How far will the excuses to shoot go?

[TragicMonkey]

In my self-defense training, which consists entirely of watching the ABC After School Special on angel dust featuring Scott Baio and or Helen Hunt, you don't want to take on a drugged up wrestler with pepper spray or a baton. YMMV.

Yeah, Helen Hunt beat the crap out of Baio. Thank goodness Nancy McKeon was there to bring her down with that bazooka.

 

[TragicMonkey]

Show me and I will try and clear the matter up for you.

I'll do so when I get home, I can't multiquote from my phone.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

I don't think that term means what you think it means.

Why, because you don't realize you made a straw argument up?

Here, let me help you:

Why is this:

"If he felt his life was in danger then yes, he should have removed hiself from the situation until help arrived. Instead of killing someone."​

Not the same as this:

"Why have cops at all if they're supposed to just run away from danger?"​

Because "run away from danger" is not the same as "removed hiself from the situation until help arrived" even though you apparently think it is.

 

[Dan O.]

The only problem is, nobody has ever given any reasonable actions for things that could have been 'done better'.

********.

 

[carlitos]

Yeah, Helen Hunt beat the crap out of Baio. Thank goodness Nancy McKeon was there to bring her down with that bazooka.

Mmm...Nancy McKeon.

If an officer "removes himself from a situation" and a deranged wrestler goes on to eat someone's face, who would be at fault?

 

[Dan O.]

Just like you would if you had somepne pointing a gun at you and telling you to dance.

Except no one was doing that.

Ooh, a claim. Care to back that up? Where's your evidence??

But if lies are all that's left in your arsenal...

What lies are you talking about? Is that a personal attack?

 

[Nessie]

I'll do so when I get home, I can't multiquote from my phone.

Fair does. I am working off my new and first ever smart phone and am strggling with some functions.

 

[TragicMonkey]

Mmm...Nancy McKeon.

If an officer "removes himself from a situation" and a deranged wrestler goes on to eat someone's face, who would be at fault?

Tempestt Bledsoe's, if memory serves. She pushed the drugs that Sarah Jessica Parker and Corin Nemec refused, but Helen Hunt took.

I miss the 80s.

 

[DreamingNaiad]

Mmm...Nancy McKeon.

If an officer "removes himself from a situation" and a deranged wrestler goes on to eat someone's face, who would be at fault?

Again, no one said he should hide under a desk and leave the guy to his own devices. But from inside the station he could have kept an eye on him through the window until back up arrived.

Not sure what they would do then since apparently cops can't go within five feet of a suspect without being at risk of injury.

And as we all know, if a cop thinks he is at risk of getting hit he should shoot to kill. Possible injury to cop = certain death to suspect. Even if suspect is too out of it to know what's happening around him.

 

[Belz...]

You made a false claim about shoplifters, revealing your ignorance, nice to see you acknowledge you were wrong.

A trait you don't seem to share with said poster.

Since he is not psychic, he should have gone out with all of his equipment.

Assuming he had them. Do you have a memory problem ? Are you able to remember as far back as a few pages ? Because you don't seem to notice when people respond to your arguments.

 

[WildCat]

Why, because you don't realize you made a straw argument up?

Here, let me help you:

Why is this:

"If he felt his life was in danger then yes, he should have removed hiself from the situation until help arrived. Instead of killing someone."
​

Not the same as this:

"Why have cops at all if they're supposed to just run away from danger?"
​

Because "run away from danger" is not the same as "removed hiself from the situation until help arrived" even though you apparently think it is.

Riiiiiight...

 

[Belz...]

If he felt his life was in danger then yes, he should have removed hiself from the situation until help arrived. Instead of killing someone.

Seriously, why ?

Why would you put priciple in front of reality, and say that all killings are bad, full stop ?

 

[Belz...]

You don't think there are situations when a police officer should call for backup and wait to act until backup arrives?

How does you question follow from WildCat's post ?

 

[Belz...]

From what I am reading people are saying the cop was justified in shooting as he was supposedly facing a deadly threat. But so far none have shown that shooting is the only option when faced with someone high on drugs.

Bolding mine.

How, exactly, are those two sentences connected ?

I wouldn't call trying to talk to the suspect for 30 seconds 'trying repeatedly'.

What does "repeatedly" have to do with length of time ?

 

[Belz...]

Yes, those things are what people in the thread are arguing.

Then you shouldn't have any trouble backing this up with a quote, right ?

 

[Segnosaur]

Again, no one said he should hide under a desk and leave the guy to his own devices. But from inside the station he could have kept an eye on him through the window until back up arrived.

Just how exactly is that supposed to work?

From the moment the guy came to the station, the officer had a duty to check things out. (The individual might have actually been seeking assistance... "help help! I got attacked", so he would have needed to respond immediately. Or the person might have been a threat to others.)

So, because of that he's outside. He has to deal with the individual. The only way he could find himself back inside so he could watch him from safety is to use his magic teleportation powers, or to turn his back on an individual who was threatening him to run away/run for the door.

Not sure what they would do then since apparently cops can't go within five feet of a suspect without being at risk of injury.

You do know that there's a difference between a cooperative suspect (i.e. "Get Down! OK... I'm down... don't shoot") and a guy who's actually ignoring orders and actually going after the cops.

I know, its a subtle difference. That might have been lost on you.

And as we all know, if a cop thinks he is at risk of getting hit he should shoot to kill. Possible injury to cop = certain death to suspect.

As well it should be. We're not talking an 80 year old grandmother, or young child throwing a snowball. We're talking about a muscular male, and with his wrestling background could have probably wiped the floor with you.

Even if suspect is too out of it to know what's happening around him.

Ummm... why should it matter if the suspect is "out of it"? Do punches not hurt if the guy throwing them is stoned? If he knocks the cop down is there a magical force field caused by the drug use that keeps him from impacting the ground?

 

[Belz...]

(A quick google search gave me 45k a year as the average police salary in Alabama)

Really ? I make more than that sitting at a desk.

 

[Belz...]

It is not a strawman to ask those such as TragicMonkey who say shooting was the only option

The word only does not appear in my post.

It sure doesn't !

There are some here such as TragicMonkey and Triforcharity who say anyone who attacks the police deserve to be shot.

Nobody said that. Seeing how many times people have tried to tell you this, I am now convinced that you are right: it is not a misunderstanding. You are lying.

I find it staggering I have yet to get much of a response and have been pilloried for asking such a question.

You'll find that people are rarely in the mood to answer questions that deliberately misrepresent their statements.

I suspect it is because as soon as people say, no the police should not shoot students high on drugs or the mentally ill, they cannot then support the cop who shot the student.

You suspect wrong, because the two are not remotely comparable.

 

[Segnosaur]

The only problem is, nobody has ever given any reasonable actions for things that could have been 'done better'.

********.

I'm assuming the blacked section is some sort of response indicating you disagree. The problem is, you'd be wrong.

Lets take a look at some of the typical suggestions:

- Should have stayed inside... However, as an officer its his duty to investigate incidents
- Run away/run back inside... And possibly turn your back on a potential threat? Not exactly a smart move. Neither is trying to get back inside when the individual can easily cover the distance while trying to open the door/etc.
- Tried to use "verbal skills"... yeah, that will work. Especially when the guy is advancing towards you. If he's not listening to orders to stop, at what point are you going to assume verbal skills are useless? When he's got his arms around your throat?
- Tried to use hand-to-hand techniques. Yeah, of course officers should be willing to get involved in fist fights with individuals who are obviously very fit. What could possibly go wrong? Well, except for serious injury to the officer. Maybe the officers need to watch more chuck norris movies.
- Waited for backup.... Yeah, I'm sure the backup was sure to arrive in the 2 seconds it would have taken the guy to get 5 feet to attack the officer
- Used his baton... Trouble is a baton is a close-proximity weapon. No guarantee that its going to stop a guy who knows about self-defense. (Also, the initial reports were that he didn't have a baton. Perhaps he might have been violating regulations for not having it with him, but even if he did the risk of using it when fighting 1-on-1 is still a risk.)
- Used pepper spray... again he didn't have it on him, but since others have mentioned that people can still partially function after being sprayed, it would have left the officer at significant risk
- Tazer... but then the department wasn't licensed for tazers.

 

[Chris_Halkides]

from the wire

- Used pepper spray... again he didn't have it on him, but since others have mentioned that people can still partially function after being sprayed, it would have left the officer at significant risk
- Tazer... but then the department wasn't licensed for tazers.

According to today's AP story (linked above) he had pepper spray and a baton.