Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Hordini wrote:

 Dreadwinter wrote:
How about the idea that the Police think they need to use at least two to three magazines at any time on Civilians?

What if they ever have to deal with a violent encounter involving more than one person? Or do you think officers should just be issued one bullet, similar to Barney Fife, to ensure that they never have the proper tools to deal with anything. Would you feel comfortable potentially going into harm's way with a single magazine? If you knew you might have to go into a fight with more than one person, who could easily all be armed, alone, with backup potentially minutes away, would you really want only one magazine?

Wow, when did the US become a War Zone? Have you been watching too many action movies? You are treating this like every single time an officer puts on the badge he is going to be getting in to a gun fight with the Triad over millions of dollars worth of drugs. We have Swat teams for a reason, I'm not talking about serving warrants either. These types of incidents to not happen every day.

How often do you think these situations occur? Also, you should stop trying to prove your points with ridiculous scenarios that have never occurred.

 whembly wrote:

 the shrouded lord wrote:
ebery single one of the people wholiked that post should be shot in the head. If possible I would volunteer to do so.

Whoa there buddy... I believe #BlueLivesMatter too, but the proper response is to point out the ridiculousness of that mindset.

Things like when ever DaBlasio appears, the police physically turns their back to him. That's the right way to do this.

Alright, this you need to explain to me, what did deblasio do? I heard the leader of the police union pretty much blame him for the attack, and I really don't understand it.

 Hordini wrote:

 Dreadwinter wrote:
How about the idea that the Police think they need to use at least two to three magazines at any time on Civilians?

What if they ever have to deal with a violent encounter involving more than one person? Or do you think officers should just be issued one bullet, similar to Barney Fife, to ensure that they never have the proper tools to deal with anything. Would you feel comfortable potentially going into harm's way with a single magazine? If you knew you might have to go into a fight with more than one person, who could easily all be armed, alone, with backup potentially minutes away, would you really want only one magazine?

No, they should not have to deal with violent criminals. They need to rely on an organization and pull back till a US Army/Marine unit arrives on scene to deal with the Insurg...eerrrr combatant. The risk is to high to have LEO go in under equip and under gun regardless of the situation.

 Dreadwinter wrote:

 Hordini wrote:

 Dreadwinter wrote:
How about the idea that the Police think they need to use at least two to three magazines at any time on Civilians?

What if they ever have to deal with a violent encounter involving more than one person? Or do you think officers should just be issued one bullet, similar to Barney Fife, to ensure that they never have the proper tools to deal with anything. Would you feel comfortable potentially going into harm's way with a single magazine? If you knew you might have to go into a fight with more than one person, who could easily all be armed, alone, with backup potentially minutes away, would you really want only one magazine?

Wow, when did the US become a War Zone? Have you been watching too many action movies? You are treating this like every single time an officer puts on the badge he is going to be getting in to a gun fight with the Triad over millions of dollars worth of drugs. We have Swat teams for a reason, I'm not talking about serving warrants either. These types of incidents to not happen every day.

How often do you think these situations occur? Also, you should stop trying to prove your points with ridiculous scenarios that have never occurred.

So a police officer having to defend himself against multiple assailants is a ridiculous scenario that has never occurred?

Carrying a service pistol with two or three additional magazines does not make the US a war zone. Most police deaths happen in the course of normal traffic stops.

Just a little aside, but I'm kind of glad my cousin, who was a NY state trooper, retired this year. I really hope no more of this happens, on either side. The rhetoric spouting from both sides is ridiculous, and it looks like this is going to just get worse.

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

 whembly wrote:

 the shrouded lord wrote:
ebery single one of the people wholiked that post should be shot in the head. If possible I would volunteer to do so.

Whoa there buddy... I believe #BlueLivesMatter too, but the proper response is to point out the ridiculousness of that mindset.

Things like when ever DaBlasio appears, the police physically turns their back to him. That's the right way to do this.

Alright, this you need to explain to me, what did deblasio do? I heard the leader of the police union pretty much blame him for the attack, and I really don't understand it.

:whembly cracks his knuckles:


A) He was part of this march:
http://nation.foxnews.com/2014/12/14/millions-march-nyc-what-do-we-want-dead-cops-when-do-we-want-it-now
Shouting “What do we want? Dead cops! When do we want it? Now!”

B) He held secret meeting with the protesters saying that he's "sorry" for how awful his police were...
http://nypost.com/2014/12/19/de-blasio-meets-with-protest-leaders/

C) Every chance he can get, he's utterly divisive towards the police.

D) When he actually showed up to visit the victims, the police there literally turned their back against him:
http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/nyc-crime/nypd-cops-turn-backs-de-blasio-hospital-article-1.2052215

E) Former governor Pataki said it best:

@GovernorPataki
Follow
Sickened by these barbaric acts, which sadly are a predictable outcome of divisive anti-cop rhetoric of #ericholder & #mayordeblasio. #NYPD
8:17 PM - 20 Dec 2014

Frankly, law enforcement has lost faith and trust in City Hall and the system has veered dangerously toward the type of dysfunction which opens the door to anarchy.

DeBlasio is damaged goods... he needs to be recalled pronto. (if that's possible)

 Hordini wrote:

 Dreadwinter wrote:

 Hordini wrote:

 Dreadwinter wrote:
How about the idea that the Police think they need to use at least two to three magazines at any time on Civilians?

What if they ever have to deal with a violent encounter involving more than one person? Or do you think officers should just be issued one bullet, similar to Barney Fife, to ensure that they never have the proper tools to deal with anything. Would you feel comfortable potentially going into harm's way with a single magazine? If you knew you might have to go into a fight with more than one person, who could easily all be armed, alone, with backup potentially minutes away, would you really want only one magazine?

Wow, when did the US become a War Zone? Have you been watching too many action movies? You are treating this like every single time an officer puts on the badge he is going to be getting in to a gun fight with the Triad over millions of dollars worth of drugs. We have Swat teams for a reason, I'm not talking about serving warrants either. These types of incidents to not happen every day.

How often do you think these situations occur? Also, you should stop trying to prove your points with ridiculous scenarios that have never occurred.

So a police officer having to defend himself against multiple assailants while knowing how many enemies he is going to be fighting and instead choosing to take only one single weapons magazine is a ridiculous scenario that has never occurred?

Carrying a service pistol with two or three additional magazines does not make the US a war zone. Most police deaths happen in the course of normal traffic stops.

WAIT A SECOND! ILL FIX THIS POST FOR YOU!

There you go, that pretty much set up the situation you presented to me. You were almost tricky enough to get me though, you sly dog you!

Also, can you give me some links to normal traffic stop fatalities for police where they have needed to fire more than 1 magazines worth of bullets? Also, its not like most cop cars are not equipped with additional firepower in case of such events. Like shotguns or rifles or things like that. They never have those handy. Not ever.

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

 whembly wrote:

 the shrouded lord wrote:
ebery single one of the people wholiked that post should be shot in the head. If possible I would volunteer to do so.

Whoa there buddy... I believe #BlueLivesMatter too, but the proper response is to point out the ridiculousness of that mindset.

Things like when ever DaBlasio appears, the police physically turns their back to him. That's the right way to do this.

Alright, this you need to explain to me, what did deblasio do? I heard the leader of the police union pretty much blame him for the attack, and I really don't understand it.

In his speeches, he is painting the cops in New York as racist, trigger happy killers.

 whembly wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

 whembly wrote:

 the shrouded lord wrote:
ebery single one of the people wholiked that post should be shot in the head. If possible I would volunteer to do so.

Whoa there buddy... I believe #BlueLivesMatter too, but the proper response is to point out the ridiculousness of that mindset.

Things like when ever DaBlasio appears, the police physically turns their back to him. That's the right way to do this.

Alright, this you need to explain to me, what did deblasio do? I heard the leader of the police union pretty much blame him for the attack, and I really don't understand it.

:whembly cracks his knuckles:

Spoiler:

A) He was part of this march:
http://nation.foxnews.com/2014/12/14/millions-march-nyc-what-do-we-want-dead-cops-when-do-we-want-it-now
Shouting “What do we want? Dead cops! When do we want it? Now!”

B) He held secret meeting with the protesters saying that he's "sorry" for how awful his police were...
http://nypost.com/2014/12/19/de-blasio-meets-with-protest-leaders/

C) Every chance he can get, he's utterly divisive towards the police.

D) When he actually showed up to visit the victims, the police there literally turned their back against him:
http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/nyc-crime/nypd-cops-turn-backs-de-blasio-hospital-article-1.2052215

E) Former governor Pataki said it best:

@GovernorPataki
Follow
Sickened by these barbaric acts, which sadly are a predictable outcome of divisive anti-cop rhetoric of #ericholder & #mayordeblasio. #NYPD
8:17 PM - 20 Dec 2014

Frankly, law enforcement has lost faith and trust in City Hall and the system has veered dangerously toward the type of dysfunction which opens the door to anarchy.

DeBlasio is damaged goods... he needs to be recalled pronto. (if that's possible)

Makes sense then. NYC politicians are never not nuts it seems.

Police should, if anything, have BETTER guns. I would prefer a thousand scum die than a single cop.

 the shrouded lord wrote:
Police should, if anything, have BETTER guns. I would prefer a thousand scum die than a single cop.

Seriously, calm down. We need to solve this problem at it's root, not increase tensions. Rhetoric will only lead to more violence and death.

 the shrouded lord wrote:
Police should, if anything, have BETTER guns. I would prefer a thousand scum die than a single cop.

Really? That is pretty sick and twisted. I personally would prefer nobody die in this situation and instead we pull our heads out of our butts and stop shooting each other.

But to each his own I guess.

 the shrouded lord wrote:
Police should, if anything, have BETTER guns. I would prefer a thousand scum die than a single cop.

Wow. I see that pro-authoritarian mindsets are strong among the UK teenage crowd...

1. I'm australian.
2. most people my age here hate the cops.
3. while I would prefer that a criminal die than a police officer, my prior comment may have been...somewhat over the top.
4. no, now that i tihink more, the cops should not have better guns. they are fine the way they are.

Statements mad in the heat of the moment usually are, and that's the main problem here. People have not calmed down long enough to deal with anything

Although I will agree that many people my ages (late teens-early twenties) do seem to have an irractional hate of cops. For no reason other than it's "cool". And possibly because of pot possession.

 the shrouded lord wrote:
1. I'm australian.
2. most people my age here hate the cops.
3. while I would prefer that a criminal die than a police officer, my prior comment may have been...somewhat over the top.
4. no, now that i tihink more, the cops should not have better guns. they are fine the way they are.

Fair enough, I clicked reply before looking at your flag. I had it in my head you were one of the UK guys.

I mean, no one wants the bad guy to get away, or the bad guy to kill the good guy. Don't get me wrong. A Dredd style attitude is too far the opposite direction as well though.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
Although I will agree that many people my ages (late teens-early twenties) do seem to have an irractional hate of cops. For no reason other than it's "cool". And possibly because of pot possession.

Hey, I'm 30 and have an irrational hatred of the cops.

Doesn't mean I'm cheering when one gets shot though.

 the shrouded lord wrote:

2. most people my age here hate the cops.

Do they really, though? I don't know how old you are but most people I know, including the ones around my age (Late teens), who don't go around breaking the law don't hate them.
Honestly more hate is directed towards Judges in my experience.

Well then. I am not surprised that a bunch of people hate cops.

I mean I don't trust american police officers at all. Not since one of them thought I was illegal immigrant when I told them I was from Australia.

There is a difference between truly hating the cops, such as the man that performed these two terrible murders, and disliking some of the laws that the cops are bound to enforce.

If you cannot make the distinction between the two, you should not be involved in the argument. Do the responsible thing and excuse yourself from it.

 Dreadwinter wrote:
There is a difference between truly hating the cops, such as the man that performed these two terrible murders, and disliking some of the laws that the cops are bound to enforce.

If you cannot make the distinction between the two, you should not be involved in the argument. Do the responsible thing and excuse yourself from it.

Let's provide an example...

The Garner incident...

Why did NY felt it necessary to empower the police to arrest someone for selling loosies? It's a teeny-tiny black market infraction... why not just ticket the person? ala like parking tickets?

The more regulated an environment gets... the more likely you'd see what transpired to Garner.

 Matt.Kingsley wrote:

 the shrouded lord wrote:

2. most people my age here hate the cops.

Do they really, though? I don't know how old you are but most people I know, including the ones around my age (Late teens), who don't go around breaking the law don't hate them.
Honestly more hate is directed towards Judges in my experience.

oh, which state do you live in?
nearly all teenagers here seem to have a strong disdain for the police, one that irks me.

 Dreadwinter wrote:


Also, can you give me some links to normal traffic stop fatalities for police where they have needed to fire more than 1 magazines worth of bullets? Also, its not like most cop cars are not equipped with additional firepower in case of such events. Like shotguns or rifles or things like that. They never have those handy. Not ever.

It's not the 'normal traffic stops' that they carry multiple magazines for. It's those extraordinary circumstances like this that police need to, and SHOULD be, carrying more than one magazine.




(And if you'll pay attention, you'll notice the criminal RELOAD his firearm.)

Not only that, but you do realize that IF the cars are "equipped with additional firepower" it's often locked in the trunk, yes? That's not exactly handy.

The notion that police officers should only be carrying the magazine that is in their firearm is, quite frankly, an absurd one.

 the shrouded lord wrote:

 Matt.Kingsley wrote:

 the shrouded lord wrote:

2. most people my age here hate the cops.

Do they really, though? I don't know how old you are but most people I know, including the ones around my age (Late teens), who don't go around breaking the law don't hate them.
Honestly more hate is directed towards Judges in my experience.

oh, which state do you live in?
nearly all teenagers here seem to have a strong disdain for the police, one that irks me.

QLD, in Brisbane, too.

Though I live in the Northern-most suburbs, so that could play into it.

I'm west and closer to the city itself. ight have something to do with it, pot and cocaine are also more available here which may be another part of it.

Can we have some postitivity for the cops please? I mean I dislike Illinois cops. But not all american cops are that bad right?

 cincydooley wrote:

 Dreadwinter wrote:


Also, can you give me some links to normal traffic stop fatalities for police where they have needed to fire more than 1 magazines worth of bullets? Also, its not like most cop cars are not equipped with additional firepower in case of such events. Like shotguns or rifles or things like that. They never have those handy. Not ever.

It's not the 'normal traffic stops' that they carry multiple magazines for. It's those extraordinary circumstances like this that police need to, and SHOULD be, carrying more than one magazine.




(And if you'll pay attention, you'll notice the criminal RELOAD his firearm.)

Not only that, but you do realize that IF the cars are "equipped with additional firepower" it's often locked in the trunk, yes? That's not exactly handy.

The notion that police officers should only be carrying the magazine that is in their firearm is, quite frankly, an absurd one.

WOO! WE GOT A VIDEO! Finally, some evidence. Alright, lets look at this bad boy. Oh man, he DID reload his firearm after 7 shots. Then he didn't shoot anymore and ran away!

Wow, you really showed me with that situation. The cop clearly needed more firepower with that one weapon being fired at him and one magazine being used. GIVE THIS MAN A GRENADE!

I'm glad you could respond with so much mature sarcasm and hyperbole.

I'll just wrap it up here and say that I agree with all the other people on this thread that think you're wrong.

 Dreadwinter wrote:

 Hordini wrote:

 Dreadwinter wrote:

 Hordini wrote:

 Dreadwinter wrote:
How about the idea that the Police think they need to use at least two to three magazines at any time on Civilians?

What if they ever have to deal with a violent encounter involving more than one person? Or do you think officers should just be issued one bullet, similar to Barney Fife, to ensure that they never have the proper tools to deal with anything. Would you feel comfortable potentially going into harm's way with a single magazine? If you knew you might have to go into a fight with more than one person, who could easily all be armed, alone, with backup potentially minutes away, would you really want only one magazine?

Wow, when did the US become a War Zone? Have you been watching too many action movies? You are treating this like every single time an officer puts on the badge he is going to be getting in to a gun fight with the Triad over millions of dollars worth of drugs. We have Swat teams for a reason, I'm not talking about serving warrants either. These types of incidents to not happen every day.

How often do you think these situations occur? Also, you should stop trying to prove your points with ridiculous scenarios that have never occurred.

So a police officer having to defend himself against multiple assailants while knowing how many enemies he is going to be fighting and instead choosing to take only one single weapons magazine is a ridiculous scenario that has never occurred?

Carrying a service pistol with two or three additional magazines does not make the US a war zone. Most police deaths happen in the course of normal traffic stops.

WAIT A SECOND! ILL FIX THIS POST FOR YOU!

There you go, that pretty much set up the situation you presented to me. You were almost tricky enough to get me though, you sly dog you!

Also, can you give me some links to normal traffic stop fatalities for police where they have needed to fire more than 1 magazines worth of bullets? Also, its not like most cop cars are not equipped with additional firepower in case of such events. Like shotguns or rifles or things like that. They never have those handy. Not ever.

It's not about knowing how many enemies you'll face. The point is you don't know what you're going to face that day, so it's better to be prepared. That's why most police officers carry two or three extra magazines.

What would your suggestion be, since you seem to be so concerned with police carrying two or three extra mags?

 cincydooley wrote:
I'm glad you could respond with so much mature sarcasm and hyperbole.

I'll just wrap it up here and say that I agree with all the other people on this thread that think you're wrong.

How do you want me to react when somebody provides me with something that I did not ask for and then tries to say "HA GOTCHA!"

Here is a quote from me! Look, it says exactly what I want.

Also, can you give me some links to normal traffic stop fatalities for police where they have needed to fire more than 1 magazines worth of bullets? Also, its not like most cop cars are not equipped with additional firepower in case of such events. Like shotguns or rifles or things like that. They never have those handy. Not ever.

There was no fatality. There was not more than 1 magazines worth of bullets fired. In fact, did the cop fire a shot? Do not act high and mighty here when you cant even give me what I want to continue your argument with me.

As for the people that are disagreeing with me, that is pretty much Hordini. Jihadin just made a joke. Did I miss somebody?

 Dreadwinter wrote:

 cincydooley wrote:
I'm glad you could respond with so much mature sarcasm and hyperbole.

I'll just wrap it up here and say that I agree with all the other people on this thread that think you're wrong.

How do you want me to react when somebody provides me with something that I did not ask for and then tries to say "HA GOTCHA!"

Here is a quote from me! Look, it says exactly what I want.

Also, can you give me some links to normal traffic stop fatalities for police where they have needed to fire more than 1 magazines worth of bullets? Also, its not like most cop cars are not equipped with additional firepower in case of such events. Like shotguns or rifles or things like that. They never have those handy. Not ever.

There was no fatality. There was not more than 1 magazines worth of bullets fired. In fact, did the cop fire a shot? Do not act high and mighty here when you cant even give me what I want to continue your argument with me.

As for the people that are disagreeing with me, that is pretty much Hordini. Jihadin just made a joke. Did I miss somebody?

Here's a link to a video that meets your requirements. WARNING: It is quite graphic. link

You haven't answered my question yet though. How many magazines do you think police should carry? And why do you think two or three extra is too many? I'm pretty sure very few people think that two or three extra magazines is anything extreme. I'm guessing nobody else is engaging with you, not because they agree with you, but because your posts are ridiculous.