| Forum Index > General Forum |
Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets. Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source. If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland27125 Posts
Thus I’m unclear on whether the police had literally just arrived or not, and whether they had verbally announced their presence/for people to stand down and drop weapons etc. There are going to be scenarios where police situationally have very little option, then there will be situations where the police are ultimately left with little other option after mismanaging a situation. Quite unsure what this latest incident would fall into | ||
|
farvacola
United States18866 Posts
| ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands22446 Posts
On April 21 2021 20:37 farvacola wrote: How about "drop the knife"?The way I see the video of the encounter is that the knife wielding woman was in an attacking stance and was well within proximity of the woman in the pink sweatsuit such that she was in the process of stabbing her or could have stabbed her in mere moments. That's as close to posing a substantial threat of grievous injury or death as it gets and I'm not sure what sort of de-escalation tactics could have been employed at that point. Seriously, it can be that simple. Just because someone with a knife is nearby someone else doesn't mean they have to be killed immediately. | ||
|
farvacola
United States18866 Posts
If one wants to maintain that deadly force should not be used even where its reasonable to conclude that the threatening person posed an immediate threat to someone within reach, that's not unreasonable, but I don't think concluding otherwise is unreasonable either. | ||
|
Stratos_speAr
United States6959 Posts
On April 21 2021 20:50 Gorsameth wrote: How about "drop the knife"? Seriously, it can be that simple. Just because someone with a knife is nearby someone else doesn't mean they have to be killed immediately. We of course don't have the full video is that particular incident yet, but assuming worst case for the sake of argument: Taking the time to yell "drop the knife" and then giving the offender time to comply gives the attacker a huge window of time to stab and kill the victim. People here have a rather fanciful idea of the amount of time that people have to work with when one person is actively attacking another. They are also severely trivializing how dangerous a knife can be. | ||
|
Artisreal
Germany9235 Posts
On April 21 2021 20:50 Gorsameth wrote: How about "drop the knife"? Seriously, it can be that simple. Just because someone with a knife is nearby someone else doesn't mean they have to be killed immediately. We don't have these facts, do we? So let's sit back and wait for them before going on too many hypotheticals. Or focus on what is probably common knowledge, that deescalation training is basically nonexistent in US cops' training regime. A while back a user posted a ridiculous comparison between time spent on shooting range vs. time spent in deescalation training during a police person's duty life. hyperbolically speaking like 12 hours of deescalation vs. 1,000s of hours on a shooting range. One of the first google results paints a smaller discrepancy, but not quite. A deeper look into the records of 34 officers who shot unarmed people in 2015 and 2016 shows that more than half had obtained two or fewer hours of de-escalation training since at least 2012. Only one officer had received 40 hours, which is considered optimal. [...] Among more than 280 law enforcement agencies, new recruits received an average of 58 hours of firearms training and just eight hours of de-escalation training, according to the results of a 2015 survey by Wexler's organization. When it came to veteran officers, who usually must fulfill a yearly in-service training requirement, only 65 percent of the agencies taught de-escalation techniques. But those that did spent only 5 percent of their time on the topic, compared to 18 percent on firearms. Source What do you do in a sticky situation? Rely on what you have trained for the most I'd wager. | ||
|
farvacola
United States18866 Posts
On April 21 2021 21:00 Artisreal wrote: We don't have these facts, do we? So let's sit back and wait for them before going on too many hypotheticals. Or focus on what is probably common knowledge, that deescalation training is basically nonexistent in US cops' training regime. A while back a user posted a ridiculous comparison between time spent on shooting range vs. time spent in deescalation training during a police person's duty life. hyperbolically speaking like 12 hours of deescalation vs. 1,000s of hours on a shooting range. One of the first google results paints a smaller discrepancy, but not quite. Source What do you do in a sticky situation? Rely on what you have trained for the most I'd wager. Absolutely agree with this, even more so given how many folks I know that "train" endlessly at ranges and yet cant stay on target at 10 yards. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States24099 Posts
On April 21 2021 20:50 Gorsameth wrote: How about "drop the knife"? Seriously, it can be that simple. Just because someone with a knife is nearby someone else doesn't mean they have to be killed immediately. I'd add that as often as cops miss their targets it's a mistake for people to assume the person that was potentially going to be stabbed was statistically safer with the cop shooting in their direction. Most statistics show they typically miss more often than they hit their targets. A 2019 study of the Dallas Police Department found that in more than 130 shootings, officers struck their targets 35% of the time. Most of their shots were misses. And a 2006 analysis, which examined a number of major metropolitan police department shootings throughout the late '80s and early '90s, found that hit rates rarely exceeded 50%. Some departments, including the New York Police Department in 1990, hit only about 23% of targets. www.cnn.com | ||
|
Stratos_speAr
United States6959 Posts
I probably get more firearms training as a reservist in the military than a full-time cop does in most departments and we've already been over how little de-escalation training exists. The root of the problem is that it is treated more as a street trade than a trained and educated profession. The vast majority of people that go into it are the types that didn't like school, don't like the idea of extensive education and training, and have a bit of an anti-intellectual streak. This has permeated the entire culture of law enforcement. | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands22446 Posts
On April 21 2021 20:56 Stratos_speAr wrote: But should "they looked threatening and possibly could have done something" be the level needed for lethal force?We of course don't have the full video is that particular incident yet, but assuming worst case for the sake of argument: Taking the time to yell "drop the knife" and then giving the offender time to comply gives the attacker a huge window of time to stab and kill the victim. People here have a rather fanciful idea of the amount of time that people have to work with when one person is actively attacking another. They are also severely trivializing how dangerous a knife can be. Its a very short walk from there to "he was a big black man and I couldn't see his hands so I shot him" and Tyrone dying on a routine walk to the grocery store. Edit: and yes ofcourse everything tends to return to "their training is bad". | ||
|
Stratos_speAr
United States6959 Posts
On April 21 2021 21:14 Gorsameth wrote: But should "they looked threatening and possibly could have done something" be the level needed for lethal force? Its a very short walk from there to "he was a big black man and I couldn't see his hands so I shot him" and Tyrone dying on a routine walk to the grocery store. Edit: and yes ofcourse everything tends to return to "their training is bad". We waive it away when conservatives try to use the slippery slope argument, so I don't think we need to jump to it right away either. I think it's entirely possible to draw a line between "Black man with hands in his pockets" and "person with a large knife actively attacking someone else". | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland27125 Posts
Nonetheless, they tend not to despite it seeming by far the most prudent course of action. In this incident I’m unsure (in the genuine sense not as a leading qualifier) what all went down and how the scenario escalated. Given what we actually saw it appears things had gone quite badly, and the person who called it in was involved in scuffles with the other folk. Perhaps the person who called it in was holding the fort calmly up to a point but could only do so for so long. I’m unsure how effective any verbal request would have been, maybe a gunshot into the air but I’m sure that’s not procedurally sound. Once the red mist descends it’s rather difficult to notice things outside of your immediate combat. This is purely with the benefit of hindsight for this particular incident. I’m unsure on how long police were on the scene before the bodycam footage we saw. If the police had hightailed it into the situation and physically separated the people, quickly then I could see this particular shooting being avoided. But I could absolutely see situations where that’s a bad idea to employ that strategy, so it really is very much a hindsight being 20/20 kind of deal. In a wider sense, and I don’t think my posting history in here would paint me as anyone other than a supporter of radical reform, I don’t think some reporting of this has been responsible whatsoever. Not every case is a George Floyd, and it’s wholly unedifying to see some angles clearly trying to drive clicks atop a wave of (merited) outrage. | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands22446 Posts
On April 21 2021 21:17 Stratos_speAr wrote: But now we've moved to 'actively attacking someone".We waive it away when conservatives try to use the slippery slope argument, so I don't think we need to resort to it either. I think it's entirely possible to draw a line between "Black man with hands in his pockets" and "person with a large knife actively attacking someone else". Was the victim being actively attacked? Even if the footage doesn't show it I would assume some news report would mention stab wounds on a victim if that was the case right? There is a massive gab in level of response between someone being threatening and possibly being able to do something in the time it takes to tell them to disarm and someone actively attacking someone else. | ||
|
Stratos_speAr
United States6959 Posts
On April 21 2021 21:20 Gorsameth wrote: But now we've moved to 'actively attacking someone". Was the victim being actively attacked? Even if the footage doesn't show it I would assume some news report would mention stab wounds on a victim if that was the case right? There is a massive gab in level of response between someone being threatening and possibly being able to do something in the time it takes to tell them to disarm and someone actively attacking someone else. The stills that are available look like the attacker is actively attacking two people, but this is also why we need to wait for the full video. It's supposedly being released today. | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland27125 Posts
On April 21 2021 21:12 Stratos_speAr wrote: U.S. police training is pathetically minimalist in every regard. I probably get more firearms training as a reservist in the military than a full-time cop does in most departments and we've already been over how little de-escalation training exists. The root of the problem is that it is treated more as a street trade than a trained and educated profession. The vast majority of people that go into it are the types that didn't like school, don't like the idea of extensive education and training, and have a bit of an anti-intellectual streak. This has permeated the entire culture of law enforcement. An oft-neglected point, but an important one. I don’t think the (largely but not exclusively) American media portrayals as cops always getting their guy, even when they bend the rules it’s justified particularly helps. Training only goes as far as the people you’re training, and the culture into which you introduce training. I’ve heard some departments actively exclude some applicants if they’re ‘too smart’ on an IQ test, but don’t quote me on that. Some people want to join the force so they can be Dirty Harry or what have you. It might not be reflected in the pay check but compared to most of our careers the cops have a degree of power over people that most of us don’t in any real sense. Not to say don’t train them better, but without a wider cultural overhaul I’m not sure how much that would accomplish. Dirty Harry would attend, mouth off to the chief and smoke a cigarette and then go back to being Dirty Harry once he’s been signed off on his training | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland27125 Posts
On April 21 2021 21:20 Gorsameth wrote: But now we've moved to 'actively attacking someone". Was the victim being actively attacked? Even if the footage doesn't show it I would assume some news report would mention stab wounds on a victim if that was the case right? There is a massive gab in level of response between someone being threatening and possibly being able to do something in the time it takes to tell them to disarm and someone actively attacking someone else. If I am charging you with a knife, only to be shot before getting to you, or if I shoot at you and miss I would consider both to be active attacks even if no damage was done. | ||
|
farvacola
United States18866 Posts
| ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands22446 Posts
On April 21 2021 21:26 Stratos_speAr wrote: it happens so often in the US that I find it hard to fault people for jumping to conclusions.The stills that are available look like the attacker is actively attacking two people, but this is also why we need to wait for the full video. It's supposedly being released today. | ||
|
Jockmcplop
United Kingdom9889 Posts
On April 21 2021 21:42 farvacola wrote: Training is a small piece of the puzzle, the bigger one is consistent, routine accountability. Unless and until "Cops that do illegal things go to jail and cops who cover for them do too" becomes the norm, no amount of training will fix things. Police departments need to be held accountable too. Not for individual instances, but for trends and where lack of training can be proved to have caused police to make unnecessary mistakes or use force where its unjustified. Honestly I don't know whether this already happens in America or not. Is there some kind of standard that police training must adhere to? | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands22446 Posts
On April 21 2021 21:31 WombaT wrote: Harder to do nothing when attacking someone with a knife, and I would assume someone actively attacking with a knife would be to close to the victim to shoot without hitting both?If I am charging you with a knife, only to be shot before getting to you, or if I shoot at you and miss I would consider both to be active attacks even if no damage was done. | ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Dota 2 League of Legends Counter-Strike Other Games |
|
GSL
Replay Cast
WardiTV Weekly
PiGosaur Cup
The PondCast
Replay Cast
CrankTV Team League
Replay Cast
Replay Cast
CrankTV Team League
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
