• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Police shoots 13 year old kid when he raises his arms in air.

Twilight Hue

Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
Or....
Their training should be several years, rather than several months.
Something. Risk assessment is notably lacking.


I mean the kid was running away! He was not pointing a gun at any officer. He stopped and did a common sense and smart move by surrendering and holding hands in the air. How could that be interpreted as any mortal threat?

A well trained officer in risk assessment would at that point ordered a felony spread and the kid would be in juv hall.
 

Koldo

Outstanding Member

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
But tazer lady not only had 26 yrs experience but also trained others, I think I read.
I'm betting she had 26 years experience of not knowing what she's doing.
How much training did she receive in order to be a trainer? Quality?
Consider this guy....
Shooting of Justine Damond - Wikipedia
He had 7 months of training...insufficient for a license to kill.
He also had a troubling record, showing a propensity
to assault & threaten civilians.
It doesn't appear that the system weeds out the bad cops,
& it doesn't adequately train any of them, given their fear
of the populace, & over-reaction to any perceived threat.
They're just too eager to shoot to kill.
 

Estro Felino

Believer in free will
Premium Member
The second website is unavailable to Europeans.


Btw...I think there should be a special training for police officers as for the use of firearms.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
Something. Risk assessment is notably lacking.


I mean the kid was running away! He was not pointing a gun at any officer. He stopped and did a common sense and smart move by surrendering and holding hands in the air. How could that be interpreted as any mortal threat?

A well trained officer in risk assessment would at that point ordered a felony spread and the kid would be in juv hall.
It appears that shooting to kill is a decision too easily made.
This tells me that cops aren't well enuf trained to manage their
emotions, or to employ non-violent options. They appear to
have instilled a deep fear of civilians....we're the enemy, &
all out to kill them.
BTW, police work isn't even in the top 10 most dangerous jobs.
 

Twilight Hue

Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
I don't see how it could be possible to disarm the police when the general population is armed to their teeth.
I like Norways system. They have a huge hunting population and gun control together.

Maybe a custom made system could be drafted based on Norway as a template that preserves the second amendment and offers adequate gun regulation in a bipartisan way.

Norwegians love their guns as much as Americans.
 

Twilight Hue

Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
The second website is unavailable to Europeans.


Btw...I think there should be a special training for police officers as for the use of firearms.
Not just training but persistent and routine qualifications. The military does that, the police should as well.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
Here's an interesting case. Authorities say that this
shooting was justified & done according to training.
But looking at the video, the cop was playing a game
of Simons Says, ie, many confusing commands with
a single error meaning a loss...in this game, death.
Cops are trained to do this...provoke & then execute
an unarmed guy.

Another problem is that the cop who executed Shaver
appeared to be hostile towards civilians, & was looking
for a kill. Such people should never be given a badge,
& if such tendencies are discovered, they should be
immediately fired. But instead, they're protected.
Shooting of Daniel Shaver - Wikipedia
Excerpted....
An internal investigation report revealed that Brailsford had violated department weapon policy by engraving his patrol rifle with the phrases "You're ****ed" and "Molon labe" (a Greek expression meaning "come and take them").[31][32] Brailsford had also previously been investigated for body slamming a teenager during an arrest.[33]
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
It was relevant in the 18th/19th Centuries but now ..?
We still value things like freedom of speech, freedom
of religion, the right to a jury trial, etc, etc.
And yes, the right to bear arms.
I don't trust our government to operate without the
constraints imposed by the Constitution. Would you
have given Trump the ability to do anything he wants?
I wouldn't.
 

Stevicus

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member

Stevicus

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
It appears that shooting to kill is a decision too easily made.
This tells me that cops aren't well enuf trained to manage their
emotions, or to employ non-violent options. They appear to
have instilled a deep fear of civilians....we're the enemy, &
all out to kill them.
BTW, police work isn't even in the top 10 most dangerous jobs.

A lot of people keep talking about how cops need more training and see incidents like these as an indicator that their training must be lacking in some way. It seems what you're referring to is more of a psychological training, not more training on the mechanics of how to use a firearm, since they seem to have that down pretty well.

They may have a deep fear of civilians, but where do you suppose this comes from? Every time one of these incidents happen, they are often ostensibly justified because the police officer "thought" his/her life was in danger and had no other choice. Where do they think they are? The jungles of Vietnam?

Another problem seems to rest in the philosophy that "we must pursue and arrest these petty criminals at all costs." They apparently believe that we can't let anything go - every single violation of the law must be dealt with, as if they're a bunch of anal-retentive morons who have lost all sense of perspective. They're just like Constable Alvin Adams in the movie "Death Hunt":


Sergeant Edgar Millen : Let me give you a little advice, kid. Just throw those law books away, huh? It's better to turn your eyes and let them fight their damn dogs. Damn sight better than them killin' each other.

Constable Alvin Adams : But you can't let people get away with that - makin' up their own laws.

Sergeant Edgar Millen : The only thing to remember is Millen's Law. You want to stay a Mountie, then all you have to do is keep headquarters happy, huh? 'Cause the only time they're unhappy is when there's an unaccounted for killing. So if you account for all the killings, you live to be a nice, ripe old Mountie just like me. You got that?


The line from Adams here "But you can't let people get away with that - makin' up their own laws," that's a philosophical position taken by police departments. That, in and of itself, is the core of the problem. And that's exactly what they're trained to believe. Unless they change that part of the training, then "more training" will not do a lick of good.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
A lot of people keep talking about how cops need more training and see incidents like these as an indicator that their training must be lacking in some way. It seems what you're referring to is more of a psychological training, not more training on the mechanics of how to use a firearm, since they seem to have that down pretty well.
Yes, more training on how to handle themselves & the situations
they encounter. Also, cops tend to be weak on knowing the rights
of civilians....seeming to be all about fearing & fighting us, rather
than protecting anyone but other cops.
They may have a deep fear of civilians, but where do you suppose this comes from? Every time one of these incidents happen, they are often ostensibly justified because the police officer "thought" his/her life was in danger and had no other choice. Where do they think they are? The jungles of Vietnam?
3 problems...
1) Their culture of "us against them", ie, civilians are a
threat, & therefore the enemy.
2) TV shows make their job look more dangerous than it
really is. Cops have an irrational fear of us.
3) Their culture of being "heroes", & above the rest of us.
Another problem seems to rest in the philosophy that "we must pursue and arrest these petty criminals at all costs." They apparently believe that we can't let anything go - every single violation of the law must be dealt with, as if they're a bunch of anal-retentive morons who have lost all sense of perspective. They're just like Constable Alvin Adams in the movie "Death Hunt":
I've also run into the other side of that coin, ie, cops who
just can't be bothered to address any petty crime.
Sergeant Edgar Millen : Let me give you a little advice, kid. Just throw those law books away, huh? It's better to turn your eyes and let them fight their damn dogs. Damn sight better than them killin' each other.

Constable Alvin Adams : But you can't let people get away with that - makin' up their own laws.

Sergeant Edgar Millen : The only thing to remember is Millen's Law. You want to stay a Mountie, then all you have to do is keep headquarters happy, huh? 'Cause the only time they're unhappy is when there's an unaccounted for killing. So if you account for all the killings, you live to be a nice, ripe old Mountie just like me. You got that?


The line from Adams here "But you can't let people get away with that - makin' up their own laws," that's a philosophical position taken by police departments. That, in and of itself, is the core of the problem. And that's exactly what they're trained to believe. Unless they change that part of the training, then "more training" will not do a lick of good.
Of course, by "more training", I'm proposing that it be better.
Not a continuation of the status quo....
"When angry in doubt, kill the ************* civilian".
 
Top