So, how about the police engage with suspects from farther away (they can park their squad car across the street, for example) to minimize the risk of unnecessarily killing them due to mortal terror from this horrendous 'charging' risk?
-
Features
Little Brother is watching you.
- Thread starter Bronzeage
- Start date
repoman
Contributor
Or wait until the other cars arrive, which happened within a minute anyway.
They should be better trained in conflict de-escalation.
They should be better trained in conflict de-escalation.
repoman
Contributor
Here is a video of a police/driver encounter where both parties showed not enough respect.
It is long, but the problem starts right away with the police doesn't even calmly and respectfully state that it is SOP during all traffic stops for the driver to remain in the car.
These police need to practice this kind of conversation all the time and be graded on it. Be cordial for fucks sake!
In all of this I am not going to excuse the 40 year old driver losing his cool so badly.
On the cops side, he is not a total dick, he states that he didn't want to cuff or taze the guy in front of his son.
It is long, but the problem starts right away with the police doesn't even calmly and respectfully state that it is SOP during all traffic stops for the driver to remain in the car.
These police need to practice this kind of conversation all the time and be graded on it. Be cordial for fucks sake!
In all of this I am not going to excuse the 40 year old driver losing his cool so badly.
On the cops side, he is not a total dick, he states that he didn't want to cuff or taze the guy in front of his son.
It's not a miracle cure.
The current cure of shoot anyone who moves toward you is not working very well and the obvious outcome will be more dead people, both civilians and policemen.
It's a matter of understanding control and taking control. The policemen in the video got out of their car and never had control over the situation, even though they outnumbered the suspect by two to one and they had guns and he didn't. The suspect made them feel threatened and they shot him. The strangest part of the video is when they roll the guy over and put hand cuffs on him, in some desperate attempt to appear in charge of something.
If you are happy with law enforcement which just one grade above vigilante justice, we can keep on this path. It's simple. Call the police, and when the police get there, they shoot whoever seems most likely to need shooting. Of course, this kind of thing makes the police superfluous, as we can do that ourselves. It would have been a lot simpler if the store owner had shot the man as he left the store. If anyone was in danger, it would have been him. The store owner has confronted the man, but doesn't seem to feel any danger. Two policemen show up and all they can manage to do is draw their guns and shoot the first person they encounter. Anybody could have done that and saved the tax payers a lot of money.
I know, right? Why take precautions to protect and serve when if the perp appears vaguely liable to charge them they can just "break leather" on their "heaters" and "lead poison" the "mutt"?
Jason Harvestdancer
Contributor
Loren, what would it take to cause you to doubt the police?
There have been cases discussed on here where I think the cops were in the wrong.
That would probably when one officer shoots his partner, right?