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.
This is so well thought out because as Hillary said last night at the debate the cops need more training hence they are the problem.
I wonder if the LA police Commission has their eye on the bottom line and will put public safety at risk to prevent being sued?
If a cop shoots a perp and lets face it if the perp is white it is just another day but a black guy shot by a racist cop watch out there will be riots.
If an armed black criminal is put down by the cops there will be investigations after the smoke from the riots clear and all manner of lawsuits that follow which are very negative hurting the image of the city and costly.
It is far cheaper to let the gun toting criminal go to give him a chance to kill an innocent person then the Police can come in to clean up the mess and maybe make an arrest.
This decision is about the bottom line and not public safety.
This is so well thought out because as Hillary said last night at the debate the cops need more training hence they are the problem.
I wonder if the LA police Commission has their eye on the bottom line and will put public safety at risk to prevent being sued?
If a cop shoots a perp and lets face it if the perp is white it is just another day but a black guy shot by a racist cop watch out there will be riots.
If an armed black criminal is put down by the cops there will be investigations after the smoke from the riots clear and all manner of lawsuits that follow which are very negative hurting the image of the city and costly.
It is far cheaper to let the gun toting criminal go to give him a chance to kill an innocent person then the Police can come in to clean up the mess and maybe make an arrest.
This decision is about the bottom line and not public safety.
So both of those links are obviously pro police websites so I figured I would go to the real source and make my own conclusion. The report is linked below and it is actually a good read.
In this case, the report shows that officers arrived on scene and stopped at about 70 feet from the subject. The subject advanced on the officers. One officer did not move and allowed the subject to advance on her to the point that she had to shoot. She was not equipped with her taser which department policy states she should have on her person. She also did not have a baton which department policy states she must have. The report also makes note of a training method called redeployment which is to readjust your position to maintain a tactical advantage. That also was not used.
One thing that constantly comes up in each police involved shooting is whether non lethal forms of containment were used or considered first. Many in the public feel that police are too quick to shoot. So while the police websites and union are spinning this as a commission telling police to run away (which is so far from the truth), the commission is merely stating that their own police policy was not followed correctly by this officer and as a result, someone was shot. In fact, 2 officers shot at the subject. The report states that this other officer followed policy in shooting due to his vantage point and belief that the threat was imminent.
Look...each case is a separate instance but we have heard time and time again that police followed policy and then are cleared. In this case, by their own police procedures, there is option A (taser), option B (baton), option C (redeployment) before option D (gun) should be used. This report is a GOOD thing and twisting the conclusions in the way the articles in the OP's post is doing is not productive to addressing the issues between Police and citizens.
One of the reasons we have law enforcement,
is to stop.madmen with guns running wild in the
streets.
As a native, I assure you LA cops will continue to enforce the law to
the fullest extent of the law.
I wouldn't make that bet. Societal tides are a turning and NOT in a good way... Think of Baltimore where the cops now sit and wait for something to happen and then use the absolute LEAST amount of response to handle it. That is what is coming to cities near you.
More of Charlotte,Baltimore,Ferguson style riots and looting while LEO's stand by watching your city burn. Anarchists have learned that there will be limited/NO response to their actions and crooks/thugs will pick it up soon enough.
So both of those links are obviously pro police websites so I figured I would go to the real source and make my own conclusion. The report is linked below and it is actually a good read.
Look...each case is a separate instance but we have heard time and time again that police followed policy and then are cleared. In this case, by their own police procedures, there is option A (taser), option B (baton), option C (redeployment) before option D (gun) should be used. This report is a GOOD thing and twisting the conclusions in the way the articles in the OP's post is doing is not productive to addressing the issues between Police and citizens.
Very interesting read. I can only imagine that this commission was put in place because it was ruled that the LA police proved many times, they cannot investigate themselves fairly, and covered up for each others mistakes, which was what the Chief was trying to do by subverting their own procedures in his report. He, like many other Chiefs that cleared bad shoots, used jargon to cover up the mistake, and has to be checked for it. Which is not surprising, since the officers had non lethal weapons in their arsenal, such as bean bag guns and tasers, and decided right when jumping out of the cars that the gun was the only way to stop a little woman with a knife. And thats why the laws need to change. Its funny how cops know when other cops screw up, but dont admit it to keep their ability to kill people with impunity. I guess thats what the job does to you.
I'd hate to be an unarmed civilian in any big liberal city. Cops aren't stupid they all see a Baltimore experience in their possible future if they take action.
This is another reason why anyone who would willingly buy property or even rent a place within the jurisdiction of the city of Los Angeles (which is only 40 percent of Los Angeles County) would have to be seriously mentally ill.
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.
Societal tides are a turning and NOT in a good way...
Think of Baltimore where the cops now sit and wait for something to happen and then use the absolute LEAST amount of response to handle it. That is what is coming to cities near you. 
