Results 1 to 6 of 6

Thread: Distraught people, deadly results

  1. #1
    Regular Member Logan 5's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    690

    Distraught people, deadly results

    This is not an anti-cop post. However, the problem is still very real no matter what color you paint it- officer-involved shootings are still very real and increasing at an alarming rate.

    This is an article by the Washington Post that touches this issue.
    "Distraught people, deadly results" -- http://www.washingtonpost.com/sf/inv...eadly-results/

    Another good source is http://www.killedbypolice.net/

    As we have seen, just because the media says the perp had a gun does not make it true. Look at Dillon Taylor. He was walking away. He lifted his shirt to show he had no weapons. Now he is dead.

    Or the guy (can't find his case) that was shot & killed by a cop, yet he was running away from the cop. Not only had he not committed a crime, but the cop placed a gun on him. That would have been open & shut, but a passer by got it on his smart phone.

    The problem we face is clear- when police-involved shootings kill more Americans inside American borders than even ALL of the known terrorist groups in the same time-frame, world-wide, there is a problem.

    I realize I could be wrong. But I doubt it.

    We have to find a solution to this. Would that be increased gun-control? Would that be decreased gun-control? Increased training? What laws should be created or stricken in order to solve this dilemma?
    Last edited by Logan 5; 07-07-2015 at 03:37 PM.
    Lifetime member, Gun Owners of America (http://gunowners.org/)
    Lifetime member, Jews for the Preservation of Firearm Ownership (http://jpfo.org/)
    Member, Fraternal Order of Eagles since 8/02 (http://www.foe.com/)

    Registering gun owners to prevent crime, is like registering Jews to prevent a HOLOCAUST.

    I am not a lawyer in real life, or in play life. So anything I say is for debate and discussion only.

  2. #2
    Regular Member J_dazzle23's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    675
    Quote Originally Posted by Logan 5 View Post
    This is not an anti-cop post. However, the problem is still very real no matter what color you paint it- officer-involved shootings are still very real and increasing at an alarming rate.

    This is an article by the Washington Post that touches this issue.
    "Distraught people, deadly results" -- http://www.washingtonpost.com/sf/inv...eadly-results/

    Another good source is http://www.killedbypolice.net/

    As we have seen, just because the media says the perp had a gun does not make it true. Look at Dillon Taylor. He was walking away. He lifted his shirt to show he had no weapons. Now he is dead.

    Or the guy (can't find his case) that was shot & killed by a cop, yet he was running away from the cop. Not only had he not committed a crime, but the cop placed a gun on him. That would have been open & shut, but a passer by got it on his smart phone.

    The problem we face is clear- when police-involved shootings kill more Americans inside American borders than even ALL of the known terrorist groups in the same time-frame, world-wide, there is a problem.

    I realize I could be wrong. But I doubt it.

    We have to find a solution to this. Would that be increased gun-control? Would that be decreased gun-control? Increased training? What laws should be created or stricken in order to solve this dilemma?
    I don't believe this has anything to do with the guns.

    I believe it will take an absolute 180 in the hiring standards, training and general attitude of the police in general. It may take some adjustment from the citizens as well, but having friends and family in law enforcement, it's high time for the unspoken attitude of "us vs them" to come to an end.

  3. #3
    Campaign Veteran skidmark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    North Chesterfield VA
    Posts
    10,682
    Sorry, but as far as I am concerned those behaving criminally do not get a special pass because they are, they identify as, or are identified by others have having a disabling condition as defined by the Americans with Disabilities Act.

    The issue as I see it is that more often than not cops want to "do something" so that they can get the call cleared and go on to the next exciting adventure. Occasionally there is a danger of an innocent person (hostage) being hurt, but more often than not what's taking place could be handled by a stand-off. If the person threatens a hostage or comes out in the street with a weapon (in hand or accessible) and threatens to kill cops then it might be prudent to shoot them. But when that happens, it would be nicer all around (and especially for my blood pressure) if just one cop took an aimed shot.

    It does not matter that cops are not extensively trained to deal with mentally disabled/emotionally distraught persons. What should matter is that cops should understand that sometimes the best thing to do is apply a large dose of tincture of time. (That and tell those on-the-scene reporters that they will not do anything just so the video can make this, that, or another broadcast deadline.)

    stay safe.
    "He'll regret it to his dying day....if ever he lives that long."----The Quiet Man

    Because stupidity isn't a race, and everybody can win.

    "No matter how much contempt you have for the media in all this, you don't have enough"
    ----Allahpundit

  4. #4
    Regular Member Logan 5's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    690
    Quote Originally Posted by J_dazzle23 View Post
    it's high time for the unspoken attitude of "us vs them" to come to an end.
    ...and the "blue line of silence" (IIRC)?

    Quote Originally Posted by skidmark View Post
    Sorry, but as far as I am concerned those behaving criminally do not get a special pass because they are, they identify as, or are identified by others have having a disabling condition as defined by the Americans with Disabilities Act.

    The issue as I see it is that more often than not cops want to "do something" so that they can get the call cleared and go on to the next exciting adventure. Occasionally there is a danger of an innocent person (hostage) being hurt, but more often than not what's taking place could be handled by a stand-off. If the person threatens a hostage or comes out in the street with a weapon (in hand or accessible) and threatens to kill cops then it might be prudent to shoot them. But when that happens, it would be nicer all around (and especially for my blood pressure) if just one cop took an aimed shot.

    It does not matter that cops are not extensively trained to deal with mentally disabled/emotionally distraught persons. What should matter is that cops should understand that sometimes the best thing to do is apply a large dose of tincture of time. (That and tell those on-the-scene reporters that they will not do anything just so the video can make this, that, or another broadcast deadline.)

    stay safe.
    Funny that you say that, Skid. There's a cop not far from here that got an award for saving a life. Why don't you call the Wellington Utah city hall @ (435)637-5213 and tell them that. I bet they are damned glad their Captain used his head.

    I agree, though. ANYONE breaking the law should bee punished.

    Cops included.

    However your response leaves me questioning of there was something else on your mind about this...?
    Lifetime member, Gun Owners of America (http://gunowners.org/)
    Lifetime member, Jews for the Preservation of Firearm Ownership (http://jpfo.org/)
    Member, Fraternal Order of Eagles since 8/02 (http://www.foe.com/)

    Registering gun owners to prevent crime, is like registering Jews to prevent a HOLOCAUST.

    I am not a lawyer in real life, or in play life. So anything I say is for debate and discussion only.

  5. #5
    Campaign Veteran deepdiver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Southeast, Missouri, USA
    Posts
    5,974
    I think a great deal of it is the change in historic perspective of police being peace officers to police being law enforcement officers. It says it right there in their preferred nomenclature - law enforcement officers.

    When the perspective changed from protecting and serving the public, i.e. maintaining the peace and helping fulfill the government responsibility of protecting we, the people, from the evil among us to instead being the tip of the spear enforcers of gov't fiat using swarm tactics under color of gov't monopoly on force we ended up heading where things appear to be continuing towards today. Further, when we have mandatory arrest statutes/policies such as for domestic situations even if the judgment of the officer on scene contradicts such generalized action or quotas or other policies, procedures and statutes that require a non-discretionary action that may not be judicious in the totality of circumstances, there necessarily develops an adversarial tension between police and the policed.

    The tension is exacerbated when police training fails to explain that freedom dictates that anything not illegal is legal leading to officers stopping an OCer in a parking lot for 30 minutes trying to figure out why what he is doing is illegal when it is not. We see this often in police digging around in their computers trying to find something under which to charge someone. If you have to work that hard for it then it probably isn't worth denying the citizen's liberty even if you find it. Policing becomes a chase and catch game built upon "we'll get you for something" akin to applying the same precepts under which the gov't finally caught Capone on tax evasion because it couldn't make a case on racketeering, assault, murder, etc. to the majority of citizen they are supposedly serving.

    Add to this the fact that SCOTUS has ruled repeatedly that police have no duty to protect any individual citizen and the entire policing force becomes only an enforcement tool for gov't power.

    Well, when the entirety of the police force becomes a (gov't) hammer, all the citizen start looking like nails. And here we are.

    All of that being said, I find that in my neck of the woods we have far more local/county cops who are steeped in the peace keeper mindset than law enforcement mindset. They are part of the community, not separate from it. In part, because there are so few of them in relation to the general population that isolation is not feasible. A "cop bar" for example in one of our local towns would not survive economically. However, the state police around here seem to often be a caricature of Judge Dredd, all "I am the law". But then many of them are not from the community but are rather assigned here for a time before moving on to another region. Which goes to the broader point that the more the police feel a part of the local community, the less they feel they are gov't agents and more that they are neighbors and friends, the less likelihood that we have abuses and corruption.

    So, I don't think any of it has anything to do with guns. Guns are merely tools. The mindset and perspective of those holding the guns and their place in the community in which they carry will determine the use, or holstering, of the gun.
    Bob Owens @ Bearing Arms (paraphrased): "These people aren't against violence; they're very much in favor of violence. They're against armed resistance."

  6. #6
    Moderator / Administrator Grapeshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    North Chesterfield, Va.
    Posts
    34,622
    Quote Originally Posted by Logan 5 View Post
    This is not an anti-cop post. However, the problem is still very real no matter what color you paint it- officer-involved shootings are still very real and increasing at an alarming rate.

    This is an article by the Washington Post that touches this issue.
    "Distraught people, deadly results" -- http://www.washingtonpost.com/sf/inv...eadly-results/

    Another good source is http://www.killedbypolice.net/

    As we have seen, just because the media says the perp had a gun does not make it true. Look at Dillon Taylor. He was walking away. He lifted his shirt to show he had no weapons. Now he is dead.

    Or the guy (can't find his case) that was shot & killed by a cop, yet he was running away from the cop. Not only had he not committed a crime, but the cop placed a gun on him. That would have been open & shut, but a passer by got it on his smart phone.

    The problem we face is clear- when police-involved shootings kill more Americans inside American borders than even ALL of the known terrorist groups in the same time-frame, world-wide, there is a problem.

    I realize I could be wrong. But I doubt it.

    We have to find a solution to this. Would that be increased gun-control? Would that be decreased gun-control? Increased training? What laws should be created or stricken in order to solve this dilemma?
    You may not consider this an anti LEO thread, but the previously defined called decisions of the administration does so include it.

    What has been said (paraphrasing) is that "individual/singular LEO actions contrary to law and/or good order are fair game, but that a litany of such will constitute bashing and shall not be allowed." Any user/poster that develops a history of such will be subject to sanctions. Again, for the upteenth time - we do not intend to become a CopWatch type forum.

    OCDO is about normalizing open carry as we go about our everyday lives. Period. Exclamation point.

    Thread lock obtained.
    You will not rise to the occasion; you will fall back on your level of training. Archilochus, 650 BC

    Old and treacherous will beat young and skilled every time. Yata hey.

Posting Permissions

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