Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
John Paul Stevens interrupted the oral arguments in Tennessee v. Garner to ask why the officer involved could not have aimed at a leg or arm or otherwise "shot to wound" the fleeing Garner
Having heard Biden make this statement several times, I was wondering if others found it as stupid as I do.
Comments?
..they miss while aiming center massA leg is also a very difficult target to hit in the real world. When you miss, the round is likely to hit an innocent bystander instead.
What idiot would aim for the leg? This has to be the dementia talking.
1. shooting pistols is not easy--even at close range--even at non-threatening targets
2. hitting center mass is not easy
3. police are not known for '''accuracy'''
4. sure, people can train a lot more than the police, and hit the NON-THREATENING targets and do '''trick''' shooting
5. Biden is not the only one ignorant of the subject
John Paul Stevens interrupted the oral arguments in Tennessee v. Garner to ask why the officer involved could not have aimed at a leg or arm or otherwise "shot to wound" the fleeing Garner
A Hail of Bullets, a Heap of Uncertainty (Published 2007)
Police often don’t hit their target, but not because of bad aim.www.nytimes.com
Yes. Biden Family Crime Boss, Joe Biden is a first rate moron.Having heard Biden make this statement several times, I was wondering if others found it as stupid as I do.
Comments?
He clearly has no sense of what a heart rate tacking toward 200 bpm does to fine motor skills.Biden is suggesting that instead of aiming for a big stationary target like the criminal’s chest, go for a tiny moving target like the leg. In other words, make it more likely that even a sharpshooting officer misses the target.
Small wonder not a SINGLE police group supports this corrupt clown.Joe, it’s real-life, not a crime drama. A cop doesn’t use the lethal force of shooting a criminal unless it’s needed and justified. The gun is not used as a scare tactic; it’s used as a last resort to save lives. Most police officers go through their whole careers of 20, 30, or more years and never discharge their weapons. But there is always a chance of being confronted by a bad guy with a gun.
I don’t think anyone would disagree with you. Some kind of science fiction stunner would be a godsend to police and security work. But nothing like that exists. Even a tazer can be lethal to some people.I agree with the spirit of what Biden is saying. I think it would be reasonable moving forward to have a greater emphasis on non-lethal methods when applicable.
I don’t think anyone would disagree with you. Some kind of science fiction stunner would be a godsend to police and security work. But nothing like that exists. Even a tazer can be lethal to some people.I agree with the spirit of what Biden is saying. I think it would be reasonable moving forward to have a greater emphasis on non-lethal methods when applicable.
I don’t think anyone would disagree with you. Some kind of science fiction stunner would be a godsend to police and security work. But nothing like that exists. Even a tazer can be lethal to some people.I agree with the spirit of what Biden is saying. I think it would be reasonable moving forward to have a greater emphasis on non-lethal methods when applicable.
Police officers have very difficult and dangerous jobs, I fully realize that, and I know that they don't have the luxury of hindsight when they are out doing their jobs, however, I do think it's reasonable to consider making more sincere attempts to lessen the chance of a deadly encounter. "Shoot them in the leg" probably comes across as either ignorant or insulting or both to many cops out there, but the concept is reasonable and necessary in my opinion. De-escalation practices and non-lethal force does not need to be considered wishful thinking for modern day policing in my personal opinion.