what is happening here?

[ponderingturtle]

I keep seeing this statistic bandied about.

When you guys are saying "most dangerous" you're meaning shot or killed.

But how about assaulted?
Surely a police officer is more likely to get beaten at work than a power lineman or a shrimpin' boat captain.

What is your exact metric then? Does getting injured but not killed in a tree falling accident count or is it just being beaten?

 

[Pterodactyl]

At risk of harm in general. How many police drown or get electrocuted?

It seems that lineman and fishermen probably both take proactive measures to counter the dangers of their respective workplaces.

I think we can assume a lot more electrocutions and drownings would occur if they did not.

 

[ponderingturtle]

It seems that lineman and fishermen probably both take proactive measures to counter the dangers of their respective workplaces.

I think we can assume a lot more electrocutions and drownings would occur if they did not.

And of course we are happy to have them drown or electrocute innocent bystanders, because their safety is the most important.

 

[Pterodactyl]

A power lineman is more likely to be electrocuted than a police officer.
A commercial fisherman is more likely to drown than a power lineman.
A police officer is more likely to be assaulted than either.

It's almost as if these jobs have their own distinct dangers and ways of dealing with them.

 

[ponderingturtle]

A power lineman is more likely to be electrocuted than a police officer.
A commercial fisherman is more likely to drown than a power lineman.
A police officer is more likely to be assaulted than either.

It's almost as if these jobs have their own distinct dangers and ways of dealing with them.

Which is why the police need to kill anyone for any reason they want. Following their orders, not following their orders, following too quickly following too slowly. All these are great reasons for the police to kill innocents to keep themselves safe.

 

[Pterodactyl]

Which is why the police need to kill anyone for any reason they want. Following their orders, not following their orders, following too quickly following too slowly. All these are great reasons for the police to kill innocents to keep themselves safe.

...said no one, ever.

 

[caveman1917]

...said no one, ever.

...but did a lot of cops, all the time.

 

[zooterkin]

A power lineman is more likely to be electrocuted than a police officer.
A commercial fisherman is more likely to drown than a power lineman.
A police officer is more likely to be assaulted than either.

It's almost as if these jobs have their own distinct dangers and ways of dealing with them.

How many of those ways involve danger to the very people the people doing the job are supposed to serve and protect?

 

[ponderingturtle]

...said no one, ever.

Plenty of people defend each and every one of those killings. I know that 5 minutes of do exactly what I say or die is what anyone needs to do to live in any interaction with the police. As seen by this that many people do support.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/ct-daniel-shaver-police-video-20171208-story.html

So if no one said that, why were they supporting the murderous cop that time? that is their position, they just won't phrase it that bluntly. Just always use those as perfectly good reasons to defend a cop when one is warranted.

 

[Pterodactyl]

How many of those ways involve danger to the very people the people doing the job are supposed to serve and protect?

That's why it's an apples to hand grenades comparison.

 

[Pterodactyl]

Plenty of people defend each and every one of those killings. I know that 5 minutes of do exactly what I say or die is what anyone needs to do to live in any interaction with the police. As seen by this that many people do support.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/ct-daniel-shaver-police-video-20171208-story.html

So if no one said that, why were they supporting the murderous cop that time? that is their position, they just won't phrase it that bluntly. Just always use those as perfectly good reasons to defend a cop when one is warranted.

"Plenty of people"...
Sounds a lot like Trump's "people are saying..."

Yes, police get a little more benefit of the doubt in using force because, literally, part of their job is to use force. That's not hardly anyone else's job.

 

[ponderingturtle]

"Plenty of people"...
Sounds a lot like Trump's "people are saying..."

Yes, police get a little more benefit of the doubt in using force because, literally, part of their job is to use force. That's not hardly anyone else's job.

Of course the jury found him to have acted appropriately, so those people for a start. It seem surprising that he isn't still on the job as is so often the case.

Go look at the threads on Tamir Rice. People really don't care.

 

[ponderingturtle]

"Plenty of people"...
Sounds a lot like Trump's "people are saying..."

Yes, police get a little more benefit of the doubt in using force because, literally, part of their job is to use force. That's not hardly anyone else's job.

Yep nothing criminal about killing someone after holding him at gun point for 5 minutes with him being compliant until his pants started to fall down. That is a legal reason to kill for the cops.

 

[Mumbles]

Of course the jury found him to have acted appropriately, so those people for a start. It seem surprising that he isn't still on the job as is so often the case.

Go look at the threads on Tamir Rice. People really don't care.

Also: Eric Garner, John Crawford 3rd, Rekia Boyd, Terence Crutcher, Philando Castille.

ANd those are the more famous ones, on camera, clearly posing no threat, black people. Apply my usual caveats about increased rates among the mentally ill of all races, and for Native Americans.

(I strongly suspect that many who openly supported the above murders were outraged when that one cop abused and arrested a white nurse for refusing to illegally draw blood from a crash victim, but honestly, why bother looking whether someone's a racist murder apologist versus some other sort, when they're ethically repugnant either way?)

 

[Roboramma]

It seems that lineman and fishermen probably both take proactive measures to counter the dangers of their respective workplaces.

I think we can assume a lot more electrocutions and drownings would occur if they did not.

You claimed that police were injured more often. When asked what your metric is, this is your reply? Can you just give a straight answer?

 

[luchog]

I keep seeing this statistic bandied about.

When you guys are saying "most dangerous" you're meaning shot or killed.

But how about assaulted?
Surely a police officer is more likely to get beaten at work than a power lineman or a shrimpin' boat captain.

Police are really not at much greater risk to get assaulted on their jobs than a lot of other public-facing positions. They're certainly at less risk of being assaulted and robbed than people who work with money and don' t have the security of a bank.

But the majority of police line-of-duty deaths are traffic incidents.

Are most job-related deaths of police caused by traffic incidents?

Excerpt:

The memorial fund found that traffic-related incidents were the leading cause of death for officers in 15 of the past 20 years. According to the fund’s count, 124 law enforcement officers were killed in 2015. Traffic-related incidents were the leading cause, comprising 52 of the deaths. Of the 52, 41 died in automobile or motorcycle crashes and 11 were struck and killed outside their vehicles. Of the total number of officers killed in 2015, 42 were shot and killed.

Excerpt:

In terms of occupational deaths, 104 law enforcement workers were killed on the job in 2014, according to BLS. The 2014 report shows that fewer police officers were killed on the job than a variety of occupational categories. The three industries with the largest number of total fatal occupational injuries were, in order with the highest, construction; transportation and warehousing; and agriculture, forestry, fishing and hunting.

Even using the rate of occupational deaths, these three industries ranked in the top three. And regardless of whether you use the number of officers in the BLS measure, FBI measure or the memorial fund’s measure, police deaths rank lower than these three industries — and many others.

There's a chart in the article showing industry deaths and injuries. Law Enforcement doesn't even make the top 10. Although it's much harder to find information on non-fatal injuries for various industries, from my reading it seems to be that industries where people are carrying money or are put in close contact with the public in certain situation are more likely to be assaulted -- retail, bars/nightclubs, hospitality, and related jobs.