We'll have to agree to disagree. The only person who knows for sure is, unfortunately dead.
Possible? Someone who refuses to obey a cop with a weapon drawn is clearly a probable threat.
Concern? No. I don't concern myself with useless speculation about things I have no control over.
Does it make me think? Yes.
Surely if your cops came here, they'd be getting their asses kicked a lot more often, and constantly dropping their weapons. Surely if OUR cops and fire a 45 cal SA Glock accurately, yours should too, right?
False dilemma logical fallacy.
Sometimes, yes. However, most UK citizens do not have the access to firearms like the US does, so it's a moot point.
It's not a fallacy. Our cops could be trained to use guns, they just don't want them. Just like your cops could be trained in self defence so they don't resort to deadly force against unarmed people.
I would have thought all cops were trained in how to resolve a situation without discharging their gun. Most of them are good at it. This cop should maybe have tried a little harder.
So, it couldn't happen? How about a naked, unarmed person severely injuring someone? How about a naked, unarmed suspect who just killed someone, and is out of his damn mind?
It wouldn't have mattered. Did you read the entire article? Armour piercing rounds wouldn't have worked anyway. Kevlar is designed to stop even AP rounds. Also, 9mm doesn't pack THAT much of a punch anyway.
And it's fair to ask why a US cop was unable to subdue this student when a UK cop would have at least tried. Gun laws have nothing to do with this case really.
Remember the video of the man beating the officer almost to death? He used his fists.
Likelihood is a cool word, but it's useless in this situation. Since we're not psychic, and cannot predict alternate outcomes of events, we don't know. Nobody does.
Or is it that your laws don't allow for the general issue of firearms to your officers? If you claim it's because they don't want them, then you'll need to provide evidence for that claim.
So, it couldn't happen? How about a naked, unarmed person severely injuring someone? How about a naked, unarmed suspect who just killed someone, and is out of his damn mind?
Speculation. Useless exercise. The only one who knows for certain what his intentions were, is dead.
To clarify, just because we can't find an instance of it happening before doesn't mean it's impossible. It does support (note: is not proof of) it being unlikely though.
We all want cops to go home safe. Some will get injured though and causing death to avoid injury (rather than causing injury to avoid being injured) seems baffling.
I have nothing but respect for police officers the world over but they do have to take some risks.
I suppose it comes down to how people view the police. As primarily being enforcers or primarily protectors. I view them as the latter.
It is. Please feel free to google what that means.
Or is it that your laws don't allow for the general issue of firearms to your officers? If you claim it's because they don't want them, then you'll need to provide evidence for that claim.
Who said they aren't? You? We know how uninformed foreigners are.
Again, uninformed opinions of foreigners and all.....
BBC Magazine article dated 19th sept says a 2006 survey found that 82% of officers didn't want guns.
I'm on my nokia so I cant post the link but if you type 'uk police dont want guns' into google it should be there.
It's not about being an uninformed foreigner, it's about not being sure why someone wouldn't use none lethal force when they *could*. I admit it is likely the cop felt he was in serious danger, I just don't think he was.
And I was just offering up a possibility about the radio. It is possible the cop didn't hear that back up was coming because he was so focussed on the student. I don't know how anyone can hear anything over those. Even while standing in front of an officer it just sounds like mumbles and gibberish to me.
When you've listened to police radio for a few years, it becomes almost subliminal... You can instantly filter out stuff that doesn't concern you and pick out the slight tremor in an officer's voice that tells you he's in trouble.
However...If I sit in a cab I can't tell what the cab dispatcher is saying for beans. Go figure.
True incident. Years ago, when I was with my previous department, I was sitting on a parking lot talking with another officer.
One of the guys called out on a car stop. Nothing unusual at all. However, he said, "send me a backup."
There was something in his voice... We took off like the proverbial bats and arrived on the scene... He'd been shot 6 times by an armed robbery suspect, and had killed the shooter. He remained conscious long enough to give a good description of the remaining suspects and their car.... And survived the shooting.
This is an obviously fallacious misuse of 'statistics'. For one you're including absolute risk with risk at that instance, and for another you're including irrelevant facts into the equation.
For example, it's rare for any given death to be caused by falling patina-green copper roof tiles. It's fallacious to conclude that therefore those falling patina-green copper roof tiles aren't dangerous or unlikely to cause harm.
That he was naked isn't really relevant besides to make it clear that he's not concealing a weapon. The other person being a cop isn't relevant for the danger either. A slam to the ground doesn't magically hurt a cop less. Unarmed doesn't not mean not a threat either. Would you risk being body slammed by a muscly 135 lbs man onto hard dirt or concrete? You shouldn't, because it's a deadly risk.
So what you're really looking for is beating or slamming deaths. You'll find them more common than 'to a cop, by a naked unarmed male students of 135 lbs on a Tuesday'.
I'd agree, some of those are not legitimate self defense claims, IMO. I'd agree with you.
Get away with it? Perhaps you need to research the cases you cited a little more.
Agree, to a degree. The older man who shot the kid in his driveway may have feared for his safety, however it wasn't justified. In fact, he ended up losing in a civil court, and said he'd never own a gun again.
No correct. Your OPINION (which again, we know what that is based on) is that the officer didn't have a right to shoot. I, as well as many in the law enforcement community, agree that he did.
The fact that you disagree with that is what forms your entire argument. We do things differently here, and your opinion is based on Scottish laws, and not American laws.
BBBBZZZZTTTTTTTT!!! If you charge me with a bunny rabbit, you're no threat to me. Charge me with a knife, and I will draw and fire.
Wrong again. You, just being in my presence, even yelling a screaming, are not a threat to me. Now, while we're yelling (You bloody wank!! ) you retrieve a tire iron from your car and run towards me, you're now a threat.
And I to you.
I've been a CWP holder for well over 10 years. In that time, I have drawn my weapon once, and never fired it. Most CWP holders that I know, (I know dozens personally) have never fired their weapon in self defense.
In fact, unless you do something legitimately threatening to someone, you don't have to worry. There are, (IIRC) about 800,000 CWP holders in Florida. Of those, I know of only 2 in recent months that have fired their weapon. Once was an old man in a gaming type casino when it was robbed at gunpoint. He drew his weapon, and fired till it was empty, causing the robbery to scatter. Nobody but the robbers hurt, and the store owner didn't lose a dime of their hard earned money.
Here is the video.
I can post these for days.
The second, which I'm sure you've heard of, is George Zimmerman.
So, good, your opinion is again, based on your own preconceived bias against guns. That's fine. I'm biased against New York Yankee fans. Doesn't mean I have a right to try to chance the way the Yankees do things, does it?
Bear in mind my opinion is based on a number of key facts, the main one for this thread being the lame excuses people use for shooting. You agree on two out of three and have little to offer as to why Austin was right to go straight to being armed and shooting.
You say irrelevant, but I say dodge when you avoid the issue that if UK cops would arrest Collar without a gun, why can't Austin and his colleagues do it?
I was asking about threat level and PCP and evidence. You gave no evidence. Re pain and fighting, getting cuffs on is not an issue with pain. Baton and CS are.
Awesome. I'm stoked that you've never had to experience that fear.
Huh? What's a DGU? Can you cite your source please? A link will do fine.
Well, the first was when someone tried to yank me out of my car while threatening to hit me with a baseball bat, so yes, I would consider that about as close to an attempt to kill me as I would ever want to feel.
Just because no one has tried to kill me or I perceive to be a real attempt does not mean I have not experienced fear.
A DGU is a defensive gun use. Search any of the names listed or Lamont and Florida for a study of DGUs in Dade County. You will see further evidence that claims of guns being
used to defend are not being found to be reasonable.
If you would have shot Collar and I would not, it is reasonable to say your perception of deadly threat is lower. I have also sited studies which show gun carriers are more paranoid and have a greater fear of threat.
I'm really not seeing what the issue is here. If someone with a gun tells you to stay back and you keep advancing, you get shot. That seems fairly obvious. The cop had a right to defend himself, even if we ignore his responsibility to keep someone from taking his gun.
Thing is I get accused of strawman with the follow up questions. A simple answer would do. If you say you would shoot 100% that means a number of follow up questions which I can imagine appear as strawman, but this is a heated topic!
No. I'll say no because sometimes even the police are caught off guard.
For instance, back about 1996 (IIRC) there was a bank robbery in North Hollywood California. Two dudes dressed in full body armour, armed to the teeth with AK-47 fully automatic rifles, robbed a bank, and ended up in a shootout with police.
It took quite some time (more than 10 minutes) for the cops to commandeer rifles powerful enough to penetrate their body armour.
Wait, are you seriously claiming that your opinions are based on reality, when you are obviously already biased against US police, and Americans in general, and basing your opinion on what YOU would do, based on your training in ANOTHER country?
And you claim your opinion is more in tune with reality?????
Yet you keep on going on about cases other than the ones on topic and have no policing exerience. You should relate your opinions and theories to what happened with Austin and Collar.
That the UK police as well as most US police officers can arrest people under the influence in all sorts of situations casts grave doubt on Austin's inability to do so.
This is an obviously fallacious misuse of 'statistics'. For one you're including absolute risk with risk at that instance, and for another you're including irrelevant facts into the equation.
For example, it's rare for any given death to be caused by falling patina-green copper roof tiles. It's fallacious to conclude that therefore those falling patina-green copper roof tiles aren't dangerous or unlikely to cause harm.
That he was naked isn't really relevant besides to make it clear that he's not concealing a weapon. The other person being a cop isn't relevant for the danger either. A slam to the ground doesn't magically hurt a cop less. Unarmed doesn't not mean not a threat either. Would you risk being body slammed by a muscly 135 lbs man onto hard dirt or concrete? You shouldn't, because it's a deadly risk.
So what you're really looking for is beating or slamming deaths. You'll find them more common than 'to a cop, by a naked unarmed male students of 135 lbs on a Tuesday'.
I did just that earlier in the thread and found abour 7 instances of pro-wrestlers who had killed with moves and one with a kid. So it it is very very rare and so police should take that into account when arresting wrestlers. It is very very rare for ghem to kill and most involve the man mountain wrestler which Collar was not.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
) you retrieve a tire iron from your car and run towards me, you're now a threat.
