Originally Posted by T LEE
Originally Posted by 4ager
Originally Posted by deflave
Originally Posted by Mannlicher

a couple of things come to mind. First, that most of these incidents come as a result of the 'war on drugs'. Maybe we should not be calling local police efforts a WAR. That is sending the wrong signal to the police.
Second, a huge percentage of new police persons are recent military veterans. It's possible that they have a mindset of killing things, particularly since they are told we are 'at war with drugs'.
Third, with the proliferation of military equipment being used by local police, I see a lot of the "if you have it, you'll use it" mentality.

Of course, I'm just a dumb ole country boy, but this is how I view it.

and as an addendum, the rancor and nasty comments in these threads come mostly from the police and their supporters. Vile ad hominem attacks and the like are common currency with those that are 'tired of the attacks on the police'.


The only change has been smart phones and societies ability to share media with the entire world in the push of just a few buttons.

There is nothing pretty about the use of force and people that are subject matter experts on the use of force know that a video gives one dimension to a four dimension story. People that do not understand the legal parameters of the use of force have a difficult time seeing much of the footage and believing it could be justified in a court of law. And that is understandable.



Travis


Shooting an unarmed man in the back when he has agreed to surrender (AZ) is indefensible. Shooting an elderly man in the back during a traffic stop (with no probable cause) in front of his wife because he needs his cane to stand (SC) is indefensible.

Shooting a man's dog in front of him when you've been called BY the man to investigate a burglary of his home (TX), in his fenced in yard when you have no warrant, no probable cause, and no damned reason to be there (UT), shooting an old Bassett hound in front of a woman and her kids and firing toward that woman and her kids when you have no warrant, no probable cause, and no reason to be on their property (WV), among many others, is indefensible.


Yep and these are the exceptions that prove the rule. 99% of interactions with LE DO NOT result in a shooting or excessive violence. It is the sensationalism that makes these popular, not the mundane day to day type of LE interactions.


No those are the exceptions that prove only that you and yours in LE accept and excuse a level of malpractice that no other profession would accept much less excuse; and you demand that we citizens, also, accept and excuse it with a hearty 'Yes Sir, may I have another.'

I will even accept your own percentages, 99% acceptable policing to 1% 'in a shooting or excessive violence', without question or a demand for documentation. Should we and would you accept and excuse 1 horrid case of malpractice in 100 from any profession other than LEO:

A surgeon that did a sex change 1 in of 100 surgeries when he was to do only a hernia repair.

A bus driver that left his loaded bus parked to be crushed by a train on 1 of each 100 routes driven.

A garbageman that dumps 1 in 100 barrels on his clients' yard.

Even a clerk at a taco stand, an illegal with poor English, would be quickly fired if he served 1 in 100 customers a taco when they ordered a burrito.

If we factor in that the components of arrogance and intent in incidents of LEO malpractice to our garbageman comparison, it would be more like if the garbageman dumped the garbage on our doorstep instead of our yard and shat on top of the pile.

You accept and excuse much too much; and demand that we do too. You, also, expect us to thank you for the insults and injuries.

[Linked Image]