Modern American Police

[Akumz Razor]

For what it's worth, the submachinegun-toting guards outside the parliament building were more than willing to pose during my recent trip to London. They also gave some good tips & directions for walking tours in the area.

[CmdrWilkens]

While each of the cases mentioned points to horrible things gone wrong not ONCE in the entire article is a statistic mentioned. There is a LOT of little anecdotes to the point that the author writes:

There’s plenty of anecdotal evidence that police are far from reluctant to pull their weapons or feel much remorse when they do.

It may in fact be the case that excessive use of force is on the rise but the author presents no data merely anecdotes. In fact there is the additional point of noting that he cherry picked cases by pointing out that he asked for reports on "two other high-profile officer-involved deadly shootings from 2001 and 2004." So the sample data was 3 cases over 8+ years with no mention as to what constitutes "high profile." Again it MAY be true but this article doesn't provide the basis to make any such judgement aside from the fact that the author did an excellent job of compiling a list of incidents where the police did a really shitty job.

I'll throw one more point out there:

In one case I recall several years ago, Anaheim police went to arrest an elderly doctor for a nonviolent crime. They drove one of those mini-tanks into his wealthy suburban neighborhood, black-clad SWAT-team members hanging onto the sides clutching high-powered rifles. (SWAT stands for Special Weapons and Tactics.)

So based on recollection without a date (for anyone to be able to fact check) the police brought in the SWAT Team and... yup he doens't mention how the incident resolved. Did the SWAT members knock on the door and politely walk the guy away? Did they barrel into the ouse spraying bullets only to get lucky nobody died? If you are talking about results then you shoudl probably mention results. If the police brought a tank but nobody was injured well then it kinda argues against his point about police being weapon happy and unaccountable.

So yes each of the deaths mentioned was tragic and very likely unneccessary...but none of it proves any point that the author is trying to make. It takes what could have been a good hook for looking into a growing problem, which may or may not exist since the guy never bothered to look and see, and turns it into a sensationalist "Police are evil" rant.

[Darth Wong]

Part of the problem may be the author's emotionalism. Look at his opening paragraphs:

In the summer of 2006 a frail, troubled 18-year-old girl named Ashley MacDonald ran through a nearly empty Huntington Beach, California, city park in the early morning holding a small knife. An onlooker called the police and soon two large male officers showed up. They shot the girl to death with 18 bullets, claiming she had lunged toward them and put their lives in danger. It was just another day for law enforcement in suburban Orange County, where—despite low crime rates—police have become increasingly aggressive and militaristic.

The MacDonald killing sparked an unusual amount of public outrage. This shooting, in particular, was hard to grasp. An empty park and a tiny teenager hardly make for a life-threatening situation for the officers. Couldn’t they just have backed away and used nonlethal alternatives such as pepper spray? The police admitted that they were readying a beanbag gun in the parking lot when the officers claimed that “time ran out.”

He's obviously being emotional about this, and not looking realistically at it. Is an 18 year old girl more "frail" than a muscular male police officer? Almost certainly. Does this mean there is no serious risk if she lunges at him with a knife? Hell no. And why is it so absurd to think that "time ran out" on the police officers' attempt to deploy a beanbag gun? It could be that she lunged at the cops with her knife and they put her down; a knife is not a trivial threat, and real-life isn't like kung fu movies. You don't just deflect it and then do cool kung-fu shit to put down the knife-wielder.

[Oscar Wilde]

Part of the problem may be the author's emotionalism. Look at his opening paragraphs:

In the summer of 2006 a frail, troubled 18-year-old girl named Ashley MacDonald ran through a nearly empty Huntington Beach, California, city park in the early morning holding a small knife. An onlooker called the police and soon two large male officers showed up. They shot the girl to death with 18 bullets, claiming she had lunged toward them and put their lives in danger. It was just another day for law enforcement in suburban Orange County, where—despite low crime rates—police have become increasingly aggressive and militaristic.

The MacDonald killing sparked an unusual amount of public outrage. This shooting, in particular, was hard to grasp. An empty park and a tiny teenager hardly make for a life-threatening situation for the officers. Couldn’t they just have backed away and used nonlethal alternatives such as pepper spray? The police admitted that they were readying a beanbag gun in the parking lot when the officers claimed that “time ran out.”

He's obviously being emotional about this, and not looking realistically at it. Is an 18 year old girl more "frail" than a muscular male police officer? Almost certainly. Does this mean there is no serious risk if she lunges at him with a knife? Hell no. And why is it so absurd to think that "time ran out" on the police officers' attempt to deploy a beanbag gun? It could be that she lunged at the cops with her knife and they put her down; a knife is not a trivial threat, and real-life isn't like kung fu movies. You don't just deflect it and then do cool kung-fu shit to put down the knife-wielder.

Does the bean bag gun HAVE to be something that takes more time than raising it to be "ready?"

[CmdrWilkens]

Does the bean bag gun HAVE to be something that takes more time than raising it to be "ready?"

Apparently neither of the officers who confronted her had it on them so another officer was responding to a call for backup with one...that is at least as best as I was able to pierce it together from the article.

Again, and DW hit it, this article is laced with emotion and that does nothing to address whether there is a problem or not. This may have been a legitimate self defense case where she was aggressive and attacked, it may have been a case of officer over reaction...but the author repeatedly seeks anecdotes rather than trying to find out if there is a problem and whether or not this incident was part of it. Its just a sloppy rant rather than journalism.

[tim31]

Two patrolmen didn't have the equipment to use 'less lethal force' and had to call in for it. It didn't arrive in time.

Contrast this to, say, the United Kingdom, where beat cops do not carry firearms at all and have to call them in. The difference, of course, is that the general populace does not own guns as broadly as in the U.S.

There have been a lot of accusations of police using excessive force here lately too. For example, earlier this month police tasered a man who received third degree burns. I think the taser was only the enabling factor here, because he was threatening the police with a can of petroleum and a lighter..

[Nieztchean Uber-Amoeba]

The thing of it is, I'd like to know(yeah, impossible) a correlated statistic for the amount of times an officer armed with a service pistol has to actually draw the weapon, versus how many times an officer with a a ballistic vest, helmet, and an assault rifle has to level said weapon. One of those says 'don't fuck with me' a lot more than the other.

I'm reminded of an interesting anecdote by Regina's former chief of police, whom I was with on a fishing trip recently. He mentioned how much he disliked full-time SWAT officers because they become entirely divorced from the sense of keeping the peace of a community, the legwork, normal life, and all the normal aspects of policework, since their only job is to train and exercise for smashing in doors and shooting things, and to then do those things, and as such they become gungho, prone to use overkill, and since they never actually have to do the afterwork of an arrest, ignore the consequences of those actions. On the other hand, part-time SWAT officers who still do the regular policework and only turn para-military when called to it, are much better-mannered and aren't nearly as macho or aggravating to deal with.

[Darth Wong]

Two patrolmen didn't have the equipment to use 'less lethal force' and had to call in for it. It didn't arrive in time.

Contrast this to, say, the United Kingdom, where beat cops do not carry firearms at all and have to call them in. The difference, of course, is that the general populace does not own guns as broadly as in the U.S.

There have been a lot of accusations of police using excessive force here lately too. For example, earlier this month police tasered a man who received third degree burns. I think the taser was only the enabling factor here, because he was threatening the police with a can of petroleum and a lighter..

I think it's worth pointing out that Toronto cops have extremely strict protocols on using their weapons (they have to fill out paperwork and justify their conduct to superiors every time they draw a weapon, never mind discharging it), and that there have been very few incidents in the news of police being too quick to fire their weapons. I actually can't recall any at all, at least not in recent times. It is not necessary to disarm the police.

[Tiriol]

Two patrolmen didn't have the equipment to use 'less lethal force' and had to call in for it. It didn't arrive in time.

Contrast this to, say, the United Kingdom, where beat cops do not carry firearms at all and have to call them in. The difference, of course, is that the general populace does not own guns as broadly as in the U.S.

There have been a lot of accusations of police using excessive force here lately too. For example, earlier this month police tasered a man who received third degree burns. I think the taser was only the enabling factor here, because he was threatening the police with a can of petroleum and a lighter..

I think it's worth pointing out that Toronto cops have extremely strict protocols on using their weapons (they have to fill out paperwork and justify their conduct to superiors every time they draw a weapon, never mind discharging it), and that there have been very few incidents in the news of police being too quick to fire their weapons. I actually can't recall any at all, at least not in recent times. It is not necessary to disarm the police.

That holds true in Finland, as well, I think. It does reduce the desire to act "super-cool" and "all tough" by drawing a gun on someone if you have to file paperwork afterwards and justify why you did it. This coincidentally also holds true for those precious few security guards who are given access to guns in their job. Even some of the decidedly less lethal tools are rather strictly regulated and their use as well.

[weemadando]

Why does this all remind me of the case in Melbourne last year where a teenaged had stolen knives from a store, threatened people with the knives, then rushed the police with the knives when they were there [IIRC after he failed to be put down by capsicum spray] and then was shot.

Somehow this was seen as a massive police failure. People are idiots and expect the police to be able to shoot a gun out of someone's hands or do some Matrix bullshit to disarm a drugged up guy with a knife.

Yes, there are some egregious examples of police brutality and unnecessary force, but it's hardly ever those that get brought up by these articles.

[Narkis]

You know, last December a cop shot and killed a teenager under controversial circumstances in the capital. There were riots everywhere. Just sayin'.

[Kamakazie Sith]

I'm not sure Portland would really rank as a "major" American city, I think it might be a bit small for that; the city itself is 29th most populous in the US and the metro area is only 23rd. I would hesitate to extrapolate from Portland to reach a conclusion about American police forces in general with regard to the article, especially when it seems like the article is focused on Orange County - which, if I remember right, is near or is itself the birthplace of the SWAT team concept as we know it today.

The SWAT concept was created by the LAPD, one county to the north, but I would not be surprised if there are as many SWAT officers in Orange County as LA. Having a SWAT team seams to be a prestige item for the local police forces.

It is a prestige item because it means your department has been recognized as in need of one. If you don't have a SWAT team and you need one you have to call for another agency to assist and therefore time is wasted.

[Kamakazie Sith]

This is, if true, completely terrifying.

You know, if a cops first reaction to a teenager with a knife is to shoot them, or if you're preparing a non lethal solution and "run out of time" maybe you shouldn't be a cop or go for a shot that will stop them, but not kill them.

Let's say you do that, but it doesn't stop them and they stab you and you die?

And if you feel the need to chase down a boy riding a bike without a helmet and then shoot a dog that is trying to stop a stranger from entering his yard, you really don't need to be issued a gun.

Granted the entire situation should never have happened and the officer in question should be terminated and spend some time in jail, but at the same time I don't know of any place where it is legal for a dog to bite a person if they walk onto your property. Maybe inside your home, but certainly not just walking up to the door step.

Depending on the size if I were charged by a dog I'd shoot it too.

[Kamakazie Sith]

Second, they've always carried shot-guns, and since the North Hollywood shoot-out, I've heard more and more second-hand reports of cops wanting to have access to higher caliber weaponry in cases where suspects might be wearing body armor. I've yet to see cops walking around with AK's or M14/16's. Even if I know SWAT has access to that kind of weaponry I've yet to hear about police using them.

The North Hollywood shoot-out is exactly the reason regular patrol officers keep assault rifles in their cars. I have a AR-15 that I keep in my car and I've deployed it on a several occassions where we had information that the subject was dangerous and had guns. Nothing wrong with bringing superior firepower to a possible gun fight.

Also, I think someone asked by the concerns of over-penetration with rifle fire. It certainly is a concern that is trained on and the ammunition used for our rifles is designed to fragment upon impact with dry wall. Still creates dangerous fragments but far less dangerous than an intact round.

I don't have an opinion on this article that others haven't already shared. I could add some stories of officers who used less lethal force when deadly force was justified to even the playing field.

[His Divine Shadow]

Then I daresay it's a quote taken out of context, or the 'former' police chief is completely uninformed. Anyone who's fired a .38 revolver back-to-back with a 9mm pistol knows that the former has decidedly more stopping power.

Some points.

1. The concept of "stopping power" is a nonscensial unit of measure that does not exist, it's mostly touted by old people who go on about .45ACP being the best round ever and weak 9mm not being good enough.

2. The average 9mm JHP round (147gr JHP has about 640 joules) has more energy than your usual .38 special round (319 joules for a 110gr JHP). The reason you might think a .38spl has more kickback is probably because you shoot it from a revolver as opposed to a semiauto pistol which absorbs recoil in order to reload itself.


Also I don't really see what difference it makes if cops carry modern pistols or not, are they under some sort of obligation to remain behind the times?

[His Divine Shadow]

Seriously, they had me there for a good while, I was thinking "Oh those bastard cops right up until we hit this part" 9mm is not "high caliber" in fact .38's are bigger than several 9mm sizes
Click for bigger image

True but the gross physical sizwe of a .38spl cartidge is bigger than a 9mm cartidge. But a 9mm is a higher pressure round than the .38spl and fires a heavier projectile and is more lethal.

[His Divine Shadow]

In front of the J.P. Morgan building, which appeared to be under construction or renovation or something like that. There was scaffolding on parts of it.

The thing of it is, I'd like to know(yeah, impossible) a correlated statistic for the amount of times an officer armed with a service pistol has to actually draw the weapon, versus how many times an officer with a a ballistic vest, helmet, and an assault rifle has to level said weapon. One of those says 'don't fuck with me' a lot more than the other.

An assault rifle in a busy street. Wouldn't this result in a horrific amount of accidental shootings if it was needed?

I don't see why it should result in more accidental shootings than if you where to replace it with a shotgun, or a pistol or revolver. Probably less than with the handguns that are much harder to aim.

[His Divine Shadow]

Contrast this to, say, the United Kingdom, where beat cops do not carry firearms at all and have to call them in. The difference, of course, is that the general populace does not own guns as broadly as in the U.S.

I don't really think that's it at all. Every other west-european country I can think of does have armed police offiers as standard and I cannot recall police shootings in france, germany, switzerland, sweden, finland, etcetera being that much different than in the UK.

Obviously the major difference between western europe and the US is the existance of a solid welfare state, which reduces the level of overall violence. That's my theory anyway.

[Vendetta]

Contrast this to, say, the United Kingdom, where beat cops do not carry firearms at all and have to call them in. The difference, of course, is that the general populace does not own guns as broadly as in the U.S.

Depends. A solo plod might not be carrying a gun, but police cars have gunsafes with a firearm in, and at least in Nottingham we have the same "show of force" thing that was discussed earlier, particularly on the major clubbing nights, you will sometimes see officers strolling around with mp5's.

[The Duchess of Zeon]

Yeah, the police being heavily armed has nothing to do with this. For fuck's sake, almost every non-Anglosphere nation on the Earth has a Gendarme which is literally a national armed paramilitary police service with arrest powers, since they have nothing like posse comitatus in most countries of the world which don't have a British-derived legal system. Indeed in many of these countries, at least in the past, the Gendarmes could be mobilized as reserve divisions in wartime, or the military had no military police of its own and all military policing functions are handled by Gendarmes (Jandarma in Turkish--the Ottoman Jandarma divisions fought fairly well in the First World War for instance). The French Gendarmerie have been armed with full auto submachineguns for many decades before the SWAT team even existed. The idea that this has anything to do with arming the cops (or arming the populace) is truly a red herring.. This is about procedures and attitudes in the police service.

[The Duchess of Zeon]

There's a fairly graphic depiction of the differences in European police forces... To your right, a British police officer. To your left, a French. Not even the most militarized SWAT teams in the US have quite gone over to the level of military uniform styling of the French, and it's clearly obvious that they carry just as openly as police in the US.

[Kamakazie Sith]

<snip image>
There's a fairly graphic depiction of the differences in European police forces... To your right, a British police officer. To your left, a French. Not even the most militarized SWAT teams in the US have quite gone over to the level of military uniform styling of the French, and it's clearly obvious that they carry just as openly as police in the US.

SWAT teams in the US look a lot like combat troops. Below is a typical image of how SWAT teams across the US dress and look...

[The Duchess of Zeon]

Yeah--when in combat gear. The gendarmerie has military style uniforms at all times. Because it is, of course, a military organization which enforces the law.

[His Divine Shadow]

I suppose I better add some too.

Finnish police officer:


Swedish police officer with dog:

[Broomstick]

An assault rifle in a busy street. Wouldn't this result in a horrific amount of accidental shootings if it was needed?

Depends.

Assuming Mr. Badass with the BFG is observing basic gun safety (like, don't point it at anything you don't want shot) the likelihood of accidental shooting is pretty close to zero. Guns do not spontaneously leap up and shoot by themselves. But that's probably not what you meant, right?

If I was on said busy street and Mr. Badass with the BFG suddenly raised it I'd probably either run like hell or drop flat to the ground, as would a lot of other people. Assuming (always dangerous, but let's) the guy with the BFG is competent and whoever is his target doesn't use a human shield... mmm, yes, there is a danger of ricochet and the like, but you could have that with a pistol, too. On the other hand, a BFG has serious deterrent value, being visible and big and scary looking, and a successful deterrent may avoid any shooting entirely.

Past shoot outs between police and perpetrators have at times resulted in significant exchanges of bullets without anyone being actually hit. I know the police engage in regular target practice, so that illustrates the difficulty of actually shooting a moving target.

What strikes me in the above cases are the sheer number of bullets used on, say, a person seated in a car. If you're sitting in a car you aren't going to be able to get out of it that quickly, and your maneuverability is limited.

Do some cops abuse their power? Hell yes - my Uncle Bill spent the last 15 years of his career on the St. Louis force in Internal Affairs investigating potential cop misconduct, and that was back in the 1970's and early 1980's. Most cops, I do believe, don't really want to shoot anyone, they'd much prefer to go home at the end of the day without that particular drama and trauma. Sure, some young rookies might be gung-ho, but it doesn't take long for the "glamour" to wear off.

On the other hand, I have to wonder if the trend of reducing patrols to just one cop is increasing tension and anxiety in officers? I remember 30 yeas ago cops always seemed to travel in pairs, now they seldom do. In this area most of the cops killed on the job in the last 10 years were killed at traffic stops - they pull someone over and get shot. Can't imagine an officer, who surely knows this, approaching your car after he pulls you over isn't a little tense. The proper response, of course, is to move slowly, speak calmly, and always keep your hands visible. The more "I'm harmless" vibes you give off the safer you will be.

I think it's a complex question, more than "RAR! Police bad! Police violent!" vs. "It's a fucking dangerous world and cops are targets"