• Supreme Court to weigh police use of TASERs
    163 replies, posted
[QUOTE=Lankist;35869099]Shooting people is NOT a cop's job.[/QUOTE] When did anyone ever say it was? You seem to have a horrible habit of jumping to radical conclusions on every cop related topic i've seen you in
[QUOTE=areolop;35868933]You just dont understand. You may call me out on my rulings but when it happens in real life, I know that I will be protected by the law, justifying a taking of another life to save my own.[/QUOTE] This is not your job. This is the antithesis to your job. [editline]7th May 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=Monkey Arms;35869111]When did anyone ever say it was? You seem to have a horrible habit of jumping to radical conclusions on every cop related topic i've seen you in[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=areolop;35868588]You have no idea how the job works then. No officer wants to shoot anyone (and rarely does). If shooting someone means protecting another, then [B]yes. IT IS THEIR JOB.[/B] [/QUOTE] I have a horrible habit of remembering what people said ten minutes prior to denying they ever said it. "If shooting someone means protecting another, then [B]yes. IT IS THEIR JOB.[/B]" His words. Shooting people is a part of the job, he says. That he changed his mind so suddenly does not instill faith in his competency as an officer of the law.
Seriously. You even said an officer is there to "Protect and Serve" "[h2]PROTECT[/h2] and serve" An officer will shoot someone who is of immediate danger of harming another with deadly force. Then, he is protecting the public. [editline]7th May 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=Lankist;35869115]This is not your job. This is the antithesis to your job. [editline]7th May 2012[/editline] I have a horrible habit of remembering what people said ten minutes prior to denying they ever said it. "If shooting someone means protecting another, then [B]yes. IT IS THEIR JOB.[/B]" His words. Shooting people is a part of the job, he says. That he changed his mind so suddenly does not instill faith in his competency as an officer of the law.[/QUOTE] Out of context, and wealth of knowledge
[QUOTE=Lankist;35869115] Shooting people is a part of the job, he says. [/QUOTE] "if shooting someone means protecting another" unless you're suggesting that police should ignore armed and dangerous individuals and let them cause harm to the population?
[QUOTE=areolop;35869141]Seriously. You even said an officer is there to "Protect and Serve" "[h2]PROTECT[/h2] and serve" An officer will shoot someone who is of immediate danger of harming another with deadly force. Then, he is protecting the public.[/QUOTE] Your job is to arrest, not to kill. Shooting people is the antithesis to protection. Innocent until proven guilty. Lethal force is an ABSOLUTE last resort, and is completely unacceptable in many cases. Do you realize how many children have been shot and killed for brandishing toy weapons because of your bullshit? Because a cop was more fucking worried about himself. That's what your shit means. It's shameful and disgusting, and as someone who has seen where this road ends, fucking reconsider. Get a desk job. SOMETHING. You should not be the one with a gun strapped to your hip.
[QUOTE=areolop;35869089]We're done here. Mod's please Lock and DDT this thing[/QUOTE] That doesn't magically happen because you realize you're acting creepy. Look, you just did it again. [QUOTE=areolop;35869089]Officers dont like using their guns because that could mean the end of their career and thats why they use tasers.[/QUOTE] How a sane cop thinks: You use a taser when progression of force necessitates it. How it sounds like you think: You use a taser when you'd like to shoot somebody but don't want to get fired. You really, [I]really[/I] need to stop reacting and think something through and then post that calmly, because this is getting uncomfortable.
[QUOTE=Lankist;35869168]Your job is to arrest, not to kill. Shooting people is the antithesis to protection. Innocent until proven guilty. Lethal force is an ABSOLUTE last resort, and is completely unacceptable in many cases. Do you realize how many children have been shot and killed for brandishing toy weapons because of your bullshit? Because a cop was more fucking worried about himself. That's what your shit means. It's shameful and disgusting, and as someone who has seen where this road ends, fucking reconsider. Get a desk job. SOMETHING. You should not be the one with a gun strapped to your hip.[/QUOTE] So do you actually disagree with what he said? Is it unreasonable for an officer to shoot an individual who is an immediate danger of harming another with deadly force? In your idealistic view, what is the 'rational response' to that situation?
[QUOTE=Lankist;35869168][1][B]Your job is to arrest, not to kill.[/B] [2] Lethal force is an ABSOLUTE last resort, and is completely unacceptable in many cases. Do you realize how many children have been shot and killed for brandishing toy weapons because of your bullshit? Because a cop was more fucking worried about himself. [/QUOTE] [1] Its not an officers job to arrest, its their job to keep the peace. [2]You do know, police do not actually respond to cime that they report. They respond to 911 calls from people in the community who spot suspicious activity. If your saying that toy-guns dont look like real ones, then we have another issue here. Cops have to make split-second decisions that may or may-not save their lives. [U]If a police officer cannot protect his own life, how can he protect another's?[/U]
[QUOTE=areolop;35869193][1] Its not an officers job to arrest, its their job to keep the peace. [2]You do know, police do not actually respond to cime that they report. They respond to 911 calls from people in the community who spot suspicious activity. If your saying that toy-guns dont look like real ones, then we have another issue here. Cops have to make split-second decisions that may or may-not save their lives. [U]If a police officer cannot protect his own life, how can he protect another's?[/U][/QUOTE] Or you don't fucking shoot children on suspicion. Your suspicion is not fucking good enough. Do you even know how many children have died for no reason because of your suspicion? In situations where no shots had been fired, no bystanders injured, and no confirmation of an actual weapon in play, and a cop makes that split-second decision? And he makes the wrong one? You take the risks. You do not shoot first and ask questions later. You are not Dirty Fucking Harry. [editline]7th May 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=Monkey Arms;35869188]So do you actually disagree with what he said? Is it unreasonable for an officer to shoot an individual who is an immediate danger of harming another with deadly force? In your idealistic view, what is the 'rational response' to that situation?[/QUOTE] Provably dangerous. Suspicion is not enough. Verbal threats in conjunction with brandishing a firearm at [I]civilians[/I] is justification. Shots-fired in any circumstance is justification. That is my opinion. Precedence disagrees. A 911 call of a toddler with a water gun is not. And when cops care more about their own safety, those kids die. And no amount of investigation nor charges against the officer will ever let that kid grow up. This is why you take the risk to confirm, to reason and to understand. If you don't, innocent people suffer for the sake of your safety as an officer. It may not be popular. It sure as shit isn't how police do things. But it goddamn well should be.
[QUOTE=Lankist;35869221] Provably dangerous. Suspicion is not enough. Verbal threats in conjunction with brandishing a firearm at [I]civilians[/I] is justification. Shots-fired in any circumstance is justification. A 911 call of a toddler with a water gun is not. And when cops care more about their own safety, those kids die.[/QUOTE] It's impossible to conduct a logical argument with you when you're not even specifically responding to points being made.
[QUOTE=Monkey Arms;35869267]It's impossible to conduct a logical argument with you when you're not even specifically responding to points being made.[/QUOTE] The answer was yes, with elaboration. Post also edited to reflect that it is my own personal, ideological opinion, and not supported by our current system.
[QUOTE=Lankist;35869277]The answer was yes, with elaboration.[/QUOTE] Yes to which question? (take a look, there were three)
[QUOTE=Lankist;35869221] A 911 call of a toddler with a water gun is not. And when cops care more about their own safety, those kids die. And no amount of investigation nor charges against the officer will ever let that kid grow up. This is why you take the risk to confirm, to reason and to understand. If you don't, innocent people suffer for the sake of your safety as an officer. It may not be popular. It sure as shit isn't how police do things. But it goddamn well should be.[/QUOTE] No one is going to shoot a toddler, especially with a water-gun. What is wrong with you
[QUOTE=Monkey Arms;35869290]Yes to which question? (take a look, there were three)[/QUOTE] All of them. Cops using lethal force is unreasonable except in X scenarios, which is my personal stance and not the stance of the law as it stands today. Do you want a bulleted list? [editline]7th May 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=areolop;35869301]No one is going to shoot a toddler, especially with a water-gun. What is wrong with you[/QUOTE] [url]http://www.newschannel5.com/Global/story.asp?S=6736457[/url] I can post more.
[QUOTE=areolop;35869193][1] Its not an officers job to arrest, its their job to keep the peace.[/QUOTE] That's funny, because that's not how I was taught. Any idiot can "keep the peace", we're not in some wasteland of rampant crime and only officers are capable of protecting themselves and others. The rights of citizens to basic self-defense negates the impact of citizens causing basic disturbances to "the peace" for the most part. A cop is unique in being able to detain a criminal, not take action against them.
[QUOTE=Xenocidebot;35869311]That's funny, because that's not how I was taught. Any idiot can "keep the peace", we're not in some wasteland of rampant crime and only officers are capable of protecting themselves and others. The rights of citizens to basic self-defense negates the impact of citizens causing basic disturbances to "the peace" for the most part. A cop is unique in being able to detain a criminal, not take action against them.[/QUOTE] Well, if keeping the peace means arresting someone then yes. I guess it would be their job then. But, its not their sole-job to just go around arresting everyone.
[QUOTE=Lankist;35869303] [url]http://www.newschannel5.com/Global/story.asp?S=6736457[/url] I can post more.[/QUOTE] A 12 year old is a toddler..?
Police shoot 8th grader for having a pellet gun [url]http://news.yahoo.com/texas-police-kill-8th-grader-carrying-pellet-gun-003818851.html[/url] Police shoot autistic 15-year-old for brandishing a butter knife [url]http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2012/02/01/boy-15-shot-dead-by-police-in-calumet-city/[/url] I can keep going
[QUOTE=Lankist;35869303] [url]http://www.newschannel5.com/Global/story.asp?S=6736457[/url] I can post more.[/QUOTE] [quote]The accused officer said Farrow was playing with a toy gun, which he mistook as real.[/quote] Where is this water-gun? A toy gun can look like real ones. Which is why they are required by-law to have the orange tip.
[QUOTE=Monkey Arms;35869334]A 12 year old is a toddler..?[/QUOTE] I am sticking strictly to shootings from [I]this year[/I] Water gun was a few years back. Another few years was a Wii-peripheral. These three all occurred within the first five months of 2012. This happens dozens of times every year. There are more.
[QUOTE=Lankist;35869343]Police shoot 8th grader for having a pellet gun [url]http://news.yahoo.com/texas-police-kill-8th-grader-carrying-pellet-gun-003818851.html[/url] Police shoot autistic 15-year-old for brandishing a butter knife [url]http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2012/02/01/boy-15-shot-dead-by-police-in-calumet-city/[/url] I can keep going[/QUOTE] [quote]The weapon turned out to be a pellet gun that closely resembled the real thing, police said late Wednesday, several hours after 15-year-old Jaime Gonzalez was repeatedly shot in a hallway at Cummings Middle School in Brownsville. No one else was injured.[/quote] Active threat with a deadly weapon. [quote]Calumet City Police Chief Edward Gilmore said the boy cut a police officer through his shirt sleeve with a “kitchen knife.”[/quote] Looks like a threat to me. oh, and: [quote]“I think they did everything they possibly could to avoid this,” Gilmore said. “It’s unfortunate that we had to get to this situation.”[/quote]
2010 Officer shoots 7 year old girl while police were raiding her parents' house. [url]http://www.heraldnet.com/article/20100516/NEWS02/705169829[/url] 2011 Officers accidentally shoot 2-year-old while shooting at a fleeing robbery suspect. [url]http://www.news4jax.com/news/Boy-Shot-By-Police-Remains-Critical/-/475880/2010836/-/ibtk3vz/-/index.html[/url]
Let's not mention all the times cops have shot pets that were completely harmless.
[QUOTE=areolop;35869369]Looks like a threat to me.[/QUOTE] It was a dull, non-stick butter knife. This is why you confirm.
[QUOTE=Lankist;35869374]2010 Officer shoots 7 year old girl while police were raiding her parents' house. [url]http://www.heraldnet.com/article/20100516/NEWS02/705169829[/url] 2011 Officers accidentally shoot 2-year-old while shooting at a fleeing robbery suspect. [url]http://www.news4jax.com/news/Boy-Shot-By-Police-Remains-Critical/-/475880/2010836/-/ibtk3vz/-/index.html[/url][/QUOTE] [quote]A 7-year-old girl was shot and killed when an officer’s gun went off during contact with a woman in a house where Detroit police were searching for a suspect in the slaying of a teenager, a police official said.[/quote] A stray bullet - Accidents Happen. Police accuracy when discharging their weapon while in fight are damn near 0. Shit happens. Its sad, but it happened.
[QUOTE=areolop;35869417]A stray bullet - Accidents Happen. Police accuracy when discharging their weapon while in fight are damn near 0. Shit happens. Its sad, but it happened.[/QUOTE] You can take your accuracy and shove it up your ass. It doesn't bring a two year old boy back to life. You don't fucking shoot people. You dismiss this shit so easily. "Accidents happen." No, they don't. Not when you don't fucking shoot first and ask questions later.
[QUOTE=Lankist;35869393]It was a dull, non-stick butter knife. This is why you confirm.[/QUOTE] A butter knife that cut through a uniform sleeve? Thats no butter-knife.
[QUOTE=areolop;35869429]A butter knife that cut through a uniform sleeve? Thats no butter-knife.[/QUOTE] I can see a butter knife being able to cut someone with enough force. It's definitely possible.
[QUOTE=Protocol7;35869436]I can see a butter knife being able to cut someone with enough force. It's definitely possible.[/QUOTE] So, would it be far to say that the officer acted on instinct and protected himself?
[QUOTE=areolop;35869454]So, would it be far to say that the officer acted on instinct and protected himself?[/QUOTE] We don't know that. It's more likely the officer thought the blade was dangerous and acted in self-defense. In a quick situation you can't really determine if a blade is safe or not, although a butter knife should be pretty easy to identify.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.