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.
Status:
"“If a thing loves, it is infinite.”"
(set 2 days ago)
Location: Great Britain
27,175 posts, read 13,455,286 times
Reputation: 19472
Advertisements
It's very covenient for certain groups to just play the race guard, but when you look at US Society it is very different to European Society and other parts of the world.
For a start the US Police are more primed to expect and react to firearms, their training is different and their organisation is also very different. There is also a good deal of difference between small local police departments and State Police Departments, whilst the police are afforded much more protection in terms of the US Supreme Court.
In 1989 the US Supreme Court deemed it constitutionally permissible for police to use deadly force when they “reasonably” perceive imminent and grave harm. State laws regulating deadly force – in the 38 states where they exist – are almost always as permissive as Supreme Court precedent allows, or more so.
In Europe, the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) which has been signed by some 47 European Countries, makes it abundantly clear in Article 2 that the Right to Life is paramount and that to take a life must be a last resort and that force should be no more than absolutely necessary, whilst there is also a positive duty to protect life. Killings excused under America’s “reasonable belief” standards often violate Europe’s “absolute necessity” standards.
So police in Europe have a duty to try all means in order to de-esculate situations and to use non-lethal force for instance when someone has a knife rather than resort to firearms. Indeed far more training is aimed at de-esculation in many European countries than is apparent in the US.
The US Police are far more aggressive in their approach and I have to admit if you are constantly wary of being shot, then you are going to be primed in this way.
I think the Link to the Article below deals all of these points and others more thoroughly, and is one of more sensible articles I have reas when it comes to the different policing style in the US and Europe.
Why is it that violent humans are supposed to be treated with kid gloves while violent animals are killed on the spot? I couldn't care ANY less if someone being violent is killed. None, nadda, zip.
Status:
"“If a thing loves, it is infinite.”"
(set 2 days ago)
Location: Great Britain
27,175 posts, read 13,455,286 times
Reputation: 19472
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dbones
Why is it that violent humans are supposed to be treated with kid gloves while violent animals are killed on the spot? I couldn't care ANY less if someone being violent is killed. None, nadda, zip.
So it's therefore okay to just resort to shooting the mentally ill, homeless or those under the influence od drugs or alcohol, and to just shoot anyone with or without a weapon as long as they are acting in what the police deem a violent manner.
I think most sensible people would agree that the Police should only be taking someones life as a matter of last resort.
If Country X had as many armed, violent criminals on the streets as the United States, they'd have similar numbers of police shootings. It's really that simple.
Status:
"“If a thing loves, it is infinite.”"
(set 2 days ago)
Location: Great Britain
27,175 posts, read 13,455,286 times
Reputation: 19472
Quote:
Originally Posted by DerpyDerp
If Country X had as many armed, violent criminals on the streets as the United States, they'd have similar numbers of police shootings. It's really that simple.
I am not in favour of shooting animals, and violence in animals is often related to instinct such as protecting their young.
Sadly there have been too many cases of US Police shooting unarmed people and people who could be contained by other methods including the mentally ill, homeless and those suffering from substance abuse.
Furthermore with over 2 million in US Prisons how many violent criminals are out there.
Also why don't the US Police make better use of non-lethal options especially when someone has a knife rather than a gun, which is what happens in most countries.
The difference really is that US Police can just use “reasonable belief” as an excuse, in Europe a higher standard of “absolute necessity” applies.
Last edited by Brave New World; 09-26-2016 at 09:20 AM..
Police have a very difficult job when you think about the kind of people they deal with on a daily basis and recently their jobs have gotten even harder because they have the scrutiny of the public up to the President leaning on them.
Imagine having a job that requires you to respond to all manner of crimes from jaywalkers to murder scenes, from domestic abuse to drug overdoses to drug dealers and now throw a possible terrorist who is looking to kill the police never know what they are going to stumble on.
As an example we can look to Ferguson where officer Wilson was on his patrol, came across 2 youths walking in the street, he stopped to tell them to get onto the sidewalk and the next minute he is fighting for his life.
I think America has anger management issues above all else. We have too many that are self entitled and think the rules don't apply to them. Imagine if Michael Brown with the stolen cigars in his pocket had simply said "OK" and got off the street? Wilson would have gone on his way.
People are just so quick to anger today. The cops are the first line working overtime to keep it all from falling apart into chaos.
We demand a lot from our Police and they need our support not our scrutiny.
Why is it that violent humans are supposed to be treated with kid gloves while violent animals are killed on the spot? I couldn't care ANY less if someone being violent is killed. None, nadda, zip.
PETA notwithstanding, most people around the world consider human life more valuable than wild animals, particularly in a circumstance when the choice is between one or the other.
So it's therefore okay to just resort to shooting the mentally ill, homeless or those under the influence od drugs or alcohol, and to just shoot anyone with or without a weapon as long as they are acting in what the police deem a violent manner.
I think most sensible people would agree that the Police should only be taking someones life as a matter of last resort.
I tell you what. Detroit PD, and Chicago PD are always looking for officers. Why don't you come over here and do that job for a month...then get back to us.
Police have a very difficult job when you think about the kind of people they deal with on a daily basis and recently their jobs have gotten even harder because they have the scrutiny of the public up to the President leaning on them.
Imagine having a job that requires you to respond to all manner of crimes from jaywalkers to murder scenes, from domestic abuse to drug overdoses to drug dealers and now throw a possible terrorist who is looking to kill the police never know what they are going to stumble on.
As an example we can look to Ferguson where officer Wilson was on his patrol, came across 2 youths walking in the street, he stopped to tell them to get onto the sidewalk and the next minute he is fighting for his life.
I think America has anger management issues above all else. We have too many that are self entitled and think the rules don't apply to them. Imagine if Michael Brown with the stolen cigars in his pocket had simply said "OK" and got off the street? Wilson would have gone on his way.
People are just so quick to anger today. The cops are the first line working overtime to keep it all from falling apart into chaos.
We demand a lot from our Police and they need our support not our scrutiny.
Really? So if a doctor does something wrong and a patient ends up dead, no scrutiny?
How about a special ed teacher who gets caught smacking around a disabled child in anger, no scrutiny?
Why do the police get a pass? You don't think there are any bad cops?
How about the ones who shouldn't be in the job? Just like any other profession there are people who should not be in certain jobs.
The female officer in PA who shot and killed a man in the back who was handcuffed and lying on the ground(because she was scared) comes to mind. It was a traffic stop and she was afraid of him so even though he posed no threat she shot him. She went on trial for murder and got off, and was offered her job back.'
She has no business in that line of work.
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.
