How far will the excuses to shoot go?

[Nessie]

Talking. With an L.



High, in that he is a well-muscled possibly drugged man who is ignoring both police orders and a drawn weapon.

He would likely be resistant to baton strikes and CS, meaning tasers, at least. Again, draw time. Also, tasers are not a last resort. There's a big gap between them and guns, at least. In some districts, cops are tased as part of training. In fact, this page places them at about the same level as CS and batons.

http://nij.gov/topics/law-enforcement/officer-safety/use-of-force/continuum.htm

Sorry, talking, which is one thing about Collar I am not sure about, which is how responsive he would be to talking, especially as there is video but no sound.

A drugged man ignoring police orders and a drawn weapon suggests to me someone not in full possession of their faculties is someone who needs protection and does not deserve to be treated the same way as a sober guy who is well aware of what they are doing. That is why I was asking about deserving before. I would vary my actions also depending on what the other person deserved. I see a student who has potentially been daft with drugs as different from a druggy who has chosen a life full of drugs.

So I would go in harder on a druggy or sober guy than a student for whom this is likely to be a act completely out of character.

My experience also tells me druggies and drunks are easier to restrain than others. People sober or just under the influence not drunk but wild with anger are the hardest. Kids from children's homes who lose their temper are something to behold and I have see a very thin frail looking girl bend a set of cuffs.

We are harder on our regulars who get drunk and want to fight every weekend than we are on people who are decent and have had a one off bad experience.

If Collar is high, how would you rate a male, 6'10', sober, enraged as his wife has left him, armed with a shot gun and handgun with a knife down his sock?

We rate a tazer as above a baton and below a gun. You missed out cuffs as a way of dealing with Collar, why?

 

[000063]

Sorry, talking, which is one thing about Collar I am not sure about, which is how responsive he would be to talking, especially as there is video but no sound.

The cop said "stop" several times. He ignored him.

A drugged man ignoring police orders and a drawn weapon suggests to me someone not in full possession of their faculties is someone who needs protection and does not deserve to be treated the same way as a sober guy who is well aware of what they are doing.

Of course not. It also means they might be even more dangerous.

That is why I was asking about deserving before. I would vary my actions also depending on what the other person deserved. I see a student who has potentially been daft with drugs as different from a druggy who has chosen a life full of drugs.

I don't think Austin had time to do an intake interview.

So I would go in harder on a druggy or sober guy than a student for whom this is likely to be a act completely out of character.

That's not really relevant to the situation. What's relevant, first of all, is the immediate threat.

My experience also tells me druggies and drunks are easier to restrain than others. People sober or just under the influence not drunk but wild with anger are the hardest. Kids from children's homes who lose their temper are something to behold and I have see a very thin frail looking girl bend a set of cuffs.

People on several drugs have increased strength and pain resistance, and we are talking about a well-muscled guy.

We are harder on our regulars who get drunk and want to fight every weekend than we are on people who are decent and have had a one off bad experience.

If Collar is high, how would you rate a male, 6'10', sober, enraged as his wife has left him, armed with a shot gun and handgun with a knife down his sock?

An irrelevant fishing expidition.

We rate a tazer as above a baton and below a gun. You missed out cuffs as a way of dealing with Collar, why?

Because I answered it in post 958. I am dealing with these out of order, sorry.

 

[Nessie]

So are you accepting Austin got the threat level wrong? Or are you still skirting around the actual topic making up fantasies?

For days now I have been saying and showing to others that each situation is different, though within the differences there are similarities. Those similarities are what makes it possible and for a good cop easy to identify threat levels very accurately. Some thing Austin failed at by shooting Collar. As did the shooters of de Vries and Hattori.

So you do not believe me? Show me why.

Why are the cases that started off this topic irrelevant to the topic?

Because it may easily be impossible for an officer to determine someone's actual threat level with total certainty. In this case, there is a very slim but non-zero chance the subject, in his altered state, just wanted a hug. Which is why the law doesn't rely on total certainty, just reasonable certainty.

The question is not whether he actually was a deadly threat. The question is whether he could reasonably be judged as enough of a serious/deadly threat to justify deadly force. Whether he was a deadly threat alone is not relevant.

The police have to act on what can be reasonable expected and what experience has told them can be expected. They cannot act as if they know nothing, have learned nothing from past experience and so say it is impossible because of some uncertainty to make a reasonable decision. I agree hug is unlikely, but I also death was unlikely, past experience and events have told me that and I make reasonable assessments based on that.

That is why I say it was a reasonable judgement to say he was a medium threat, not a high one needing deadly force applied.

 

[DreamingNaiad]

Are people overestimating the injuring power of the student as well?

Depends. Are we talkin bruises/scrapes or a broken neck?

The former was more likely. The latter, extremely unlikely.

Should cops shoot to avoid *any* injury?

 

[DreamingNaiad]

I posted an account of a guy who was shot at close range by a cop and went on to kill him in cold blood with a rifle. As someone pointed out, many US homicides are unarmed. About 15% in 2008, according to this, and 6%, says this. And given the subject's likely resistance to pain and apparent physical fitness, there was a significant risk of him being able to seriously harm the officer in a fight.

And, once again, drawing a gun does not mean it was his first resort, and the officer tried evading and commanding the suspect. You have been informed of this several times, no matter how many times you try to conflate drawing a weapon with using it, especially since the option always exists to put the weapon away.

Again, a statistic for how many cops were killed in the line of duty by unarmed assailants would be relevant. This is not.

 

[Nessie]

What has illegally held guns got to do with the topic?

OK, you are the exception to the rule. Do you already have or do you want US gun laws and possession of guns to be the norm in your country?

It is based on research of DGUs and gun ownership by the likes of Kleck, Gertz, Hemenway etc. Handgun purchases are primarily for self defence and not sport or hunting.

I may have been contradicted, but I have not been shown to be wrong. Having a gun compared to not having a gun makes shooting more likely. Drawing your gun compared to keeping it holstered makes its use more likely. Going for a gun instead of baton, cuffs or CS makes the use of the gun more likely. There was an earlier post by a US cop about his training regards to guns and arrests which detailed that.

There have been studies which show carrying a gun makes you more scared and more likely to use it

http://www.smartplanet.com/blog/thinking-tech/study-carrying-a-gun-can-make-you-more-paranoid/10875

http://www.newscientist.com/article...ncreases-risk-of-getting-shot-and-killed.html

Well, you mentioned American "gun fans" causing "so many" deaths by firearm in the US. Most gun fans own their guns legally, and never kill anyone.

I'm not living in my country. I am not from, nor have I spent any significant amount of time in the US, nor have I ever handled a loaded weapon. Neither my country of origin or residence have gun laws or possession comparable to the US, but I'm not telling you whether it's up or down. But please, keep trying to win points on something irrelevant to the actual discussion.

Which leaves shotguns, rifles...

In that you are less likely to be interrupted if a situation arises where it needs to be used, yes. However, suspects are less likely to attack an officer with their weapon drawn.

Which is why it's standard police procedure in risky situations, including those with "vaguely deadly" subjects, yet most are dealt with peacefully, and most cops never shoot at anyone. In raw statistics, yes, it's easier to shoot someone if you already have a gun out. But that does not mean, as you asserted way back, that merely going outside with the gun made the shooting inevitable, or that the shooting itself wasn't justified.

Also, baton use requires grappling, and CS is ineffective on many people on drugs. Cuffs are useful when the suspect has submitted or been subdued. And all of those require time to draw.

Also, he still could've just put the gun away and used any of those if he thought it appropriate, regardless of whether he drew it inside or outside.

Were those for random civilians or trained cops?



A comment on the first article points out they didn't say they sampled anyone who actually owned or uses guns regularly. There's a number of interesting criticisms in both articles, in fact. Actual gun enthusiasts often stress the responsibility in using a firearm. Even pointing the gun at someone you aren't willing to shoot is taken very seriously.

OK so illegal guns are not the issue here. But use of guns for defence and the lame excuses used afterwards is bang on topic.

DGUs primarily involved handguns, not rifles or shotguns.

All I have said is that going out with your gun drawn limits your options and means you have gone to deadly force as the most likely option straightaway.

Baton use does not mean grappling (as in you now have hands on each other). Baton use for us is fend offs and strikes to create distance and is a defensive not offensive weapon. Cuffs can be used offensively when the suspect is being aggressive with the aim being to get at least one cuff on and then there are moves such as drag to prone. Otherwise it is a grapple to get cuffs onto an aggressive person to them have more control over them. CS either works or it does not depending on what drug the person is on, how much of it they have taken and other factors such as anger and natural immunity to CS. The time to draw cuffs, baton, CS and a gun is pretty much the same and should be within 2 seconds in a fast draw. There are slower covert draws also taught. You are plain wrong about the use of baton, cuffs and CS.

I wish Austin had holstered his gun and gone with other more appropriate means.

It was a cop talking about cops being trained.

I wish you would link to evidence more.

 

[Belz...]

C is wrong, it is possible to determine threat levels with a high degree of accuracy and in any case they should be adjusted instantly as a situation develops.

Super-cop !

 

[Belz...]

You said I claimed he was not a threat. Another word for that would beeee ... harmless.

The two phrases have different connotations... but the wording you used was clear.

And yes, I don't think it's too much to expect a cop to at least attempt to subdue an unarmed man in a non lethal fashion.

Maybe, but what if that doesn't work ? It's not like the cop can get away easily, and he's just made it possible for the perp to get a hold of his weapon. I assume this sort of thinking is part of an officer's training.

 

[DreamingNaiad]

Super-cop !

Or competent cop. Same difference.

 

[Belz...]

So are you accepting Austin got the threat level wrong?

We don't know that yet.

For days now I have been saying and showing to others that each situation is different, though within the differences there are similarities.

Then stop conflating and simplifying everything.

So you do not believe me? Show me why.

Your dishonesty in this thread has made me very wary. In any case, it doesn't follow.

Why are the cases that started off this topic irrelevant to the topic?

They were never relevant.

 

[DreamingNaiad]

The two phrases have different connotations... but the wording you used was clear.



Maybe, but what if that doesn't work ? It's not like the cop can get away easily, and he's just made it possible for the perp to get a hold of his weapon. I assume this sort of thinking is part of an officer's training.

And what if it does work? Isn't the chance of that worth preserving a life?

 

[Belz...]

Or competent cop. Same difference.

Yes, competent cops instantly adapt to any scenario ! It's hilarious that I'm told I misrepresent your posts when you say such ridiculous things.

 

[Belz...]

And what if it does work? Isn't the chance of that worth preserving a life?

The life of the cop, yes. He's the one under threat. The problem here is that we are dealing with theory vs practics. Ideology vs reality. The latter is what matters. Again, this isn't a comic book where the heroes always manage to capture the bad guys alive.

 

[DreamingNaiad]

Yes, competent cops instantly adapt to any scenario ! It's hilarious that I'm told I misrepresent your posts when you say such ridiculous things.

Apparently to accurately determine threat levels and adjust your actions based on that makes you super-human. How ludicrous to expect a cop to be capable of this!

The life of the cop, yes. He's the one under threat. The problem here is that we are dealing with theory vs practics. Ideology vs reality. The latter is what matters. Again, this isn't a comic book where the heroes always manage to capture the bad guys alive.

Under threat of injury. The threat of death was small.

It's not only in comic books that bad guys are captured alive. It happens remarkably often in real life. It could and should have happened in this instance.

 

[Nessie]

Super-cop !

That is where you are so wrong. The thousands of arrests that are made every day without issue prove there is no need for supercop fantasy powers which you have made up from a point of ignorance about how the police actually function.

 

[Nessie]

Maybe, but what if that doesn't work ? It's not like the cop can get away easily, and he's just made it possible for the perp to get a hold of his weapon. I assume this sort of thinking is part of an officer's training.

If it does not work a competent police officer will try something else. So if they cannot subdue with cuffs alone, a baton strike may now be reasonable. If the does not work then CS and so on.

One of the reasons for keeping a distance between you and the person, which Austin did do, is to allow you to have time to switch tactics, which he did not.

 

[fuelair]

OK so illegal guns are not the issue here. But use of guns for defence and the lame excuses used afterwards is bang on topic.

DGUs primarily involved handguns, not rifles or shotguns.

All I have said is that going out with your gun drawn limits your options and means you have gone to deadly force as the most likely option straightaway.

Baton use does not mean grappling (as in you now have hands on each other). Baton use for us is fend offs and strikes to create distance and is a defensive not offensive weapon. Cuffs can be used offensively when the suspect is being aggressive with the aim being to get at least one cuff on and then there are moves such as drag to prone. Otherwise it is a grapple to get cuffs onto an aggressive person to them have more control over them. CS either works or it does not depending on what drug the person is on, how much of it they have taken and other factors such as anger and natural immunity to CS. The time to draw cuffs, baton, CS and a gun is pretty much the same and should be within 2 seconds in a fast draw. There are slower covert draws also taught. You are plain wrong about the use of baton, cuffs and CS.

I wish Austin had holstered his gun and gone with other more appropriate means.

It was a cop talking about cops being trained.

I wish you would link to evidence more.

The draw for the pistol should be well under two seconds - though I'll buy that for the handcuffs. 2 seconds can be the end of a lifetime.

 

[fuelair]

Nessie - As much as I tend to disagree with you on this from my background, I do want to say you sound like a good police officer of the kind I would be proud to know/work with. Just different thought processes and backgrounds here.

 

[Nessie]

Sorry, talking, which is one thing about Collar I am not sure about, which is how responsive he would be to talking, especially as there is video but no sound.

A drugged man ignoring police orders and a drawn weapon suggests to me someone not in full possession of their faculties is someone who needs protection and does not deserve to be treated the same way as a sober guy who is well aware of what they are doing. That is why I was asking about deserving before. I would vary my actions also depending on what the other person deserved. I see a student who has potentially been daft with drugs as different from a druggy who has chosen a life full of drugs.

So I would go in harder on a druggy or sober guy than a student for whom this is likely to be a act completely out of character.

My experience also tells me druggies and drunks are easier to restrain than others. People sober or just under the influence not drunk but wild with anger are the hardest. Kids from children's homes who lose their temper are something to behold and I have see a very thin frail looking girl bend a set of cuffs.

We are harder on our regulars who get drunk and want to fight every weekend than we are on people who are decent and have had a one off bad experience.

If Collar is high, how would you rate a male, 6'10', sober, enraged as his wife has left him, armed with a shot gun and handgun with a knife down his sock?

We rate a tazer as above a baton and below a gun. You missed out cuffs as a way of dealing with Collar, why?

The cop said "stop" several times. He ignored him.

Of course not. It also means they might be even more dangerous.

I don't think Austin had time to do an intake interview.

That's not really relevant to the situation. What's relevant, first of all, is the immediate threat.

People on several drugs have increased strength and pain resistance, and we are talking about a well-muscled guy.

An irrelevant fishing expidition.

Because I answered it in post 958. I am dealing with these out of order, sorry.

I have argued he should tried more to establish verbal contact that shout one word, but since there is no audio we will never fully know what what was said.

No one said Austin should do an intake interview, but he should be able to distinguish between a student high on drugs and a druggie high on drugs. I see such regularly decent folks on drugs or drunk and they are easy to spot from the criminals who do the same.

I say it is relevant. I will take more off a decent person who is high as they are worth fighting for as this may well be a one off or not even their fault if a drink was spiked. Collar is worth fighting to preserve. A junkie criminal is less worthy of attempts to help.

Please evidence your claims about several drugs, strength and pain. You have made such, as have others without linking to evidence. I want evidence please. I expect you to list drugs which can affect strength and pain, if there is evidence they improve ability to fight. It is the ability to fight that is important. Someone can be immune to pain as much as they want. If you get them cuffed and I forget to mention fast straps (velcro straps wrapped about legs) it does not matter how much or little pain they feel, they are not a threat any more. Ability to fight and stop being cuffed and strapped is more important than pain. If they are feeling pain but can fight well, more injuries will be done.

Asking you to rate another example if you say Collar is a high risk is not a fishing expedition, it is you dodging the question. Please rate a large angry armed man for risk.

In post 958 you were wrong about the use of cuffs, batons and CS on a number of points.

 

[Nessie]

"Originally Posted by Nessie View Post
So are you accepting Austin got the threat level wrong?

We don't know that yet.

Quote:
For days now I have been saying and showing to others that each situation is different, though within the differences there are similarities.

Then stop conflating and simplifying everything.

Quote:
So you do not believe me? Show me why.

Your dishonesty in this thread has made me very wary. In any case, it doesn't follow.

Quote:
Why are the cases that started off this topic irrelevant to the topic?

They were never relevant."

Belz, I cannot find the post you have quoted from, so I copied and pasted

I think because of CCTV and the run up to the incident and Collar's action we do know Austin had got this wrong.

I have asked follow up questions to clarify and I have shown a very detailed knowledge of arrests. No conflating or simplification.

As to whether you believe me, as I say I cannot find the original post.

The other cases are very relevant, stop dodging.