Killed by police - 2015

[ksen]

Asking police to be more careful about who they kill doesn't make them ineffective, it makes them more effective because police work is not about killing people.

It means they're either more likely to die or less likely to get involved.

We are seeing that as a result of this BLM crap--the police backing off, crime going up.

the "ferguson effect" is an unsubstantiated crock of shit

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Asking police to be more careful about who they kill doesn't make them ineffective, it makes them more effective because police work is not about killing people.

It means they're either more likely to die or less likely to get involved.

We are seeing that as a result of this BLM crap--the police backing off, crime going up.

We are? Isn't BLM a relatively new thing? Do we have enough data to look at?

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Not long ago we had a case posted on here where a German policewoman advanced on a knife-armed attacker--and got stabbed. Is that the kind of safety you want?

If the trade off is that the Tamir Rice's of the world are not gunned down, then yes.

In your world you'll replace Tamar Rice with a bunch of kids killed because law enforcement is ineffective.

If Tamir Rice was armed and robbing a store, you'd have an argument. Rice wasn't armed with a real gun, however, so your claim is bogus.

The complaint is simple. The Officers shouldn't run into situations without assessing them, potentially putting their lives needlessly at risk. Really a win-win for the unarmed civilian and the Officer(s).

 

[Malintent]

It might be fair to say that our society is careless with guns and at the same time heavily armed. Our cops have the same condition...carelessness with a dash of racism thrown in and we have what we have...between two and three black males being killed about every day...usually, though not always shot. There definitely is something wrong with our cop system because its stats are nothing like European stats. What makes the differences stand out even more is the great amount of refugee traffic in Europe also. They definitely are not a model of perfection, but next to the U.S. they are head and shoulders superior.

Loren blames our high level of cops shooting people on "nutters" improperly treated by our inferior mental health system...and people desperately avoiding being imprisoned in terrible jails. He seemingly is not noticing that preponderance of black people falling to cop guns. He is inferring that these black people are all either nutters or criminals? That might be true if it were a crime to be a black person in America, which it technically isn't. So what is left to explain it...racism.

The North Hollywood Bubble again... Explain to us this, then.. Why is it Males make up slightly less than half the world population, but represent almost 100% of the 'killed by cop' statistic.. explain without being sexist. Should be easy, in your nice insulated bubble of Californian political correctness fascism.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

It means they're either more likely to die or less likely to get involved.

We are seeing that as a result of this BLM crap--the police backing off, crime going up.

Try stepping out of your little bubble and see how non-US police prevent crime quite effectively without killing people at anywhere near the rate of US police.

Quite effectively? Compare the crime rates between Europe and the US! Don't just focus on murder, look at all crimes.

 

[ksen]

why don't you show us since you apparently have the numbers?

 

[laughing dog]

Asking police to be more careful about who they kill doesn't make them ineffective, it makes them more effective because police work is not about killing people.

It means they're either more likely to die or less likely to get involved.

You need to explain why being more careful necessarily leads to those only 2 outcomes.

We are seeing that as a result of this BLM crap--the police backing off, crime going up.

I realize you are "seeing that". Perhaps you could share the evidence that you are seeing.

 

[bigfield]

Try stepping out of your little bubble and see how non-US police prevent crime quite effectively without killing people at anywhere near the rate of US police.

Quite effectively? Compare the crime rates between Europe and the US! Don't just focus on murder, look at all crimes.

I'm quite familiar with your propensity for making bullshit claims like this; let's see you provide the evidence lest I dismiss your claim out-of-hand.

And if you provide links to blogs, I will laugh at you.

 

[ronburgundy]

It means they're either more likely to die or less likely to get involved.

We are seeing that as a result of this BLM crap--the police backing off, crime going up.

Try stepping out of your little bubble and see how non-US police prevent crime quite effectively without killing people at anywhere near the rate of US police.

You are the one in your safe little bubble encased arm-chair. Your "theorizing" ignores the clear reality of the many times greater probability of threat to life that US cops face everytime they interact with a criminal suspect. US criminals are many many times more likely to have a gun on them when cops approach. In addition to threats from suspects, they face threats from "bystanders" who in the neighborhoods where cops spend most of their time responding to 911 are often armed and violent criminals themselves.

Not only does the pervasive presence of guns among the populace require that cops be at the ready and prepared to draw and use their firearms, but means it they cannot safely enforce even minor law infractions without at least being armed just in case. The mere fact that US cops have guns (unlike in several European countries) makes use of it and thus death of the suspect much more likely.

 

[bigfield]

Try stepping out of your little bubble and see how non-US police prevent crime quite effectively without killing people at anywhere near the rate of US police.

You are the one in your safe little bubble encased arm-chair. Your "theorizing" ignores the clear reality of the many times greater probability of threat to life that US cops face everytime they interact with a criminal suspect. US criminals are many many times more likely to have a gun on them when cops approach. In addition to threats from suspects, they face threats from "bystanders" who in the neighborhoods where cops spend most of their time responding to 911 are often armed and violent criminals themselves.

Not only does the pervasive presence of guns among the populace require that cops be at the ready and prepared to draw and use their firearms, but means it they cannot safely enforce even minor law infractions without at least being armed just in case. The mere fact that US cops have guns (unlike in several European countries) makes use of it and thus death of the suspect much more likely.

That is but one factor of many. See here:

So how many of those do you think were unjustified?

Police in the USA kill civilians at something like 50+ times the rate of other First World countries, so US police are clearly killing far more people (like over 5000%) than can be justified by a First World nation.

The US governments (state and federal) need to fix some obvious problems to bring those numbers down to something less insane:

1. Your police are poorly trained and resort to shooting too readily. Organise them into state-level police forces that have better training, regulation, and support.

2. Your police are scared of your heavily-armed populace. Enact laws to take most of the guns out of circulation. Fuck your obsolete, musket-age Second Amendment.

3. Your police have a military culture which encourages the use of excessive force and abuse of authority.

4. End the war on drugs that has fueled the rise of organised, well-armed criminal gangs.

And here:

Reality: We have an inferior mental health system and thus more nutters walking around.

Reality: Our prisons are harsher, we have more people willing to risk death in order to avoid going back. (Or even going there--many years ago we had a 16 year old with no rap sheet point a realistic replica gun at the cop who stopped him for driving a stolen car.)

Reality: The availability of firearms makes it easier for people to do a suicide-by-cop by provoking the cop into shooting them.

Do try to keep up, Ron.

 

[atrib]

I'm not suggesting perfect safety; I'm suggesting safety comparable to other developed nations where the rate of deaths-by-police are a tiny fraction of the rate in the US. That's not too much to ask.

Not long ago we had a case posted on here where a German policewoman advanced on a knife-armed attacker--and got stabbed. Is that the kind of safety you want?

It is not black or white as you make it out to be. Many thousands of police officers are able to serve and protect their communities without getting stabbed or killed and without killing the people they police at the slightest provocation. I don't want to live in a society where 12 year old kids are shot down on the streets because the police officers who responded did not make the effort to ascertain the details of the situation before using lethal force. I don't want to live in a society where a police officer shoots a man lying prone on the ground with 2 bullets in him 12 more times. I don't want to live in a society where a police officer kills a civilian by placing him in a chokehold simply because said civilian is suspected of selling loose cigarettes. I don't want to live in a society where a police officer shoots a man 6 times in the back while the man is trying to run away from him, probably because he fears for his life. The question is, why are you? And is it really safety if the police are able to kill members of society without due process?

 

[ronburgundy]

You are the one in your safe little bubble encased arm-chair. Your "theorizing" ignores the clear reality of the many times greater probability of threat to life that US cops face everytime they interact with a criminal suspect. US criminals are many many times more likely to have a gun on them when cops approach. In addition to threats from suspects, they face threats from "bystanders" who in the neighborhoods where cops spend most of their time responding to 911 are often armed and violent criminals themselves.

Not only does the pervasive presence of guns among the populace require that cops be at the ready and prepared to draw and use their firearms, but means it they cannot safely enforce even minor law infractions without at least being armed just in case. The mere fact that US cops have guns (unlike in several European countries) makes use of it and thus death of the suspect much more likely.

That is but one factor of many. See here:

So how many of those do you think were unjustified?

Police in the USA kill civilians at something like 50+ times the rate of other First World countries, so US police are clearly killing far more people (like over 5000%) than can be justified by a First World nation.

The US governments (state and federal) need to fix some obvious problems to bring those numbers down to something less insane:

1. Your police are poorly trained and resort to shooting too readily. Organise them into state-level police forces that have better training, regulation, and support.

2. Your police are scared of your heavily-armed populace. Enact laws to take most of the guns out of circulation. Fuck your obsolete, musket-age Second Amendment.

3. Your police have a military culture which encourages the use of excessive force and abuse of authority.

4. End the war on drugs that has fueled the rise of organised, well-armed criminal gangs.

And here:

Reality: We have an inferior mental health system and thus more nutters walking around.

Reality: Our prisons are harsher, we have more people willing to risk death in order to avoid going back. (Or even going there--many years ago we had a 16 year old with no rap sheet point a realistic replica gun at the cop who stopped him for driving a stolen car.)

Reality: The availability of firearms makes it easier for people to do a suicide-by-cop by provoking the cop into shooting them.

Do try to keep up, Ron.

It would be easier to "keep up" if your arguments were not such and incoherent, self-contradictory mess.

Loren pointed out that US cops react more aggressively, because their lives are constantly threatened by well armed criminals. You replied that this is invalid and he should step out of his bubble and see that other cops don't act that way and don't die.
That ignores the psychological reality of the life threatening experiences they regularly face and how they inherently will impact their responses, even in situations where it turn out there was no serious threat to them.

The fact that you previous contradicted your own point by noting the armed populace US cops face is not my failing. Also, even when you posted that list, you wrongly labeled it as reasons why US police "are killing more people than can be justified". The fact that most of the people US cops kill are armed threats makes those killings justified. IOW, most of the disparity in the numbers you cite are not, as you claim, disparities in unjustified killings. Rather they are disparities in the justified killings, due to disparities in the number of people in the US trying to kill cops and others.

The other factors you list are also relevant, but not nearly as much.

 

[bigfield]

Loren pointed out that US cops react more aggressively, because their lives are constantly threatened by well armed criminals. You replied that this is invalid and he should step out of his bubble and see that other cops don't act that way and don't die.
That ignores the psychological reality of the life threatening experiences they regularly face and how they inherently will impact their responses, even in situations where it turn out there was no serious threat to them.

Loren's claim was that "they're either more likely to die or less likely to get involved." That just doesn't line up with reality: the evidence shows that US police kill people far, far too readily even when they have no reason to fear a gun being pulled on them, even with the US gun culture. That is incompetence and could easily be fixed by learning from the way police departments are run outside of the US.

The fact that you previous contradicted your own point by noting the armed populace US cops face is not my failing. Also, even when you posted that list, you wrongly labeled it as reasons why US police "are killing more people than can be justified". The fact that most of the people US cops kill are armed threats makes those killings justified. IOW, most of the disparity in the numbers you cite are not, as you claim, disparities in unjustified killings. Rather they are disparities in the justified killings, due to disparities in the number of people in the US trying to kill cops and others.

I've read so many examples of US police killing unarmed people, it's becoming mundane. US police can justify only a fraction of the people they kill on the basis that the dead person was armed (with an actual gun).

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Loren's claim was that "they're either more likely to die or less likely to get involved." That just doesn't line up with reality: the evidence shows that US police kill people far, far too readily even when they have no reason to fear a gun being pulled on them, even with the US gun culture. That is incompetence and could easily be fixed by learning from the way police departments are run outside of the US.

1) A gun is the only threat??? Ever hear of a knife??

2) A weapon isn't required to be a threat--sometimes it's because they're going for the cop's gun.

 

[ksen]

Loren's claim was that "they're either more likely to die or less likely to get involved." That just doesn't line up with reality: the evidence shows that US police kill people far, far too readily even when they have no reason to fear a gun being pulled on them, even with the US gun culture. That is incompetence and could easily be fixed by learning from the way police departments are run outside of the US.

1) A gun is the only threat??? Ever hear of a knife??

2) A weapon isn't required to be a threat--sometimes it's because they're going for the cop's gun.

>argues cops need to kill people on the job or be killed
>copping isn't even in the top 10 most dangerous jobs
>fishing, mining and picking up garbage is more dangerous

 

[ronburgundy]

Loren's claim was that "they're either more likely to die or less likely to get involved." That just doesn't line up with reality: the evidence shows that US police kill people far, far too readily even when they have no reason to fear a gun being pulled on them, even with the US gun culture. That is incompetence and could easily be fixed by learning from the way police departments are run outside of the US.

Your safe armchair bubble is no place to accurately determine when they have a reason to fear a gun being pulled on them. Given the amount of guns they encounter on criminals, including teenagers, they have reason to have this fear almost ever time they interact with people, especially in generally high crime neighborhoods.
Yes, sometimes this rationally learned prepotent fear leads them to over-react to a situation. That isn't incompetence, it is human nature and the main reason other cops "over-react" less often is that they have less objective basis to be generally fearful for their lives.

The fact that you previous contradicted your own point by noting the armed populace US cops face is not my failing. Also, even when you posted that list, you wrongly labeled it as reasons why US police "are killing more people than can be justified". The fact that most of the people US cops kill are armed threats makes those killings justified. IOW, most of the disparity in the numbers you cite are not, as you claim, disparities in unjustified killings. Rather they are disparities in the justified killings, due to disparities in the number of people in the US trying to kill cops and others.

I've read so many examples of US police killing unarmed people, it's becoming mundane. US police can justify only a fraction of the people they kill on the basis that the dead person was armed (with an actual gun).

IOW, you actually think that media designed for hype gives you an representative sample of police interactions with suspects rather than focusing on every unarmed killing and ignoring 99.99% of the armed and justified ones. Sorry, but your tiny biased sample doesn't count as evidence of anything but your own statistical illiteracy.

 

[ronburgundy]

1) A gun is the only threat??? Ever hear of a knife??

2) A weapon isn't required to be a threat--sometimes it's because they're going for the cop's gun.

>argues cops need to kill people on the job or be killed

Given that most of the people cops kill are trying to kill them or others, yes.

>copping isn't even in the top 10 most dangerous jobs

Number of deaths is not a measure of how dangerous a job is. Idiots die on safe jobs, and people that know how to deal with dangers, don't die on dangerous jobs.
Cop is the job (other than military) where you are most likely to encounter people who can and will kill you, if you do not take measures to prevent it. Cops are good at preventing it, thus they come out successful most of the time in these countless situations.

 

[bigfield]

Loren's claim was that "they're either more likely to die or less likely to get involved." That just doesn't line up with reality: the evidence shows that US police kill people far, far too readily even when they have no reason to fear a gun being pulled on them, even with the US gun culture. That is incompetence and could easily be fixed by learning from the way police departments are run outside of the US.

1) A gun is the only threat??? Ever hear of a knife??

Most of the time, cops don't need to shoot people with knives. Once again, demonstrated by non-US police.

 

[arkirk]

Loren's claim was that "they're either more likely to die or less likely to get involved." That just doesn't line up with reality: the evidence shows that US police kill people far, far too readily even when they have no reason to fear a gun being pulled on them, even with the US gun culture. That is incompetence and could easily be fixed by learning from the way police departments are run outside of the US.

1) A gun is the only threat??? Ever hear of a knife??

2) A weapon isn't required to be a threat--sometimes it's because they're going for the cop's gun.

I am re-posting this chart because it shows the significance of guns in the story. If you look carefully you can see that almost the entire difference between the U.S. and other countries is the difference caused by the lax gun policies of this country.


It appears to me to be undeniable that the difference in safety is entirely in the area of how many guns are at large in society. See what I mean? Good guys with guns just doesn't cut it!

 

[Loren Pechtel]

1) A gun is the only threat??? Ever hear of a knife??

2) A weapon isn't required to be a threat--sometimes it's because they're going for the cop's gun.

I am re-posting this chart because it shows the significance of guns in the story. If you look carefully you can see that almost the entire difference between the U.S. and other countries is the difference caused by the lax gun policies of this country.
View attachment 5371

It appears to me to be undeniable that the difference in safety is entirely in the area of how many guns are at large in society. See what I mean? Good guys with guns just doesn't cut it!

1) I suggest a visit to the optometrist. The only country on your chart with a non-firearms homicide rate approaching ours is Finland. Thus it's a lot more than just guns that is driving it.

2) Your chart has nothing to do with the issue at hand--the threat to police.