Forums before death by AOL, social media and spammers... "We can't have nice things"
|    alt.prisons    |    Not always a Johnny Cash song    |    3,649 messages    |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
|    Message 3,492 of 3,649    |
|    Morf to LaW Man    |
|    Re: Police killed son needlessly, mother    |
|    24 Dec 03 17:22:43    |
      XPost: alt.law-enforcement, alt.thebird.copwatch, nyc.general       XPost: alt.true-crime       From: central222@hotmail.com              LaW Man wrote:       >       > >       > > I need a little help on this please. Is this how officers of the law       > > are trained to deal with citizens who are mental patients?       >       > It has nothing to do with being a mental patient. It has to do with dealing       > with an armed individual.              Cops are allowed to execute anyone they assume to be a threat.              Regardless that they would likely be found not guilty.              As was John Hinckley.              > Just because someone is a mental patient, and       > comes at you with a knife, do you treat him any different than an armed       > person coming at you with a knife who is not a mental patient. I think not,       > and that is how we are trained....to go home after your shift.              Executions not sanctioned by juries have been halted as per the federal       ruling.              Preemptive executions are not constitutional.              A citizen has a right to self defense.              A government preemptively executing in self defense any imagined threat,       is authorized       nowhere in the Constitution.              If someone is acting mentally ill, it is further reason not to execute       him, due to the       likelihood of being found not guilty.              Cops are obsolete.              Mental patients are disarmed every day by medical personnel without       deadly force.              Bringing only a gun to all situations is ignorant negligence and       deliberate intentional       homicide.              > I am not       > > condemning all officers of the law with my posting of these articles.       > > I am concerned, for one reason, because my younger sister is       > > schizophrenic. So, therefore, I do have experience on these matters. I       > > have never had to use deadly force on her to protect her, myself or       > > anyone else (yes there have been irrational moments of danger). Are       > > some officers who choose to use deadly force allowed to be judge,       > > jury, and executioner, so to speak?       >       > Not Judge, Jury and Executioner, but statutorily protected, as are you.       >       > You have the authority to use deadly force as a last resort in the defense       > of one's self, when there is reasonable cause to believe that you are in       > eminent danger of death or great bodily harm, and as a last resort in the       > defense of another person or persons, who you have reasonable cause to       > believe is being unlawfully attacked and in eminent danger of death or great       > bodily harm, and as a last resort to prevent the escape of a suspect, that       > you have PROBABLE CAUSE to believe that the person to be arrested has used       > deadly force in the commission of a felony, or the person to be arrested can       > reasonably be thought to be intent on endangering human life or upon       > inflicting serious bodily harm.       >       > It seems to me it is highly       > > possible too unarm a citizen of a knife with a baton bat to the wrist,       > > etc. How do officers of the law go from initiating a taser subduction       > > to two fatal shots in the chest, avoiding attacking the shoulders       > > first and then the legs?       >       > These things happen in seconds. With the information supplied in the post,       > one could not comment on why they went from taser to gun. Normally there is       > one cover officer, and one contact officer in these situations. I don't know       > what this particular department carries. Some departments don't carry oc,       > some do. Some departments carry PR24 batons (which I think are useless) and       > some carry expandables, but I suppose it's possible that some don't carry       > either. Either way, it takes some amount of time to get them out, unless       > you're holding it to begin with. We are trained to escalate one level of       > force above the suspect's. He had a knife, the officers should have their       > guns out. I'm surprised they even tried to taser him, but that's a decision       > that was made at the time and at the scene, that I wouldn't second guess.       > They were probably trying anything they could short of shooting him, that's       > why they tried the taser. The cover officer in the situation in question       > obviously thought that either he or his partner were going to be severely       > injured by this knife weilding mentally disordered person. As for shooting       > in the shoulders or legs, I don't mean to put you down, but you obviously       > have never fired a handgun, or been in a situation like this. I have seen       > shooting situations where both a suspect and officer have emptied their gun       > at each other, and both hit absolutly nothing. We are trained to shoot body       > mass...the largest target, nothing more.       >       > This officer has but 2 1/2 years experience.       > > Does anyone think this may have been a factor?       >       > It very well could have been a factor. But what is the answer. Leave the       > rookie on the desk until he gets 10 years experience, but then where would       > he get it from. The most you can hope for is that you train new recruits       > adequately, and then hope they make correct decisions, and respond to       > situations in the way you trained him. In this situations, it seems that he       > did react the way he was trained. Would a veteran officer have handled this       > differently? Who knows, maybe, maybe not. I don't believe the kid did       > anything wrong.       >       > > I end up with more questions than answers on this. Again I am not here       > > to condemmn all officers of the law, but I am allowed to question some       > > of their actions. Any response is greatly appreciated. -frog       >       > Yes, as is the question.              --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05        * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)    |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
(c) 1994, bbs@darkrealms.ca