Protect and Serve . . . yeah right !

FloppyPoppy · 10 Apr 2015 at 13:05

thep02 said:
Last month they killed more Americans than the British police have killed Brits in the last hundred years

Where did you get this information?

It is terrible what goes on in America at the moment it's worst when you see police officers not being penalised for there murdering ways. I understand the requirements to protect yourself and with the usa being a gun haven I understand that the only way to stop someone with a gun is realistically with a gun. However the police need to learn a bit of courageous restraint as our soldiers do. Hell they get shot at over and over by Taliban in Afghanistan, yet they don't fireback until they can prove they are Taliban and dangerous and are in fact using a firearm to cause harm to them.

Where as American police.. QUICK HE HAS A STONE KILL HIM.

There was a shooting at a campus in USA that luckily had a police officer stationed there who ended the shooting in 80 seconds! and nobody but the shooter were injured ( the shooter took his own life ) I'm sure that has already been mentioned somewhere in this thread however I haven't much time to read the whole thing unfortunately

Orionaut · 10 Apr 2015 at 13:37

Abraham said:
That's the nub of it, whether in that moment he felt it was justified as it sounds Orionaut would, legally it wasn't justified.

"Fear for your life" as justification for lethal force, or even non lethal force is only valid when the fear is real, it cannot boil down to "because he was black", which is essentially what you're suggesting Orionaut.

Not really. I am suggesting that the cop shot him because he fitted the highly probable statistical likelihood of being armed and dangerous. and he wasn't prepared to either let him escape or run the risk of running into a deadly ambush.

Unfortunately, Being Black would have been part of that statistical pattern, but a far bigger part would have been the fact that he assaulted the cop and took his Taser over an incident (Faulty tail light) that would probably have been dealt with with nothing more than a friendly word had he played nice.

Nobody would assault a US Policeman, take his weapon, and attempt to escape over a faulty tail light unless he was either insane or had something very serious to hide!

Every time a US policeman stops a vehicle he risks something like this happening.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q4lkK0Si-1g

I can understand why they may be jumpy if somebodies behaviour doesn't "feel right". Comparing the US with the UK is really not fair. Even when firearms were common in the UK it was very rare for criminals to get involved in shoot-outs with the Police.

In the US it is pretty routine. It has been pointed out that around 50% of "Waistband" shootings involve people who are not in fact armed.

But it is easy for campaigners to overlook the fact that 50% ARE armed and ARE going for their weapon!

A Gun can be drawn, aimed and fired in less than 100mS. ("Fastdraw" contestants can do it in 60mS :eek:

That is right, just over 1/20 of a second!) If a Cop waits to see the suspects gun before firing, he will not have time to shoot first.

Another question is this, Let us consider the exact same scenario, but it is found that he did have an illegal pistol in his waistband. (That he never had the opportunity do draw)

Would that have made the shooting "Justifiable"?

Mr Joshua · 10 Apr 2015 at 18:32

Yet another recent video showing the US police in less than a good light.

TheVoice · 10 Apr 2015 at 18:36

drs101 said:
Im not saying its a police wide issue, im saying that if we had an armed force in the UK we would experiance issues like this one and thats based on some of the incidents mentioned.

Yes you are. You just did, in fact.

jumpy said:
It's a trend that is not exclusively american and the only reason we don't have such comparable rates of police killings is because we do not arm our regular plod. The longer we can keep it that way the better.

Totally false because again, other countries do have routinely-armed police services and yet these incidents don't occur to anywhere near the same regularity as they do in the US.

Orionaut said:
Not really. I am suggesting that the cop shot him because he fitted the highly probable statistical likelihood of being armed and dangerous. and he wasn't prepared to either let him escape or run the risk of running into a deadly ambush.

You don't shoot someone because of probabilities and statistics. They're trained (or at least, supposed to be) to constantly risk-assess the situation and who they're dealing with.

thep02 · 10 Apr 2015 at 19:29

harry5522 said:
Where did you get this information?

It is terrible what goes on in America

Here though I believe it's elsewhere too.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-...re-civilians-march-uk-police-killed-100-years

Amnesia · 10 Apr 2015 at 20:25

Orionaut said:
but a far bigger part would have been the fact that he assaulted the cop and took his Taser over an incident (Faulty tail light) that would probably have been dealt with with nothing more than a friendly word had he played nice.

Has new video evidence been released ?

thep02 · 10 Apr 2015 at 20:33

Originally Posted by Orionaut

over an incident (Faulty tail light) that would probably have been dealt with with nothing more than a friendly word had he played nice.

Or alternatively the cop could have beaten him to death as commonly happens over there, if I was a young black Murkin I'd run from any interaction with a cop if I was able to.

thep02 · 11 Apr 2015 at 13:29

http://photographyisnotacrime.com/2...g-surrendering-man-for-more-than-two-minutes/

Yank cops earning the name pigs.

Plenty more of the same on that site, as I say you can't kill more in a month than Brit cops kill in a century without being plain old murderers, that's only deaths though what about the thousands beaten to the point of brain damage or multiple broken bones.

sharpygsxr · 11 Apr 2015 at 18:02

Mr Joshua said:
Yet another recent video showing the US police in less than a good light.

Just seen this on BBC news, crazy, at first i seen the 2 cops laying into the guy and thought thats bad enough, then the others join in for the lolz.

Not a good time to be a cop in murica at the moment thats for sure

thep02 · 11 Apr 2015 at 20:21

sharpygsxr said:
Just seen this on BBC news, crazy, at first i seen the 2 cops laying into the guy and thought thats bad enough, then the others join in for the lolz.

Not a good time to be a cop in murica at the moment thats for sure

Not a good time to meet a cop in Murka you mean.

Orionaut · 11 Apr 2015 at 23:58

thep02 said:
Originally Posted by Orionaut

over an incident (Faulty tail light) that would probably have been dealt with with nothing more than a friendly word had he played nice.

Or alternatively the cop could have beaten him to death as commonly happens over there, if I was a young black Murkin I'd run from any interaction with a cop if I was able to.

Up until the guy did a runner (And whatever) the cop dealt with him in an entirely civilised and non-discriminatory manner (The dash-cam footage shows this quite clearly)

Had he remained in the vehicle this would not have become an indecent of any significance.

The problem here is of course that the whole thing has become political now. Truth and justice are no longer of any importance.

Amnesia · 12 Apr 2015 at 00:15

Orionaut said:
Had he remained in the vehicle this would not have become an indecent of any significance.

Or he could have just chose not to murder him.

friddela · 12 Apr 2015 at 00:29

doofer said:
In a single incident the US Police discharged more bullets than the entire German Police Force did in a whole year. They are completely out of control and our Police are slowly but surely heading the same direction, they protect and serve the Corporations not the people they swore to protect.

Can you explain what you meant by this?

Such a sweeping statement, how are the police in the UK 'out of control'?

Von Smallhausen · 12 Apr 2015 at 10:19

doofer said:
In a single incident the US Police discharged more bullets than the entire German Police Force did in a whole year. They are completely out of control and our Police are slowly but surely heading the same direction, they protect and serve the Corporations not the people they swore to protect.

How are British police going slowly out of control /

Sliver · 12 Apr 2015 at 11:31

friddela said:
Such a sweeping statement, how are the police in the UK 'out of control'?

Von Smallhausen said:
How are British police going slowly out of control /

Clearly they are not. I think doofer is frankly wrong. In any large organisation like the police force, there will always be some bad apples but ultimately it's the system within which the police operate that is most important.

In the UK, we only used armed police to respond to armed threats. So the chances of the police going overboard and killing someone without justification are very slim. It's happened, but it's rare. This is because the systems we have in place in the UK for the use and deployment of armed police are very good.

In the US, all police are armed and they respond to all calls regardless of threat level. So the chances of a policeman going overboard and killing someone without justification are exponentially higher than here in the UK. It is a catch 22 in the US though because the population is mostly armed, so the police need to assume initially that every intervention they make when trying to enforce the law, will be/or could be, with an armed civilian. This I feel enforces an attitude amongst many officers that encourages the use of lethal force in circumstances where it clearly is not required.

This recent shooting however goes beyond what I've just outlined above. It was simply murder.

ElliorR · 12 Apr 2015 at 11:36

I don't know, Von is on here moderating and not out solving crime, terrorism and world hunger.

Von Smallhausen · 12 Apr 2015 at 11:51

I'm on a weeks leave ..... well deserved I might add.

Von Smallhausen · 12 Apr 2015 at 11:53

Sliver said:
Clearly they are not. I think doofer is frankly wrong. In any large organisation like the police force, there will always be some bad apples but ultimately it's the system within which the police operate that is most important.

In the UK, we only used armed police to respond to armed threats. So the chances of the police going overboard and killing someone without justification are very slim. It's happened, but it's rare. This is because the systems we have in place in the UK for the use and deployment of armed police are very good.

In the US, all police are armed and they respond to all calls regardless of threat level. So the chances of a policeman going overboard and killing someone without justification are exponentially higher than here in the UK. It is a catch 22 in the US though because the population is mostly armed, so the police need to assume initially that every intervention they make when trying to enforce the law, will be/or could be, with an armed civilian. This I feel enforces an attitude amongst many officers that encourages the use of lethal force in circumstances where it clearly is not required.

This recent shooting however goes beyond what I've just outlined above. It was simply murder.

Agreed 100%.

Orionaut · 12 Apr 2015 at 11:56

Amnesia said:
Or he could have just chose not to murder him.

Everything was fine until Scot chose to do a runner. There is no suggestion whatsoever from the dash-cam footage that ****er was a "Good ole Boy" itching for any excuse to "Kill Me a ******!" (Mississippi Burning)!

Scot chose to run, He chose to assault a police officer in order to make his escape. He established himself not as an "Innocent Man" but as a desperate fugitive prepared to do whatever was necessary to make his escape.

New reports suggest that he was heading towards a public park.

What would he do there, would he carry on running? would he duck behind a tree or other cover and pull out a hitherto concealed weapon to ambush the following Policeman? Would he take a hostage? would he shoot/stab an innocent bystander in order to force the Policeman to break off the chase?

The Cop doesn't know why he ran, all he knows is that Scott was desperate to escape, wayyy too desperate to be accounted for by a broken tail light and iffy documents.

He had about one second to consider all of the above and make his decision.

The only reason why this is being considered a "Bad" decision is because, in hindsight, there is no logical explanation for Scott to make such a desperate attempt to escape and it turned out, in hindsight, that he was infact unarmed..

Had Scot actually turned out, in hindsight, to be armed and/or a wanted Murderer or terrorist ****er would by now be being considered a hero.

But as I said earlier, Its political now so truth/justice no longer has a part to play.

No doubt, in due course, there will be the obligatory riot, the liberals will wring their hands, ****er will be put on the pyre of political correctness and If he isn't found guilty first time round, he will no doubt be subjected to multiple retrials until a Jury gives the right answer!

scorza · 12 Apr 2015 at 11:57

Orionaut said:
Everything was fine until Scot chose to do a runner. There is no suggestion whatsoever from the dash-cam footage that ****er was a "Good ole Boy" itching for any excuse to "Kill Me a ******!" (Mississippi Burning)!

Scot chose to run, He chose to assault a police officer in order to make his escape. He established himself not as an "Innocent Man" but as a desperate fugitive prepared to do whatever was necessary to make his escape.

New reports suggest that he was heading towards a public park.

What would he do there, would he carry on running? would he duck behind a tree or other cover and pull out a hitherto concealed weapon to ambush the following Policeman? Would he take a hostage? would he shoot/stab an innocent bystander in order to force the Policeman to break off the chase?

The Cop doesn't know why he ran, all he knows is that Scott was desperate to escape, wayyy too desperate to be accounted for by a broken tail light and iffy documents.

He had about one second to consider all of the above and make his decision.

The only reason why this is being considered a "Bad" decision is because, in hindsight, there is no logical explanation for Scott to make such a desperate attempt to escape and it turned out, in hindsight, that he was infact unarmed..

Had Scot actually turned out, in hindsight, to be armed and/or a wanted Murderer or terrorist ****er would by now be being considered a hero.

But as I said earlier, Its political now so truth/justice no longer has a part to play.

No doubt, in due course, there will be the obligatory riot, the liberals will wring their hands, ****er will be put on the pyre of political correctness and If he isn't found guilty first time round, he will no doubt be subjected to multiple retrials until a Jury gives the right answer!

Agreed 100%