Cops Stand Down...

[Neo Deist]

Let me ask something, if those 99.5% of police were on the scene during this shooting, in your honest opinion, would they have pulled out their weapon and gunned down Officer Slager to protect the guy running away?

You would have to ask them that question. My answer is pure speculation.

Having said that, if multiple officers are on the scene, a suspect is controlled more easily. It also lessens the likelihood in the use of deadly force. It is not that they would have gunned down the officer, but that it would have never gotten to that point.

There are cases where an officer calls off the other officers on the scene because they realize those officers are wrong.

 

[Deathbydefault]

I am not particularly big on this issue.
All I know is that it could be worse.
Our cops could be the "cops" in southern Mexico.
That might be a bit too far though...

Regardless, many cops realize that they are in some sort of a position of power.
We all know what happens when normal people get put in a position of power.
Abuse of that power.

They are normal people after all, the only difference between them and many of us is a career choice.
That's not my concern though, I care little for violent tendencies among police officers.

So when one gets a bit too violent with someone or accidentally shots a guy for legitimate reasons.
Such as the guy they pull over quickly sticks his hands under their car seat.
That could be interpreted as reaching for a gun, I would shoot the guy too.
Many people don't realize the decision making process until they're forced to make the decision.

I don't understand why they don't just outfit all the officers with shoulder cameras.
It would make life so much easier for the police force.

I believe some statistic I saw somewhere said that like 80% of the USA police force has abused their power.
Not just a couple times but repeatedly.
Don't know if I believe it or not though, statics tend to cherry-pick their variables.

'Spose that's all I had to say.
Peace.

 

[Neo Deist]

Many people don't realize the decision making process until they're forced to make the decision.

Therein lies the problem with most non-LEOs that like to run off at the mouth. They don't have a clue what they are talking about as they have never been in the split second decision situations cops see on a daily basis.

I don't understand why they don't just outfit all the officers with shoulder cameras.
It would make life so much easier for the police force.

Our P.D. uses shoulder cameras. People still try and complain or file false reports even though the audio/video shows a completely different story.

I am 100% behind every cop in the nation wearing a body camera while on duty.

 

[Deathbydefault]

Therein lies the problem with most non-LEOs that like to run off at the mouth. They don't have a clue what they are talking about as they have never been in the split second decision situations cops see on a daily basis.



Our P.D. uses shoulder cameras. People still try and complain or file false reports even though the audio/video shows a completely different story.

I am 100% behind every cop in the nation wearing a body camera while on duty.

I support your support

 

[philbo]

There are roughly ~1 million LEOs in the US.

99.5% of those LEOs will NEVER have to fire their weapons in the line of duty.

Only .5% (or roughly 5,000) will engage in a gunfight or have to fire at a threat, and of those only a small handful are actually "illegal" shootings. If a cop does an illegal shooting (such as Officer Michael Slager) then YES, they deserve to go to prison.

I'd like to know where you get your statistics, and whether you're comparing like with like: while there are in excess of a million law enforcement officers, most of these aren't police. As for the number who have to use their firearm, that sounds unfeasibly low given the number of people shot per annum (but as these statistics don't appear to be officially recorded, it's rather hard to be sure).

That police today are taking a lot of flak, probably more than they deserve right now but IMHO not disproportionately, has a lot to do with old habits not catching up with modern technology: historically there have always been policment who've thrown their weight around, bullied and abused their power. The reaction of their colleagues and the authorities to this being discovered has typically been to cover up and pretend it didn't happen. Today that reaction is not just useless, it's positively counterproductive as evidence of misbehaviour is so swiftly propagated.

We, the public, need to understand that individual police officers do make honest mistakes & not indulge our lynch party mentality when mistakes are made.. though the police need to acknowledge when things go wrong, rather than pretending that they haven't or it was all the other guy's fault.

This isn't only happening in the US, there has been a similar erosion of trust in the police here for very similar reasons. Though not quite as extreme, helped by most UK police not being armed & so far less likely to shoot the wrong person.

But trust, once lost, takes an awful lot of work to get back. Sulking in ones car isn't exactly conducive to that.

 

[dust1n]

In the wake of public scrutiny, outcry and lawsuits, police officers across the USA are standing down on the job. In other words, they are not doing anything except showing up for work, clocking in, and sitting in their patrol cars. Crime rates are starting to soar because the criminals know that they have a larger window of opportunity.

Police officers have an extremely difficult job to do. They have to make split second decisions based on what they observe in that moment. Everyone else can take days or weeks to sit back, scrutinize and armchair quarterback those decisions. Police are often hated, assaulted, shot at by criminals and betrayed by the very department they work for in order for the department to "save face" in the public eye. More times than not, police officers are judged in the "Court of Public Opinion" long before the facts of a case are even known.

Crime rates peaked in 1991 and have been going down ever since, more or less.

United States Crime Rates1960 - 2013

"Did you know that according to official FBI and U.S. Department of Justice reports, the rates of violent crime in the U.S. are now at their lowest level in 40 years? Did you know that violent crime rates of 2010 were 1/3 the rates of 1994? Other countries are experiencing a similar decline. And deaths of law enforcement officers are at their lowest in 50 years according to this Boston Globe article."

FBI Statistics: Major Violent Crime Rate's Dramatic Reduction

Many people hate a cop simply because he wears a badge. He could be the most courteous, lenient and understanding officer you'll ever meet, but they don't care. He is a cop, and all cops are corrupt, evil tools of a system of oppression. Sigh.

Many people hate homosexuals simply because they are attracted to a member of the opposite sex, etc. Unjustified hate is never a great thing. Cops are people and deserve the same recognition of complexity as any other person.

There are roughly ~1 million LEOs in the US.

99.5% of those LEOs will NEVER have to fire their weapons in the line of duty.

Only .5% (or roughly 5,000) will engage in a gunfight or have to fire at a threat, and of those only a small handful are actually "illegal" shootings. If a cop does an illegal shooting (such as Officer Michael Slager) then YES, they deserve to go to prison.

Tis is true, though I suspect many people's perceptions of police officers relies on impressions they get from interactions, even when not illegal shot. Or, in other worlds, if one acts unnecessarily like a douche, people are going to think that person is a douche.

But when you paint all cops in a negative light, constantly complain about them, the media constantly running with a story despite the facts to the contrary, and the Mayor's Office telling the Police Chief "we need more revenue...write more tickets and make more arrests" only to burn the cops when something happens...

...it is no wonder that cops are saying to hell with it.

As long as there has been criminal cultures, there is going to be aggrandizement of police distrust. I don't think people hate cops as much as for some reason people seem to think they do. I do think it's an issue for revenue quotas, and things like civil forfeiture where police can just take any material possession without charging a crime, but just suspecting one.

 

[Nakosis]

In the wake of public scrutiny, outcry and lawsuits, police officers across the USA are standing down on the job. In other words, they are not doing anything except showing up for work, clocking in, and sitting in their patrol cars. Crime rates are starting to soar because the criminals know that they have a larger window of opportunity.

It's the job they accepted.
I've known good cops and bad cops. Unfortunately the bad cops hide behind the same authority the good cops have.

This is not going to go well. It's not going to make the police any more favorable to the public. Unfortunately you've got to take the crap and still do the job like a professional. Or it's not the job for you.

 

[oldbadger]

Ok.

I am a member of the Libertarian Society.

Ok.....
I'm a member of the Studdhill Moonlight Frolickers.
But the point is this, I have a reasonably held belief that folks who can signal to 'in' cops can get preferential treatment. Our London Met Police had a very very bad press during the 60's, doing some very very naughty things..... most corrupt.
Look up the film on dvd 'the bank job' with Jason Stratham in it. That is a true story and utterly gobsmacking.

Now.......... I read that many of your forces are riddled with secret society members. It's not funny..... it's utterly corrupt if they give preference to other members. Now decide on what you think about human nature in general, and the rest will just fall into place.

PS: But it don't beat some of naughtier members of the Studdhill Moonlight Frolickers. Lord Almighty!
When's the next full moon?

 

[Quintessence]

Is there a source for this claim?

I'm going going to repeat this, @The Deist . Until you can substantiate the claims made in the OP - and they're pretty darned specific ones - I'm inclined to ignore everything you said in the OP as mere hearsay and rhetoric.

 

[freethinker44]

You would have to ask them that question. My answer is pure speculation.

Having said that, if multiple officers are on the scene, a suspect is controlled more easily. It also lessens the likelihood in the use of deadly force. It is not that they would have gunned down the officer, but that it would have never gotten to that point.

There are cases where an officer calls off the other officers on the scene because they realize those officers are wrong.

No, I mean it happens exactly the same way except this time one of those 99.5% of officers are running up in time to see, but not help, everything we saw in the video of the shooting. And this isn't that far fetched, if the second officer on the scene after the shooting had arrived a minute earlier he would have been in exactly this situation.

So, just based on your pure speculation, do you believe that if other officer had been any of those 99.5%, would they have used deadly force against Officer Slager to prevent the shooting?

 

[Neo Deist]

I'm going going to repeat this, @The Deist . Until you can substantiate the claims made in the OP - and they're pretty darned specific ones - I'm inclined to ignore everything you said in the OP as mere hearsay and rhetoric.

Go ahead, but my numbers are accurate.

5,000 cops (or .5%) = averages to 100 shootings allotted per state. Some states have no shootings. Most states don't even approach 100 shootings. The bigger, most commonly mentioned cities are the ones where a majority of the shootings take place. Think about it...how many times has a place like Ashville, AL. or Plano, TX. been in the news or on social media because of a LEO involved shooting? More times than not, it is a place like LA, NY, Chicago, Miami, etc.

Some people WANT all police to be evil and corrupt, but the truth is it simply is not so.

 

[Neo Deist]

No, I mean it happens exactly the same way except this time one of those 99.5% of officers are running up in time to see, but not help, everything we saw in the video of the shooting. And this isn't that far fetched, if the second officer on the scene after the shooting had arrived a minute earlier he would have been in exactly this situation.

So, just based on your pure speculation, do you believe that if other officer had been any of those 99.5%, would they have used deadly force against Officer Slager to prevent the shooting?

I can only speak for myself. I can't stand a corrupt cop. I would have stopped him in that hypothetical, no other option scenario you gave.

 

[psychoslice]

OP brings up that they don't feel loved any more.

Well perhaps its not only the fault of the civilians.

Yea I suppose we all have to blame someone.

 

[freethinker44]

I can only speak for myself. I can't stand a corrupt cop. I would have stopped him in that hypothetical, no other option scenario you gave.

You know, let's skip all of this back and forth with hypothetical situations where you try to interpret the question so you can have your cake and eat it too, and then I rephrase it to exclude those special circumstances, let's be honest, if we had to place a bet on whether or not an officer would kill another officer to save someone running away, the safe bet would be no, they wouldn't. Right? The problem with police, and any corrupt authority in general, isn't the 0.5% that are corrupt, it's the 99.5% that allow them to be. If police continue with this "brotherhood"/gang mentality, then as long as there are some bad cops, there are no good cops.

 

[Neo Deist]

You know, let's skip all of this back and forth with hypothetical situations where you try to interpret the question so you can have your cake and eat it too, and then I rephrase it to exclude those special circumstances, let's be honest, if we had to place a bet on whether or not an officer would kill another officer to save someone running away, the safe bet would be no, they wouldn't. Right? The problem with police, and any corrupt authority in general, isn't the 0.5% that are corrupt, it's the 99.5% that allow them to be. If police continue with this "brotherhood"/gang mentality, then as long as there are some bad cops, there are no good cops.

 

[philbo]

Go ahead, but my numbers are accurate.

You use this word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

"Estimate" would be closer; "guess" would be closer still.

You haven't shown you're comparing like with like: that the shooting numbers you use cover all million-plus law enforcement officers or just state police; you're obviously using per annum figures for shooting and inferring from that an absolute number. You're kind of new to this game of using numbers, aren't you?

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

Cops in all countries tend to get the respect that they earn.
Respect does not come as part of the job like a uniform.
Respect is very easily lost and hard to win.

If police defend their own, in preference to defending the public or the individual,
they lose all respect.

If they defend the bad apples, they are all seen in the same light.

Perhaps American Cops should spend some time in the UK working in the toughest spots and unarmed.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Many people hate a cop simply because he wears a badge.

I will criticize them for driving drunk while on duty and killing another motorist. I will criticize them for threatening to shoot people, including the mayor, for not getting a day off. I will criticize them for tasing an elderly man with Alzheimer's. I will criticize them for searching just to search. I will criticize them for being bullies with a badge.

 

[Neo Deist]

I will criticize them for driving drunk while on duty and killing another motorist. I will criticize them for threatening to shoot people, including the mayor, for not getting a day off. I will criticize them for tasing an elderly man with Alzheimer's. I will criticize them for searching just to search. I will criticize them for being bullies with a badge.

Me too.

 

[Quintessence]

Go ahead, but my numbers are accurate.

If your numbers are accurate, you should have no difficulty pointing us to an actual source or study demonstrating them to be the case. Claims in the OP that have yet to be evidenced with any sort of proper statistical analysis:

1) Police officers across the United States are refusing to do their job while on the job
2) Crime rates for all types of crimes (as you didn't specify any particular type of crime) are on the increase
3) Generously assuming 1 & 2 are correct, that criminals somehow know that 1 is the case and that is the prime causal factor in 2 (this would have to be demonstrated)

The crap about gunfight statistics I don't care about. It is common sense knowledge that police responses involving firearms are rare. What I'm balking at is this baseless claim in that first paragraph.