Dimannos view on recent police killings and mayhem
- Thread starter nottyboi
- Start date
Some of her points are valid, but she is off base about scissors Frankly the best thing the Toronto Police Service could do, presuming they have this type of training set up. Is to invite her to come in and do a computerized shoot don't shoot involving edged weapons. I believe she will really be shocked how little time there is to make such decisions and how quickly that person clear across the room can stab you.
One on one, you have a point, but there were a bunch of cops in surrounding this guy and many other options including pepper spray or tazers. Not only that, was it really necessary to TRIPLE tap the guy? WTF
Not necessary, but expedient. If the victim lives, he can tell his version of events. When he's dead the police can make up a story to cover up their guilt.
I believe any police force needs to be itself policed effectively. So I wholeheartedly support the SIU, so long as they're doing their jobs.
I'm not familiar enough with the situation.
However, FWW most police are trained to double tap. If you have decided to shoot make sure that the suspect is hit. Further, a lot of people are frankly surprised to learn that police agencies value a lot of things in non-special unit Constables more than being able to shoot like "Dirty Harry."
Clearly a cultural issue. If cops want to be soldiers I say we drop them off in Afghanistan and give them a 50% pay cut.
Soldiers? Only in your world. Those who have actually serve would tell you it's not the same at all and I'm being polite.
I'm not sure if you "get" that I'm saying that other than SWAT team types, most Constables are not Annie Oakley the fact that they fire three times is likely not so much that they are "trying to finish someone off," as it is they are attempting to make sure that they actually hit the person they are shooting at.
Face it what would most of us want in a Constable someone who will turn into or already is the best detective in the Golden Horseshoe or someone who can shoot the wings off a fly across a football field?
I would want the detective. The fact is, gun use is a small part of being a cop. Investigation and community relations are far more important. Frankly I think the first 2 rounds in the clip should be plastic bullets. This would give police a very useful non-lethal knock down option. If they need to use lethal force, they are only 2 pulls of the trigger away.
Riiiight! Just like the people who think that a cop should be able to shoot to wound like they do in Hollywood. You really are a dreamer. Two rounds and 1 second behind the bad guys who has a free choice of weapons and rounds, purposely putting the cops at a lethal disadvantage. Ask the widows of cops killed in action how they feel about your idea, but I suggest you wear safety glasses when you do.
As someone who was a soldier I can tell you that everything I know confirms that police have so much more to know and be concerned about before pulling the trigger than the military. I can also tell you that shooting is not as easy as some people think especially with a hand gun. Now exchange paper targets with moving live angry human beings who most people including military and I would suspect police are naturally avert to shooting and you have a whole new ball of wax to deal with. As far as the "double or triple tap" goes, I was always taught in the army that you shoot at your target until the threat is neutralized (unable to continue their attack whether they be dead or otherwise non-capable of causing injury) I am pretty sure that the police are taught the same theory.....
On top of all of this I find that after the fact we all have time to critique and judge things at length when both soldiers and police at the time of the event do not have that same luxury, everything going on (usually in chaos of some form) needs to be assessed in seconds or less, targets acquired, weapons identified and defences chosen, alternate actions considered, what is behind the target, what is the ramification if you act one way or another etc etc etc....
I think 99.9% of armchair quarterbacks judging soldiers and/or cops would fail the shoot/don't shoot simulation trials, so it is a little unfair to be pillaring people stuck in that situation.
Agreed.
A lot can happen in a fraction of a second and thats the difference between life and death.
.
Apply the same use of force training to police as you do to soldiers is insane. Soldiers have a much more clear cut mandate (in traditional wars anyway) To assess all threats as the same is also wrong. Some nut walking along with a pair of scissors is NOT the same as a guy carrying a loaded ak-47. When a guy has a gun, and he is injured. He can still deliver lethal force. When someone has a pair of scissors, he actually had to be able to stand to attack you. In any case I am glad the press is finally starting to question what our police are doing.
Not sure how many hunters there are on Terb. Shooting an unarmed deer at 20 yards a minimum of 50% of novice hunters will miss. The average guy in the bush will get "buck fever" (too excited) and miss the target. Firing a handgun at a paper target from 20 yards novice shooters at a controlled gun range with no pressure on them 50% will miss the target.
Imagine what happens when firing at a human when that human has become a threat to you. Adrenaline kicks in, fear, there is no such thing as attempting to wound an assailant. You shoot at the largest part of the body (the chest) there is no such thing as shooting at his legs/arms. The average police officer is not the greatest of marksmen. Would not want their job.
Imagine what happens when firing at a human when that human has become a threat to you. Adrenaline kicks in, fear, there is no such thing as attempting to wound an assailant. You shoot at the largest part of the body (the chest) there is no such thing as shooting at his legs/arms. The average police officer is not the greatest of marksmen. Would not want their job.
21 feet
That is the distance on all accredited research that an armed assailant with an edged weapon (knife/pair of scissors, piece of broken glass) will kill you if they are at or within that distance even if you are armed with a gun.
As long as a target is a threat, able to wield a weapon they will be fair game to be neutralized (edged weapon or AK47 etc etc etc). you do not have to be able to stand to deliver a lethal blow with an edged weapon or even a blunt force weapon such as a club/wrench etc. I have no problem with questioning the police actions so long as it is placed in an accurate context. The time it takes you to read this post is probably 100 times that the officer has had to see the threat, make a decision on what to do, react and then re-assess.
