CCW holder killed reaching for ID.

blutoski said:
Yes, but notice, at this instant, you have stopped obeying his last order (fetch the ID) so you have given him reason to regard you as a threat, visually.
Click to expand...

No you say what you're doing first and ask if it's OK ... for example I used to keep my wallet in my tool box so i would not lose it climbing in the steel (when I worked in construction)

If the LEO says "Let's see some ID" I would not immediately jump over the seat and open a steel box in the back of the van.

I would say, "No problem sir, it's locked in my tool box in the back , shall I go to the back doors to get it now?"
 
blutoski said:
Yep. That's why I like the analogy. Neither has central leadership, they disagree among themselves on practically everything &c. What's good for the goose is good for the gander, is what I'm saying. But only if people want to be consistent.
Click to expand...

So you are saying most muslims are covering up the wrongful actions of fellow muslims, like most police cover up the wrongful acts of fellow cops?
 
Yeggster said:
No you say what you're doing first and ask if it's OK ... for example I used to keep my wallet in my tool box so i would not lose it climbing in the steel (when I worked in construction)

If the LEO says "Let's see some ID" I would not immediately jump over the seat and open a steel box in the back of the van.

I would say, "No problem sir, it's locked in my tool box in the back , shall I go to the back doors to get it now?"
Click to expand...

Exactly you have to treat all cops as is they are trigger happy crack heads. There really is no distinction in how one needs to behave in an arrest or a mugging as they are functionally identical.
 
ponderingturtle said:
Exactly you have to treat all cops as is they are trigger happy crack heads. There really is no distinction in how one needs to behave in an arrest or a mugging as they are functionally identical.
Click to expand...

The protocols I posted are recommended and taught at CCW classes in the US.

I don't see the need for the hyperbole ...
 
Dr.Sid said:
I wonder how many cops get shot during stops like these .. I guess there are cases here and then, but I doubt it's as frighteningly high number ..
Click to expand...

Quick check ... about one cop per month is shot during traffic stops, just in the US ...
 
lobosrul said:
Good for you. Do you think its acceptable to be shot if you reach for your ID too quickly? I've been pulled over exactly once; I was nervous and jumpy as hell and couldn't find my insurance in my wallet. Glad the cop didn't assume I had a gun in the center console when I opened it fishing for it (ETA: which is actually perfectly legal here without a license) . I recall him looking a bit nervous when I did though.
Click to expand...

I knew a (white) man who was shot and killed by a police officer when he was reaching for his ID. His three boys (about my age) were in the car. Granted, this was 40 years ago, but it's not always about race.

However, in this case I think it was a large factor.
 
Yeggster said:
Quick check ... about one cop per month is shot during traffic stops, just in the US ...
Click to expand...

Given there are 900,000 sworn LEO's in the US that's a rate of 1.33 per 100,000 per year. Hardly justification to shoot people if they believe they just might be reaching for a gun.
 
Last edited:
lobosrul said:
Given there are 900,000 sworn LEO's in the US that's a rate of 1.33 per 100,000 per year. Hardly justification to shoot people if they believe they just might be reaching for a gun.
Click to expand...

Consider the possibility that there are relatively few shootings of this nature, not because it isn't dangerous, but because specific training (S.T.O.P.S.) greatly reduces the number of these occurrences.
 
lionking said:
You of all people should recognise deliberate hyperbole when you see it.

The police here were poorly trained cowboys.

I've said it time and time again. The biggest problem with policing in the US is the vast number of police forces, each with different standards of recruitment, training and policy setting. A "force" of a hundred police can't have the same standards as the Met, the RCMP or state forces of 15,000+ in Australia.

Small forces have small mindsets and poor training. Leading to stupid events like this. Amalgamate US forces. Have state forces. Learn from others. For one of the very rare times.
Click to expand...

Indeed.

http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/csllea08.pdf



About 8,800 state and local law enforcement agencies (49% of the total) employed fewer than 10 full-time sworn personnel, and about 5,400 (30%) employed fewer than 5 officers. Among these smaller agencies, about 2,100 (12%) had just one full-time officer or had part-time officers only
Click to expand...

The 2008 CSLLEA included 17,985 state and local law enforcement agencies employing at least one full-time officer or the equivalent in part-time officers. The total included—
„
12,501 local police departments
„
3,063 sheriffs’ offices
„
50 primary state law enforcement
agencies
„
1,733 special jurisdiction agencies
„
638 other agencies, primarily county
constable offices in Texas.
Click to expand...

In comparison, the smallest police force in the UK is the Civil Nuclear Constabulary with 750 officers and an obvious highly specialised role.

There are 45 territorial police forces in the UK and 3 special police forces (including the aforementioned Civil Nuclear Constabulary).

There have been discussions as to whether some of these territorial forces are too small for efficiencies of scale.

A 5-person police force lacks the oversight that a larger one could have. It also seems an environment that could be conducive for small-scale corruption.
 
Pterodactyl said:
Consider the possibility that there are relatively few shootings of this nature, not because it isn't dangerous, but because specific training (S.T.O.P.S.) greatly reduces the number of these occurrences.
Click to expand...

I don't doubt proper training has reduced police deaths. There were 123 LEO's killed in the line of duty last year compared to an average of 162 a year in the 1990's (those figures include traffic accidents), despite there being more police now.

What does that training consist of? Googling S.T.O.P.S. is not helpful. I hope they're not trained to shoot at the mere belief that maybe the driver was reaching for a gun when he said he was getting his wallet.

Source: http://www.nleomf.org/facts/enforcement/
 
lobosrul said:
Given there are 900,000 sworn LEO's in the US that's a rate of 1.33 per 100,000 per year. Hardly justification to shoot people if they believe they just might be reaching for a gun.
Click to expand...

I could only make that judgement if I was in the situation ...

I'm sure the "statistically low probability of death" is not what's going through anyone's mind when they fear they may be shot.

Some of this could be well served by more technology .... its WAY cheaper than the lawsuits resulting.

If it was the poor kids car the officer should KNOW with ZERO effort the guy has a carry permit (license plate scan, on computer, shows his info)

Cops in Ontario have had a notice on their computer screens by default (once your plate number is entered) that alerts them if the vehicle's registee simply even OWNS a handgun ... since at least the early the 1990's

Many recent cruisers scan plates automatically too (although I don't know if it's planned for all cruisers here)
 
jimbob said:
Indeed.

http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/csllea08.pdf







In comparison, the smallest police force in the UK is the Civil Nuclear Constabulary with 750 officers and an obvious highly specialised role.

There are 45 territorial police forces in the UK and 3 special police forces (including the aforementioned Civil Nuclear Constabulary).

There have been discussions as to whether some of these territorial forces are too small for efficiencies of scale.

A 5-person police force lacks the oversight that a larger one could have. It also seems an environment that could be conducive for small-scale corruption.
Click to expand...

Yup and little towns use them as revenue generation. One town in Colorado was pulling over people for having obstructed windshields and writing them a ticket. The obstruction was sometimes as small as a 3"x3" parking pass sticker.
 
The guy was not shot by a white cop. Nevertheless, it is still indicative of a problem.

(eta) and they "had some weed in the car", according to the woman. Not that that should make a bit of difference but I'm sure some factions are going to pounce on that. Details emerge.
 
Last edited:
lobosrul said:
I don't doubt proper training has reduced police deaths. There were 123 LEO's killed in the line of duty last year compared to an average of 162 a year in the 1990's (those figures include traffic accidents), despite there being more police now.

What does that training consist of? Googling S.T.O.P.S. is not helpful. I hope they're not trained to shoot at the mere belief that maybe the driver was reaching for a gun when he said he was getting his wallet.

Source: http://www.nleomf.org/facts/enforcement/
Click to expand...

It is basically just tactics to safely approach and deal with a stopped vehicle.

It most certainly doesnt train people to shoot at motorists reaching for their wallets, but it does teach tactics to keep a officer out of the line of fire.
I'm not making a comment on this officer's specific actions, just that with the proliferation of gun ownership (legal or otherwise), the general attitude (even in these threads, and maybe not wholly unjustified) of the public toward police, it is indeed dangerous business.
 
ponderingturtle said:
So you are saying most muslims are covering up the wrongful actions of fellow muslims, like most police cover up the wrongful acts of fellow cops?
Click to expand...

I don't think most police cover up the wrongful acts of fellow cops, no.

The 'fellow traveller' argument is that one does not have to be involved in the original bad act to be held accountable by association. That the only way to prove one is morally right is to immediately and publicly cease affiliation. In the religious context, the advocates of this POV say they will be satisfied if the person publicly denounces her religion. In the police context, this would mean an officer quitting his job.
 
blutoski said:
I don't think most police cover up the wrongful acts of fellow cops, no.

The 'fellow traveller' argument is that one does not have to be involved in the original bad act to be held accountable by association. That the only way to prove one is morally right is to immediately and publicly cease affiliation. In the religious context, the advocates of this POV say they will be satisfied if the person publicly denounces her religion. In the police context, this would mean an officer quitting his job.
Click to expand...

I don't think the two are analogous. not that I think either is a valid claim;

'signing up to' a religion means you are signing up to a doctrine of morals or whatever, and it is pretty demonstrable that these doctrines are ethically screwed up, and also that most adherents don't actually follow what their book etc says but tend to just take the socially and morally acceptable and leave the rest, pretty much according to the century or decade, and some of them actually take it way too seriously and do some deeply wrong stuff, but that isn't actually all that at odds with what their doctrines state

signing up to be a police officer, whether or not that is the actual motivation for every single individual, is signing up to uphold the moral doctrines of society, and some of them do some deeply wrong stuff that is completely at odds with the stated doctrines...

ETA:

I think the key difference is, there were some actually pretty bad 'doctrines' with regards to policing, but when they updated them, they got rid of the old ones.

Religions never do this. They just have some collective understanding that they ignore certain parts. Probably why it gets such bad results sometimes, the cognitive dissonance must be a strain
 
Last edited:
AdamSK said:
The cop told him not to reach for anything. He reached for something. He got shot. No sympathy.
Click to expand...

Even assuming this was a justified shooting, what happened is a tragedy and very much deserving of sympathy. This cop, if he's a decent person, will carry this with him the rest of his life, and the guy who was shot was apparently doing nothing more than reaching for his I.D., which normally isn't a death sentence.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom