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:

 Smacks wrote:
I would like to point out the impossibility of grabbing a police officers gun, if he isn't carrying one. The presence of the guns in this case is what caused the situation to escalate to where someone died.

If a person grabs or tries to grab a police officer's gun, and that person is subsequently shot as a direct consequence of that action, it is that person's own fault. "Don't grab a police officer's weapon" is not a high bar to overcome.

Neither is subduing a man in a 1v5 fight. But, here we are.....

 Hordini wrote:
If a person grabs or tries to grab a police officer's gun, and that person is subsequently shot as a direct consequence of that action, it is that person's own fault.

Assuming the person is mentally culpable, and aware of the risks. I will give you that.

"Don't grab a police officer's weapon" is not a high bar to overcome.

It shouldn't be, certainly not for you and me right? But when 12 year old boys and homeless men are allegedly giving the police "no choice" but to use deadly force, you have to wonder if maybe we can't always rely on people's good judgement. Remember, in this case the officer's safety was threatened by his own gun.

In all fairness, we are talking about the potential intersection of quite a few social problems here (mental health, homelessness, racial bias, perception of police) and I would argue the least of them is police officers being armed with pistols.

I wonder if this will spark new riots. Police brutality had only just gotten out of the news too...

Dropbear Victim wrote:
I wonder if this will spark new riots.

No one's going to riot over a homeless guy in a place like LA. If it's anything like NYC the homeless population is generally considered to be annoying scenery, like pigeons.

Large-scale homelessness in the US really only happens in like, 4 states, and the people who live there are pretty oblivious to their existence by and large.

To put it differently, if society gave a gak about people like him, he wouldn't have been living in a tent on the street in one of the richest countries in the world.

It has a lot to do with how the police handle it, don't you think? The LAPD is probably pretty prepared for this sort of thing from a PR perspective.

 Manchu wrote:
In all fairness, we are talking about the potential intersection of quite a few social problems here (mental health, homelessness, racial bias, perception of police) and I would argue the least of them is police officers being armed with pistols.

Appealing to bigger problems is not an argument, it is a deflection.

 Smacks wrote:
Remember, in this case the officer's safety was threatened by his own gun.

If you try to push an agenda, yes.

In the real world, his safety was threatened by another person attacking him and reaching for his gun.

 Smacks wrote:
Appealing to bigger problems is not an argument, it is a deflection.

That's true enough. I should have said that the fact that police officers are armed with deadly weapons is not in my view a problem in itself nor is the fact that these deadly weapons are sometimes used to fatal effect necessarily a problem, either. Indeed, that is exactly the intended result and I think we have the legal, regulatory, and ethical infastructure to be reasonably assured of its justification generally. The problem is when a fatality or really any injury, whether caused by a firearm or otherwise, results inappropriately. Whether the result in these circumstances was inappropriate is not evident on the face of the available facts. And speculation does not afford grounds to judge.

 Dreadwinter wrote:

 Hordini wrote:

 Smacks wrote:
I would like to point out the impossibility of grabbing a police officers gun, if he isn't carrying one. The presence of the guns in this case is what caused the situation to escalate to where someone died.

If a person grabs or tries to grab a police officer's gun, and that person is subsequently shot as a direct consequence of that action, it is that person's own fault. "Don't grab a police officer's weapon" is not a high bar to overcome.

Neither is subduing a man in a 1v5 fight. But, here we are.....

So tell me about your experience of subduing a man who had just shrugged a taser off. You're speaking with such absolute certainty, you obviously have personal knowledge of this.

So the US police has now taken to monthly executions of its own citizens?
Good job...



I mean... Couldn't they think of any other way to stop him reaching for that gun except shooting him? Maybe they need more training in how to restrain people? Doesn't the US police carry pepper spray, batons etc. for restraining when their taser does not work?

 Iron_Captain wrote:
So the US police has now taken to monthly executions of its own citizens?
Good job...



I mean... Couldn't they think of any other way to stop him reaching for that gun except shooting him? Maybe they need more training in how to restrain people?

Hey, how's that hyperbole working out for you?

 djones520 wrote:

 Iron_Captain wrote:
So the US police has now taken to monthly executions of its own citizens?
Good job...



I mean... Couldn't they think of any other way to stop him reaching for that gun except shooting him? Maybe they need more training in how to restrain people?

Hey, how's that hyperbole working out for you?

I don't know. Are you supposed to pronounce it like hyperbowl or hyperbo-le?

 Jehan-reznor wrote:
Homeless are not really people so it's okay.

I always make Jokes about Judge death in the dredd universe but murica cops are getting there.

Dredd was a wussy who'd get eaten alive in Compton.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Iron_Captain wrote:
So the US police has now taken to monthly executions of its own citizens?
Good job...



I mean... Couldn't they think of any other way to stop him reaching for that gun except shooting him? Maybe they need more training in how to restrain people? Doesn't the US police carry pepper spray, batons etc. for restraining when their taser does not work?

Thats why the US beat the Soviets, our monthly culling of the weak. That and Tex Mex, the destroyer of empires (and bathrooms) for centuries.

IF someone points a gun a a policeman and doesn't drop it after being told to do so - well ....

IF a old, underfed homeless guy is able to get a gun while being arrested be FIVE policemen, well .... maybe your policemen need more/better training?

I (and I am aware I could be wrong) think, that if the USA would reduce the amount of money they spend for their military by 1% they could use one of the many billions they would save on better training for their police officers. That might actually save more lives.

 von Hohenstein wrote:
IF someone points a gun a a policeman and doesn't drop it after being told to do so - well ....

IF a old, underfed homeless guy is able to get a gun while being arrested be FIVE policemen, well .... maybe your policemen need more/better training?

Or the perp is on drugs.

In all fairness, if someone shrugs off a taser, they're one of two things; a zombie, or a vampire. And we don't want either of them becoming an epidemic.

What if they were Vampire Zombies?

 thedarkavenger wrote:
In all fairness, if someone shrugs off a taser, they're one of two things; a zombie, or a vampire. And we don't want either of them becoming an epidemic.

Speaking of which... I wonder if it's possible to train yourself to "overcome" a taser shot.

Regardless, from what I've seen at LAPD, it appears that the officers is fully justified.

 Ouze wrote:

Dropbear Victim wrote:
I wonder if this will spark new riots.

No one's going to riot over a homeless guy in a place like LA. If it's anything like NYC the homeless population is generally considered to be annoying scenery, like pigeons.

Large-scale homelessness in the US really only happens in like, 4 states, and the people who live there are pretty oblivious to their existence by and large.

To put it differently, if society gave a gak about people like him, he wouldn't have been living in a tent on the street in one of the richest countries in the world.

yeah, you only riot over people whose face you can put on a sign

 Frazzled wrote:

 von Hohenstein wrote:
IF someone points a gun a a policeman and doesn't drop it after being told to do so - well ....

IF a old, underfed homeless guy is able to get a gun while being arrested be FIVE policemen, well .... maybe your policemen need more/better training?

Or the perp is on drugs.

I have been part of an 8 person dogpile of a guy on PCP who was able to come of the ground with all of us on top of him. That was after he ripped the padded wall from the cell that was secured with giant anchors into the concrete. During that fight he was able to grab the baton of one of the officers from his belt.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 hotsauceman1 wrote:

 Ouze wrote:

Dropbear Victim wrote:
I wonder if this will spark new riots.

No one's going to riot over a homeless guy in a place like LA. If it's anything like NYC the homeless population is generally considered to be annoying scenery, like pigeons.

Large-scale homelessness in the US really only happens in like, 4 states, and the people who live there are pretty oblivious to their existence by and large.

To put it differently, if society gave a gak about people like him, he wouldn't have been living in a tent on the street in one of the richest countries in the world.

yeah, you only riot over people whose face you can put on a sign

It was the same way back during the civil rights marches. Do you really think Rosa Parks was the first person to refuse to give up her seat? She was the most sympathetic, so she became the face of the movement.

 d-usa wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

 von Hohenstein wrote:
IF someone points a gun a a policeman and doesn't drop it after being told to do so - well ....

IF a old, underfed homeless guy is able to get a gun while being arrested be FIVE policemen, well .... maybe your policemen need more/better training?

Or the perp is on drugs.

I have been part of an 8 person dogpile of a guy on PCP who was able to come of the ground with all of us on top of him. That was after he ripped the padded wall from the cell that was secured with giant anchors into the concrete. During that fight he was able to grab the baton of one of the officers from his belt.

Jesus... seriously?

O.o

That's terrifying!

I don't know the facts about this case but I think some people have the mistaken impression that if you are unarmed, you should be able to fight with cops and expect not to be shot.

 KiloFiX wrote:
I don't know the facts about this case but I think some people have the mistaken impression that if you are unarmed, you should be able to fight with cops and expect not to be shot.

I think that people have the non-mistaken impression that resistance should be met with appropriate levels of force. The question remaining is "what is the appropriate level of force".

 KiloFiX wrote:
I don't know the facts about this case but I think some people have the mistaken impression that if you are unarmed, you should be able to fight with cops and expect not to be shot.

My friend who is a police officer says he sees this sentiment on a weekly basis. People believe that they have the right to fight, and that they expect a cop to only 'fight back' using the same level of effort. So if they want a fist fight, they think the cop is legally obligated to disarm and only subdue the person with their bare hands, one-on-one. Like if they 'win' they are not going to get arrested.

Well, people are dumb.

But isn't that what batons are for, was a gun necessary?

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
But isn't that what batons are for, was a gun necessary?

We will have a better, but not perfect, answer after footage is released.

Was he "just" reaching? Did his fingers touch it? Did he have a hold of it but hasn't managed to get the release loose?

 Iron_Captain wrote:

I mean... Couldn't they think of any other way to stop him reaching for that gun except shooting him? Maybe they need more training in how to restrain people? Doesn't the US police carry pepper spray, batons etc. for restraining when their taser does not work?

If Tasers don't work on a subject then pepper spray and batons aren't going to work either.

 Frazzled wrote:
What if they were Vampire Zombies?

In Some countries that's what vampires are.

OT: Seems insane that 5 police man cant take down 1 homeless dude after a tazor. ether they are fresh desk jockeys out for a field run or the homeless guy is on some crazy stuff.