| Forum Index > General Forum |
To keep this thread open for discussion, please READ THIS BEFORE POSTING: The following types of posts are banworthy: - Nation bashing. - Significantly disrespectful posts toward any of the parties involved. Please familiarize yourself with some of the basics on the use of force in the United States before posting in this thread. If you feel the need to post a reaction to the news, post a comment on the youtube video. Don't bring it here. This thread is for a discussion on the topic, and your post better have substance to it. Low content posts will be met with moderator action. Here is a good post by someone with experience in escalation of force training. Read that too. This post might change your opinion of in the incident. | ||
|
aksfjh
United States4853 Posts
On January 25 2012 08:42 Chargelot wrote: Which works well against a woman holding an airsoft gun loaded with not-ammunition which is not being utilized to kill said dog. Indeed. I was just giving a personal anecdote loosely related to the story. In the topic at hand, the dog was not the correct tool. The officers acted in the proper way. | ||
|
Nawyria
Netherlands140 Posts
On January 25 2012 08:44 Tula wrote: ... That is pretty much standard procedure to a certain extent. They take position so that the suspect cannot see them when he exits the building (mostly to avoid the suspect taking hostages) and then challenge them and give verbal warnings from a certain range (5-10m optimal range in Austria, not sure what they train for in the USA). They need to be close enough to be clearly understood, and also to reduce the chance of bystanders to become involved. The video is not good enough to accuratly judge the distance, but it seems to be about 5m. Anything beyond that range makes it almost impossible to tazer someone (unless he is in swim shorts). Even at the range he used the tazer failed because he did not hit correctly. If they stand away more than that they cannot stop him from drawing a gun in many situations, it also becomes difficult to shoot accuratly with a handgun beyond 10m range. ... If I understand you correctly they got as close as they did to get within warning distance and the effective range of tasers, and they did it as fast as they did to minimize the risk to bystanders? Seems reasonable to me. | ||
|
dAPhREAk
Nauru12397 Posts
On January 25 2012 08:46 Powerpill wrote: Oh missed the failed 1 attempt in the beginning, no need to be rude sir. Still, I'm sure they had more than 1 taser between the bunch of them, or at least shoot the knee caps. you are ready to send him to prison for manslaughter when you didnt even carefully review the video (or read the thread). i guess i am the rude one though for calling you out though.... | ||
|
azdzaazfaz
4 Posts
User was banned for this post. | ||
|
Alex1Sun
494 Posts
In many states in the USA the police are trained to shoot to kill. In some European countries the police are trained to give a warning shot first and then to try to disable a suspect with a minimum amount of harm. I think both systems are fully justified, no nation bashing intended here. Countries have their differences, and I don't understand why posters should get warnings for pointing this obvious thing out. Again, I'm ok with both systems, and I don't have any principles against moving either to USA or to Europe. | ||
|
aksfjh
United States4853 Posts
On January 25 2012 08:46 Calm wrote: Interesting insight. I'm actually kind of surprised by this. But it's also up to the police to deploy it. Well, the idea is that the training is enough to protect the dog and it's partner in a threatening scenario. Much like officers ARE trained in some form of hand-to-hand combat for worst case scenarios. In this way, if they use the dog to track down somebody running, the dog isn't at the sole mercy of somebody with a weapon if the person chooses to turn and defend itself. | ||
|
gruff
Sweden2276 Posts
On January 25 2012 08:46 Powerpill wrote: Oh missed the failed 1 attempt in the beginning, no need to be rude sir. Still, I'm sure they had more than 1 taser between the bunch of them, or at least shoot the knee caps. Give me one example of a police shooting someone in the knee cap on purpose. | ||
|
Chargelot
2275 Posts
On January 25 2012 08:48 azdzaazfaz wrote: If you are ok with that because it is "standard procedure" then you have been successfully brain-washed, congrats. Justification of actions and justification of opinions are two different things. "Standard Operating Procedure" is the justification of his actions. "If someone was swinging a large melee weapon at my partner that could, and probably would, kill him, I would shoot him dead too" is my justification of opinion. | ||
|
dAPhREAk
Nauru12397 Posts
On January 25 2012 08:48 azdzaazfaz wrote: If you are ok with that because it is "standard procedure" then you have been successfully brain-washed, congrats. experts determine what is the best way to handle situations (i.e., standard procedures). police officers are trained to react with standard procedures. so, yes, i think it is okay for the police officer to use standard procedure. i am curious why you think you are more qualified to determine what standard procedure should be. | ||
|
HiTeK532
Canada171 Posts
They are given the powers to make these decisions and have to make them split second it's easy for us to sit here and second guess their decision but it's a completely different feeling when you are actually there and the suspect is swinging a crowbar at your partner/friend and no amount of training in a controlled environment can mentally prepare you for the actual threat of someone with the power and potential mentality to kill you coming at you. | ||
|
Nawyria
Netherlands140 Posts
On January 25 2012 08:48 azdzaazfaz wrote: If you are ok with that because it is "standard procedure" then you have been successfully brain-washed, congrats. Judging whether the police officers acted according to their training is an entirely different matter than evaluating the procedures they are taught to follow. I'm simply trying to understand why the officers handled the situation the way they did. EDIT: typo. | ||
|
seiferoth10
3362 Posts
On January 25 2012 08:48 azdzaazfaz wrote: If you are ok with that because it is "standard procedure" then you have been successfully brain-washed, congrats. Yup, I've been brain washed to prefer the officer live over the criminal, but that's just me. Maybe you love criminals, I dunno. | ||
|
dAPhREAk
Nauru12397 Posts
On January 25 2012 08:50 Alex1Sun wrote: Well, the situation is completely clear to everybody. In many states in the USA the police are trained to shoot to kill. In some European countries the police are trained to give a warning shot first and then to try to disable a suspect with a minimum amount of harm. I think both systems are fully justified, no nation bashing intended here. Countries have their differences, and I don't understand why posters should get warnings for pointing this obvious thing out. Again, I'm ok with both systems, and I don't have any principles against moving either to USA or to Europe. firing warning shots where? in the air, into the ground, into buildings? you know that stray bullets kill people, right? | ||
|
Elegy
United States1629 Posts
| ||
|
Tula
Austria1544 Posts
On January 25 2012 08:47 Nawyria wrote: If I understand you correctly they got as close as they did to get within warning distance and the effective range of tasers, and they did it as fast as they did to minimize the risk to bystanders? Seems reasonable to me. Yes, those are the basic arguments explained to me in my training. If you are shouting from 20m away you personally might be fairly safe, but there might be (and often are) quite a few bystanders far closer to the suspect. I am not quite sure if the word can be used in English for this context, but in German it's called "Wirkungsraum", i guess the closest translation would area of intervention (instead of effect which would be literal). You need to be close enough to restrict the options for the suspect (run away, take hostage, take cover behind something before shooting etc.) without unduly exposing yourselve to risks (meaning definitly outside of meele range). | ||
|
Assault_1
Canada1950 Posts
On January 25 2012 08:52 dAPhREAk wrote: firing warning shots where? in the air, into the ground, into buildings? you know that stray bullets kill people, right? into his feet I guess | ||
|
DR.Ham
Netherlands621 Posts
On January 25 2012 05:18 iNcontroL wrote: excessive? Police are supposed to shoot to kill.. it isn't like he reloaded and unloaded on the guy again. If a cop EVER shoots it's not to stop or slow down someone or something.. it's to kill him. This is completely true, once a situation occurs in which a police officer feels the need to shoot, they are trained to fire all of their bullets into the biggest area of mass, which is the targets chest. If it's a life or death situation, they shoot and keep shooting, the idea of shooting in the leg etc. is just for the movies. This is also pretty standard internationally too, certainly here in Australia at least. I think the only point of debate is obviously if there was justification in the shooting itself, but I can imagine that being hit by a metal bar in the head is going to be potentially lethal. Pretty sad situation for all involved, it must be incredibly traumatic for the police involved as well as the victim and their families. | ||
|
Chargelot
2275 Posts
On January 25 2012 08:52 dAPhREAk wrote: firing warning shots where? in the air, into the ground, into buildings? you know that stray bullets kill people, right? The first round may be a blank, but I am unfamiliar with European police agency regulations. That idea itself seems dangerous, because sometimes the first shot needs to count. | ||
|
dAPhREAk
Nauru12397 Posts
;-) please don't miss. a BART police officer killed someone in the San Francisco Bay Area recently when a bullet ricocheted off the ground. | ||
|
aksfjh
United States4853 Posts
Ricochet bullets kill too. In any situation where you are firing a weapon with non-hostiles around, you want to do so to minimize the possibility of missing. | ||
| ||
|
|
Monday Night Weeklies
OSC
PiGosaur Monday
The PondCast
OSC
Big Brain Bouts
Serral vs TBD
BSL 21
BSL 21
Wardi Open
|
|
|
EPT
