How far will the excuses to shoot go?

[LTC8K6]

From The Vanguard's Facebook page, the USA student paper:

Repeatedly asked questions:

*No, USAPD doesn't have Tasers.

*They often do have mace. Some outlets say the officer had mace, and some didn't. When we know for certain, we'll tell you.

*Yes, we will be watching the tape Thursday.

*We're uncertain why the officer didn't have backup. It was a night on fall break but USAPD typically has a full staff on-hand even over Christmas break. They may have
been out on calls, we just don't know.

*The lapel pin camera was in the USAPD station being charged and not on the officer when he went to see what the banging noise was and discovered Collar.

*There are vigils and protests and such planned, but USA is not sanctioning or sponsoring any of them.

 

[LTC8K6]

Caption of photo at Vanguard FB page:

Community and students protest the lack of tasers at USAPD. Expect more info later this afternoon.

https://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hpho...3x403/430402_445072005529091_1872152175_n.jpg

 

[WildCat]

Caption of photo at Vanguard FB page:



https://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hpho...3x403/430402_445072005529091_1872152175_n.jpg

"Please tase me bro"

 

[Nessie]

Actually the "evidence" does not support that at all.

There are 2 possibilities...

Either
A: the situations you are in were not as serious as the one the officer was in. You talk of dealing with "junkies" and such, but not always the specifics... were you in a controlled environment? Did you know there were backups around? Did you have at least some opportunity to learn about who you were dealing with before you dealt with them (as opposed to going into the situation cold.)

Indeed, your description in another post (of you having to deal with someone with mental problems, but having the opportunity to "close the door") strongly suggest that your situation was very much controlled, and you were never really in any significant danger.

or

B: you really were dealing with unknown people, alone, in unknown situations without any such controls, and in that case you were risking your life and health

I have arrested, either on my own or with colleagues, with back up nearby or hours away, numerous people who were aggressive, I found frightening and who were under the influence of drugs, alcohol or with mental health or behavioral issues. Some I knew well, some I had never encountered before.

I see no point in trading stories as that is off topic. What I will say is that officer failed in his duty to protect and preserve life an the excuse for him doing so is quite frankly pathetic especially when you look at other incidents where people have been excused killing because they got scared.

 

[TragicMonkey]

I have arrested, either on my own or with colleagues, with back up nearby or hours away, numerous people who were aggressive, I found frightening and who were under the influence of drugs, alcohol or with mental health or behavioral issues. Some I knew well, some I had never encountered before.

I see no point in trading stories as that is off topic. What I will say is that officer failed in his duty to protect and preserve life an the excuse for him doing so is quite frankly pathetic especially when you look at other incidents where people have been excused killing because they got scared.

You continually cite your own (alleged) experience as evidence of your authority in these matters, and now you "won't trade stories" because it's off topic? In the same post containing yet more claims of experience?

 

[Nessie]

Wait a second....

Are you actually trying to draw some sort of equivalency between that experience of yours and what happened in this shooting incidence.

Between a situation where you actually had the benefit of a door that you could close to separate you from the screaming mental patient, and that of the officer who was basically face-to-face with the potential threat?

How well do you think you would have been able to speak with him and deal with patience if you didn't have the benefit of a door separating you from him? How about if he was actually running at you? Do you think you would have the opportunity to "talk rationally" at that point?

As I said, no point in trading stories, though do you have any, what is your experience of such?

Those who have attacked me have all been clothed. I have had minor injuries, no one has died. Those who have just run at me have either gone on to attack or have backed down. I have always gone for open handed fend offs or my cuffs first.

What have you done in such situations?

 

[LTC8K6]

I have arrested, either on my own or with colleagues, with back up nearby or hours away, numerous people who were aggressive, I found frightening and who were under the influence of drugs, alcohol or with mental health or behavioral issues. Some I knew well, some I had never encountered before.

I see no point in trading stories as that is off topic. What I will say is that officer failed in his duty to protect and preserve life an the excuse for him doing so is quite frankly pathetic especially when you look at other incidents where people have been excused killing because they got scared.

I don't see the relevance at all. Even if I take you at your word.

 

[Nessie]

You continually cite your own (alleged) experience as evidence of your authority in these matters, and now you "won't trade stories" because it's off topic? In the same post containing yet more claims of experience?

I was being asked what experience I had. Answered it and then will now stop to prevent this going further off topic.

Her a police officer is cleared of killing a man who appears to have been having a mental health episode. The justification being he did not do what the officer told him to. There are further similarities with the college incident in that the officer in that he did not use a baton for fear of the male and could not use a tazer as he was not certified. Yet he was still allowed out on patrol

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-marine-death-20120929,0,1874048.story

"Sandberg told investigators he didn't use a baton to subdue Loggins because he thought Loggins could overpower him. He could not use a Taser because he was not certified at that time and there wasn't another deputy present with one."

"At 4:46 a.m., an officer stated over the radio that Loggins was returning. Over the next 27 seconds, Sandberg repeatedly commanded Loggins to stop and said, "Show me your hands," and "Don't you get in the car or I'll shoot you."

Loggins ignored Sandberg and was heard saying, "I have somewhere to go" and "Give me my kids back." Another deputy said Loggins appeared stiff and had a "very determined and very mean" expression."

So the police officer got scared and went straight to deadly force.

 

[Nessie]

I don't see the relevance at all. Even if I take you at your word.

What experience have you got? I have answered that question which various people have asked me as I came out with arguments to show how that cop was a coward and killed an ill man.

I have now posted another example of a police officer who killed a ill man.

 

[LTC8K6]

I was being asked what experience I had. Answered it and then will now stop to prevent this going further off topic.

Her a police officer is cleared of killing a man who appears to have been having a mental health episode. The justification being he did not do what the officer told him to. There are further similarities with the college incident in that the officer in that he did not use a baton for fear of the male and could not use a tazer as he was not certified. Yet he was still allowed out on patrol

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-marine-death-20120929,0,1874048.story

"Sandberg told investigators he didn't use a baton to subdue Loggins because he thought Loggins could overpower him. He could not use a Taser because he was not certified at that time and there wasn't another deputy present with one."

"At 4:46 a.m., an officer stated over the radio that Loggins was returning. Over the next 27 seconds, Sandberg repeatedly commanded Loggins to stop and said, "Show me your hands," and "Don't you get in the car or I'll shoot you."

Loggins ignored Sandberg and was heard saying, "I have somewhere to go" and "Give me my kids back." Another deputy said Loggins appeared stiff and had a "very determined and very mean" expression."

So the police officer got scared and went straight to deadly force.

Uh huh...

Wagner said the threat Sandberg faced was "instantaneous" and "immediate." Price added that Sandberg had a clear concern for the children in the back seat; he told investigators that he acted out of the belief that Loggins would cause harm to his daughters.

In witness statements, both of Loggins' daughters said he ran a red light before the crash. One said she heard her father mumbling after he drove into the parking lot. "I was afraid and I think the officer was too, so that's why he shot him, so we wouldn't get hurt," she said.

 

[LTC8K6]

What experience have you got? I have answered that question which various people have asked me as I came out with arguments to show how that cop was a coward and killed an ill man.

I have now posted another example of a police officer who killed a ill man.

Internet heroes are a dime a dozen.

I don't care what your experience or my experience is, it's irrelevant. We weren't there. We didn't have to deal with the situation. We would be under completely different rules, anyway.

My experience is with the US Army, which you probably hate even more than US police officers.

 

[Nessie]

So I was right, straight to deadly force as he was too scared of the male to try and use his baton, he made limited use of trying to talk him down and did not have his tazer as he was not certified. The police officer spent a lot of time standing back watching the situation unfold until he decided I am going to kill him.

Here if you are not qualified or it has run out, you are not allowed out on patrol and can be disciplined for allowing your certification to go out of date. If an armed police officer said I killed him because I had left my other kit in the office and he was scary, he would be in jail and out of the job.

 

[LTC8K6]

So I was right, straight to deadly force as he was too scared of the male to try and use his baton, he made limited use of trying to talk him down and did not have his tazer as he was not certified. The police officer spent a lot of time standing back watching the situation unfold until he decided I am going to kill him.

Here if you are not qualified or it has run out, you are not allowed out on patrol and can be disciplined for allowing your certification to go out of date. If an armed police officer said I killed him because I had left my other kit in the office and he was scary, he would be in jail and out of the job.

Your oversimplifications of the incidents are cute, but I don't think they are fooling anyone.

 

[Nessie]

Internet heroes are a dime a dozen.

I don't care what your experience or my experience is, it's irrelevant. We weren't there. We didn't have to deal with the situation. We would be under completely different rules, anyway.

My experience is with the US Army, which you probably hate even more than US police officers.

Wrong, I despair about a situation where such lame excuses allow people to get away with killing others. That is it. The rest is you trying to avoid the issue.

 

[Nessie]

Your oversimplifications of the incidents are cute, but I don't think they are fooling anyone.

He heard a car crash, saw a male acting erratically, watched as he did did not want to go near him for fear of being over powered, failed to establish verbal contact and then killed him as he may have been going to drive off, assuming he could have with the damage to his car.

The officer also did not have all his equipment with him and vitally not the non lethal weapon.

Would he have gone out on patrol without his gun, but with his tazer and baton?

Your inability to deal with the actual issues is not fooling anyone.

 

[Turgor]

What I can't wrap my head around is who thought it was a good idea to place a single police officer with a gun on duty at a place where they apparently think police presence is needed. I've never seen armed cops works in smaller groups than 2 in my country, because where they are needed, they are likely to need backup.

ETA: well except for cops on motorbikes

 

[Bikewer]

I suppose in the ideal world envisioned by some of the responders here, all police officers would be ex-Navy Seals, capable of running marathons without elevating their heart-rates and subduing drug-addled individuals with one hand while writing the appropriate report with the other....
In the real world, where there are federally-mandated hiring requirements and vastly different standards of fitness and training and equipping...
On our campus department, most all the officers have been hired after police service elsewhere, and no one is in the "young and juicy" category. I'm 65. I still retain a degree of competence... Still, as the guy in No Country For Old Men said, "sometimes I feel...Overmatched."
We have twice subdued individuals much as described in this situation. One lad required 5 of us sitting on top of him while we waited for the ambulance. The other was tasered as I mentioned.
We have officers ranging from 30-ish years of age to myself, ranging in size from a female about 5 feet tall to a male who's 6'4" and 250 pounds.... With a very wide level of fitness as well.
I think that's pretty typical.
Departments that have tried to maintain strict standards for fitness have run into problems trying to apply same across the board. Officers have demanded on-duty access to training facilities, or compensation for gym memberships.
Older officers have suffered injuries in training... even suffered heart attacks. Lawsuits have resulted, and many departments are now reluctant to press mandatory fitness standards outside of the academy....

 

[Joe Random]

My experience is with the US Army, which you probably hate even more than US police officers.

If run of the mill campus security is expected (at least by some in this thread it would seem) to have marksmanship skills not seen since the remake of "Dawn of the Dead" (e.g. hit a fast moving target in a specific body part) then I imagine you Army types can do all that fancy curve-the-bullet-mid-flight stuff with your tanks, right?

 

[Nessie]

All you need is a cop who is prepared to have a go at tackling with non lethal methods and having the patience to keep trying verbal communication.

If all else fails and as a last resort then use your gun.

My argument with all of these cases is that people went for their guns way too early and killed and then got away with murder for seriously lame excuses.

One of the reasons I shot him was because I had left my baton behind in the office, or I had let my tazer qualification lapse FFS. I got scared of someone banging on my door. He was dressed as John Travolta. They have all passed as a reasonable excuse to kill.

 

[LTC8K6]

If run of the mill campus security is expected (at least by some in this thread it would seem) to have marksmanship skills not seen since the remake of "Dawn of the Dead" (e.g. hit a fast moving target in a specific body part) then I imagine you Army types can do all that fancy curve-the-bullet-mid-flight stuff with your tanks, right?

We're so good at shot placement, we're only allowed to carry .22LR derringers...