• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Police shoot and kill unarmed man in New York

Status
Not open for further replies.
L

Log4Girlz

Member
http://nypost.com/2015/04/25/man-critically-injured-after-being-shot-by-police-in-east-village/

This occurred yesterday.

"Police shot and killed a man Saturday after he turned violent as they tried to arrest him at an East Village halfway house, authorities said.

Felix David, 22, was wanted for beating and robbing a female acquaintance in a classroom building at City College in Harlem on Thursday evening, police said."

"During the struggle, David — who police sources said had a record of arrests for violent offenses — grabbed one of the detectives’ radios, and used it to strike both officers in the head.

David hit the officers so hard, the radio broke, cops said.

Then, one of the officers fired one shot at David, striking him in the torso, police said."




If I'm blind and a thread, please lock!
 
Subpar Spatula

Subpar Spatula

Banned
If the story is true then the man hit the officers with the radio and caused it to break. I would take that, if it was me, as trying to kill me so the shot seems justified if from a fear perspective.
 
A

Aegus

Member
It feels like I could set my watch to when people are killed by the police.

Are they not able to use nonlethal takedown techniques or something? It feels like they just grapple like school kids and when they start losing they go for the ultimate win.
 
C

CSJ

Member
Title seems to paint a different story until you read what he did, what's the word for that? Me english not good today.
 
C

Cartoons

Banned
Well, I don't condemn the officers for defending themselves. The only thing that confuses me is, in this day and age, why is the gun the very first line of defense people go for? I feel like that should be more of a last resort. Do we not have more sophisticated, advanced means of incapacitating even the most violent person without risk of killing them?
 
R

Razmos

Member
Is he unarmed if he's beating them with a police radio though? He was unarmed when he started the attack, and they only shot him after he was armed.

(unless "unarmed" means "no gun")
 
A

Aegus

Member
Subpar Spatula said:
If the story is true then the man hit the officers with the radio and caused it to break. I would take that, if it was me, as trying to kill me so the shot seems justified if from a fear perspective.
Click to expand...

CSJ said:
Title seems to paint a different story until you read what he did, what's the word for that? Me english not good today.
Click to expand...

Really? Turning violent on the police is a death sentence?

Getting hit is unfortunately a part of being a police officer. Their job is to protect citizens and last I checked even criminals or people in the middle of committing crimes are citizens.
 
L

Log4Girlz

Member
Razmos said:
Is he unarmed if he's beating them with a police radio though? He was unarmed when he started the attack, and they only shot him after he was armed.
Click to expand...

Hmm, that can be interpreted that way. But it broke before they fired a shot. So the one weapon that could cause serious damage is no longer in play right? And this is assuming their account is accurate. I no longer put the benefit of the doubt on the police due to obvious reasons.
 
Subpar Spatula

Subpar Spatula

Banned
Aegus said:
Really? Turning violent on the police is a death sentence?

Getting hit is unfortunately a part of being a police officer. Their job is to protect citizens and last I checked even criminals or people in the middle of committing crimes are citizens.
Click to expand...

Undoubtedly being in the thick of it is part of the job but if someone is striking me in the head personable radio I would be more worried about my livelihood than theirs so ultimately I do understand their position if the story is true.
 
1

1.21Gigawatts

Banned
I always wonder why there are so many people dieing after beeing shot by police.
Isn't police trained to fire nonlethal shots? Like shooting at the legs or something.
 
C

Cuburt

Member
Log4Girlz said:
Hmm, that can be interpreted that way. But it broke before they fired a shot. So the one weapon that could cause serious damage is no longer in play right? And this is assuming their account is accurate. I no longer put the benefit of the doubt on the police due to obvious reasons.
Click to expand...

I think "broke", in this instance, means that it was unable to be used as a radio, not that it was unable to be used as a weapon.
 
A

akira28

Member
1.21Gigawatts said:
I always wonder why there are so many people dieing after beeing shot by police.
Isn't police trained to fire nonlethal shots? Like shooting at the legs or something.
Click to expand...

In America we only shoot to kill, and we shoot for many reasons, like running away, or quick sudden movements. Kind of like an aggressive dog. If a cop stops you, don't look him in the eyes, just let him sniff your crotch and he'll eventually leave you alone.


sometimes a man attacks you with a broken walkie talkie. sometimes you gotta shoot that man. honestly anything in your hands more menacing than a pillow and you're dead walking.
 
T

Tugatrix

Member
1.21Gigawatts said:
I always wonder why there are so many people dieing after beeing shot by police.
Isn't police trained to fire nonlethal shots? Like shooting at the legs or something.
Click to expand...

Nope, too difficult and is still lethal if you hit the artery. Police are trained in many countries to use the gun only in extreme situations and on those you aim to "neutralize"(that's the term they use nowadays)
 
P

Parakeetman

No one wants a throne you've been sitting on!
1.21Gigawatts said:
I always wonder why there are so many people dieing after beeing shot by police.
Isn't police trained to fire nonlethal shots? Like shooting at the legs or something.
Click to expand...

No they are not trained to fire non-lethal shots. Its generally center mass which basically is the largest target.
 
L

Log4Girlz

Member
Cuburt said:
I think "broke", in this instance, means that it was unable to be used as a radio, not that it was unable to be used as a weapon.
Click to expand...

That would be silly. "He struck me so hard the radio couldn't make a call". If two men couldn't subdue another man with a radio of all things...
 
R

Razmos

Member
Log4Girlz said:
Hmm, that can be interpreted that way. But it broke before they fired a shot. So the one weapon that could cause serious damage is no longer in play right? And this is assuming their account is accurate. I no longer put the benefit of the doubt on the police due to obvious reasons.
Click to expand...
The article makes it sound like it all happened in a very short amount of time, and the gun was fired straight after he beat two officers over the head with the radio.
I imagine in the chaos they didn't even realize the radio had broken. And the nature of the "broken" radio isn't explained. We don't know if it was broken as in non-functional or broken as in falling apart.

We can try and make a timeline all we want, but we don't know how quickly this went down, how hard he was hitting the officers (pretty hard I imagine since they were hospitalized), the state of the radio at that point (could have been broken and sharp) or a myriad of minor details that the article is awfully light on.

The article doesn't give enough details, IMO.
 
H

hohoXD123

Member
Log4Girlz said:
Hmm, that can be interpreted that way. But it broke before they fired a shot. So the one weapon that could cause serious damage is no longer in play right? And this is assuming their account is accurate. I no longer put the benefit of the doubt on the police due to obvious reasons.
Click to expand...

It may not work properly but may still be able to be used as a weapon, the cops may not have even known until after. With the shameful police shootings we have seen recently, your thread title is slightly misleading, the man wasn't exactly standing still doing nothing or running away. If he was mentally ill then that changes things, possibly another story of cops not having the appropriate conflict resolution skills.
 
L

Log4Girlz

Member
Razmos said:
The article makes it sound like it all happened in a very short amount of time, and the gun was fired straight after he beat two officers over the head with the radio.
I imagine in the chaos they didn't even realize the radio had broken.

We can try and make a timeline all we want, but we don't know how quickly this went down, how hard he was hitting the officers (pretty hard I imagine since they were hospitalized), the state of the radio at that point (could have been broken and sharp) or a myriad of minor details that the article is awfully light on.

The article doesn't give enough details, IMO.
Click to expand...

I think the detail of him being unarmed or rather, armed with nothing but a radio if we want to dispute that, is damning enough IMO. Having said that, I really do not give any benefit of the doubt to police anymore. I assume malice or incompetence unless film footage indicates otherwise.
 
J

jakonovski

Member
The Use Of Force Continuum 2015

Struggles hard -- gets shot immediately
Struggles weakly -- gets beaten up and dies later
Doesn't struggle -- maybe survives
 
C

Cuburt

Member
Cartoons said:
Well, I don't condemn the officers for defending themselves. The only thing that confuses me is, in this day and age, why is the gun the very first line of defense people go for? I feel like that should be more of a last resort. Do we not have more sophisticated, advanced means of incapacitating even the most violent person without risk of killing them?
Click to expand...

The crazy thing is that cops do seem pretty willing to use non-lethal methods, but I frequently only see or hear about it when people pose absolutely no threat to anyone, such as tasing someone while they are handcuffed or shooting teargas and rubber pellets at peaceful demonstrators.

I'm not sure when they are trained to use lethal and non-lethal tactics but the use of non-lethal tactics I've seen on the news seems like bully tactics to assert authority in a situation where force probably isn't necessary and situations where there is any sort of potential threat of violence (whether that threat is lethal or non-lethal in nature), that's when the guns come out and it's shoot to kill.

Seems it's not about countering force with adequate force to control the situation but if you have a stick, they aren't getting a bigger stick, they are sending in a battering ram on a tank and smashing your face in before you can even turn your head to look for a stick.
 
Dice

Dice

Pokémon Parentage Conspiracy Theorist
Going to arrest a man with a history of violent crimes for a recent violent crime... just two cops, but they have guns!

Yeah, it's fairly obvious how that was going to turn out. They really couldn't be arsed to send two more people to pick him up?
 
L

Log4Girlz

Member
Dice said:
Going to arrest a man with a history of violent crimes for a recent violent crime... just two cops, but they have guns!

Yeah, it's fairly obvious how that was going to turn out. They really couldn't be arsed to send two more people to pick him up?
Click to expand...

"Dead or alive he's coming with us".
 
S

Siegcram

Member
Dice said:
Going to arrest a man with a history of violent crimes for a recent violent crime... just two cops, but they have guns!

Yeah, it's fairly obvious how that was going to turn out. They really couldn't be arsed to send two more people to pick him up?
Click to expand...
Not to mention he had a history of mental illness as well, apparently.
 
C

CSJ

Member
Log4Girlz said:
What part of the title is inaccurate?
Click to expand...

By my understanding he wasn't unarmed.


Aegus said:
Really? Turning violent on the police is a death sentence?

Getting hit is unfortunately a part of being a police officer. Their job is to protect citizens and last I checked even criminals or people in the middle of committing crimes are citizens.
Click to expand...

I'm always disgusted by the behavior of police shooting people, it sounds like it's a multiple daily thing by how often it gets reported.

That being said, if someone cracks you over the head with a radio and it breaks, police or not if I had a gun I'd be defending myself.
We don't know entirely what happened of course, it could literally have been a life or death situation for the cops, or it could have been something minor and they straight up murdered him. But on what we know, yeah don't go hitting police over the head with a hard object. It looked pretty serious.
 
1

1.21Gigawatts

Banned
Tugatrix said:
Nope, too difficult and is still lethal if you hit the artery. Police are trained in many countries to use the gun only in extreme situations and on those you aim to "neutralize"(that's the term they use nowadays)
Click to expand...

I think thats a mistake. Police should be trained to fire nonlethal shots.
In germany they are trained to do that, in addition to that they regularly have seminars where they learn to assess situations and whether or not its necessary to fire the weapon.
476 people were shot and killed by police in germany since 1952. 2364 shots were fired at people since 1988. So its safe to say that the vast majority of shots fired at people is non lethal.
Only a german source, sorry: http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waffengebrauch_der_Polizei_in_Deutschland
There is also a table listing shots fired at people and killed people for each year. IN 2013 42 shots were fired at people. Eight were lethal, 20 people were injured by shots.
About 40 shots fired at people per year is standard now. Back in the early 90s this was different. In 1992 for example 315 shots were fired. In the meantime training has been reformed to better prepare policemen for difficult situations.

You could also look at the UK for comparison. Similar situation. Or scandinavian countries.


I think the US really needs better trained policemen. We have cases on a daily basis that could've been avoided if policemen were trained better.
Of course there are good cops and bad cops, but its not like this is something you can't fix. Have better training and you'll have less bad cops. Better training would make it safer for policemen and for citizens.
 
H

hohoXD123

Member
1.21Gigawatts said:
I think thats a mistake. Police should be trained to fire nonlethal shots.
In germany they are trained to do that, in addition to that they regularly have seminars where they learn to assess situations and whether or not its necessary to fire the weapon.
476 people were shot and killed by police in germany since 1952. 2364 shots were fired at people since 1988. So its safe to say that the vast majority of shots fired at people is non lethal.
Only a german source, sorry: http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waffengebrauch_der_Polizei_in_Deutschland
There is also a table listing shots fired at people and killed people for each year. IN 2013 42 shots were fired at people. Eight were lethal, 20 people were injured by shots.
About 40 shots fired at people per year is standard now. Back in the early 90s this was different. In 1992 for example 315 shots were fired. In the meantime training has been reformed to better prepare policemen for difficult situations.

You could also look at the UK for comparison. Similar situation. Or scandinavian countries.


I think the US really needs better trained policemen. We have cases on a daily basis that could've been avoided if policemen were trained better.
Of course there are good cops and bad cops, but its not like this is something you can't fix. Have better training and you'll have less bad cops. Better training would make it safer for policemen and for citizens.
Click to expand...
Are these non-lethal shots on target which hit the suspect or just a general shots fired which may have missed? Would be interesting to compare to the US.
 
R

Razmos

Member
liquidtmd said:
Someone punched me last year. If I was armed I am entitled to kill them?
Click to expand...
Do you have a history of violence?, were you resisting arrest?, did you beat 2 people over the head with a makeshift weapon?

I'm not saying that shooting him was the correct choice of action, it wasn't. but your post is stupid and adds nothing to the discussion.
 
1

1.21Gigawatts

Banned
hohoXD123 said:
Are these non-lethal shots on target which hit the suspect or just a general shots fired which may have missed? Would be interesting to compare to the US.
Click to expand...

Its says in the wikipedia article "shots against persons".
"Die Anzahl der in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland insgesamt seit 1988 gegen Personen abgegebenen Polizeischüsse beträgt 2364."

Given the context I'd say this number includes all shots fired at people. Lethal hits, Non-lethal hits and missed shots.
It doesn't include warning shots or shots at car tires in a car chase for example. Its also doesn't include shots fired at animals, which make up the vast majority of fired shots in germany. For example deer thats been hit by a car and badly injured but still alive.
 
T

Tugatrix

Member
1.21Gigawatts said:
I think thats a mistake. Police should be trained to fire nonlethal shots.
In germany they are trained to do that, in addition to that they regularly have seminars where they learn to assess situations and whether or not its necessary to fire the weapon.
476 people were shot and killed by police in germany since 1952. 2364 shots were fired at people since 1988. So its safe to say that the vast majority of shots fired at people is non lethal.
Only a german source, sorry: http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waffengebrauch_der_Polizei_in_Deutschland
There is also a table listing shots fired at people and killed people for each year. IN 2013 42 shots were fired at people. Eight were lethal, 20 people were injured by shots.
About 40 shots fired at people per year is standard now. Back in the early 90s this was different. In 1992 for example 315 shots were fired. In the meantime training has been reformed to better prepare policemen for difficult situations.

You could also look at the UK for comparison. Similar situation. Or scandinavian countries.


I think the US really needs better trained policemen. We have cases on a daily basis that could've been avoided if policemen were trained better.
Of course there are good cops and bad cops, but its not like this is something you can't fix. Have better training and you'll have less bad cops. Better training would make it safer for policemen and for citizens.
Click to expand...

Ballisticly speaking you need to understand a thing about 9mm ammo, isn't design and use to kill more than it wound. After all it's military caliber and the philosophy of armies today is that a wounded soldiers consume more resources than dead ones.

No police I know is trained to aim to legs(still lethal, less lethal at most) because it's a small target and difficult to aim. Police Officers are trained to only use their guns on extreme situations, so aiming for legs can be deadly for police officers or innocents they are trying to protect, as it requires more precision and time
 
L

lednerg

Member
These killer cops are making Americans seem like total pussies on the international stage. Homicidal pussies. Maybe that truly is who we are as a people, but I'd rather that no be the case.
 
Z

Zaptruder

Banned
Tugatrix said:
Ballisticly speaking you need to understand a thing about 9mm ammo, isn't design and use to kill more than it wound. After all it's military caliber and the philosophy of armies today is that a wounded soldiers consume more resources than dead ones.

No police I know is trained to aim to legs(still lethal, less lethal at most) because it's a small target and difficult to aim. Police Officers are trained to only use their guns on extreme situations, so aiming for legs can be deadly for police officers or innocents they are trying to protect, as it requires more precision and time
Click to expand...

The reasoning comes from a good place...

But when in practice, it results in more unreasonable deaths... maybe it's time we reassessed the policy.
 
S

SapientWolf

Trucker Sexologist
1.21Gigawatts said:
I think thats a mistake. Police should be trained to fire nonlethal shots.
In germany they are trained to do that, in addition to that they regularly have seminars where they learn to assess situations and whether or not its necessary to fire the weapon.
476 people were shot and killed by police in germany since 1952. 2364 shots were fired at people since 1988. So its safe to say that the vast majority of shots fired at people is non lethal.
Only a german source, sorry: http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waffengebrauch_der_Polizei_in_Deutschland
There is also a table listing shots fired at people and killed people for each year. IN 2013 42 shots were fired at people. Eight were lethal, 20 people were injured by shots.
About 40 shots fired at people per year is standard now. Back in the early 90s this was different. In 1992 for example 315 shots were fired. In the meantime training has been reformed to better prepare policemen for difficult situations.

You could also look at the UK for comparison. Similar situation. Or scandinavian countries.


I think the US really needs better trained policemen. We have cases on a daily basis that could've been avoided if policemen were trained better.
Of course there are good cops and bad cops, but its not like this is something you can't fix. Have better training and you'll have less bad cops. Better training would make it safer for policemen and for citizens.
Click to expand...
Most law enforcement officials don't hit what they're aiming at anyway. The overwhelming majority don't. But if there are no injuries those stories don't make the news. So training them to shoot at extremities isn't going to work.

n Los Angeles, which has 9,699 officers, the police fired 283 rounds in 2006, hitting their target 77 times, for a hit ratio of 27 percent, said Officer Ana Aguirre, a spokeswoman. Last year, they fired 264 rounds, hitting 76 times, for a 29 percent hit ratio, she said.

So far this year the hit ratio in Los Angeles is 31 percent, with 74 of 237 bullets fired by officers hitting the target.

In the New York reports, the hit ratio of officers who committed suicide with a firearm — and, therefore, hit their target 100 percent of the time — is included when the overall average is calculated, bringing it up.
Click to expand...

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/08/nyregion/08nypd.html?pagewanted all _r 0#40495046513027166720

Holy shit at that dry comment at the end.
 
T

Tugatrix

Member
Zaptruder said:
The reasoning comes from a good place...

But when in practice, it results in more unreasonable deaths... maybe it's time we reassessed the policy.
Click to expand...

the problem in America is that Police Officers don't restrain the use of the gun, they just pull it for no reason many times.
 
M

minx

Member
liquidtmd said:
Someone punched me last year. If I was armed I am entitled to kill them?
Click to expand...

Not remotely the same and you know that. Nice try.

Cartoons said:
Well, I don't condemn the officers for defending themselves. The only thing that confuses me is, in this day and age, why is the gun the very first line of defense people go for? I feel like that should be more of a last resort. Do we not have more sophisticated, advanced means of incapacitating even the most violent person without risk of killing them?
Click to expand...

The very first thing most officers go for isn't their gun. The headlines are only when an officer shoots an unarmed black male. No one is interested when a criminal resists arrest and attacks the officer while the officer then apprehends the criminal using proper use of force. Happens too many times a day to be notable. We don't know exactly how this scenario went down to know if it was a last resort. Body cameras would help and they are coming at an accelerated rate.
 
P

Pankratous

Member
Sometimes I wish other countries were anywhere near as strong as America so they could threaten them to sort this shit out. Clearly never going to do it themselves.
 
1

1.21Gigawatts

Banned
SapientWolf said:
Most law enforcement officials don't hit what they're aiming at anyway. The overwhelming majority don't. But if there are no injuries those stories don't make the news. So training them to shoot at extremities isn't going to work.
Click to expand...

How long is the training period to become a police officer in the US?
Should be at least 2-3 years and I don't think its to much to ask for police officers who can hit a leg from a few meters away.
Or even better: Police officers who are able to stay calm and assess situations the right way, like this american police officer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ysGtZdeZT0k
He could've easily shot the guy. The guy had his hands in his pockets acting like he had a gun, he was charging at the officer, he even pushed the officer to the ground. Shooting him would've been viewed justified. But thats not the police work we want. What the officer did is the police work we want.


Pankratous said:
Sometimes I wish other countries were anywhere near as strong as America so they could threaten them to sort this shit out. Clearly never going to do it themselves.
Click to expand...
I doubt that has anything to do with how strong a country is. Generally countries don't interfere much with other countries internal problems.
 
M

minx

Member
1.21Gigawatts said:
How long is the training period to become a police officer in the US?
Should be at least 2-3 years and I don't think its to much to ask for police officers who can hit a leg from a few meters away.
Or even better: Police officers who are able to stay calm and assess situations the right way, like this american police officer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ysGtZdeZT0k
He could've easily shot the guy. The guy had his hands in his pockets acting like he had a gun, he was charging at the officer, he even pushed the officer to the ground. Shooting him would've been viewed justified. But thats not the police work we want. What the officer did is the police work we want.



I doubt that has anything to do with how strong a country is. Generally countries don't interfere much with other countries internal problems.
Click to expand...

I guessing you aren't from the USA based on your comments. Who is going to pay for 2-3 years of training for officers? Most cities and States don't have enough money to even buy officers their uniforms, firearm, and equipment.

Also guessing you have never shot a pistol at a small moving target in a high stress scenario. This isn't the movies. Aiming for the legs is not a realistic scenario.
 
W

whitehawk

Banned
Subpar Spatula said:
If the story is true then the man hit the officers with the radio and caused it to break. I would take that, if it was me, as trying to kill me so the shot seems justified if from a fear perspective.
Click to expand...
If the same thing happened at a club and someone pulled a gun because they got hit by a radio, I think people would be blaming the shooter. It shouldn't make a difference.
 
D

DragonSworne

Banned
Tugatrix said:
Ballisticly speaking you need to understand a thing about 9mm ammo, isn't design and use to kill more than it wound. After all it's military caliber and the philosophy of armies today is that a wounded soldiers consume more resources than dead ones.

No police I know is trained to aim to legs(still lethal, less lethal at most) because it's a small target and difficult to aim. Police Officers are trained to only use their guns on extreme situations, so aiming for legs can be deadly for police officers or innocents they are trying to protect, as it requires more precision and time
Click to expand...

Source on the bolded? Being told to only use your gun in extreme situations is not the same as training. What lessons and practice are cops going through to make them situationally aware?

All I see are people getting trained to shoot and kill and dead bodies piling up daily.
 
1

1.21Gigawatts

Banned
minx88 said:
I guessing you aren't from the USA based on your comments. Who is going to pay for 2-3 years of training for officers? Most cities and States don't have enough money to even buy officers their uniforms, firearm, and equipment.
Click to expand...
Other countries can afford it, the US should be able to afford it, too.
Training takes 2.5 - 3 years in germany, for example.

minx88 said:
Also guessing you have never shot a pistol at a small moving target in a high stress scenario. This isn't the movies. Aiming for the legs is not a realistic scenario.
Click to expand...
Works in other countries, why can't american officers do it?
 
T

Tugatrix

Member
DragonSworne said:
Source on the bolded? Being told to only use your gun in extreme situations is not the same as training. What lessons and practice are cops going through to make them situationally aware?

All I see are people getting trained to shoot and kill and dead bodies piling up daily.
Click to expand...

I can get you portuguese Police manuals but i don't think you can read portuguese
 
M

minx

Member
1.21Gigawatts said:
Other countries can afford it, the US should be able to afford it, too.
Training takes 2.5 - 3 years in germany, for example.


Works in other countries, why can't american officers do it?
Click to expand...

What kind of logic is this? Other countries can afford it do America can as well? Do I really have to explain to you that different countries have different financial situations? That America has more police than any other country. Not to mention Cities within Counties within States have different budgets and revenue.

And other countries don't have the gun problem that America has. Other countries don't have as many violent criminals attacking police officers. Directly comparing other countries to America saying it works there why not America is completely ignorant. I could go on a loy about how shooting someone in the leg is an idiotic idea. This stupid shit gets brought up in almost every thread like this. Sadly most people like you aren't joking about it.

And your stats about shots fired compared to deaths doesn't mean shooting to injure is necessarily happening or a good idea. We don't know how many of those shots were missed shots and what the person was armed with, etc. 40 shits in a year just backs my point up the America isn't remotely close to the same situation as the one you are referring to.
 
1

1.21Gigawatts

Banned
minx88 said:
What kind of logic is this? Other countries can afford it do America can as well? Do I really have to explain to you that different countries have different financial situations? That America has more police than any other country. Not to mention Cities within Counties within States have different budgets and revenue.
Click to expand...

Maybe the US should re-evaluate its priorities then. If a country like the US can't afford to train its police force properly somethings wrong.


minx88 said:
And other countries don't have the gun problem that America has. Other countries don't have as many violent criminals attacking police officers. Directly comparing other countries to America saying it works there why not America is completely ignorant. I could go on a loy about how shooting someone in the leg is an idiotic idea. This stupid shit gets brought up in almost every thread like this. Sadly most people like you aren't joking about it.
Click to expand...

Most of the cases we see on a daily basis show that badly trained police officers are the problem. Not highly aggressive criminals with weapons.
Cases like the one of Eric Garner, or the recent one were Walter Scott was shot have nothing to do with the gun problem.

If anything, the fact that everybody in the US potentially carries a gun is another reason to improve training for police men.
 
N

Nightbird

Member
minx88 said:
I guessing you aren't from the USA based on your comments. Who is going to pay for 2-3 years of training for officers? Most cities and States don't have enough money to even buy officers their uniforms, firearm, and equipment.

Also guessing you have never shot a pistol at a small moving target in a high stress scenario. This isn't the movies. Aiming for the legs is not a realistic scenario.
Click to expand...

Not even when they are close enough? Because that happens. A lot.

1.21Gigawatts said:
Most of the cases we see on a daily basis show that badly trained police officers are the problem. Not highly aggressive criminals with weapons.
Cases like the one of Eric Garner, or the recent one were Walter Scott was shot have nothing to do with the gun problem.

If anything, the fact that everybody in the US potentially carries a gun is another reason to improve training for police men.
Click to expand...

Stop being resonable.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Tupac Shakur Murder: Bodycam Shows Police Raiding Nevada Home Connected to Rapper’s Killing
1
697
DeafTourette replied
[13ABC] Police: Two arrested for sex on Cedar Point ride
Social News Event
10
2K
jason10mm replied
Cartel launch drone attack on Mexico police station
2
60
3K
Airbus Jr replied
Woman duct-taped, slashed naked Tinder date — then ordered DoorDash
2
80
7K
Putonahappyface replied
Law Enforcement is Fucking Nutty
Opinion Clickbait
12
2K
Mossybrew replied
Top Bottom