Cleveland police to stop hitting people on heads with guns

[bucs90]

Pistol whipping is a non lethal submission tactic. I know you can't tell the difference between that and stabbing someone in the spleen with a bayonet affixed to an M-16 so I won't even try to explain it.

Idiot.

So you think that police should go around hitting people with their guns, because they don't have a baton - even though they do?

What about another alleged 'non-lethal tactic'? Like choke holding (kills people), slapping hard (severely injures people), using tasers (known to kill people with heart conditions), and attacking non-violent protesters with heavy crowd control gear and tear gas (which can cause deaths, amputations, and miscarriages). Just because a tactic is declared 'non-lethal' doesn't mean it isn't extreme or heavy handed. So you still don't get the point.

You can't tell the difference between a military police force, like that deployed by an authoritarian government, or a civilian police force.

So, what is the difference? A bayonet*, is the next step, after all, if you think that using one military method doesn't justify another, then you haven't paid attention in history class.

Russia Today would have a field day with people like you, and they already get enough propaganda ammunition from what US police do already - in violating civil liberties and humans rights to 'keep the peace'.

Thankfully the Justice Department doesn't think that hitting people with guns is a good tactic of keeping the peace, in fact it puts police in disrepute as it emphasizes police brutality and makes people lose faith in the police force.

*Link to Chinese Security forces training with bayonets: Meanwhile In China Bayonets At The Ready Zero Hedge

Again...what would you tell a Dad sending his 21 year old daughter to Police Academy? Is she going to get the best possible hand to hand and gunfighting training they can offer? Or not?

You want to turn every patrol officer into a member of a SWAT or an anti-terrorism squad?

As the 'best training available' is not on offer, for obvious reasons - most American neighborhoods are not full of terrorists and heavily violent criminals, in fact crime is on the decline in most towns and cities, and Baltimore is the exception rather than the rule: Crime Rates in U.S. Drop to 1970s levels

Violent crime in the U.S. fell 4.4 percent last year to the lowest level in decades, the FBI announced Monday.

In 2013, there were 1.16 million violent crimes, the lowest amount since the 1978’s 1.09 million violent crimes, Reuters reports.

All types of violent crimes experienced decline last year, with rape dropping 6.3 percent, murder and non-negligent manslaughter dropping 4.4 percent and robbery dropping 2.8 percent.

The rate of violent crime is 367.9 crimes for every 100,000 people, which marked a 5.1 percent decline since 2012. The rate has fallen each year since at least 1994.

But any cop on any day could. Garland TX? Fort Hood...that terrorist was dropped by a female civilian cop.

Patrol cops are the first to encounter violence. SWAT shows up 30 minutes later.

By using the butt of her gun to hit them with, or bullets?

At no point was it necessary for her to use the butt of her gun to hit someone with: Police officer who shot Fort Hood suspect says she s doing well - CNN.com

Once inside, Munley, who has been trained in active-response tactics, began exchanging fire with the alleged gunman, Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, a military psychiatrist, authorities said. They said her shots disabled Hasan and halted the attacks.

You're dodging the question. No police academy in America teaches to pistol whip.

What im asking is about your quote regarding "demilitarized" police tactics. I said...they arent using military tactics. Exclusively military tactics inclide warships and tank battalions and bombers.

Police DO however attempt to use the best available hand to hand and firearms training available.

So.happens....that the military does do.

They both train people how to WIN a hand to hand fight and a figh involving small arms like pistols and rifles.

So...my question is...would you tell a father that his soon to be cop daughter...will get the best possible survival training for her to win a violent encounter? Or...are you gonna tone it down so no one is offended by her having those skills?

 

[MathewSmith]

What if all the police and all the white people were removed from the communities-how would that change the rest of the community ? There would be no changes, I can swear. There would still be drugs, murder and unemployment. We should wake up and see where the real fault lies.

 

[skookerasbil]

Wait, so this was a thing? Holy fucking Christ, let's just bring back the gulags while we're at it.

Cleveland police to stop hitting people on heads with guns as part of Justice Department agreement cleveland.com

What a dummy ^^

Maybe they should use pool styrofoam fun rods on violent perps??!!!!

This is what you get when you get board members from places like Scratchmyassville USA commenting on stuff happening in the real world!!

 

[bucs90]

Wait, so this was a thing? Holy fucking Christ, let's just bring back the gulags while we're at it.

Cleveland police to stop hitting people on heads with guns as part of Justice Department agreement cleveland.com

What a dummy ^^

Maybe they should use pool styrofoam fun rods on violent perps??!!!!

This is what you get when you get board members from places like Scratchmyassville USA commenting on stuff happening in the real world!!

Yep. DontTazeMeBro is the ultimate poser. He claims to be some MMA fighter in training...but his knowledge of that field is oddly limited. The most dangerous thing hes ever done is probably using the Xbox vibrate controller while playing the UFC video game. Heck...thats probably the "training" he claims to do.

 

[hipeter924]

So you think that police should go around hitting people with their guns, because they don't have a baton - even though they do?

What about another alleged 'non-lethal tactic'? Like choke holding (kills people), slapping hard (severely injures people), using tasers (known to kill people with heart conditions), and attacking non-violent protesters with heavy crowd control gear and tear gas (which can cause deaths, amputations, and miscarriages). Just because a tactic is declared 'non-lethal' doesn't mean it isn't extreme or heavy handed. So you still don't get the point.

You can't tell the difference between a military police force, like that deployed by an authoritarian government, or a civilian police force.

So, what is the difference? A bayonet*, is the next step, after all, if you think that using one military method doesn't justify another, then you haven't paid attention in history class.

Russia Today would have a field day with people like you, and they already get enough propaganda ammunition from what US police do already - in violating civil liberties and humans rights to 'keep the peace'.

Thankfully the Justice Department doesn't think that hitting people with guns is a good tactic of keeping the peace, in fact it puts police in disrepute as it emphasizes police brutality and makes people lose faith in the police force.

*Link to Chinese Security forces training with bayonets: Meanwhile In China Bayonets At The Ready Zero Hedge

Again...what would you tell a Dad sending his 21 year old daughter to Police Academy? Is she going to get the best possible hand to hand and gunfighting training they can offer? Or not?

You want to turn every patrol officer into a member of a SWAT or an anti-terrorism squad?

As the 'best training available' is not on offer, for obvious reasons - most American neighborhoods are not full of terrorists and heavily violent criminals, in fact crime is on the decline in most towns and cities, and Baltimore is the exception rather than the rule: Crime Rates in U.S. Drop to 1970s levels

Violent crime in the U.S. fell 4.4 percent last year to the lowest level in decades, the FBI announced Monday.

In 2013, there were 1.16 million violent crimes, the lowest amount since the 1978’s 1.09 million violent crimes, Reuters reports.

All types of violent crimes experienced decline last year, with rape dropping 6.3 percent, murder and non-negligent manslaughter dropping 4.4 percent and robbery dropping 2.8 percent.

The rate of violent crime is 367.9 crimes for every 100,000 people, which marked a 5.1 percent decline since 2012. The rate has fallen each year since at least 1994.

But any cop on any day could. Garland TX? Fort Hood...that terrorist was dropped by a female civilian cop.

Patrol cops are the first to encounter violence. SWAT shows up 30 minutes later.

By using the butt of her gun to hit them with, or bullets?

At no point was it necessary for her to use the butt of her gun to hit someone with: Police officer who shot Fort Hood suspect says she s doing well - CNN.com

Once inside, Munley, who has been trained in active-response tactics, began exchanging fire with the alleged gunman, Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, a military psychiatrist, authorities said. They said her shots disabled Hasan and halted the attacks.

You're dodging the question. No police academy in America teaches to pistol whip.

What im asking is about your quote regarding "demilitarized" police tactics. I said...they arent using military tactics. Exclusively military tactics inclide warships and tank battalions and bombers.

Police DO however attempt to use the best available hand to hand and firearms training available.

So.happens....that the military does do.

They both train people how to WIN a hand to hand fight and a figh involving small arms like pistols and rifles.

So...my question is...would you tell a father that his soon to be cop daughter...will get the best possible survival training for her to win a violent encounter? Or...are you gonna tone it down so no one is offended by her having those skills?

First of all Pistol Whipping is not trained at all Police Academies because it isn't considered acceptable for most arrest situations, and can be rife for abuse (in this case literally): WATCH NYPD Officers Pistol-Whip Teen Suspected of Marijuana Possession - US News

Military methods include things not expected to be used in a civilian police force, the overlap begins in special units, SWAT teams, and counter-terrorism units.

It wouldn't for instance be acceptable to shoot to kill, when making an arrest of a non-violent protester or a non-violent criminal, as that is not a method of first resort.

That changes if you employ military methods to all aspects of the police force, like Authoritarian countries that entirely blur the line between police and the military - and train their officers to use extreme methods daily.

So, when you talk about the police training for extreme situations, as if they are a daily occurrence, that is not sending the right message.

It can offend people that military methods can be used, but they aren't restricted entirely on basis of 'offense' caused but on the actual requirement for the jurisdiction - extreme situations receive limited training as it isn't expected to be a daily part of police work.

However, there is nothing that stops a police officer receiving supplementary training that isn't provided in certain jurisdictions, so long as they attempt to follow police procedure. This changes when their life is threatened or many people are threatened, and in a terrorist situation for example leniency is given.

So I would tell x, that it isn't required as a part of basic police training, as it would on paper be rarely a part of police work. If the daughter wants to gain additional training for extreme situations, I don't have issue.

 

[bucs90]

Again...what would you tell a Dad sending his 21 year old daughter to Police Academy? Is she going to get the best possible hand to hand and gunfighting training they can offer? Or not?

You want to turn every patrol officer into a member of a SWAT or an anti-terrorism squad?

As the 'best training available' is not on offer, for obvious reasons - most American neighborhoods are not full of terrorists and heavily violent criminals, in fact crime is on the decline in most towns and cities, and Baltimore is the exception rather than the rule: Crime Rates in U.S. Drop to 1970s levels

Violent crime in the U.S. fell 4.4 percent last year to the lowest level in decades, the FBI announced Monday.

In 2013, there were 1.16 million violent crimes, the lowest amount since the 1978’s 1.09 million violent crimes, Reuters reports.

All types of violent crimes experienced decline last year, with rape dropping 6.3 percent, murder and non-negligent manslaughter dropping 4.4 percent and robbery dropping 2.8 percent.

The rate of violent crime is 367.9 crimes for every 100,000 people, which marked a 5.1 percent decline since 2012. The rate has fallen each year since at least 1994.

But any cop on any day could. Garland TX? Fort Hood...that terrorist was dropped by a female civilian cop.

Patrol cops are the first to encounter violence. SWAT shows up 30 minutes later.

By using the butt of her gun to hit them with, or bullets?

At no point was it necessary for her to use the butt of her gun to hit someone with: Police officer who shot Fort Hood suspect says she s doing well - CNN.com

Once inside, Munley, who has been trained in active-response tactics, began exchanging fire with the alleged gunman, Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, a military psychiatrist, authorities said. They said her shots disabled Hasan and halted the attacks.

You're dodging the question. No police academy in America teaches to pistol whip.

What im asking is about your quote regarding "demilitarized" police tactics. I said...they arent using military tactics. Exclusively military tactics inclide warships and tank battalions and bombers.

Police DO however attempt to use the best available hand to hand and firearms training available.

So.happens....that the military does do.

They both train people how to WIN a hand to hand fight and a figh involving small arms like pistols and rifles.

So...my question is...would you tell a father that his soon to be cop daughter...will get the best possible survival training for her to win a violent encounter? Or...are you gonna tone it down so no one is offended by her having those skills?

First of all Pistol Whipping is not trained at all Police Academies because it isn't considered acceptable for most arrest situations, and can be rife for abuse (in this case literally): WATCH NYPD Officers Pistol-Whip Teen Suspected of Marijuana Possession - US News

Military methods include things not expected to be used in a civilian police force, the overlap begins in special units, SWAT teams, and counter-terrorism units.

It wouldn't for instance be acceptable to shoot to kill, when making an arrest of a non-violent protester or a non-violent criminal, as that is not a method of first resort.

That changes if you employ military methods to all aspects of the police force, like Authoritarian countries that entirely blur the line between police and the military - and train their officers to use extreme methods daily.

So, when you talk about the police training for extreme situations, as if they are a daily occurrence, that is not sending the right message.

It can offend people that military methods can be used, but they aren't restricted entirely on basis of 'offense' caused but on the actual requirement for the jurisdiction - extreme situations receive limited training as it isn't expected to be a daily part of police work.

However, there is nothing that stops a police officer receiving supplementary training that isn't provided in certain jurisdictions, so long as they attempt to follow police procedure. This changes when their life is threatened or many people are threatened, and in a terrorist situation for example leniency is given.

So I would tell x, that it isn't required as a part of basic police training, as it would on paper be rarely a part of police work. If the daughter wants to gain additional training for extreme situations, I don't have issue.

What about teaching her the best possible hand to hand and gun skills she can get? Why are you opposed to cops learning these skills in the academy...where instructors can also teach the legal ramifications of using them and when its appropriate?

Would you rather her go to McDojo and learn some martial arts from some lunatic...or worse...some wannabe who doesnt know his shit?

Thank God...fighting for ones life is NOT a part of daily police work. Some departments it happens more often. Most departments. ..an officer will face a handful of these incidents a year. 5 or less truly oh shit moments.

But why not train for those moments? Cops dont want to be killed.

Your logic is like saying most Army recruits shouldnt do weapons training in boot camp since most wont go into combat jobs. Or that Navy and Air Force recruits should never do weapons or hand to hand training since they'll almost never need it. Right?

 

[hipeter924]

You want to turn every patrol officer into a member of a SWAT or an anti-terrorism squad?

As the 'best training available' is not on offer, for obvious reasons - most American neighborhoods are not full of terrorists and heavily violent criminals, in fact crime is on the decline in most towns and cities, and Baltimore is the exception rather than the rule: Crime Rates in U.S. Drop to 1970s levels

But any cop on any day could. Garland TX? Fort Hood...that terrorist was dropped by a female civilian cop.

Patrol cops are the first to encounter violence. SWAT shows up 30 minutes later.

By using the butt of her gun to hit them with, or bullets?

At no point was it necessary for her to use the butt of her gun to hit someone with: Police officer who shot Fort Hood suspect says she s doing well - CNN.com

Once inside, Munley, who has been trained in active-response tactics, began exchanging fire with the alleged gunman, Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, a military psychiatrist, authorities said. They said her shots disabled Hasan and halted the attacks.

You're dodging the question. No police academy in America teaches to pistol whip.

What im asking is about your quote regarding "demilitarized" police tactics. I said...they arent using military tactics. Exclusively military tactics inclide warships and tank battalions and bombers.

Police DO however attempt to use the best available hand to hand and firearms training available.

So.happens....that the military does do.

They both train people how to WIN a hand to hand fight and a figh involving small arms like pistols and rifles.

So...my question is...would you tell a father that his soon to be cop daughter...will get the best possible survival training for her to win a violent encounter? Or...are you gonna tone it down so no one is offended by her having those skills?

First of all Pistol Whipping is not trained at all Police Academies because it isn't considered acceptable for most arrest situations, and can be rife for abuse (in this case literally): WATCH NYPD Officers Pistol-Whip Teen Suspected of Marijuana Possession - US News

Military methods include things not expected to be used in a civilian police force, the overlap begins in special units, SWAT teams, and counter-terrorism units.

It wouldn't for instance be acceptable to shoot to kill, when making an arrest of a non-violent protester or a non-violent criminal, as that is not a method of first resort.

That changes if you employ military methods to all aspects of the police force, like Authoritarian countries that entirely blur the line between police and the military - and train their officers to use extreme methods daily.

So, when you talk about the police training for extreme situations, as if they are a daily occurrence, that is not sending the right message.

It can offend people that military methods can be used, but they aren't restricted entirely on basis of 'offense' caused but on the actual requirement for the jurisdiction - extreme situations receive limited training as it isn't expected to be a daily part of police work.

However, there is nothing that stops a police officer receiving supplementary training that isn't provided in certain jurisdictions, so long as they attempt to follow police procedure. This changes when their life is threatened or many people are threatened, and in a terrorist situation for example leniency is given.

So I would tell x, that it isn't required as a part of basic police training, as it would on paper be rarely a part of police work. If the daughter wants to gain additional training for extreme situations, I don't have issue.

What about teaching her the best possible hand to hand and gun skills she can get? Why are you opposed to cops learning these skills in the academy...where instructors can also teach the legal ramifications of using them and when its appropriate?

Would you rather her go to McDojo and learn some martial arts from some lunatic...or worse...some wannabe who doesnt know his shit?

Thank God...fighting for ones life is NOT a part of daily police work. Some departments it happens more often. Most departments. ..an officer will face a handful of these incidents a year. 5 or less truly oh shit moments.

But why not train for those moments? Cops dont want to be killed.

Your logic is like saying most Army recruits shouldnt do weapons training in boot camp since most wont go into combat jobs. Or that Navy and Air Force recruits should never do weapons or hand to hand training since they'll almost never need it. Right?

Why do you automatically assume, that because it isn't part of basic training that there are no affiliated training instutions and programs do so, as you would find a lot of state funded ones (and not just private).

Again, US military has different procedures and rules of thumb. It is required to do weapons and hand to hand training because they may be required to defend themselves or protect an installation against attack by a hostile force. Which kinda makes sense.

Unless it is a place like Iraq, then police don't need as basic training to learn how to defeat a terrorist insurgency or a foreign military unit.

 

[bucs90]

But any cop on any day could. Garland TX? Fort Hood...that terrorist was dropped by a female civilian cop.

Patrol cops are the first to encounter violence. SWAT shows up 30 minutes later.

By using the butt of her gun to hit them with, or bullets?

At no point was it necessary for her to use the butt of her gun to hit someone with: Police officer who shot Fort Hood suspect says she s doing well - CNN.com

Once inside, Munley, who has been trained in active-response tactics, began exchanging fire with the alleged gunman, Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, a military psychiatrist, authorities said. They said her shots disabled Hasan and halted the attacks.

You're dodging the question. No police academy in America teaches to pistol whip.

What im asking is about your quote regarding "demilitarized" police tactics. I said...they arent using military tactics. Exclusively military tactics inclide warships and tank battalions and bombers.

Police DO however attempt to use the best available hand to hand and firearms training available.

So.happens....that the military does do.

They both train people how to WIN a hand to hand fight and a figh involving small arms like pistols and rifles.

So...my question is...would you tell a father that his soon to be cop daughter...will get the best possible survival training for her to win a violent encounter? Or...are you gonna tone it down so no one is offended by her having those skills?

First of all Pistol Whipping is not trained at all Police Academies because it isn't considered acceptable for most arrest situations, and can be rife for abuse (in this case literally): WATCH NYPD Officers Pistol-Whip Teen Suspected of Marijuana Possession - US News

Military methods include things not expected to be used in a civilian police force, the overlap begins in special units, SWAT teams, and counter-terrorism units.

It wouldn't for instance be acceptable to shoot to kill, when making an arrest of a non-violent protester or a non-violent criminal, as that is not a method of first resort.

That changes if you employ military methods to all aspects of the police force, like Authoritarian countries that entirely blur the line between police and the military - and train their officers to use extreme methods daily.

So, when you talk about the police training for extreme situations, as if they are a daily occurrence, that is not sending the right message.

It can offend people that military methods can be used, but they aren't restricted entirely on basis of 'offense' caused but on the actual requirement for the jurisdiction - extreme situations receive limited training as it isn't expected to be a daily part of police work.

However, there is nothing that stops a police officer receiving supplementary training that isn't provided in certain jurisdictions, so long as they attempt to follow police procedure. This changes when their life is threatened or many people are threatened, and in a terrorist situation for example leniency is given.

So I would tell x, that it isn't required as a part of basic police training, as it would on paper be rarely a part of police work. If the daughter wants to gain additional training for extreme situations, I don't have issue.

What about teaching her the best possible hand to hand and gun skills she can get? Why are you opposed to cops learning these skills in the academy...where instructors can also teach the legal ramifications of using them and when its appropriate?

Would you rather her go to McDojo and learn some martial arts from some lunatic...or worse...some wannabe who doesnt know his shit?

Thank God...fighting for ones life is NOT a part of daily police work. Some departments it happens more often. Most departments. ..an officer will face a handful of these incidents a year. 5 or less truly oh shit moments.

But why not train for those moments? Cops dont want to be killed.

Your logic is like saying most Army recruits shouldnt do weapons training in boot camp since most wont go into combat jobs. Or that Navy and Air Force recruits should never do weapons or hand to hand training since they'll almost never need it. Right?

Why do you automatically assume, that because it isn't part of basic training that there are no affiliated training instutions and programs do so, as you would find a lot of state funded ones (and not just private).

Again, US military has different procedures and rules of thumb. It is required to do weapons and hand to hand training because they may be required to defend themselves or protect an installation against attack by a hostile force. Which kinda makes sense.

Unless it is a place like Iraq, then police don't need as basic training to learn how to defeat a terrorist insurgency or a foreign military unit.

So cops dont have to potentially defend themselves in a life or death situation?? You arent making sense.

We have an Air Force base here in Charleston. Its surrounded by ghetto of North Charleston. Those airmen...arent gonna get invaded anytime soon. So why would their basic 9 week training need weapons and fighting skills? They can just learn it before they deploy right? But what about the cops who police the ghetto around that AF base? They hot the streets of thr ghetto on Day 1 after graduating.

So...I dont see your logic in saying cops shouldnt get great hand to hand or firearms training in the academy. They hit the street Day 1. Some cops have been killed in their first week...or even first day...by violent offenders.

 

[hipeter924]

By using the butt of her gun to hit them with, or bullets?

At no point was it necessary for her to use the butt of her gun to hit someone with: Police officer who shot Fort Hood suspect says she s doing well - CNN.com

You're dodging the question. No police academy in America teaches to pistol whip.

What im asking is about your quote regarding "demilitarized" police tactics. I said...they arent using military tactics. Exclusively military tactics inclide warships and tank battalions and bombers.

Police DO however attempt to use the best available hand to hand and firearms training available.

So.happens....that the military does do.

They both train people how to WIN a hand to hand fight and a figh involving small arms like pistols and rifles.

So...my question is...would you tell a father that his soon to be cop daughter...will get the best possible survival training for her to win a violent encounter? Or...are you gonna tone it down so no one is offended by her having those skills?

First of all Pistol Whipping is not trained at all Police Academies because it isn't considered acceptable for most arrest situations, and can be rife for abuse (in this case literally): WATCH NYPD Officers Pistol-Whip Teen Suspected of Marijuana Possession - US News

Military methods include things not expected to be used in a civilian police force, the overlap begins in special units, SWAT teams, and counter-terrorism units.

It wouldn't for instance be acceptable to shoot to kill, when making an arrest of a non-violent protester or a non-violent criminal, as that is not a method of first resort.

That changes if you employ military methods to all aspects of the police force, like Authoritarian countries that entirely blur the line between police and the military - and train their officers to use extreme methods daily.

So, when you talk about the police training for extreme situations, as if they are a daily occurrence, that is not sending the right message.

It can offend people that military methods can be used, but they aren't restricted entirely on basis of 'offense' caused but on the actual requirement for the jurisdiction - extreme situations receive limited training as it isn't expected to be a daily part of police work.

However, there is nothing that stops a police officer receiving supplementary training that isn't provided in certain jurisdictions, so long as they attempt to follow police procedure. This changes when their life is threatened or many people are threatened, and in a terrorist situation for example leniency is given.

So I would tell x, that it isn't required as a part of basic police training, as it would on paper be rarely a part of police work. If the daughter wants to gain additional training for extreme situations, I don't have issue.

What about teaching her the best possible hand to hand and gun skills she can get? Why are you opposed to cops learning these skills in the academy...where instructors can also teach the legal ramifications of using them and when its appropriate?

Would you rather her go to McDojo and learn some martial arts from some lunatic...or worse...some wannabe who doesnt know his shit?

Thank God...fighting for ones life is NOT a part of daily police work. Some departments it happens more often. Most departments. ..an officer will face a handful of these incidents a year. 5 or less truly oh shit moments.

But why not train for those moments? Cops dont want to be killed.

Your logic is like saying most Army recruits shouldnt do weapons training in boot camp since most wont go into combat jobs. Or that Navy and Air Force recruits should never do weapons or hand to hand training since they'll almost never need it. Right?

Why do you automatically assume, that because it isn't part of basic training that there are no affiliated training instutions and programs do so, as you would find a lot of state funded ones (and not just private).

Again, US military has different procedures and rules of thumb. It is required to do weapons and hand to hand training because they may be required to defend themselves or protect an installation against attack by a hostile force. Which kinda makes sense.

Unless it is a place like Iraq, then police don't need as basic training to learn how to defeat a terrorist insurgency or a foreign military unit.

So cops dont have to potentially defend themselves in a life or death situation?? You arent making sense.

We have an Air Force base here in Charleston. Its surrounded by ghetto of North Charleston. Those airmen...arent gonna get invaded anytime soon. So why would their basic 9 week training need weapons and fighting skills? They can just learn it before they deploy right? But what about the cops who police the ghetto around that AF base? They hot the streets of thr ghetto on Day 1 after graduating.

So...I dont see your logic in saying cops shouldnt get great hand to hand or firearms training in the academy. They hit the street Day 1. Some cops have been killed in their first week...or even first day...by violent offenders.

You aren't making sense, as hypothetical scenarios that rarely happen in real life, are not a basis for changing basic police training.

You claim that police need military style training to defend themselves in their daily duties, based on a hypothetical scenario that they are going to be set upon by terrorists, then discount the possibility that a terrorist or crazed individual can attack a military base.

And, I haven't even said that on a voluntary basis they can't get said military style training from the government or by private organizations. So how much hot air, till this thread ends?

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

Wait, so this was a thing? Holy fucking Christ, let's just bring back the gulags while we're at it.

Cleveland police to stop hitting people on heads with guns as part of Justice Department agreement cleveland.com

Some police think they are the National Guard, or some military unit, so this is the Justice Department bringing them down a notch.

If they want to practice using guns as batons, then they can do it in their own time, or join the military and learn discipline.

Whatever rocks their boat, so long as the rest of the country doesn't have their tax dollars spent on a self-recognized military unit - instead of a civilian police force.

People are getting pistol whipped instead of killed. You demons don't get the fact that police are trying to do their job WITHOUT killing anyone. It's like you all just don't want them enforcing the law at all....

Until it's you who needs them, then you want them to pistol whip some noggins to keep you safe.

No. The governor brings in the National Guard, just as he did in Baltimore. That's how people are kept safe, and that is how states should respond to civil disturbance that exceeds police capability and training.

It is people like you that want the police to walk all over the constution, and violate their lawful authority - with military methods of enforcing order. That might be how it is done in authoritarian countries, but not in America.

Please look up Posse Comitatus and get back to me. I've been trained in the military and I can tell you the National Guard is neither equipped nor trained for law enforcement. Plus it's illegal. Posse Comitatus. Learn it, understand it.

Posse Comitatus does NOT apply to the National Guard when under state control. They and the Coast Guard are exempt.

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

The term military tactics when applied to police is stupid.

LEOs are trained to use APPROPRIATE force. That means if the suspect is peaceful, and some are, you react peacefully. IF the suspect gets worked up, you work yourself. You use the minimum force required to subdue the subject.

The problem is, some of you idiots on the left are actually saying, I've read it on here more than once, that if a suspect flees the police should just let him go. Wrong. Their job is to use appropriate force to subdue a subject, up to and including lethal force if needed.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Wait, so this was a thing? Holy fucking Christ, let's just bring back the gulags while we're at it.

Cleveland police to stop hitting people on heads with guns as part of Justice Department agreement cleveland.com

What a dummy ^^

Maybe they should use pool styrofoam fun rods on violent perps??!!!!

This is what you get when you get board members from places like Scratchmyassville USA commenting on stuff happening in the real world!!

Yep. DontTazeMeBro is the ultimate poser. He claims to be some MMA fighter in training...but his knowledge of that field is oddly limited. The most dangerous thing hes ever done is probably using the Xbox vibrate controller while playing the UFC video game. Heck...thats probably the "training" he claims to do.

Not that it's relevant to the conversation at hand, but I fight Muay Thai, dumb ass, not full MMA. Never said that I did. You're the one who keeps erroneously making that claim.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Wait, so this was a thing? Holy fucking Christ, let's just bring back the gulags while we're at it.

Cleveland police to stop hitting people on heads with guns as part of Justice Department agreement cleveland.com

What a dummy ^^

Maybe they should use pool styrofoam fun rods on violent perps??!!!!

This is what you get when you get board members from places like Scratchmyassville USA commenting on stuff happening in the real world!!

I live in Henderson, NV which is suburban Las Vegas. Prior to that I lived in suburban Charlotte, and prior to that I grew up in urban Boston. Not sure where you get the idea I haven't lived in the "real world." I see you're yet another one of those "small government" conservatives who have no problem embracing the big government abusive police state. If he wears a badge and a uniform get down on your knees and lick his boots because "Murica!!" "Freedom!" "Jesus!" and all that, right?

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

LEOs are trained to use APPROPRIATE force. That means if the suspect is peaceful, and some are, you react peacefully. IF the suspect gets worked up, you work yourself. You use the minimum force required to subdue the subject.

Unless they're about to kill you, smashing someone on the head with the butt of a gun is not appropriate force. It's abusive and dangerous.

The problem is, some of you idiots on the left are actually saying, I've read it on here more than once, that if a suspect flees the police should just let him go. Wrong. Their job is to use appropriate force to subdue a subject, up to and including lethal force if needed.

No, running away from a cop is not justification for having your life taken.

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

LEOs are trained to use APPROPRIATE force. That means if the suspect is peaceful, and some are, you react peacefully. IF the suspect gets worked up, you work yourself. You use the minimum force required to subdue the subject.

Unless they're about to kill you, smashing someone on the head with the butt of a gun is not appropriate force. It's abusive.

The problem is, some of you idiots on the left are actually saying, I've read it on here more than once, that if a suspect flees the police should just let him go. Wrong. Their job is to use appropriate force to subdue a subject, up to and including lethal force if needed.

No, running away from a cop is not justification for having your life taken.

I didn't make a blanket statement that smashing someone on top of the head with your gun is always appropriate force it is not.

And like it or not, in SOME situation, the LAW has declared that running from a cop does justify being shot., and even killed. IE The Fleeing Felon law.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

LEOs are trained to use APPROPRIATE force. That means if the suspect is peaceful, and some are, you react peacefully. IF the suspect gets worked up, you work yourself. You use the minimum force required to subdue the subject.

Unless they're about to kill you, smashing someone on the head with the butt of a gun is not appropriate force. It's abusive.

The problem is, some of you idiots on the left are actually saying, I've read it on here more than once, that if a suspect flees the police should just let him go. Wrong. Their job is to use appropriate force to subdue a subject, up to and including lethal force if needed.

No, running away from a cop is not justification for having your life taken.

I didn't make a blanket statement that smashing someone on top of the head with your gun is always appropriate force it is not.

And like it or not, in SOME situation, the LAW has declared that running from a cop does justify being shot., and even killed. IE The Fleeing Felon law.

If the perp has already killed somebody or is running away waving a weapon around then yes, I agree, shooting them is justified, but in an example of what we just saw in South Carolina a few weeks ago, there was nothing justifiable in that.

 

[Meathead]

LEOs are trained to use APPROPRIATE force. That means if the suspect is peaceful, and some are, you react peacefully. IF the suspect gets worked up, you work yourself. You use the minimum force required to subdue the subject.

Unless they're about to kill you, smashing someone on the head with the butt of a gun is not appropriate force. It's abusive.

The problem is, some of you idiots on the left are actually saying, I've read it on here more than once, that if a suspect flees the police should just let him go. Wrong. Their job is to use appropriate force to subdue a subject, up to and including lethal force if needed.

No, running away from a cop is not justification for having your life taken.

I didn't make a blanket statement that smashing someone on top of the head with your gun is always appropriate force it is not.

And like it or not, in SOME situation, the LAW has declared that running from a cop does justify being shot., and even killed. IE The Fleeing Felon law.

If the perp has already killed somebody or is running away waving a weapon around then yes, I agree, shooting them is justified, but in an example of what we just saw in South Carolina a few weeks ago, there was nothing justifiable in that.

So some thugs attacking a cop with his bare hands shouldn't be shot? What if the thug is really big and the cop is small or female, OK then?

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

LEOs are trained to use APPROPRIATE force. That means if the suspect is peaceful, and some are, you react peacefully. IF the suspect gets worked up, you work yourself. You use the minimum force required to subdue the subject.

Unless they're about to kill you, smashing someone on the head with the butt of a gun is not appropriate force. It's abusive.

The problem is, some of you idiots on the left are actually saying, I've read it on here more than once, that if a suspect flees the police should just let him go. Wrong. Their job is to use appropriate force to subdue a subject, up to and including lethal force if needed.

No, running away from a cop is not justification for having your life taken.

I didn't make a blanket statement that smashing someone on top of the head with your gun is always appropriate force it is not.

And like it or not, in SOME situation, the LAW has declared that running from a cop does justify being shot., and even killed. IE The Fleeing Felon law.

If the perp has already killed somebody or is running away waving a weapon around then yes, I agree, shooting them is justified, but in an example of what we just saw in South Carolina a few weeks ago, there was nothing justifiable in that.

Again, I did not make a blanket statement that it was always okay to shoot a fleeing suspect. But YOU make it out as if every cop is ALWAYS wrong when they fight with a suspect and or shoot a suspect, and that simply is no more true than saying they are always right when they do so.

 

[bucs90]

Wait, so this was a thing? Holy fucking Christ, let's just bring back the gulags while we're at it.

Cleveland police to stop hitting people on heads with guns as part of Justice Department agreement cleveland.com

What a dummy ^^

Maybe they should use pool styrofoam fun rods on violent perps??!!!!

This is what you get when you get board members from places like Scratchmyassville USA commenting on stuff happening in the real world!!

Yep. DontTazeMeBro is the ultimate poser. He claims to be some MMA fighter in training...but his knowledge of that field is oddly limited. The most dangerous thing hes ever done is probably using the Xbox vibrate controller while playing the UFC video game. Heck...thats probably the "training" he claims to do.

Not that it's relevant to the conversation at hand, but I fight Muay Thai, dumb ass, not full MMA. Never said that I did. You're the one who keeps erroneously making that claim.

Yeah yeah sure. So whats your record?? The best thing about Muay Thai guys is they actually try to clinch up...making the takedown and inevitable choke out even quicker.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Yeah yeah sure. So whats your record?? The best thing about Muay Thai guys is they actually try to clinch up...making the takedown and inevitable choke out even quicker.

6-1