Why did you shoot the suspect 68 times

Many of our police like our society are hyper conditioned by
a fear culture. We are taught that our societal safety can only be remedied with
the threat of death by firearm. Are there no other choices?

If we really cared about justice and had reverence for life,
the TPB could certainly have created a smart bullet by now.
(we have "smart" everything else)
Why not a Day After Bullet?

A bullet that can could vaporize just before impact and place the victim into a twilight
slumber. A sort of "We can talk about it tommorrow "bullet.
How many police officers and criminals
wish this was an option before 3 seconds changed the rest of their life?

The reason this isn't a reality is because the people in
charge are psychotic and want a "death now clean up later" culture.

It's fantastic business for the NRA that you, as a citizen, are perpetually worried
about the African American family down the street. You'll buy more and more
death culture defense systems . They want division, they want paranoia because
it gives them more and more control and wheel barrels of cash everyday.

a reply to: Ismail
Are you saying that it would be impossible for someone…say a criminal (which are in every part of the world)…to possess a firearm. I mean I get the fact most law abiding citizens and even probably a lot of criminals don't have a firearm but come on lets be real here. It can will and probably has already happened. Unless you have the dumbest people in the world as cops wherever you are they're probably gonna shoot back with the intent of stopping the attacker. Again I get the point your making…it's just unrealistic and wrong.

a reply to: RickyD

Are you saying that it would be impossible for someone…say a criminal (which are in every part of the world)…to possess a firearm.

Of course not.

It can will and probably has already happened

Yes, certainly. And most of it happened in America.

Again I get the point your making…it's just unrealistic and wrong.

The point that I'm making is that this particular event didn't happen anywere else. It happened in America, along with an overwhelming amount of most trigger-happy shootouts that occur in the western world.

Please explain how my point is unrealistic and wrong ?

originally posted by: Ismail
Sure.
But you let the police make that decision, when according to the law, it should have been a judge.
And you let them make jokes about it afterwards. About the killing of another human being, albeit a dangerous one.

What happens when the police decide that *you* are a highly dangerous individual ?

You don't seem to get it...or maybe reality is to tough for you. The perp shot first, period. That gives the SWAT all the justification they need to return fire.

As far as I'm concerned, it was a clean kill.

The cops killed a murderer that was intent on taking more lives. There is a difference between killing and murdering.

a reply to: TDawgRex

You don't seem to get it...or maybe reality is to tough for you. The perp shot first, period. That gives the SWAT all the justification they need to return fire.

I don't think I ever argued that they were'nt...

(*Or maybe *reality* is too tough for me... "T-Dawg" ? )

There is a difference between killing and murdering.

And that has to be my favorite sentence in the whole thread.
Not much I can add now, to be honest.

a reply to: Ismail

If you are trying to imply this scenario has never happened in your country your being obtuse. Give this some thought…How long have guns been around…how long has your country been around…how long has the US been around? I'd say if you took the blinders off and stop trying to make it out like this is only a thing going on in the US and research your country's past I bet you can find examples there too. There are a lot of historical reasons for the differences between American and European culture…one being how governments or in Europe's case monarchies ruled their people harshly and unfairly…because they outlawed the means to challenge their power. Those who wanted to break from that culture were the ones who designed our system…which made a point of making sure we never found ourselves in that position again. So yes there are trade offs…sometimes bad things involving firearms happen but it also gives us a means of protection from a multitude of threats including some you don't have much recourse to challenge in most of Europe's culture. It's almost like your comparison is apples to oranges simply due to the history and culture involved. In Europe however you'll probably find the same level of violence if not more…they just use melee weapons (which in my mind are much more violent).

a reply to: RickyD

In Europe however you'll probably find the same level of violence if not more…they just use melee weapons (which in my mind are much more violent).

Sure, you just keep telling yourself that.

I'm certain that you'll find plenty of links about the "european police" stabbing a suspect 68 times with spears or those other "much more violent than fully-automatic firearms melee-thingy" they must use over there, and then bragging laughingly about how they just ran out of javelins or they would have stabbed the guy some more.

It's bound to happen every day over there, same as in the US, right ?

I mean don't go out of the way and do anything drastic like research on crime statistics or whatever.
Your uninformed guess about a place you've never lived is "probably" accurate. If not more !

originally posted by: UnderKingsPeak
It's fantastic business for the NRA that you, as a citizen, are perpetually worried
about the African American family down the street. You'll buy more and more
death culture defense systems . They want division, they want paranoia because
it gives them more and more control and wheel barrels of cash everyday.

This statement has me more perplexed about the liberal mindset than anything else. Why does it have to be made racist? Because that is the liberals bread and butter. They promote the paranoia and division.

I could care less who lives down the street from me as long as they are good people, regardless of race. But a bunch of crackheads or meth-heads move in...then I do have a problem.

Guns don't kill people...people kill people. It's a freakin' simple as that.

a reply to: TDawgRex

Guns don't kill people...people kill people.

People don't kill people using guns when they don't have guns.

It's a freakin' simple as that.

What's freaking simple is killing people using a gun.

a reply to: Ismail

I get your point. I also agree that the cops in this instance wanted to kill the guy. While they were on the way to the shootout, they were all wanting to put at least one bullet in the bad guy. I have not doubts about that. I also realize they were not the judge, jury, and executioner here. But.....and I stress this, they bad guy did everything possible to make sure they could do exactly that.

In the case of the guy from PA that hid in the woods for a month, I feel like the cops really really wanted to shoot him as well. But....... he didn't give them the opportunity. Did they let him fall down on his face a few times? probably. Was that right? Probably not. But he is going to stand trial. Rather than chastise them, I think acknowledging their restraint is in order.

To put this in perspective, if someone killed a member of your family, and you had them in your sights and could pull the trigger without legal ramifications, would you? (please don't answer that, just think about it.)

a reply to: network dude

Thanks for getting where I'm coming from.
Let me add that I acknowledge your point about restraint, and agree that failure of restraint is often, if not always understandable. Nevertheless, wouldn't you agree that "understandable" is not synonymous with "right", especially when we are talking about armed executants of the law, and not petty mobsters ?

a reply to: Ismail

Absolutely. As with my hypothetical question. I am against taking any human life. But I am not sure what i would do if it were personal. I'd like to think I am a better person, but I honestly don't think I am. Would rage win over compassion?

All the anger seems to be about second guessing choices made. Since none of us were there, we cannot possibly know all the circumstances. But I agree that we as a society need to make drastic changes in how we operate. Be it police, military, or lunch counter soup guy. The real question, how do we make compassion a stronger emotion than rage?

a reply to: network dude

The real question, how do we make compassion a stronger emotion than rage?

Agreed, that is the tricky one, and it's also off-topic

Thank you for your post. I'm glad you stuck around, friend.
It made the thread worthwhile to me.

Here's to upholding the forum motto

Let's assume a few things for my hypothetical example.

Let's assume that a SWAT team is comprised of 12 individuals, each carrying a firearm with a 30 round capacity.

Let's assume we live in another dimension where everything is exactly the same, but there is no police force and we, as citizens, have to deal with criminals ourselves.

Let's assume that you are part of the group of people who are slightly more skilled than the rest when it comes to firearms, hand to hand combat, battlefield logistics etc. All the stuff that would make you better suited for being on the SWAT team (which doesn't exist in this scenario).

Now somehow there is a report that a man has executed someone, shot someone else and their dog, and is 'on the loose' in your community. You and 11 of your peers are chosen to apprehend this individual, and you are each armed with weapons with a 30 round capacity and told about his last known location.

You and the 11 others eventually find the guy and he sees you and fires a shot or two in your direction. If I place myself in this hypothetical (probably ridiculous) scenario, I'm not waiting around to see if he hits anything with his next shots. I'm firing back. What would you do? And you don't get to choose the cop-out of "I wouldn't be involved" or "In my country we don't have guns" because in this scenario you are involved, and you do have a gun, and it's up to you (along with 11 other capable individuals) to deal with a person who is killing people in your community.

What I'm trying to do with this (#ty) example is to remove the preconceived ideas of what the police are/do. In my world, there is no concern for the safety or well being of someone who plainly executes another human, and is showing that he/she has no regard for life by continuing to shoot people.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________

This case doesn't do much to show police stepping over the line. The guy killed, then shot at police. He's lucky he only got 68 when there could have been upwards of 300 rounds ready to go. Hell, someone shoots at me and misses they're lucky if I don't return fire until I hear a click. And I'm as far from a cop that you can get.

As to the idea of better training for officers, I'm all for it. Better training in firearms. Better training in human interaction. Better training in stress management. Better training in essentially every aspect of their job.

I have nothing against police in general, I know the public ask a lot of them on a daily basis. Especially in certain areas of the country where violent crime is more rampant. But to a degree I have to agree with TrueBrit that we should require more out of our officers. Maybe not by hiring only candidates with ninja skills and 2 or more ribbons in sharpshooting competitions, but there certainly needs to be some sort of screen.

My area has so many over weight cops, and I don't mean chubby. I'm talking like can't find clothes at a regular store fat. The sheriff here hadn't taken some sort of certifications for his pistol, and when people started to look into it the instructors from years past made comments like signing to certs "under a level of duress", that the sheriff has “no business carrying a gun and described him as uncoordinated and careless with the weapon".

We will never have a superhero police force, but we can certainly have a force with more skills than we currently see.

Maybe we should have this guy train the people who train the officers. Dude is an absolute beast with a gun.


ETA:: Just wanted to mention that Instructor Zero isn't all about fast shots, as that clip may indicate. He does lots of drills that work on keeping clear thought while shooting, moving, calculating...drills with math, drills with moving targets, drills with moving targets and innocents...he has an awesome perspective on combat, if you're into that kind of thing.

a reply to: ChaosComplex

Yep under the circumstances that you depict I'd probably do the same.

If I lived in a $hi##y society, where justice was often enough served at the point of a gun and you needed groups of armed thugs locked and loaded 24/7 because everyone else is packing unreasonable amonts of firepower and their lives are so screwed up by said $hi##y society that they keep blowing each other away on a regular basis (is this sounding familiar yet ?), then sure, I'd probably be in that moronic, lose-lose situation.

Would it be unfathomable, though, for me to wonder just what my $hi##y society is doing so wrong for me to have to be spraying random dudes brains all over the street every single freaking day ?

a reply to: Ismail

I get where you're coming from, but in the case presented here it's not just some random guy. It's someone who took a life and was trying to take more life. I'm not addressing the cases of blatant douche cops that shoot without real reason. There are plenty of threads about that topic.

I'm also all for a little more compassion to be introduced into the human race as a whole. However, this guy decided to kill a cop then have a firefight when SWAT got to him. Let's just wait til he runs out of ammo and arrest him, put him in prison and feed him 3 meals a day. Right? Sorry, but I have no compassion for murderers. You kill someone in this life, specifically without reason, I won't say you deserve to die...but if you get shot for it or fried in the electric chair I won't lose sleep over it. I know you're going to somehow try to equate killing someone who is shooting at you with murder, but I'll just attribute that to cultural differences. No harm, no foul.

I have to ask this just because of your avatar. Do you just hate police, hate the USA, or would you be OK with an armed police force if they acted how you think they should?

originally posted by: Ismail
Would it be unfathomable, though, for me to wonder just what my $hi##y society is doing so wrong for me to have to be spraying random dudes brains all over the street every single freaking day ?

It would be unfathomable if it weren't for the guy shooting at cops.

You expect the police to follow razor edge protocol, but you fail to address how this guy should have acted after the first incident i.e. blowing the cops brains out, shooting the other cop and the dog. He should have just went and turned himself in, to see a fair trial as guaranteed by living in the USA as a legal citizen...oh wait, he was an illegal immigrant? And he shot a cop 8 times for pulling him over?

Hmmmmm...

a reply to: ChaosComplex

FunkerTactical is awesome.

I will scream it from a mountain top, as a police officer our provided training sucks. I train out of my own pocket to receive the training I think we all should have. Most police officers feel the training they are provided is inadequate.

But let's face it the guy in your video trains all day, every day. He trains with a very military style.

The cost of training every patrol officer like that would be immense. Not to mention people think we are too militarized already.

As a police officer it is always a lose, lose situation.

a reply to: ChaosComplex

I have to ask this just because of your avatar. Do you just hate police, hate the USA, or would you be OK with an armed police force if they acted how you think they should?

I'll answer that by MP, since it's quite off topic.

originally posted by: Ismail
a reply to: TDawgRex

Guns don't kill people...people kill people.

People don't kill people using guns when they don't have guns.

It's a freakin' simple as that.

What's freaking simple is killing people using a gun.

I can see that you're pretty anti-gun. So I have to ask you, what business is it yours to be questioning my legally owned and Constitutional right to keep and bear firearms?

I don't rag on other countries who do not allow their population the right to do so. I just shake my head in wonder.

You seem to be stuck on some liberal news cycle spin where cops don't arrest any one here in the States, they just shoot them. That would be so far from the truth as to be ludicrous.

OK, I get it, you'd like to see people more compassionate. I'd like to see people show more common sense myself. Compassion without common sense doesn't work...but it does the other way around. But hey, it's not a perfect world and never will be.