StarDestroyer.Net BBS

it seems like more and more (esp in california) the police are becoming more cowardly. ten cops shoot a man because he lunges at them with a pocket knife. an old lady because she has some scissors. an old man in the back because he reaches under the bed. a kid because he has something in his hand.

if the guy comes after police with a sword or a gun then yeah shoot his ass. but aren't they trained to wrestle a guy with a knife? or a kid? i mean it's almost as if they're afraid to get a little hurt. that's their job. to place themselves in the line of fire (danger) to protect both the innocent and the suspect.

this leads me to another thing. police pursuits. in most other parts of the country the first chance police get away from innocents to pick the guy and force him off the road they take it. then when he stops they charge the vehicle and yank him out.

out here in l.a. they chase for hours on wide open roads and then sit for more long hours once the suspect has stopped waiting for him to get out on his own.

am i out of line here? tell me if i am, but i think they should be a litle more aggressive. screw the lawsuits. take action and deal with the consesuences later.

You`re not out of line what i see from here some of these cops are a bunch of wussies,maybe they should hire US marines.
and for the trigger happy jerks don`t tell me they don`t how to use their damn stick.

viperpilot wrote:it seems like more and more (esp in california) the police are becoming more cowardly. ten cops shoot a man because he lunges at them with a pocket knife. an old lady because she has some scissors. an old man in the back because he reaches under the bed. a kid because he has something in his hand.

if the guy comes after police with a sword or a gun then yeah shoot his ass. but aren't they trained to wrestle a guy with a knife? or a kid? i mean it's almost as if they're afraid to get a little hurt. that's their job. to place themselves in the line of fire (danger) to protect both the innocent and the suspect.

No, their job is to protect and serve, but not to place themselves at unnecessary risk. If some guy comes after a cop with a knife, gun him down. When I was a kid, I never went lunging after any cops with a fucking knife.

this leads me to another thing. police pursuits. in most other parts of the country the first chance police get away from innocents to pick the guy and force him off the road they take it. then when he stops they charge the vehicle and yank him out.

out here in l.a. they chase for hours on wide open roads and then sit for more long hours once the suspect has stopped waiting for him to get out on his own.

am i out of line here? tell me if i am, but i think they should be a litle more aggressive. screw the lawsuits. take action and deal with the consesuences later.

Why do you complain about police being too eager to kill in one paragraph and then immediately turn around say they're not eager ENOUGH in the next?

Can you site some specific cases here in California? Chases can dangerous too. It is not uncommon for innocents to be killed in a police chase. I do not have a problem with the cops shooting a man with a knife. A knife can kill you. However, I do support the use of bean bag guns and other non-lethals is if the situation permits it.

viperpilot wrote:it seems like more and more (esp in california) the police are becoming more cowardly. ten cops shoot a man because he lunges at them with a pocket knife. an old lady because she has some scissors. an old man in the back because he reaches under the bed. a kid because he has something in his hand.

Hey, you know what us people in Maryland call the Prince George's County
Police Department?

"The Black Man Keeping the Black Man Down, 9mm at a time"

Seems, every other week, some cop in PG county (which is majority black),
shoots some schmuck.

Alright, I think I may be the only cop on this board, so let me take a stab at this...

Guy, if somebody is coming at me with a knife, I am going to draw my gun and shoot him. "Trained to to wrestle a guy with a knife?"

FUCK THAT!!!

It's a good way to get yourself killed. Ballistic vests don't stop knives very well, even a little pocket knife with a three inch blade is long enough to reach your heart, or open your carotid artery. A Chesapeake police officer lost his life a couple of years ago when he was stabbed in the neck with a penknife at the scene of a domestic fight. Yeah, we can "wrestle a guy with a knife", but it's an absolute last resort. A knife is deadly pal. You are absolutely justified in shooting someone if he is charging you with one. Here's something else to consider: it's a well-established fact that a man with a knife, up to twenty-one feet away, can generally cut or stab you before you can clear the holster and shoot. Most people don't know that, but it's true. Most of the time, we have to confront people at much closer range than that. It doesn't leave us a whole lot of reaction time.

All due respect, but I think you've seen too many action movies. A lot of that shit they do onscreen only works because it's choreographed out in advance. Real fights are not nearly that smooth or graceful, and even if you are a martial artist, you can expect to get hit. If the bad guy has a knife, you can expect to get cut.

As for "an old lady because she has some scissors. an old man in the back because he reaches under the bed. a kid because he has something in his hand."...

I hate to break it to you, but there are legitimate reasons for all this. Street gangs these days have got kids as young as eight in them, and sometimes they do carry real guns. You can no longer afford to take it for granted that that is only a toy in his hand. Cops have been killed by children in street gangs. And old men and old ladies have shot cops to death before as well. We have to deal with all kinds of people, some of them are mentally unstable, bipolar, stopped taking their thorazine, etc. And I can't use the Force to tell what I'm walking into ahead of time. When a man suddenly reaches under a bed or couch, or under a car seat, he may be going for a gun. It happens. In legal terminology it's what is called a "furtive movement", and under certain circumstances, you can shoot people for that and it will stand up in court. On the street, an officer has fractions of a second to make life and death decisions. When a guy suddenly reaches for something, it may be harmless, but it equally well may be a gun (even if he's an old geezer; it does happen), and if you decide not to draw your own weapon, and you guessed wrong, it's already too late. When you're already staring at the gun pointed at you, you no longer have enough time to draw and fire before he can shoot. Better hope your department holds a nice funeral service for you.

If these cops you see on TV seem a little quick on the trigger, well, sometimes they are, but this is a dangerous job. It's a very dangerous job. One mistake, that takes only a half a second to make, can easily cost you your life.

Perinquus wrote:Alright, I think I may be the only cop on this board, so let me take a stab at this...

Guy, if somebody is coming at me with a knife, I am going to draw my gun and shoot him. "Trained to to wrestle a guy with a knife?"

FUCK THAT!!!

It's a good way to get yourself killed. Ballistic vests don't stop knives very well, even a little pocket knife with a three inch blade is long enough to reach your heart, or open your carotid artery. A Chesapeake police officer lost his life a couple of years ago when he was stabbed in the neck with a penknife at the scene of a domestic fight. Yeah, we can "wrestle a guy with a knife", but it's an absolute last resort. A knife is deadly pal. You are absolutely justified in shooting someone if he is charging you with one. Here's something else to consider: it's a well-established fact that a man with a knife, up to twenty-one feet away, can generally cut or stab you before you can clear the holster and shoot. Most people don't know that, but it's true. Most of the time, we have to confront people at much closer range than that. It doesn't leave us a whole lot of reaction time.

All due respect, but I think you've seen too many action movies. A lot of that shit they do onscreen only works because it's choreographed out in advance. Real fights are not nearly that smooth or graceful, and even if you are a martial artist, you can expect to get hit. If the bad guy has a knife, you can expect to get cut.

As for "an old lady because she has some scissors. an old man in the back because he reaches under the bed. a kid because he has something in his hand."...

I hate to break it to you, but there are legitimate reasons for all this. Street gangs these days have got kids as young as eight in them, and sometimes they do carry real guns. You can no longer afford to take it for granted that that is only a toy in his hand. Cops have been killed by children in street gangs. And old men and old ladies have shot cops to death before as well. We have to deal with all kinds of people, some of them are mentally unstable, bipolar, stopped taking their thorazine, etc. And I can't use the Force to tell what I'm walking into ahead of time. When a man suddenly reaches under a bed or couch, or under a car seat, he may be going for a gun. It happens. In legal terminology it's what is called a "furtive movement", and under certain circumstances, you can shoot people for that and it will stand up in court. On the street, an officer has fractions of a second to make life and death decisions. When a guy suddenly reaches for something, it may be harmless, but it equally well may be a gun (even if he's an old geezer; it does happen), and if you decide not to draw your own weapon, and you guessed wrong, it's already too late. When you're already staring at the gun pointed at you, you no longer have enough time to draw and fire before he can shoot. Better hope your department holds a nice funeral service for you.

If these cops you see on TV seem a little quick on the trigger, well, sometimes they are, but this is a dangerous job. It's a very dangerous job. One mistake, that takes only a half a second to make, can easily cost you your life.

But if you shoot an 8 year old kid with a gun just for that you might lose your job.

I don't always agree with Perinquus (in fact, we disagree more often than not), but I feel compelled to support him here. It is understood in our society that when a police officer tells you to freeze and put your hands in the air, you had goddamned well better freeze and put your hands in the air. If you won't, or worse yet, do something incredibly stupid and point an object at the officer, even if it's a damned cell-phone (especially if it's dark and he can't see you clearly), his reasonable response is to shoot and it would be YOUR fault if he does (never mind charging him with a knife!).

All of these people who get shot by cops get shot for a reason. I have never been afraid of being shot by a cop because I don't engage in criminal behaviour, don't behave in a suspicious manner, and if a cop told me to freeze and put my hands in the air, I would freeze and put my fucking hands in the air!

Montcalm wrote:But if you shoot an 8 year old kid with a gun just for that you might lose your job.

That's because the system is very strict. Doesn't change the fact that the 8 year old shouldn't have a gun or a toy gun while walking around in the street and certainly shouldn't point it at the police officer. My boys aren't 8 yet and they know better than that.

If you attempt to attack police with a weapon, you both deserve and should expect to die. If more then one officer shoots the person, that just means there all alert and know when to act.

Montcalm wrote:
But if you shoot an 8 year old kid with a gun just for that you might lose your job.

If you shoot an 8 ear old kid just for making a furtive movement, you're probably fried. If he actually did have a gun, and you can articulate that he was behaving in a threatening manner, you are justified in the eyes of the law and of your department.

Darth Wong wrote:That's because the system is very strict. Doesn't change the fact that the 8 year old shouldn't have a gun or a toy gun while walking around in the street and certainly shouldn't point it at the police officer. My boys aren't 8 yet and they know better than that.

Yes, but DW, you actually spend time with your kids and talk to them and teach them. A lot of "parents" don't.

Eh? Put themselves at unnecessary danger? Nope, their job is yo enforce the law, not do something stupid like try to wrestle with a guy who gots a gun that is trying to stab you.

your right i guess.

and although i'm not got going to quote each of you because it would make the post too long, i'll still respond.

darth wong: you're right. in one section i said police should be less agressive and in another i said said they should be more. even i was thinking that as i typing it. but let me say that i think there is a small difference. i was thinking police shouldn't be too quick to use deadly force but yet at the same time should put an end too things like pursuits quickly. the longer it goes on the greater the chance they'll hit someone. and the longer they stay in the car after it's over the longer a chance they have to decide how to fight back. i might be wrong. i'll think about it.

Perinquus: you may be right. but shouldn't you still not be so quick to shoot? it's not about cop movies or tv shows. i don't watch them because they are so stupid and fake. but there are ways to use nondeadly force. last year i recall an incident in washington dc where a man with gun outside the white house was stopped by secret service agents who disabled him be shooting out his knees. and police also have used beanbag guns. and i while i agree that a police officer shouldn't just throw themselves blindly into danger, i still feel that it is their responsibilty to put themselves in said danger if neccessary to protect.

and while you are all correct that if the person had not been breaking the law or threatening police they would likely still be alive, i still think that the descion to use lethal force should be the last stand. i'll rethink my stance but at the same time consider the situation. i drifted between both extreames the last few years. maybe i'll drift the other way again.

viperpilot, do you plan on assaulting a cop or something? Come on! I say if someone is stupid enough to assualt a cop, then buh bye. That is someone I don't want living in my society anyway.

If I were a police officer, I sure as hell would not want to try and trade punches with someone armed with a knife. I am going to stop him using the most efficient means that I have: a bullet. If you are not a cop then you don't really know what they go through. Stop bitching about what they can and cannot do.

Also, they do use bean bags when they can prepare, but cops don't generally arm themselves with these weapons. Some agencies don't even have the size or the money for them.

Beanbag guns? An officer's standard sidearm must be a lethal weapon because that's what he may need. If some perp comes out of his car and starts taking shots at you and you reach for your weapon and ... oops! it's a beanbag gun, that would be pretty fucking shitty for you, wouldn't it?

Darth Wong wrote:Beanbag guns? An officer's standard sidearm must be a lethal weapon because that's what he may need. If some perp comes out of his car and starts taking shots at you and you reach for your weapon and ... oops! it's a beanbag gun, that would be pretty fucking shitty for you, wouldn't it?

You`re forgeting the shitty pepperspray.

Superman wrote:Also, they do use bean bags when they can prepare, but cops don't generally arm themselves with these weapons. Some agencies don't even have the size or the money for them.

So, what happens if they're behind a car door with a shotgun? Beanbag doesn't work
What if there more then about 10 meters away? Beanbag doesn't work
What if the officer is facing more then one suspect? Beanbag doesn't work very well

Beanbags only work for highly specialized situations, and you need a grenade launcher or shotgun to use one in the first place. It is not easy to carry one of those, ready to be used as quickly as a handgun, while keeping your hands free for other tasks.

Driving with a 12 gauge slung across the chest is also rather difficult.

Then again there are cases of excessive force where it wasn't neccessary. Like here in Tassie a few years ago the SOGgies got a call-out because there had been reports of people with guns running around a neighbourhood.

SOGgies rock up in full kit ready to do some damage and find out that the UNINVESTIGATED call was in regards to some 8-10 y/o kids with waterpistols.

Sea Skimmer wrote: So, what happens if they're behind a car door with a shotgun? Beanbag doesn't work
What if there more then about 10 meters away? Beanbag doesn't work
What if the officer is facing more then one suspect? Beanbag doesn't work very well

Beanbags only work for highly specialized situations, and you need a grenade launcher or shotgun to use one in the first place. It is not easy to carry one of those, ready to be used as quickly as a handgun, while keeping your hands free for other tasks.

Driving with a 12 gauge slung across the chest is also rather difficult.

Metal Storm O'Dwyer VLE. Seperate barrels for non-lethal (beanbag and weird arse "shock" rounds) and lethal. So the cop can take their pick depending on the circumstance. Plus beanbags would be fairly effective when fired in an 8 rnd burst from a Metal Storm pistol.

weemadando wrote:Then again there are cases of excessive force where it wasn't neccessary. Like here in Tassie a few years ago the SOGgies got a call-out because there had been reports of people with guns running around a neighbourhood.

SOGgies rock up in full kit ready to do some damage and find out that the UNINVESTIGATED call was in regards to some 8-10 y/o kids with waterpistols.

But that's not the fault of the officers or there training or equipment. It's the result of poor information from the caller and the dispatcher.

Sea Skimmer wrote:

weemadando wrote:Then again there are cases of excessive force where it wasn't neccessary. Like here in Tassie a few years ago the SOGgies got a call-out because there had been reports of people with guns running around a neighbourhood.

SOGgies rock up in full kit ready to do some damage and find out that the UNINVESTIGATED call was in regards to some 8-10 y/o kids with waterpistols.

But that's not the fault of the officers or there training or equipment. It's the result of poor information from the caller and the dispatcher.

Indeed. In fact, I would be surprised if the caller was not charged with lodging a false report with the police.

No kid is stupid enough to point something at a cop in jest. If there is one, well for gods sakes get him before he breeds.

viperpilot wrote:Perinquus: you may be right. but shouldn't you still not be so quick to shoot? it's not about cop movies or tv shows. i don't watch them because they are so stupid and fake. but there are ways to use nondeadly force. last year i recall an incident in washington dc where a man with gun outside the white house was stopped by secret service agents who disabled him be shooting out his knees. and police also have used beanbag guns. and i while i agree that a police officer shouldn't just throw themselves blindly into danger, i still feel that it is their responsibilty to put themselves in said danger if neccessary to protect.

and while you are all correct that if the person had not been breaking the law or threatening police they would likely still be alive, i still think that the descion to use lethal force should be the last stand. i'll rethink my stance but at the same time consider the situation. i drifted between both extreames the last few years. maybe i'll drift the other way again.

I don't consider myself quick to use lethal force. I've had two situations in the last two years where I probably could have killed someone and justified it. I didn't. I will shoot someone if I have to, but I am not looking to rack up shooting victims. As for shooting out knees... I would have to look at the report that you mention, but I'm seriously inclined to doubt the accuracy of it if it reports federal agents as deliberately shooting out someone's knees. I know of no law enforcement agency that trains its personnel to do such a thing. For one thing, the knees are a small and often moving target. It's hard enough to hit center mass under the stress of an actual gunfight, with your body hyped up on adrenaline, and all your fine motor skills out the window. Shooting at the knees makes it likely that you will miss, and not only not neutralize the threat, but possibly your stray bullet will hit some innocent bystander somewhere past your target. For another thing, a firearm is an inherently lethal instrument. Trying to use it in a nonlethal manner is chancy at best (you can still hit an artery and cause the suspect to bleed out, for example, even if you shoot at the leg). Given the lethality of a gun, the only time you are justified in using it is when the situation calls for lethal force. Or to put it another way: if you're not justified in killing him, you're not justified in shooting him, period.

As for nonlethal devices like beanbag guns and tasers, and so forth. They do not work 100% of the time. They are limited in range and accuracy, and they are not appropriate to every situation. Even the manufacturer of the taser ships each taser gun with a warning never to use it unless there is a firearm to fall back on in the event it doesn't work, because there are numerous instances where it doesn't. Also, bean bag guns and tasers are single shot weapons, and don't do you much good when you have multiple targets.

Believe me, given the legal climate today, no department authorizes lethal force except when absolutely necessary. Individual officers who resort to it too quickly usually end up in deep doo doo. You may think most cops are trigger happy, but the truth is, we have to deal with some very violent, dangerous people, and we just want to go home at the end of our shifts.