PK1
Gold Member
- Jun 26, 2015
- 3,912
- 534
- 140
------------
If one is a coward, then almost any situation is a "threat". Confidence from target practice should be a requirement for gun toting, so pulling the trigger "till you're sure they're dead" would not be necessary in many cases.
Perhaps some intelligence is also helpful to differentiate a real threat from a minor one, especially if the policeman's target is a 12 yr-old boy with a toy gun.
.
If you know it's a toy, yes. If it looks real and he starts to point it in your direction, ignoring the order to stop, you put him down, center of mass, eliminate the threat.
That's intelligence. You may be willing to risk your life in the chance you're right, that's not courage, that's stupidity.
It's really easy to Monday morning QB something like this. It's damn hard to kill someone, for most of us it takes a lot more courage to live with that burden.
And as far as necessary in many cases, if my kids have to pull a weapon..it's necessary to make sure that threat is dead. It's generally harder to kill someone than one shotting them.
I certainly agree that we want to keep our kids safe. All normal parents feel that way. So, if your kid or my kid has to "make sure that threat is dead" to survive, so be it.
However, what if your kid is considered a "threat" just by holding a gun, and is killed by a policeman that has your strict viewpoint (perceives a "threat") ... Will you be ok with that?
All i'm saying is that some threat assessment by professionals (police,etc) is valuable to save innocent lives. After all, they are employed to protect citizens.
Citizen gun toters should be screened for competency too.
.
Yes, I will be ok with that. If a threat assessment has been performed BY said professional, then they are the person, and only they who are the correct person to decide what is the level of threat and how they should respond to it..
My kids have been trained how to react, so I don't worry about what will happen in such an instance. If something did, that would be my fault, for not training them better, and I'd have to live with it.
I, unlike you it seems am willing to live with the occasional accident, while trying to minimize them, am not willing to demonize what are for the most part good men and women doing a thankless job. Without them, where would you be?
A note/clarification from me ...
I do NOT demonize the difficult "thankless" jobs that are competently performed by 95% of the police & other safety officers.
My concern is with the few incompetent or mentally unstable officers who are getting the negative press and forcing policy changes that should be common sense.
From what i observed in that Cleveland shooting of the 12-yr-old boy (Tamir Rice), the policeman's action AND his department's subsequent support was reprehensible.
In a San Francisco shooting of a knife-wielding young man under mental duress (Mario Woods), the logical outrage by the civilian community & illogical explanation by the police chief eventually prompted a change in that department's "use-of-force policy", which is a step toward a rational balance in protecting civilians as well as the officers who voluntarily accept their highly paid dangerous public job.
.
You mean the case where the boy pointed a gun at an officer? Turns out it was a toy gun, but have you actually bothered to look at it? Amazingly realistic looking toy, which the officer would have no way to know. Threat....put down threat.
Knife...threat. Put down the threat.
Stupidity has it's own price. Sometimes the price is death, as it should be.
Gee, you seem to be a cold-hearted bastard. You have no problem killing a 12 yr-old boy for his innocent "stupidity"? What about your stupidity?
Are you willing to consider facts & interpret them (threat assessment), or simply act emotionally without applying intelligence to objectivity?
Did you bother to look beyond the boy-club excuses of the Cleveland police department? Obviously not. The boy did not "pointed a gun at an officer".
Here are some inconsistencies in the police account:
. 1) Police said that Rice was seated at a table with other people. The video showed that Rice was alone.
. 2) Police said that as they pulled up, they saw Rice grab the pellet gun and put it in his waistband. This is not supported by the video. Judge Adrine said the video does not show the pellet gun in Rice's hands in the moments immediately before as the zone car approaches.
. 3) Police said that Rice then reached into his waistband and pulled out the pellet gun, and was then shot and killed by Officer Timothy Loehmann. The video shows that Rice did not pull out the pellet gun. In the video, Rice is using both hands to hold his shirt up and expose the pellet gun to view just before he falls to the ground.
. 4) Police described the pellet gun as looking real and later explained that the neon tip of the pellet gun was missing. However the police never saw Rice brandish or point the pistol at them to determine if the orange cap was actually missing or not.
.