Last edited by Nightmare; 11-26-2013 at 01:49 PM.
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

  14. #14
    Regular Member Fuller Malarkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    The Cadre
    Posts
    1,077
    Quote Originally Posted by sudden valley gunner View Post
    -

    There are lies, damned lies and statistics- Mark Twain
    I'm glad you posted this. Two things I retained from a very expensive higher education:

    1. A hot beaker looks just like a cold beaker.

    2. Statistics don't lie. Statisticians do.


    Now I don't know if any statistician lied in the compilation or presentation of these figures. I do know the source quoted is currently under Department of Justice court ordered Monitor control. Peter L. Zimroth, an attorney, is the court-appointed monitor overseeing the New York Police Department due to widespread corruption and civil rights violations. I also suspect that if numbers and statistics were needed to substantiate the need for more officers and / or equipment, NYCPD has a different set of figures, and would appear. Actually, they could use the same numbers and simply change their presentation. People rarely use statistics that don't support their contentions. Or allude to figures or studies that might discount theirs.

    Again, I don't know that these stats are tainted. Let's look at this statistical info like we would a blood transfusion. Your donor has AIDS. That doesn't mean the transfusion you're getting is contaminated, or that you should be concerned, right? What have you got to lose by trusting? Tainted blood salesmen gotta eat too ya know.
    Liberty is so strongly a part of human nature that it can be treated as a no-lose argument position.
    ~Citizen

    From the cop’s perspective, the expression “law-abiding citizen” is a functional synonym for “Properly obedient slave".

    "People are not born being "anti-cop" and believing we live in a police state. That is a result of experience."

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,154

    RCMP tracks HIV-tainted prison blood.

    Quote Originally Posted by Fuller Malarkey View Post
    I'm glad you posted this. Two things I retained from a very expensive higher education: [ ... ] Again, I don't know that these stats are tainted. Let's look at this statistical info like we would a blood transfusion. Your donor has AIDS. That doesn't mean the transfusion you're getting is contaminated, or that you should be concerned, right? What have you got to lose by trusting? Tainted blood salesmen gotta eat too ya know.
    "The RCMP's criminal investigation into the tainted-blood affair will examine how HIV-contaminated plasma was collected from Arkansas prison inmates and shipped to Canada by a U.S. firm with links to President Bill Clinton." http://www.umsl.edu/~thomaskp/clinaids.htm

    George Santayana demanded that we remember "our past", and not the history written by the victors now in the White House.

    Progress, far from consisting in change, depends on retentiveness. When change is absolute there remains no being to improve and no direction is set for possible improvement: and when experience is not retained, as among savages, infancy is perpetual. Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it. In the first stage of life the mind is frivolous and easily distracted; it misses progress by failing in consecutiveness and persistence.
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

  16. #16
    Regular Member Fuller Malarkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    The Cadre
    Posts
    1,077
    Police generated statistics are interesting and somewhat predictable. In about 90 days, we'll see statistical numbers of the law enforcement killed in the line of duty. From a host of sources. I also predict there will be no statistical figures accounting for the number of citizens killed by police. Police track everything from domestic violence to child abuse to murder, and police routinely lobby state and federal lawmakers to put new crimes into statute. There are no comprehensive studies on how many people are killed each year at the hands of police. There is no objective comprehensive statistics on the police use of force either.

    I react to the mention of the state of Maryland much as a vampire does to daylight. They do, however, require police to report use of force. The only state to do so.

    Another name for self serving statistics is propaganda.

    The given statistics by the OP will look considerably different when used by the same city to apply for Federal grants and funding, the Big Apple closer resembling Beirut in lawlessness, chaos, and the need for artillery to supplement existing firepower. All a matter of perspective, right?
    Liberty is so strongly a part of human nature that it can be treated as a no-lose argument position.
    ~Citizen

    From the cop’s perspective, the expression “law-abiding citizen” is a functional synonym for “Properly obedient slave".

    "People are not born being "anti-cop" and believing we live in a police state. That is a result of experience."

  17. #17
    Regular Member Primus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    4,216
    I'm confused guys... he took time to write out a pretty well written piece that used cites and numbers to back up his premise. This forum is big on citing stuff and backing up what you say, which I personally admire. So why is that when he does it to something you guys may not like or disagree with, the response is basiclly "those numbers are lying" or "it's propoganda and fake".

    If you guys have othe citations or sources or figures to throw out to refute his premise, then send it. To just dismiss it and say it's all false doesn't seem right.

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    idaho
    Posts
    760
    http://jimfishertruecrime.blogspot.c...11-annual.html


    In 2011, according to data I have collected, police officers in the United States shot 1,146 people, killing 607. Since January 1, 2011, I have been using the internet to compile a national database of police involved shootings. The term "police involved shooting" pertains to law enforcement officers who, in the line of duty, discharge their guns. When journalists and police administrators use the term, they include the shooting of animals and shots that miss their targets. My case files only include instances in which a person is either killed or wounded by police gunfire. My data also includes off-duty officers who discharged their weapons in law enforcement situations. They don't include, for example, officers using their firearms to resolve personal disputes.

    I collected this data myself because the U.S. Government doesn't. There is no national database dedicated to police involved shootings. Alan Maimon, in his article, "National Data on Shootings by Police Not Collected," published on November 28, 2011 in the "Las Vegas Review-Journal," wrote "The nation's leading law enforcement agency [FBI] collects vast amounts of information on crime nationwide, but missing from this clearinghouse are statistics on where, how often, and under what circumstances police use deadly force. In fact, no one anywhere comprehensively tracks the most significant act police can do in the line of duty: take a life."

    The government does maintain records on how many police officers are killed every year in the line of duty. In 2010, 59 officers were shot to death among 122 killed while on the job. This marked a 20 percent jump from 2009 when 49 officers were killed by gunfire. In 2011, 173 officers died, from all causes, in the line of duty. The fact police officers feel they are increasingly under attack from the public may help explain why they are shooting so many citizens.

  19. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,154

    Friendly reminder: Don't believe everything you read on the internet TheWeek.com

    "For those fortunate enough to have missed it, it wove a scary tale: Groups of black teenagers were reported to be wandering the streets, randomly sucker-punching mostly white men and women in a violent competition termed the "knockout game." Searches for the term spiked on Google. [ ... ] that preys largely on, as Robin Abcarian suggests, "the ongoing demonization of black teenagers."

    http://theweek.com/article/index/253...n-the-internet

    A perfect example of self-reference FAILED! The classroom example; a card with "The statement on the other side is TRUE" on the obverse and on the reverse, "The statement on the other side is FALSE."

    Believe nothing read or heard without verifying it oneself unless it fits ones pre-existing world view - IOW is Weltanschauung congruent.
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

  20. #20
    Regular Member Primus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    4,216
    Quote Originally Posted by onus View Post
    http://jimfishertruecrime.blogspot.c...11-annual.html


    In 2011, according to data I have collected, police officers in the United States shot 1,146 people, killing 607. Since January 1, 2011, I have been using the internet to compile a national database of police involved shootings. The term "police involved shooting" pertains to law enforcement officers who, in the line of duty, discharge their guns. When journalists and police administrators use the term, they include the shooting of animals and shots that miss their targets. My case files only include instances in which a person is either killed or wounded by police gunfire. My data also includes off-duty officers who discharged their weapons in law enforcement situations. They don't include, for example, officers using their firearms to resolve personal disputes.

    I collected this data myself because the U.S. Government doesn't. There is no national database dedicated to police involved shootings. Alan Maimon, in his article, "National Data on Shootings by Police Not Collected," published on November 28, 2011 in the "Las Vegas Review-Journal," wrote "The nation's leading law enforcement agency [FBI] collects vast amounts of information on crime nationwide, but missing from this clearinghouse are statistics on where, how often, and under what circumstances police use deadly force. In fact, no one anywhere comprehensively tracks the most significant act police can do in the line of duty: take a life."

    The government does maintain records on how many police officers are killed every year in the line of duty. In 2010, 59 officers were shot to death among 122 killed while on the job. This marked a 20 percent jump from 2009 when 49 officers were killed by gunfire. In 2011, 173 officers died, from all causes, in the line of duty. The fact police officers feel they are increasingly under attack from the public may help explain why they are shooting so many citizens.
    Fact check. How many were in MA in those years and what towns?

  21. #21
    Regular Member Fuller Malarkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    The Cadre
    Posts
    1,077
    Quote Originally Posted by Primus View Post
    I'm confused guys... he took time to write out a pretty well written piece that used cites and numbers to back up his premise. This forum is big on citing stuff and backing up what you say, which I personally admire. So why is that when he does it to something you guys may not like or disagree with, the response is basiclly "those numbers are lying" or "it's propoganda and fake".

    If you guys have othe citations or sources or figures to throw out to refute his premise, then send it. To just dismiss it and say it's all false doesn't seem right.
    It's not a requirement to counter statistical information discounted as corrupt when the finding of corruption was determined by the Federal Courts. NYC police have been under Federal Court appointed Monitor control since August for "corruption and civil rights abuses". The court ordered monitor will supervise all training, supervision, and paperwork, which is the information used to compile statistics. Nobody need rely on this particular Department of Justice sought court intervention, as other supporting evidence exists to challenge the validity of the statistical figures due to corruption given and those numbers' source.

    NYCPD

    The Commission to Combat Police Corruption (the Commission) was established by
    Executive Order No. 18 in 1995 to combat widespread police corruption and oversee internal investigations.

    The above is an indicator of problems with integrity. IF the numbers are skewed at the street level due to low level corruption, they will not be accurate when compiled for statistics. As many statistics are used for political gain and justification [police czar is appointed by the mayor], it must be considered questionable. These numbers were not collected in a sterile manner, and were not compiled on balance scales. They were compiled to make a point. We have to figure out if the point is to get more money, power, or avoid a Federal injunction and takeover.

    Further, it seems the objection to the statistical rejection is an obtuse act. Basically, the defense is "well, if you can't trust the NYCPD, who can you trust?" This totally ignores the permanent Commission to Combat Police Corruption, and that there are four other state and city panels formed to expose NYCPD corruption. I do not understand why someone would believe that by strapping on an open carried firearm, one's brains would fall out and all accounts of Serpico would vanish.

    I could turn this guys posts into High School Freshman level debate worksheets. I'd hand out this thread and call it "Find ten fallacies in ten seconds".
    Liberty is so strongly a part of human nature that it can be treated as a no-lose argument position.
    ~Citizen

    From the cop’s perspective, the expression “law-abiding citizen” is a functional synonym for “Properly obedient slave".

    "People are not born being "anti-cop" and believing we live in a police state. That is a result of experience."

  22. #22
    Regular Member Fuller Malarkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    The Cadre
    Posts
    1,077
    Quote Originally Posted by onus View Post
    http://jimfishertruecrime.blogspot.c...11-annual.html


    In 2011, according to data I have collected, police officers in the United States shot 1,146 people, killing 607. Since January 1, 2011, I have been using the internet to compile a national database of police involved shootings. The term "police involved shooting" pertains to law enforcement officers who, in the line of duty, discharge their guns. When journalists and police administrators use the term, they include the shooting of animals and shots that miss their targets. My case files only include instances in which a person is either killed or wounded by police gunfire. My data also includes off-duty officers who discharged their weapons in law enforcement situations. They don't include, for example, officers using their firearms to resolve personal disputes.

    I collected this data myself because the U.S. Government doesn't. There is no national database dedicated to police involved shootings. Alan Maimon, in his article, "National Data on Shootings by Police Not Collected," published on November 28, 2011 in the "Las Vegas Review-Journal," wrote "The nation's leading law enforcement agency [FBI] collects vast amounts of information on crime nationwide, but missing from this clearinghouse are statistics on where, how often, and under what circumstances police use deadly force. In fact, no one anywhere comprehensively tracks the most significant act police can do in the line of duty: take a life."

    The government does maintain records on how many police officers are killed every year in the line of duty. In 2010, 59 officers were shot to death among 122 killed while on the job. This marked a 20 percent jump from 2009 when 49 officers were killed by gunfire. In 2011, 173 officers died, from all causes, in the line of duty. The fact police officers feel they are increasingly under attack from the public may help explain why they are shooting so many citizens.

    Compiling figures on police line of duty deaths is difficult, and each case must be investigated as legitimate as to year of inflicted injury, on duty or off duty, and if the officer is a human or a dog shot by it's own handlers. Not all agencies participate in Department of Justice or FBI information collection programs, nor is there much investigation into the validity to the submitted reports.

    As an example, my studies show 46 police officers legitimately died of gunshot in 2010, in the line of duty. I discounted four reports of officers that had been shot as long ago as 33 years prior as current year line of duty deaths. Some had been shot off duty in bar fights. One has to put much effort into sorting the wheat from the chaff.
    Liberty is so strongly a part of human nature that it can be treated as a no-lose argument position.
    ~Citizen

    From the cop’s perspective, the expression “law-abiding citizen” is a functional synonym for “Properly obedient slave".

    "People are not born being "anti-cop" and believing we live in a police state. That is a result of experience."

  23. #23
    Regular Member Primus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    4,216
    Quote Originally Posted by Fuller Malarkey View Post
    It's not a requirement to counter statistical information discounted as corrupt when the finding of corruption was determined by the Federal Courts. NYC police have been under Federal Court appointed Monitor control since August for "corruption and civil rights abuses". The court ordered monitor will supervise all training, supervision, and paperwork, which is the information used to compile statistics. Nobody need rely on this particular Department of Justice sought court intervention, as other supporting evidence exists to challenge the validity of the statistical figures due to corruption given and those numbers' source.

    NYCPD

    The Commission to Combat Police Corruption (the Commission) was established by
    Executive Order No. 18 in 1995 to combat widespread police corruption and oversee internal investigations.

    The above is an indicator of problems with integrity. IF the numbers are skewed at the street level due to low level corruption, they will not be accurate when compiled for statistics. As many statistics are used for political gain and justification [police czar is appointed by the mayor], it must be considered questionable. These numbers were not collected in a sterile manner, and were not compiled on balance scales. They were compiled to make a point. We have to figure out if the point is to get more money, power, or avoid a Federal injunction and takeover.

    Further, it seems the objection to the statistical rejection is an obtuse act. Basically, the defense is "well, if you can't trust the NYCPD, who can you trust?" This totally ignores the permanent Commission to Combat Police Corruption, and that there are four other state and city panels formed to expose NYCPD corruption. I do not understand why someone would believe that by strapping on an open carried firearm, one's brains would fall out and all accounts of Serpico would vanish.

    I could turn this guys posts into High School Freshman level debate worksheets. I'd hand out this thread and call it "Find ten fallacies in ten seconds".
    If I recall correctly, he did more then just list numbers. He wrote an entire post on what the numbers MAY mean among other things. So your vote is believe NOTHING the NYPD ever says. I can understand that and being skeptical.

    Bolded wasn't needed, but thanks for the contribution. Also, you might want to start out by figuring out what a fallacy is before you start making worksheets for others. In order for there to be a fallacy in my post, I would need to be arguing something. I wasn't. I asked a question "why are you guys just dismissing his post" and then a statement " If you guys have othe citations or sources or figures to throw out to refute his premise, then send it. To just dismiss it and say it's all false doesn't seem right. " So keep looking your 0 for 10 you need for your worksheet.

    To help you, I've linked a cite for the definition of a fallacy and how it works. Your welcome, sir.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacy

    You answered the question, by saying that you are dismissing the numbers because you believe everything they put out is corrupt, since they have oversight from a committee.

  24. #24
    Regular Member Fuller Malarkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    The Cadre
    Posts
    1,077
    Quote Originally Posted by Primus View Post
    If I recall correctly, he did more then just list numbers. He wrote an entire post on what the numbers MAY mean among other things. So your vote is believe NOTHING the NYPD ever says. I can understand that and being skeptical.

    Bolded wasn't needed, but thanks for the contribution. Also, you might want to start out by figuring out what a fallacy is before you start making worksheets for others. In order for there to be a fallacy in my post, I would need to be arguing something. I wasn't. I asked a question "why are you guys just dismissing his post" and then a statement " If you guys have othe citations or sources or figures to throw out to refute his premise, then send it. To just dismiss it and say it's all false doesn't seem right. " So keep looking your 0 for 10 you need for your worksheet.

    To help you, I've linked a cite for the definition of a fallacy and how it works. Your welcome, sir.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacy

    You answered the question, by saying that you are dismissing the numbers because you believe everything they put out is corrupt, since they have oversight from a committee.
    I did not say that, and your interpretation takes my contention out of context, a fifth grader tactic. The source of the given figures is corrupt, as found by the Federal courts, further evidenced by the appointment of anti police corruption panels by the city and state. My personal beliefs have nothing to do with it.

    A Google search for "New York City Police Corruption" netted thirty million six hundred thousand returns in .40 seconds.
    Last edited by Fuller Malarkey; 11-26-2013 at 10:15 PM.
    Liberty is so strongly a part of human nature that it can be treated as a no-lose argument position.
    ~Citizen

    From the cop’s perspective, the expression “law-abiding citizen” is a functional synonym for “Properly obedient slave".

    "People are not born being "anti-cop" and believing we live in a police state. That is a result of experience."

  25. #25
    Regular Member Primus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    4,216
    Quote Originally Posted by Fuller Malarkey View Post
    I did not say that, and your interpretation takes my contention out of context, a fifth grader tactic. The source of the given figures is corrupt, as found by the Federal courts, further evidenced by the appointment of anti police corruption panels by the city and state. My personal beliefs have nothing to do with it.

    A Google search for "New York City Police Corruption" netted thirty million six hundred thousand returns in .40 seconds.
    Your fascination for the 5th grade kind of concerns me.

    I'm confused again. I said you answered that you didn't believe the stats because the source (NYPD) was corrupt? How is that out of context? I even agreed with you on that premise.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •