Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
And were the guys you know blitz attacked by the police with say, real automatic weapons fire with in three seconds of some shouted command after their arrival on the scene? Or did the police actually make an effort to ascertain what was happening before they opened up?
One cant expect a stable society when white armed "protestors" at the Bundy Ranch are given the benefit of several doubts, discretion and prudence is used, and uhmm...."de escalation" initiated etc etc and a black youth is "engaged" with in seconds.
Something needs to change. It does not matter whether or not "independent" investigators cleared the officer or not. I don't vote Democrat, let alone affirm Al Sharpton types. But, criminal police misconduct needs to be identified as such and punished. And this was a case of police misconduct.
So your premise is that if a kid is seen in a park with a gun in a nice neighborhood that hasn't had a shooting in 30 years and a kid is seen in a park with a gun that has shootings on a weekly basis that the police should respond to the scene the same way?
Again, I don't agree it was handled the right way but let's at least be fair in acknowledging that this was a neighborhood where young men with real guns is routine and thus comparing it to some guys in the woods in somewhere USA or kids in some small town shooting a bb gun at cans is "the same".
Great and in less than a second that cop could be dead too!!
Being a retired cop, can you give us the reason as to why it was better for the cops to go right up to him and not stop a reasonable distance back and tell him to disarm and lie down thus reducing the possibility of bullets flying?
Being a retired cop, can you give us the reason as to why it was better for the cops to go right up to him and not stop a reasonable distance back and tell him to disarm and lie down thus reducing the possibility of bullets flying?
You're going to either get a longer distance exchange of fire (fight) or give the suspect a big headstart (flight) in those circumstances.
I don't think I have to explain why BOTH of those scenarios are bad for the public in and around the park.
What do you mean by a "reasonable distance"?????
The bust I saw in Chicago first hand had the detectives announce themselves when they were about 5 feet away and get the jump on them with guns drawn. One of the suspects despite having a gun literally touching his back STILL made a break for it, flipped a cop on his back in the street and ran down an alley. They were caught a couple hours later.
And were the guys you know blitz attacked by the police with say, real automatic weapons fire with in three seconds of some shouted command after their arrival on the scene? Or did the police actually make an effort to ascertain what was happening before they opened up? .
Big difference in how paintball appears vs an airsoft gun.
Take the orange tip off this airsoft (which is commonly done) and compare it to a real firearm. Would you be able to tell the difference if you were a cop and came upon a guy waving a gun?
Location: Free State of Florida, Support our police
5,859 posts, read 3,295,032 times
Reputation: 9145
Quote:
Originally Posted by BostonMike7
Big difference in how paintball appears vs an airsoft gun.
Take the orange tip off this airsoft (which is commonly done) and compare it to a real firearm. Would you be able to tell the difference if you were a cop and came upon a guy waving a gun?
The fact is there was no orange tip. You cant tell the difference between Rice's fake gun and a real gun.
You're going to either get a longer distance exchange of fire (fight) or give the suspect a big headstart (flight) in those circumstances.
So, is it your contention that everybody with a gun will begin blasting away once the police arrive?
Obviously, you don't believe this.
What percentage of suspects with a gun open fire once the police arrive? Just give me your best guess.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mathguy
I don't think I have to explain why BOTH of those scenarios are bad for the public in and around the park.
That's assuming that every person with a gun confronted by police begins blasting.
I'd guess the number of times that happens is relatively small.
I'd also guess that if police began making "blast first" the standard procedure, we'd see a lot more bystanders shot than when police take a more conservative approach. I also believe this might lead perps to also begin an "engage first" policy of their own, because what would they have to lose if the police arrive.
I can say one thing for certain. Had the police stopped at a distance and told the suspect (I say suspect due to the size of the child) to drop his weapon and get down, the odds of him surviving go way up and the odds of a stray bullet fired by the police hitting a bystander drops.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mathguy
What do you mean by a "reasonable distance"?????
My guess would be 20 to 30 yards, but I don't have the type of training or have I studied the subject to give more than my best guess.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mathguy
The bust I saw in Chicago first hand had the detectives announce themselves when they were about 5 feet away and get the jump on them with guns drawn. One of the suspects despite having a gun literally touching his back STILL made a break for it, flipped a cop on his back in the street and ran down an alley. They were caught a couple hours later.
If you watch the video of the Tamir Rice incident, it doesn't look like Rice had any time at all to surrender.
Do you believe the cops in Chicago you observed should have opened fire when they confronted those perps? I'm not quite sure I understand the point of your story.
My willingness to try to engage you in a rationale discussion ended with those two sentences.
Settle down, I misread your post. You said:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mathguy
You're going to either get a longer distance exchange of fire (fight) or give the suspect a big headstart (flight) in those circumstances.
And I thought you said "and give the suspect a big headstart (fight)".
Due to this mistake with my reading, I thought you meant that the suspect would always begin shooting and didn't notice the second part was flight.
That was an accident on my part. Apologies.
Now, knowing what you actually said, I believe the risk of a person with a gun, when there have been no reports of a shooting, fleeing is better than bullets flying as long as the suspect does not aim the gun at the officers. If the gun, toy or not or 12-year-old or not, is pointed at the officers, it is perfectly reasonable and acceptable for the officers to fire back. (In the video is doesn't appear that Rice aimed the gun at the officers.)
If the call was in response to a shooting, I believe that changes how much 'room' they give the suspect.
I'm sorry, but it's just my opinion that the cops handled this extremely poorly to the point of liability.
I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree on this.
If you watch the video of the Tamir Rice incident, it doesn't look like Rice had any time at all to surrender.
...
That's the key right there. Nothing else needs to be said.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
