Cops kill Costco pizza lady....

[WildCat]

I hope I have these in the right order for context...






Point of order.
Population of UK= ~63 million
Population of US= ~314 million

Per capita would be the relative format. Raw numbers are misleading.

So we should expect at least 12 cops murdered every year in the UK to adjust for population. What's the actual number? Here's a site that keeps track. Again, I'm omitting traffic accidents and heart attacks and such.

2013 - 0
2012 - 4
2011 - 1 (a NI cop killed by terrorists)
2010 - 0
2009 - 2
2008 - 0

The site doesn't go further back than 2008, but I think it's safe to say the average is less than 2 per year.


Of course, there's another factor to consider besides numbers and rates. Are the two groups equal in other ways? The cops in the USA are armed and able to aggressively defend themselves from those trying to kill them, while cops in the UK are largely unarmed with anything more lethal than pepper spray and words. If the US cops were likewise unarmed those numbers would skyrocket IMHO.

The USA isn't the UK.

 

[WildCat]

Why?

Note the 5 stabbing deaths.

By your reasoning not even gunshots are much risk, because fewer than 15% of them result in death.

 

[Nessie]

Note the 5 stabbing deaths.

By your reasoning not even gunshots are much risk, because fewer than 15% of them result in death.

You are not following my reasoning at all.

You have made the case that US cops meet with more deadly threats than the UK, another negative impact of US gun culture.

 

[Skibum]

I agree with you Foolmewunz, cheffing and fighting skills are completely different things.

I agree. They are different. We aren't talking about a knife fight though. We are talking about the simple act of being able to hold a knife and being able to plunge in into another human being, one time. Unless you have some pretty substantial physical infirmity going on, it's not difficult to do. I can however see an argument made for the type of knife used as a reason to not shoot someone and wrestle the knife away. If someone is wielding a pocket knife with a blade of only a couple inches, sure it would not be unreasonable to consider wrestling a knife away from them and being able to survive. There is no way if would let someone with a sharp chefs knife come anywhere near me and make a threatening motion, unless they obviously don't appear physically able to make the simple motion of stabbing someone.

 

[TX50]

I did not make any claims with regards to how they are trained. I make claims it is not impossible to shoot in the arm and/or leg. Those claims are true unless if you can point out the link I provided was completely wrong. But I seriously doubt it.

I lived in the Netherlands for several years and I distinctly remember reading more than once in newspapers that the Dutch police had subdued someone by shooting them in the leg. I remember because I was surprised at it at the time since it seemed to be contrary to everything I'd heard about the use of firearms by police. What I don't know, however, is if these incidents reflected training doctrine, a cop's discretionary action, or just an accident (i.e they missed).

 

[chainlink]

I lived in the Netherlands for several years and I distinctly remember reading more than once in newspapers that the Dutch police had subdued someone by shooting them in the leg. I remember because I was surprised at it at the time since it seemed to be contrary to everything I'd heard about the use of firearms by police. What I don't know, however, is if these incidents reflected training doctrine, a cop's discretionary action, or just an accident (i.e they missed).

Hopefully someone with expertise in the subject can correct me on this, but my understanding is that here in the US, cops are trained NOT to use warning shots or 'non-lethal' shots to the legs.

If the situation meets the minimum requirements for firearm use, then cops are to proceed with the most lethal force they can muster -- aim for the heart and squeeze off as many shots as possible. This is why a person is almost never shot just once, and when there are many cops standing around, they can be hit dozens of times -- basically turning a human body into a pile of mush before it even hits the ground.

It also seems that police training does not include any instruction about recognizing signs of mental illness. One thing for sure; whenever mentally-impaired people and police butt heads, the results are often fatal -- and it's not the cops who end up dying.

I've noticed that people tend to fall into two distinct camps whenever it comes to police violence. The "humanitarian" -minded group is horrified at police brutality, while the "law and order" -minded group feels that people who are <less than> fully cooperative with police deserve whatever they get. Just like the pro-gun vs. anti-gun people, I doubt that there will ever be middle ground on this issue.

 

[Silly Green Monkey]

Problem is you can die just as easily from someone suffering from mental illness killing you as you can from someone in their right mind who just wants to kill you. Either way, just as dead.

 

[marplots]

So we should expect at least 12 cops murdered every year in the UK to adjust for population. What's the actual number? Here's a site that keeps track. Again, I'm omitting traffic accidents and heart attacks and such.

2013 - 0
2012 - 4
2011 - 1 (a NI cop killed by terrorists)
2010 - 0
2009 - 2
2008 - 0

The site doesn't go further back than 2008, but I think it's safe to say the average is less than 2 per year.


Of course, there's another factor to consider besides numbers and rates. Are the two groups equal in other ways? The cops in the USA are armed and able to aggressively defend themselves from those trying to kill them, while cops in the UK are largely unarmed with anything more lethal than pepper spray and words. If the US cops were likewise unarmed those numbers would skyrocket IMHO.

The USA isn't the UK.

There are a couple of ways to look at it. The first thing you'd want to ask is, "Why isn't the US the UK?" In other words, what's the fundamental difference that makes one country more violent than the other?

Setting that aside, we'd also wonder if the well-armed cops and the response might have something to do with the death rates. So, for instance, we are all familiar with the heavily armed SWAT teams busting down the door. If US cops are more aggressive than UK cops, is it just because they have to be or is that aggression driving the increased violence?

Do cops ever just run away?

All that said, I think your analysis is probably correct.

 

[Nessie]

There are a couple of ways to look at it. The first thing you'd want to ask is, "Why isn't the US the UK?" In other words, what's the fundamental difference that makes one country more violent than the other?

If anything the UK is more violent than the USA in terms of assaults (though a truly accurate comparison is very difficult to do due to the way crime is recorded). The difference is the use of guns. Guns mean more deaths and serious injuries and longer spent in hospital than knives or punching, kicking etc.

Setting that aside, we'd also wonder if the well-armed cops and the response might have something to do with the death rates. So, for instance, we are all familiar with the heavily armed SWAT teams busting down the door. If US cops are more aggressive than UK cops, is it just because they have to be or is that aggression driving the increased violence?....

Having a gun compared to not having one means completely different tactics have to be used. But I am sure UK cops with guns behave just like US ones when it comes to arrests and house entry. An unarmed UK cop confronted with a violent angry person has to act differently to an armed US one, but US cops can and do resort to tactics whereby they do not shoot. Again the prevalence of guns, with police and citizens is why there are more deaths in the USA than the UK as being shot is less survivable that being stabbed or being hit.

 

[Xulld]

I wasn't there and don't know the details, but it's hard to believe that a man who is physically larger and stronger than the attacker AND has at least some rudimentary training in disarming an attacker was in danger of being mortally wounded in this situation. It's highly likely that he would be injured, but...the question is this: Is avoiding injury sufficient justification for using deadly force?

It is a mistake to pretend that you know what they knew in that situation when confronted with the actions that prompted the deadly force response.

Assuming you have an advantage when you do not know the extent of the perpetrators capability is a very bad mistake to make.

 

[aggle-rithm]

If US cops are more aggressive than UK cops, is it just because they have to be or is that aggression driving the increased violence?

That's a good question. What I wondered was: Why did the woman not kill anyone before the cops got there, if she was a deadly threat? The possibilities are:

1. She tried, and failed. Thus she's not really a danger.
2. She was relatively calm until the cops' aggressive manner caused her to flip out.
3. The cops did nothing to provoke her; she attacked simply because she wasn't into authority figures.

Don't have enough info.

 

[aggle-rithm]

It is a mistake to pretend that you know what they knew in that situation when confronted with the actions that prompted the deadly force response.

Assuming you have an advantage when you do not know the extent of the perpetrators capability is a very bad mistake to make.

True, it's an argument from incredulity.

Here's my thinking:

1. If you calculate the risk of lethal injury to the cop from the woman, it would probably be in the area of 45%-50%. I'm just pulling that number out of my nether regions, but it's based on the fact that a typical Costco employee probably isn't trained in knife fighting, and it is actually very difficult to kill someone with a knife. Unlike in the movies where a stabbing victim immediately dies when stabbed in the stomach, it's possible to survive for days without medical treatment when this happens in real life. It also takes a lot of strength to get a knife to penetrate living tissue, particularly in the area where the most vital organs are located.

2. Now calculate the risk of lethal injury to the woman from the cop. Very close to 100%, since he wasn't shooting to wound, but to stop the attack, which unfortunately requires killing in most cases.

3. So, why is the certainty of the woman's death a better outcome than the possibility of the cop's death? Is the cop's life more valuable? Are the cops supposed to be here for OUR protection, or are we expendable pawns in the struggle to keep THEM safe?

Of course, the standard argument here is, "The person was stupid for attacking a cop. He/she got what they deserved." But that leads us to...

4. What if the person isn't in control of their own actions?

Just playing devil's advocate, is all. As another poster said, I've really got no horse in this race, or dog in this fight, or whatever it is.

 

[Nessie]

True, it's an argument from incredulity.

Here's my thinking:

1. If you calculate the risk of lethal injury to the cop from the woman, it would probably be in the area of 45%-50%. I'm just pulling that number out of my nether regions, but it's based on the fact that a typical Costco employee probably isn't trained in knife fighting, and it is actually very difficult to kill someone with a knife. Unlike in the movies where a stabbing victim immediately dies when stabbed in the stomach, it's possible to survive for days without medical treatment when this happens in real life. It also takes a lot of strength to get a knife to penetrate living tissue, particularly in the area where the most vital organs are located.

.........

Based on the death of two police officers by being stabbed out of about 800,000 police in the USA and mortality rate of being stabbed at 4% (Study in Seattle) I think the risk of death for the police is < 1%.

But I still say if she charged the police with a knife and a tazer had failed, they are justified in shooting her.

 

[marplots]

The video of the event is sure to provide more information. I wonder if/when it will be released?

 

[aggle-rithm]

Based on the death of two police officers by being stabbed out of about 800,000 police in the USA and mortality rate of being stabbed at 4% (Study in Seattle) I think the risk of death for the police is < 1%.

Ooh, actual facts. Shiny!

But I still say if she charged the police with a knife and a tazer had failed, they are justified in shooting her.

I don't think the police did anything wrong, given the circumstances. However, I'm starting to think outside the box and wonder if it's a good idea for police to go into every situation assuming that deadly force may be required. Unthinkable for an American, I know...that's just the way it's always been done here. If you think about it, though, just having the gun means you have to use it in this situation. You can't risk a crazy person taking it away from you and killing you.

 

[aggle-rithm]

The video of the event is sure to provide more information. I wonder if/when it will be released?

I know, the New World Order is slipping. Used to be they could fake a video of planes crashing into buildings in REAL TIME. Now they seem to have trouble photo-shopping a machete into some lady's hand even with a week's notice.

 

[marplots]

I would very much like to hear the perspective of a UK copper here. How are they trained to react/act in a similar situation? What options do they see here?

Surely we have someone here familiar with UK police procedure/training?

 

[aggle-rithm]

I would very much like to hear the perspective of a UK copper here. How are they trained to react/act in a similar situation? What options do they see here?

Surely we have someone here familiar with UK police procedure/training?

This pretty much sums up the opinion most Americans have of the British police:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-DIzzk9ccu4

 

[Nessie]

Ooh, actual facts. Shiny!

Correction though, 5 were stabbed, not 2 in 2012.

I don't think the police did anything wrong, given the circumstances. However, I'm starting to think outside the box and wonder if it's a good idea for police to go into every situation assuming that deadly force may be required. Unthinkable for an American, I know...that's just the way it's always been done here. If you think about it, though, just having the gun means you have to use it in this situation. You can't risk a crazy person taking it away from you and killing you.

There is no doubt that having a gun means deadly force can be quickly used, whereas not having one or a wait till one arrives means different tactics have to be used.

Since 47 police officers were shot dead in 2012 and there is a 22% mortality rate from gunshot wounds, the presence of a gun makes death far more likely.

I do not see a way round that as the USA could never have unarmed police on patrol. However, considering the German police shoot so few people and they are always armed, there is clearly something in the tactics used. Maybe US police reach and fire quicker than German police do?

 

[Nessie]

I would very much like to hear the perspective of a UK copper here. How are they trained to react/act in a similar situation? What options do they see here?

Surely we have someone here familiar with UK police procedure/training?

Unarmed police, in that they carry batons and CS spray and have quick access to shields in police vehicles and wear stab proof vests are expected to contain and control and if they feel safe enough to do so negotiate and try and disarm.

The aim is to prevent harm to themselves, the person with the knife and anyone else in the area. So what you get is a lot of shouting as the police warn others away and try and establish some kind of contact with the person with the knife. That person needs to know they are going to be arrested and the corny, but true plea for them to drop the knife. There will be others officers, both unarmed and armed on the way who will help with containment and control whereby the aim is again to intimidate or calm and negotiate with the person to drop the knife to then effect an arrest.

Since UK police officers have to talk suspects down and do not have an immediate shoot option they are very good at it. In situations were it becomes a siege there are trained negotiators. In situations where the knife carrier is clearly going to attack the police will have armed response and they will shoot.

Two UK officers charged in a coffee shop on arriving by a lady with a knife will deploy CS, defend themselves with batons and should maintain a distance between them and the person or put a barrier between themselves and the person, which may involve throwing a chair at them, you can improvise. It could end up with a chase round the shop or into the street whereby the police are backing off, but maintain contact with the person.

Losing someone armed in a situation like that is the biggest tactical fail. You do not want a deranged armed person to get away and you do not know where they have gone.

Two UK police officers were killed on duty in 2012, both were shot in the same incident. So even though there is a knife problem, particularly in Scotland, police officers are managing that without dying at anything like the rate in the USA. (Previously calculated the death rate is four times higher in the USA).