Police Brutality Protests Thread

Grandma Bates

Only mostly banned....
VVO Supporter 🍦🎈👾❤
Joined
Sep 20, 2018
Messages
196
Location
Airport
Joined SLU
Yes
SLU Posts
-1000
I don't like tasers because they are also dangerous to the user. If you are in contact with the person you use it on, you become part of the circuit. Mace is messy, and does not always work. I hear it doesn't work as well on people who use a lot of hair spray, for example. Batons are less lethal than guns, but can maim the target, plus you don't want a guy with a knife close enough to club.

The situation in Lancaster is exactly the situation where a gun is needed. I can't think of another solution, short of only hiring cops with Bruce Lee levels of ninja training or something, which is unrealistic.

I like that the officer only fired 4 shots. Maybe one or two more than he needed, maybe not, but he did not empty the magazine like we see officers doing all over the country. He was clearly under pressure, but he showed restraint. This was not a wild, panicked shooting. It was a bit chaotic, but the officer kept his cool and did it right.
The failure in Lancaster occurred when a person who desperately needed help was allowed to degrade to the point that the criminal justice system was employed to kill him. As indicated in another thread, this was a person with a history, and the system failed him well before the four bullets were fired. Even if you feel that his family should have done more, there are alternatives to the police. For example, a program in Denver has been in place since June in which mental health professionals are sent to deal with people who need help rather than sending in police officers trained to escalate a situation. They would likely would not be called in this situation but might have made a difference in some of the previous situations this person found himself in.
 

bubblesort

Active member
Joined
Nov 16, 2018
Messages
508
The failure in Lancaster occurred when a person who desperately needed help was allowed to degrade to the point that the criminal justice system was employed to kill him. As indicated in another thread, this was a person with a history, and the system failed him well before the four bullets were fired. Even if you feel that his family should have done more, there are alternatives to the police. For example, a program in Denver has been in place since June in which mental health professionals are sent to deal with people who need help rather than sending in police officers trained to escalate a situation. They would likely would not be called in this situation but might have made a difference in some of the previous situations this person found himself in.
Oh, I totally agree with that! Also, this might not have even required institutionalization to avoid. If we just had medicare for all, this issue might not have happened, because he would not have had problems affording the medication he was prescribed. We can't have that because the political donors think medicare for all will resurrect Stalin or something stupid, so we have to bring them to heel somehow, but eventually we will get there.
 

Innula Zenovka

Nasty Brit
VVO Supporter 🍦🎈👾❤
Joined
Sep 20, 2018
Messages
7,772
SLU Posts
18459
Policemen are a hugely misinformed and timid bunch, IMHO they need psychological fitness tests on a regular basis. They will tell you all the horrible stories of drug users being immune to taser pain (might be true, but I doubt their muscles are immune to missfiring synapses). Ask any German policemen on the danger a knife poses and they will tell you hearsay anectotes passed down by other policemen on how knifes are more dangerous than guns... (their fear of the "Messerstecher" archetype would almost be comical if you would not know they carry guns).

I fear they all suffer from a collective job-induced psychosis fueled by Hollywood and the internet.
Knife-crime is all too common in the UK, but our police (generally equipped with tasers, batons and stab-proof vests) would not normally call for support from a firearms unit to deal with a suspect armed only with a knife. And the firearms unit would be trained to do all they could de-escalate the situation, so long as that was possible without endangering themselves or the public, before using their weapons.
 

Arkady Arkright

Active member
Joined
Oct 12, 2018
Messages
302
Ask any German policemen on the danger a knife poses and they will tell you hearsay anectotes passed down by other policemen on how knifes are more dangerous than guns
There's a clip out there somewhere of a UK emergency doctor saying "The 'winner' of a knife-fight is just the one who bleeds-out last in the ambulance".
 

Innula Zenovka

Nasty Brit
VVO Supporter 🍦🎈👾❤
Joined
Sep 20, 2018
Messages
7,772
SLU Posts
18459
I don't like tasers because they are also dangerous to the user. If you are in contact with the person you use it on, you become part of the circuit. Mace is messy, and does not always work. I hear it doesn't work as well on people who use a lot of hair spray, for example. Batons are less lethal than guns, but can maim the target, plus you don't want a guy with a knife close enough to club.

The situation in Lancaster is exactly the situation where a gun is needed. I can't think of another solution, short of only hiring cops with Bruce Lee levels of ninja training or something, which is unrealistic.

I like that the officer only fired 4 shots. Maybe one or two more than he needed, maybe not, but he did not empty the magazine like we see officers doing all over the country. He was clearly under pressure, but he showed restraint. This was not a wild, panicked shooting. It was a bit chaotic, but the officer kept his cool and did it right.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions: Arkady Arkright

detrius

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 20, 2018
Messages
503
Location
Land of bread, beer and BMW.
Joined SLU
09-30-2007
SLU Posts
10065
(It's not just outside Buckingham Palace that the police cope with knives by using non-lethal force)

Incomplete list of things that have successfully been used as defense against knife attacks:
garbage bins, fire extinguishers , narwhal tusks, chairs, milk crates, cars
 

bubblesort

Active member
Joined
Nov 16, 2018
Messages
508
You call this a charge? I mean... yeah, the guy is advancing on the officer, but he was more threatening to charge, rather than actually charging at full force with a knife. This guy's attack was nothing like the guy in Lancaster, PA. In Lancaster, there wasn't even enough time to bark commands, all the cop could do was draw and fire while in retreat.

I don't see a problem with killing the guy charging at all. If you are truly attempting to murder people, you have to be stopped, by any means necessary. That's what the guns are for.

It's sad the situation in Lancaster happened. It could have been avoided. Once the guy charged from the door, though, there's really only one way for it to end. This happened in my area, and I don't think I know anybody around here who thinks this shooting was unjustified.

I do understand your perspective, though. There's a big gap between european views of guns and American views. For example, I know that my friends from the UK talk about non-lethal shooting when they talk about guns, but I could never wrap my head around that. I think the idea is that the british police gun units are trained in non-lethal shooting, so they can shoot people without killing them. I was always taught that you don't even point a gun at something living unless you want it to die, so why would you shoot somebody you don't want to kill? Non-lethal shooting is like non-wet water to me, I just don't get it.
 
  • 1Eye Roll
Reactions: Govi

Innula Zenovka

Nasty Brit
VVO Supporter 🍦🎈👾❤
Joined
Sep 20, 2018
Messages
7,772
SLU Posts
18459
I do understand your perspective, though. There's a big gap between european views of guns and American views. For example, I know that my friends from the UK talk about non-lethal shooting when they talk about guns, but I could never wrap my head around that. I think the idea is that the british police gun units are trained in non-lethal shooting, so they can shoot people without killing them. I was always taught that you don't even point a gun at something living unless you want it to die, so why would you shoot somebody you don't want to kill? Non-lethal shooting is like non-wet water to me, I just don't get it.
British law on assault and homicide, which police officers must obey just as must everyone else, says that if physical force is used against a suspect, it must be reasonable force given the circumstances as the officer understands them to be at the time of the incident.

So, to take an example of when the police used firearms to effect the arrest of the Islamist terrorists Michael Adebolajo and Michael Adebowale after they murdered Lee Rigby, when they tried to attack the officers who arrived on the scene, the officers quite rightly fired on them aiming for their main body mass, but -- and here's the crucial part -- as soon as they were incapacitated and disarmed, the same officers who had shot them immediately administered first aid and summoned an ambulance, and the two men survived to face trial for murder and are now serving life sentences.

Obviously, when the officers fired single shots at Adebolajo and Adebowale they had no way of knowing whether the men would survive, but they didn't follow the protocol they use when suicide vests are involved, when they aim for the head, both in order to prevent a wounded terrorist from detonating the vest and also because firing bullets into home-made explosives at close range isn't too smart.

Had, though, the officers continued to fire on Adebolajo and Adebowale after they'd been brought to the ground and no longer seemed to be an immediate threat, it would have been murder.


Dress it up however you want to, the fact remains that when suspects brandish knives, the British police normally have little difficulty in subduing and arresting them without needing to call in a firearms unit, and when armed officers are involved, as in the arrest of Adebolajo and Adebowale, they use their firearms to render the suspect harmless, not deliberately to kill him, unless he's thought to be a suicide bomber.

In the UK we don't expect our police to need to use firearms when they're confronting someone armed only with a knife, because our police are trained in how to handle such situations using non-lethal force.
 
Last edited:

Argent Stonecutter

Emergency Mustelid Hologram
Joined
Sep 20, 2018
Messages
2,173
Location
Coonspiracy Central, Noonkkot
SL Rez
2005
Joined SLU
Sep 2009
SLU Posts
20780
Microwave weapons are not "heat rays", they cause radio frequency burns.
 
  • 1Eye Roll
Reactions: Govi

Katheryne Helendale

🐱 Kitty Queen 🐱
Joined
Sep 20, 2018
Messages
4,720
Location
Right... Behind... You...
SL Rez
2008
Joined SLU
October 2009
SLU Posts
65535
Your military police can be (ab)used against non-military citizens? Even some banana-republics don't allow such nonsense.
Pretty sure they're not supposed to be. But our government's checks and balances on such things have been asleep at the wheel the past 3.5 years, so anything goes, I guess.
 

Sid

Coffee lover.
VVO Supporter 🍦🎈👾❤
Joined
Sep 20, 2018
Messages
3,516
Location
Limburg, NL
SL Rez
2007
Joined SLU
Yes
To a man with a hammer, every problem looks like a nail. To a policeman with a gun, every problem looks like a target.
I disagree.
It is all about selection, training and education.
In many European countries all policeman and women are armed with a fire weapon. But still, we have significant less American police violence and shooting during arrests.
 

Arkady Arkright

Active member
Joined
Oct 12, 2018
Messages
302
I disagree.
It is all about selection, training and education.
In many European countries all policeman and women are armed with a fire weapon. But still, we have significant less American police violence and shooting during arrests.
I do beg your pardon, I was referring to American police (along with a few other places like Belarus).