Jimmy Higgins
Contributor
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2001
- Messages
- 47,166
- Basic Beliefs
- Calvinistic Atheist
The use of psychology and being humane certainly can be impactful when it comes to de-escalation. The more you require a person to think, the less raging and irrational they can become. It isn't a magic eraser, but it sure the heck is something that should be used before lethal force. You can only justify lethal force when lethal force by others is imminent. Being a pussy and thinking you are going to die because someone else is being irrational doesn't count as "imminent threat of lethal force."It's not some magic spell that makes the impossible happen.Doesn’t mean there was. Doesn’t mean de-escalation shouldn’t be tried.Nobody got hurt that time. Doesn't mean there wasn't a threat.As noted, I rode many subways while in NYC. The mentally ill are not uncommon on the subway. No one needed to be restrained or killed in the process of being restrained any of the times I rode the subway. While with my daughter in Chicago, a guy yelled a few things which definitely got my attention, a bit more muttering, and then nothing else happened. In "the City", you always need to be on guard. Criminals, the mentally ill, religious nuts, NY Jets fans. Never needed to lift a finger though, as nothing ever happened. linkWhat do you suggest when a violent subway rider starts causing trouble for the peaceful and civil riders? Why didn't the people who know Neely provide enough information for Penny to deal with the problem in a better way?Was his only ability of restraining the guy a chokehold?
Have you ever had to deal with a crazy person who poses a threat to the folks around you, without knowing anything about the threat?
Not killing a person isn't "appeasement". You should be ashamed to make such a void argument. The word you should be reaching for pragmatic and humane. Treating people that are of ill mind like human beings can actually go a lot farther than you appreciate (are capable of appreciating?). Remember the whole "whatever it takes" justification for "enhanced interrogation"? The pro's were protesting, indicating that there are much easier ways to get into a the mind of suspect using psychology. The goal in these situations isn't to appeasement anything, but to prevent violence. Killing someone isn't preventing violence. Of course, not everyone is trained in de-escalation techniques. In fact, it seems more people in the US are trained to kill than to de-escalate.It's this sort of attitude that's why America is now screwed--people are tired of appeasement becoming the normal approach and drove us to jump from the frying pan to the fire.