|
Post by Dark Cloud on Sept 11, 2014 18:04:53 GMT -6
The police should be well armed, well trained, and well led. And they shouldn't be used to absorb the bad decisions of politicos and business leaders. Here in Boulder, there are periodic outbreaks of "violence" involving college kids who are drunk. Go figure. They burned furniture in the streets and nobody today can remember the issue. Businesses were outraged and wanted the police to clear out the hooligans and all that. They did. Then the hooligans arrived with their high end lawyers from the folks and the same business types suddenly became concerned of police 'over reaction' less their business be hurt.........Police cannot win, sometimes.
But a kid I employed back in the day, a good guy, became a cop in Denver. They were looking for a specific guy, thought he was in this apartment, the kid climbed up the back and got in and headed for the bedroom where the guy was. The guy was startled, in bed, but moved quick and the kid killed him thinking he was grabbing a weapon. Also? Wasn't the right guy. FUBAR in spades. I know the kid, and he was not stupid, nor incompetent, nor irresponsible. He broke procedure because he thought it best at the time, I can only assume. You read about similar things, and I can only assume most are as competent as this guy, and I have to ask if the police since the 50's have developed this dramatic approach in response to movies, tv, and else even more than the general public. There's something wrong here. Colorado ain't the Bronx and neighborhood cops walking the beat ought to be more common than sitting in squad cars, waiting.
Also, it annoys me to read from around the country that a unit of police approaching some kid on the steps leading from the street, ask for ID while simultaneously telling him to keep his hands up, and when he pulls out a wallet they think it a gun and open fire. How many times have we read this "elite" unit fired a ton of bullets and few hit but enough to kill him fifteen feet away? I understand the police are not required to get hurt, but surely intermediary steps could be employed. And, for all this gun fetish, why the hell aren't they better shots? And "elite?" This probably doesn't happen as much as it seems, but way too much even so. One riot, one ranger was the myth, but now the desired result seems to be a shootout with corpses galore. Again, not as many as it may seem, but too many.
The NRA was founded on improving the shooting skills of soldiers and public. Now they want clearly unqualified idiots with automatic assault rifles given free rein, which strikes me as the exact opposite of what the founders wanted: disciplined marksmen.
|
|
|
Post by AZ Ranger on Sept 12, 2014 9:47:35 GMT -6
Don't disagree that along with the equipment and weapons there is a responsibility to make a correct decisions. That is different from the threshold of when an officer is in fear of his/her life.
A lot of criminal activities require cognizant culpability such as knowingly or negligence. Seems to me that a police officer fubar doesn't always have that mental state. Doesn't make it any less of a bad thing just lacks the criminal intent. Most of the time it is a civil remedy rather than criminal. Any police officer that knowingly harms someone in a criminal manner should be charged.
The job of police officers requires going into harms way and therefore forces decision making that may result in bodily harm or death. That same could be said about someone robbing a store there could be decisions made that result in bodily harm or death. The intent to rob the store moves the resulting injuries and/or death into criminal activity.
There are lots of variables from a justifiable shooting to 1st degree murder.
The other side to this is that you call the police and someone is in your house and threatening to kill you do you want the police officer to refuse to go in because if he/she errs he/she could be in prison.
There is no good outcome to some of these events.
I think you have a valid point that the NRA wants police marksmanship. I consider that a skill. That was lacking in my opinion at the LBH. The use of force is a choice and therefore similar to a tactic in that you choose the appropriate force for a certain observed situation. We teach a force continuum that goes from verbal to deadly force and back down to an appropriate level. If an officer choses to use deadly force he needs the skill to deliver it.
Regards
AZ Ranger
|
|
|
Post by AZ Ranger on Sept 12, 2014 9:53:36 GMT -6
Training sometimes leads to bad results. For years we have trained on the range when one officer shoots we all shoot. It could be with a whistle or some other sound to start firing but we found even without the start command if someone shot the other officer would shoot. We now tell the officers that they are to determine the threat themselves before shooting. Seems obvious but range training has caused lots of unanticipated problems.
At night we have night sites but still require the officer to identify the threat with a flashlight.
Regards
AZ Ranger
|
|
|
Post by crzhrs on Sept 12, 2014 12:30:51 GMT -6
<The police should be well armed, well trained, and well led.>
True, but they shouldn't be equipped with military-style equipment such as "Bear-Cats" and other heavily armored vehicles. Here in NH there has been controversy about Police Depts. receiving military-style equipment "just in case". In case of what? When police officers look like Navy Seals ready to take out ISIS or other terrorists-groups then we have a problem here in the US. People have the right to protest, express the views, without the Police looking like they are ready to take out anyone wearing a Peace Sign, Tie-Dyes, or Rasta Hair-Dos. Odd that we didn't see Military Style operations against that Cattle Grazing on Public Land Extremist and his supporters but used against Blacks protesting against the killing of a young African-American man! Why is that?
In addition there have been two recent incidents when Police Officers and/or officer entered a situation only to be gunned down by an assailant. The first involved four cops shot with one fatality when they approached a home and a suspect known to have a police record and a history of guns, drugs and violence. The assailant opened fire and hit all four cops with one dying. Another incident occurred when a police officer responding to dangerous situation talked to the elderly home owner whose son was in the house entered that home and was shot dead. Shouldn't the police officer have asked questions of the home owner as to temperament and whether there were guns in the house? He ended up dead! Granted police have a dangerous occupation, but common sense should be just as important as anything else. When in doubt, fall back and ask for assistance rather than rushing head-long and gung-ho into harm's way. The police have the advantage, not the suspect. Whenever possible wait for instructions and back-up rather than being Bruce Willis (Die-Hard) or Rambo and go in blasting. More times than not you end up dead or killing someone not involved.
|
|
|
Post by Yan Taylor on Sept 12, 2014 12:53:35 GMT -6
Your law enforcement is a little different than ours, so really I cannot comment, but it seems to me that the US Police have a way of saying to the criminals, whatever you can throw at us, we can hit you with something heavier, so where do you draw the line between the Police and the National Guard.
Ian.
|
|
|
Post by crzhrs on Sept 12, 2014 13:18:16 GMT -6
The police are there to protect city and town interests. The National Guard is there to supplement the federal military and/or natural disasters. One thing we must always remember here in the US . . . we are all Americans . . . we are on the same side. Stop with the us vs. them mentality. Do we want to end up like some third-world country that shoots before asking questions (whoops forgot about Iraq!) When one side has rocks and bottles and the other side has automatic weapons and military-style equipment the outcome is obvious. The strong should refrain from using their power at the last resort rather than go in with batons swinging, pepper-spray, rubber bullets, tear-gas, snarling dogs, rearing horses and other over-the-top force. This is America where we have the right to express our opinions without the threat of getting our heads bashed.
|
|
|
Post by Dark Cloud on Sept 12, 2014 13:18:50 GMT -6
crzhrs,
Agree in large measure. I don't think police training is as good as it should be, and in some cases certainly not up to snuff with their increase in firepower. Of course, we've concurrently allowed a huge increase in firepower to punks and cartels and pudgy nincompoops. And actual crooks. Very like the 7th in '76, since the actions of our government is equipping both sides by intent or incompetence.
I feel for police, especially the good ones. The temptation to say 'f___ it!' and blow away some creep who you know has done tons of evil and will do more given early parole must be strong. I worked as a bouncer and I know the sensation. They deserve it, but you cannot for tons of reasons. Once down that road, you can't heal quick or ever.
yantaylor,
We are VERY different from you. Your constitution isn't written and isn't law so much as tradition back to Canute if not Ug of Ur. You have Common Law and the requirement to retreat till the back is against the wall. The US deliberately chose the opposite view, a right to stand ground and not retreat. And sometimes, an obligation NOT to retreat.
We also have no actual national police, but the FBI with allegedly limited powers outside federal law. We have state police (AZ is part of Arizona's Rangers which are different than the Texas Rangers, who are sorta the FBI of their state police). Colorado has similar set up, a CBI and the State Patrol. Sheriffs are county, Federal Marshals work for federal judges and town marshals are ad hoc and weirdly contained in law. In Boulder County, the coroner - required to be 18 and not a felon, damn it - is the one person who can arrest a county sheriff. The only one.
Then, legal Bounty Hunters. The fun never ends.........
Most 'ranger' groups emerged from deputy status in the Wild West where nobody could afford a cop and they had to wing it. As predictable, these near street gangs had political leanings and like the police and fire companies in New York and other cities were not immune to bribes and threats of job loss. There are hysterical descriptions of all this in Bourke's On the Border with Crook.
|
|
|
Post by crzhrs on Sept 12, 2014 13:31:47 GMT -6
One thing to consider is who is allowed into the police force and military. Since the US military is now all-volunteer the government has lowered its standards of enlistment resulting in some who now are at best marginally qualified. Not sure on the standards of the police force but again one has to think that standards have been lowered to attract people into that line of work since it's not the most attractive way to earn a living. One has to be either extremely patriotic, religious, gung-ho, macho, conservative or "no way out of a dire situation" to serve today. Not saying all are like that but when you have a all-volunteer anything you are going to attract some who may not have any other options for advancement or who are doing so for ulterior motives.
|
|
|
Post by Dark Cloud on Sept 12, 2014 14:03:16 GMT -6
My impression is that the military has in general better soldiers now than ever. One problem is that far too many of those enthused and mentally there are physically not qualified. We're a fat nation. www.nbcbayarea.com/news/local/Army-Raises-Bar-on-Recruitment-Standards--211154521.htmlI'd always heard and read that the Army in the Vietnam era was the worst on average quality. Given the computers and high tech requirements now just for the rifleman, I'd doubt there are many morons in our service. I've always viewed service as a positive when hiring, absent rage and violent inclinations and flashbacks. The military discovers stuff that poor people never knew about themselves regarding eyesight and hearing that may have affected their low school and test scores.
|
|
|
Post by crzhrs on Sept 12, 2014 14:13:12 GMT -6
This is not a knock on our current service people. But we now have far more incidents of suicide, violence after being released from the military, unemployment, mental disturbance than at any other time. Granted most of the draftees during the Vietnam War didn't want to be there, let alone believe in the War and all the drugs, sex and lack of believe in what they were during compared to the enlisted people now it's very disconcerting that so many have had problems "Letting Go" of their time in combat. My father fought in WWII but never had any of the disorders so prevalent that we now see. He was very storic and only much later in life did he talk about his time in WWII and only reluctantly and with some prodding. He was kind, caring and never treated me or my siblings (or my mother) other than with respect and compassion. WWII may have been a "good" war but still many of the draftees and enlisted personnel came out of it holding it together and gave us the "Golden Years" of the late 40s and 50s when we believed that what we did and were doing was in the country's and world's best interest. Now . . . there is so much doubt and controversy that anything we do is questioned with an ulterior motive.
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Sept 12, 2014 15:42:14 GMT -6
Intended or not it is a direct knock on our military in all of the services, and betrays the fact that you have not got the slightest idea about what you are talking about CH. Not the slightest idea. It is the best qualified military we have ever had. Is it perfect ? No. Can it get better? Yes.
When you can personally guarantee that a peaceful demonstration will not become a violent riot, or that all crime from a mugging to a terrorist act will be conducted in a nonviolent, non life threatening manner, I volunteer here and now to go around the country and recover all of the up-graded, up-armored, up-capable equipment in the hands of the police departments of this great land of ours. Short of that guarantee, I would rather do all that any of us can to insure these police folks do return home to their families. It is not the equipment. Never has been. It is policy. Ask those questions of yours to policy makers.
Liberalism is only as good as the liberal THINKING behind it. Spouting off something you think is right is no good at all unless you examine the problem in depth. Their depth, not your depth.
|
|
|
Post by Yan Taylor on Sept 14, 2014 6:26:45 GMT -6
The laws over in the states are made in Washington, and these laws are extend within the boundaries of the USA, I have heard that some States can amend their laws, which is why some States have the death penalty and some don’t, but imagine if your laws were made by a bunch of bureaucrats and government officials in Toronto or Mexico city, that is what happens over here, we are governed by laws that are issued from Brussels, when the US wanted to extradite Abu Hanza from Britain he went to the European court of appeal and found loops holes found the human rights act, thus it took them years to get him, and thousands of British tax payers pounds in court costs.
And its these European laws that govern what our police can or cannot do, the US answer only to the United Nations, but we answer to the UN and the European Union, and believe me these Europeans are tricky bunch, it’s got so bad that our fishermen have to throw away some of their catch because they have caught too many, if they are found with too many fish they are fined by the harbour police.
Ian.
|
|
|
Post by AZ Ranger on Sept 14, 2014 8:55:46 GMT -6
<The police should be well armed, well trained, and well led.> True, but they shouldn't be equipped with military-style equipment such as "Bear-Cats" and other heavily armored vehicles. Here in NH there has been controversy about Police Depts. receiving military-style equipment "just in case". In case of what? When police officers look like Navy Seals ready to take out ISIS or other terrorists-groups then we have a problem here in the US. People have the right to protest, express the views, without the Police looking like they are ready to take out anyone wearing a Peace Sign, Tie-Dyes, or Rasta Hair-Dos. Odd that we didn't see Military Style operations against that Cattle Grazing on Public Land Extremist and his supporters but used against Blacks protesting against the killing of a young African-American man! Why is that? In addition there have been two recent incidents when Police Officers and/or officer entered a situation only to be gunned down by an assailant. The first involved four cops shot with one fatality when they approached a home and a suspect known to have a police record and a history of guns, drugs and violence. The assailant opened fire and hit all four cops with one dying. Another incident occurred when a police officer responding to dangerous situation talked to the elderly home owner whose son was in the house entered that home and was shot dead. Shouldn't the police officer have asked questions of the home owner as to temperament and whether there were guns in the house? He ended up dead! Granted police have a dangerous occupation, but common sense should be just as important as anything else. When in doubt, fall back and ask for assistance rather than rushing head-long and gung-ho into harm's way. The police have the advantage, not the suspect. Whenever possible wait for instructions and back-up rather than being Bruce Willis (Die-Hard) or Rambo and go in blasting. More times than not you end up dead or killing someone not involved. This is the BLM regarding the rancher seems to me the officer's are equipped with body armor, helmets, and weapon systems. As far as the vehicles are you suggesting that the police should have vehicles that make it easier to shoot at them? I doubt that any of those vehicles are patrol vehicles and are only used upon approval of the higher ups in any LE agency. As far as the body armor it is not military surplus. Look up Second Chance and see what is available. I think you should talk to the store owners to see if they thought it was a peaceful demonstration or did they experience looting and property damage. This equipment and vehicles are not the regular patrol items. They are a response to some action. Police wear a ballistic vest usually on a daily basis along with a duty belt for various use of force situations. The helmets and long arms are responsive to a situation. As far a the vehicles what are they being used for that would concern law abiding citizens. Are they running over persons? I think you would have to see their Department operating manual and what would bring about the responses. Looting and property damage along with fire bombinsg would probably have a different response than a peaceful demonstration that does not interfere with others rights. Regards AZ Ranger Attachments:
|
|
|
Post by AZ Ranger on Sept 14, 2014 9:26:01 GMT -6
The laws over in the states are made in Washington, and these laws are extend within the boundaries of the USA, I have heard that some States can amend their laws, which is why some States have the death penalty and some don’t, but imagine if your laws were made by a bunch of bureaucrats and government officials in Toronto or Mexico city, that is what happens over here, we are governed by laws that are issued from Brussels, when the US wanted to extradite Abu Hanza from Britain he went to the European court of appeal and found loops holes found the human rights act, thus it took them years to get him, and thousands of British tax payers pounds in court costs. And its these European laws that govern what our police can or cannot do, the US answer only to the United Nations, but we answer to the UN and the European Union, and believe me these Europeans are tricky bunch, it’s got so bad that our fishermen have to throw away some of their catch because they have caught too many, if they are found with too many fish they are fined by the harbour police. Ian. We don't answer to the UN. We can block any action that comes to a vote so can the Russians and Chinese. Their charter does not trump our constitution. The highest law enforcement authority designated by the constitution is the elected County Sheriff. Most federal law enforcement is created by statutes rather than constitution. That was some of the issues with the Bundy incident regarding BLM law enforcement authority. He believed the Sheriff could tell them to leave.
|
|
|
Post by AZ Ranger on Sept 14, 2014 9:48:14 GMT -6
When the officer in Ferguson fired his weapon wasn't it a handgun as carried by all uniformed officers? He wasn't in a military style vehicle at the time was he? What occurred should be investigated and the Departments should look at their procedures, equipment, and training.
What happened is that we had a different situation evolve when the property damage and looting started and the response would be different.
The available protective equipment and vehicle did not cause the initial contact to go the direction that it did. Those military style concerns are the reaction to other offenses. The last time I looked at Arizona Revised Statutes it is unlawful to destroy someone's personal property and to steal property. Depending on the number of persons involved the response would be different.
CH tried to make it appear as if the response to the Nevada rancher from the BLM was different for whatever reason he held to be important. If you look at the pictures available you will see the officer's wearing external vests, helmets, and carrying long arms and launchers.
Regards
AZ Ranger
|
|