Killer cops ????...

[iSpyCams]

The problem is in the USA cops have

1) Guns
2) Impunity
3) Near complete disdain for the communities they "serve"
4) Near complete disdain FROM the communities they "serve"

If we remove #2 (civilian review boards) #4 will eventually follow and #3 will be less of a problem as well.

[iSpyCams]

Originally Posted by aka123

We are talking about police, not you playing Rambo. Also our regular legislation requires using minimal forse when defending whatever (besides war). Just common sense, maybe you just don't have it.

Shooting someone doesn't mean that the other guy always dies. You might have heard about wounding. Not to mention about pointing a gun. Your rule says that whenever police points his gun he would have to kill. LOL. Your rules are very fuckt up. How in fuck killing is better option than threatening, do you think that you do some sort of service to the other guy? LOL, really.

OK so you are a prime example of someone who shouldn't own a gun, so I hope you don't. It's not my rule, it's the first thing you learn about handling firearms, gun safety 101 etc. Right up there with "the gun is always loaded, even when it's not loaded" etc. I don't have time to explain it all to you because as I mentioned previously, your opinion does not matter.

[aka123]

Originally Posted by pompousjohn

OK so you are a prime example of someone who shouldn't own a gun, so I hope you don't. It's not my rule, it's the first thing you learn about handling firearms, gun safety 101 etc. Right up there with "the gun is always loaded, even when it's not loaded" etc. I don't have time to explain it all to you because as I mentioned previously, your opinion does not matter.

I have a gun or two. And really, I haven't heard about that kind of gun safety that you have to kill. LOL.

"My opinion doesn't matter". Yeah, go for it, you might be this year's "conversationist".

[kane]

Originally Posted by aka123

First of all, I preferably wouldn't be alone in the first place. In your first example it would have been a matter of speed from the moment I see something "shiny". Maybe I would be fast enough, maybe I wouldn't. Having upper hand (having unholstered gun) I would enforce my command to have hands up in the air.

In most places, especially small towns, cops will be in the car alone. Even in big cities most will be alone. In this case the city he works in there are only two officers on duty at night. There is a country officer they can call for more backup, but they may be a ways away.

But then you shouldn't need to worry. Remember, this guy was just being funny and being macho and where you live the police just laugh at that kind of guy, they don't need to draw guns.

In the second case I would have done the handcuffing so that he has little change fighting back, and even if a fight would occur, acting before he gets his gun (you know, "martial arts").

Around here police is trained to inflict minimal injuries (regarding the situation). Sometimes it means shooting to death, other times shooting to leg, etc.

The guy ties his shoe, stands up and puts his hands behind his back. You go to cuff him. He changes his mind and slams his body into you pushing you far enough back that he can jump forward the 2-3 feet needed to get to his dresser. You react immediately, but in that second he has his gun out and is firing. Police get defensive tactics training, but they are not martial artists (although some may be).

I would bet, based on how the thing went down, 99% of people wouldn't have been able to stop this guy from getting to his gun.

Police here are also trained to subdue someone in the least harmful way. Sometimes that ins't an option. You don't here about the millions who are arrested every year without incident or injury, you only hear about the situations where things go bad.

[aka123]

Originally Posted by kane

In most places, especially small towns, cops will be in the car alone. Even in big cities most will be alone. In this case the city he works in there are only two officers on duty at night. There is a country officer they can call for more backup, but they may be a ways away.

What a fuckt up practices. In here police moves always as pairs. Same is in the military, don't wonder around alone (land, sea or air). These are basic tactical practices.

Originally Posted by kane

Police here are also trained to subdue someone in the least harmful way. Sometimes that ins't an option. You don't here about the millions who are arrested every year without incident or injury, you only hear about the situations where things go bad.

Glad to hear that, that Mr. Rambo got me worried.

[brassmonkey]

we have to wait to see if brown was shot in the back. my guess is they want to cool shit down

[kane]

Originally Posted by aka123

What a fuckt up practices. In here police moves always as pairs. Same is in the military, don't wonder around alone (land, sea or air). These are basic tactical practices.



Glad to hear that, that Mr. Rambo got me worried.

The town my friend works in has about 7,500 people. They have about 15 active duty officers and a few others like an evidence officer and a detective. Most of the time there are 2 of them on patrol at any given time. Sometimes during the day there will be more and sometimes they will have reserve officers riding with them. My friend has even said at times on graveyard shift the cover shift person leaves at 3am so the graveyard person is actually alone in the town until 6am when dayshift comes on.

I also know several city and county cops. Most of them are alone in their cars. It all has to do with budgets. They get budgets cut, but still have to cover the same amount of area and time so personnel and training are cut.

Here is something interesting. My buddy's department does what is called active shooter training. This is where they use guns that have paint bullets and they train for scenarios where deadly force may be needed. In almost every case the scenarios are ones taken from real life where officers were killed. Each officer will get run through 4 scenarios during the 1 day training. His department does this once per year which doesn't seem like very much. Most departments in the state will only do this every 3-4 years and some don't do it at all.

[aka123]

Originally Posted by kane

The town my friend works in has about 7,500 people. They have about 15 active duty officers and a few others like an evidence officer and a detective. Most of the time there are 2 of them on patrol at any given time. Sometimes during the day there will be more and sometimes they will have reserve officers riding with them. My friend has even said at times on graveyard shift the cover shift person leaves at 3am so the graveyard person is actually alone in the town until 6am when dayshift comes on.

I also know several city and county cops. Most of them are alone in their cars. It all has to do with budgets. They get budgets cut, but still have to cover the same amount of area and time so personnel and training are cut.

I get that cuts thing, but around here the solution is to cut down cars patrolling. 1 police per car is too little. That is tactical choice, but also very important mental and also physical health factor for the polices. Wondering around alone is not good.

[kane]

Originally Posted by aka123

I get that cuts thing, but around here the solution is to cut down cars patrolling. 1 police per car is too little. That is tactical choice, but also very important mental and also physical health factor for the polices. Wondering around alone is not good.

In a perfect world you would be correct, however, if you have two officers on duty and two calls come in at the same time, but they are sharing a car, what do they do? One person will have to wait for service.

I saw a show the other day about the city of Stockton, California. They have such budget problems that they have cut the police force down to next to nothing. Of course crime has gone up. At the 911 call center they showed at the moment the guy was in there with his camera they had 25 officers on the road all of whom were answering calls and another 45 calls on hold waiting for the next available officer.

Sadly, it is often a political ploy. They cut police and fire because that is what people notice and feel. This way when they ask for a bigger budget and more money in the next election people will be more likely to vote for it.

[aka123]

Originally Posted by kane

In a perfect world you would be correct, however, if you have two officers on duty and two calls come in at the same time, but they are sharing a car, what do they do? One person will have to wait for service.

I saw a show the other day about the city of Stockton, California. They have such budget problems that they have cut the police force down to next to nothing. Of course crime has gone up. At the 911 call center they showed at the moment the guy was in there with his camera they had 25 officers on the road all of whom were answering calls and another 45 calls on hold waiting for the next available officer.

Sadly, it is often a political ploy. They cut police and fire because that is what people notice and feel. This way when they ask for a bigger budget and more money in the next election people will be more likely to vote for it.

It's not about "sharing a car", they move in pairs. Tactical choice. If there are multiple possible missions, they take one at a time. Just like that 2 man with 2 cars won't split up, to be half mans and half cars, if there are 4 missions. And it's not about a perfect world, we use it in this world, right now. It's a matter of choice.

About the budget, how about reducing the military or spying budget? You can reallocate your resources, not just to raise those.

[kane]

Originally Posted by aka123

It's not about "sharing a car", they move in pairs. Tactical choice. If there are multiple possible missions, they take one at a time. Just like that 2 man with 2 cars won't split up, to be half mans and half cars, if there are 4 missions. And it's not about a perfect world, we use it in this world, right now. It's a matter of choice.

About the budget, how about reducing the military or spying budget? You can reallocate your resources, not just to raise those.

Again you are talking about a perfect world. You can't have a legit discussion about seriously reducing the US debt without being willing to cut the military budget. However, there are a ton of people who think you are a committing treason just for suggesting it. So I don't see a significant cut in defense spending anytime in the near future.

It isn't always possible to have two people at every call and making calls wait on 911 is just asking for lawsuits. In a perfect world if it takes 10 patrol cars each shift to adequately cover a city they would have 20 officers on duty for each shift so you had two officers per car. This would likely cut down on police violence because you are accountable to someone else, and having another officer there with you at all times means you won't feel the same level of danger in situations. But, most cities can't afford that. Maybe some day they will be able to, but it is unlikely.

[aka123]

Originally Posted by kane

Again you are talking about a perfect world. You can't have a legit discussion about seriously reducing the US debt without being willing to cut the military budget. However, there are a ton of people who think you are a committing treason just for suggesting it. So I don't see a significant cut in defense spending anytime in the near future.

It isn't always possible to have two people at every call and making calls wait on 911 is just asking for lawsuits. In a perfect world if it takes 10 patrol cars each shift to adequately cover a city they would have 20 officers on duty for each shift so you had two officers per car. This would likely cut down on police violence because you are accountable to someone else, and having another officer there with you at all times means you won't feel the same level of danger in situations. But, most cities can't afford that. Maybe some day they will be able to, but it is unlikely.

You are again talking about some "perfect wold", but it is reality in many other countries, or I would even say in most other countries, even without knowing it. It's a matter of choice. Same goes with the military budget.

[kane]

Originally Posted by aka123

You are again talking about some "perfect wold", but it is reality in many other countries, or I would even say in most other countries, even without knowing it. It's a matter of choice. Same goes with the military budget.

True. We choose to fun the massive military as opposed to other things. Personally I think we could cut the military in half and still be plenty safe and either cut taxes or find better ways to spend that money.

[Anthony]

Originally Posted by kane

I might be off on the black friday stuff. I am just going off what I read. The police stuff is pretty accurate. According to the FBI and many sources on average between 350-400 people per year are killed by the police. Not all of the deaths are via shooting, others come from other injuries.

A white police officer in the United States killed a black person on average of twice per week from 2005 to 2012, according to homicide reports offered to the FBI. But this data is limited, as only about 4 percent of law enforcement agencies contributed.

http://thefreethoughtproject.com/loc...ar-minorities/