9311
Twitter
Facebook
Fark.com Mobile
Copyright © 1999 - 2021 Fark, Inc
Last updated: Jun 04 2021 20:12:59
Contact | Report error | TOS/legal/privacy
Do Not Sell My Personal Information
Full site
Copyright © 1999 - 2021 Fark, Inc
Last updated: Jun 04 2021 20:12:59
Contact | Report error | TOS/legal/privacy
Do Not Sell My Personal Information
Full site
whidbey: g.fro: durbnpoisn: ...
Second, he could have shot her ANYWHERE else that wasn't fatal.
...
I'm going to repeat this however many times is necessary: shooting-to-wound is not a thing.
Something else that needs to change in law enforcement. Because that's bullshiat.
It's not bullshiat, it's literally close to impossible to guarantee that shooting to wound will not hit a vital organ or artery.
Also, under stress and with a moving target, it's damn near impossible to hit an arm or a leg because they're small targets and stress kills fine motor control.
That's why you shoot center of mass: it's the largest farking target available and the most likely to hit under stress.
All you get by trying to "shoot to wound" and going for a small target like an arm or a leg is a high chance of missing and sending a stray bullet off into a bystander.
This has been demonstrated by numerous experts, from military researchers to actual use of force experts with a lot of experience with combat use of arms.
close
Boojum2k: Peach_Fuz: adam6464: My question is, why do the cops always shoot center mass multiple times first? Can they not shoot a limb first to see if the "agressor" will stop and no further bullets are needed?
I was going to post something similar to this... kneecaps anyone?
Because permanently crippling people, frequently minorities, would be so much better?
They should, just like anyone else, shoot someone only in defense of themselves or others of a grave threat. And at that point you stop the threat, not play sillybuggers with trick shots that may miss and leave the threat active.
This girl was highly highly unlikely to be a threat to them or others.
Thats my point, she wasnt as much of a threat, so why go for the kill? The chest will likely result in death, crippling is not murder. They shouldn't shoot in the first place, but if necessary, go for a leg or something.
close
whidbey: g.fro: durbnpoisn: ...
Second, he could have shot her ANYWHERE else that wasn't fatal.
...
I'm going to repeat this however many times is necessary: shooting-to-wound is not a thing.
Something else that needs to change in law enforcement. Because that's bullshiat.
It's not a matter of law enforcement policy, it's a matter of common sense, morality, and physics.
We want people (including cops) shooting at people less, not more.
close
close
close
close
whidbey: Wow. Some of you really need to step away from the keys.
Pot meet Kettle.
You are doing excellent work. Irrational position, intractable, ignoring any contrary evidence/argument.
I give you the top troll for this thread!
close
whidbey: Wow. Some of you really need to step away from the keys.
Pot, meet kettle.
close
whidbey: And it's the same passive aggressive poster. Wow. Grow up.
Seems like you are talking to me, did you wait 12 hours for me to post?
close
Snort: whidbey: Wow. Some of you really need to step away from the keys.
Pot meet Kettle.
Will a beer do? I don't keep soda in my house.
close
Snort: whidbey: Wow. Some of you really need to step away from the keys.
Pot meet Kettle.
You are doing excellent work. Irrational position, intractable, ignoring any contrary evidence/argument.
I give you the top troll for this thread!
Hey all you had to do was ignore my comments. Instead you look like someone pissed in your Police Cheerios.
The fact is "the thin blue line" has been successfully challenged. There's going to be intense scrutiny whether the girl shown in the video had a knife or not. And it's very telling watching the responses when this gets brought up.
close
close
whidbey: The fact is "the thin blue line" has been successfully challenged. There's going to be intense scrutiny whether the girl shown in the video had a knife or not. And it's very telling watching the responses when this gets brought up.
You know how this is going to go, though, don't you?
"Scrutinize the video, investigate, run them under a microscope, etc."
<they do, the investigators don't find anything wrong, clear the cops>
"ZOMG BIAS THEY DIDN'T INVESTIGATE THOROUGHLY! RIGGED SYSTEM! THEY'RE GUILTY!"
close
stuffy: You get a little stabby
Cops get a little shooty
But if you get a little shooty, then cops.....contribute to your defense fund?
close
kore: asciibaron: mrshowrules: asciibaron: Dusk-You-n-Me: DeathByGeekSquad: What will they do when a simple traffic stop becomes a gun battle with someone firing an AK-47?
That wasn't a simple traffic stop, it was the end of a high speed pursuit. The idea that cops get routinely ambushed at traffic stops has no basis in reality.
except this one where the officer is executed:
[iFrame https://www.youtube.com/embed/rH6bsr61vrw?autoplay=1&widget_referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.fark.com&start=0&enablejsapi=1&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.fark.com&widgetid=1]
Bolded/underlined the word you were having problems with. If police training focuses on these rare incidents, that is one of the reasons so many unarmed people are getting wrongfully shot.
fine.
[Youtube-video https://www.youtube.com/embed/2u6Y8MD3OfM]
you have the internet, these are easy to find.
It seems that approaching over-weight men in white Silverados is dangerous.
the man who executed the officer was Hispanic. he attempted to kill another officer and was stopped by at least 30 rounds.
stop blaming the skin color of people for the actions of an individual.
close
GrizzlyPouch: Brosephus:
So what's the standard procedure when a person is about to use a lethal weapon on another one?
In Same situation, except the girl had a gun instead of knife, what's the procedure?
It's officer's perception. Some departments will allow their officers to use deadly force at the sight of a weapon. Under the current case law, that is acceptable if the officer applying deadly force perceives the person with the gun is an immediate threat to him/her or the public in the vicinity.
For thinking officers, you still haven't given enough info. Someone with a gun isn't automatically a deadly threat. I don't carry when I'm off duty because of officers with basic thinking like you're showing.
See person with *insert weapon here*. Shoot person with *insert weapon here*. Isn't always a good thing. The person could be wanting suicide by cop. The person could be an off duty officer/agent. Or, the person could have said weapon to defend themselves from an ongoing attack. It's not always a clean A+B=C situation.
Also, I noticed you didn't acknowledge the fact that I provided about the taser. It's okay. I understand the mindset you display here. You always have to be right, and you're not going to acknowledge when you're wrong. That goes double when you're proven wrong by someone you disagree with.
close
whidbey: And there it is again. The defiant "funnying" of a post because you can't make your shiat stick in mixed company.
It's easier to keep funnying your post because we can't keep spamming the following:
close
whidbey: There's going to be intense scrutiny whether the girl shown in the video had a knife or not.
Are you saying you don't believe the video? Or are you saying you have not watched the video?
SansNeural posted this above :
close
whidbey: clams_casino: So...you're dishonest AND dumb.
Right. Can't handle your narrative being challenged, start calling your opponent a liar and "dumb."
You forfeit this one.
I live in Columbus. You sir are a troll
close
whidbey: Keep proving my point chuckleheads.
I typically agree with you on most issues.
Which is why I feel I should clear this up. I think you might be misunderstanding my belief of law as a tacit approval for whatever cops do. Which is absolutely false. I can believe in a system while also acknowledging that there is corruption in the system.
Regardless of what happened yesterday, I'm in Utah, a thousand+ miles away from where this happened. I don't know anyone involved and the only info I can get is from news sources. I'm not going to jump to a conclusion off of hearsay, and even though the corruption of police has been absolutely terrible, I believe in the system and will wait for more evidence to come out before I jump on the 'This is the worst thing ever', I hedged my bets in my comments, I checked the links and sources and ultimately I didn't feel like there was enough information to make a decision.
Now there is video out and it was an intense situation. Not the 'She came out to meet the cops after she called them' narrative that we were given yesterday.
close
MrBonestripper: stuffy: You get a little stabby
Cops get a little shooty
But if you get a little shooty, then cops.....contribute to your defense fund?
[Fark user image 850x546]
was the donation made on behalf of the police department or as an individual with the right and freedom of speech (donations are free speech)?
close
close
Nidiot: SanityIsAFullTimeJob: Totally Sharky Complete: SMH
[Fark user image image 644x506]
If it appears to the cop that you're about to stab someone, it may not turn out well for you.
Alternative headline could run along the lines of 'Decisive police action saves girl (in pink) from vicious stabbing'.
I'm just assuming her black life matters.
Or... how about "police help kill 16 year old girl's attackers with gunfire"
I've read over and over that it's okay to defend yourself but I guess the cops thought differently. The tazer wasn't going to help those other girls enough so gunfire it is.
It's always best to let your attackers get you because nobody can trust the police to sort anything out before firing their side-arm.
/Do this, don't do that
//don't do this, do that
///whatever fits the scenario in which the police's victim can be blamed
close
Now it looks like this girl, defending herself or not, made a huge mistake wielding a knife and attacking what appears to be someone trying to get away from her just before the police shot her. Could they have done something different, maybe? Should they have waited for a stab to happen, probably not. Could they have identified their presence better, perhaps, but it's not clear if other police had given orders, identified themselves as present, or used sirens on the way in. Either way, I don't expect this officer to be charged with anything, and I'm not sure I think he should be given the perspective he had from the video.
close
asciibaron: MrBonestripper: stuffy: You get a little stabby
Cops get a little shooty
But if you get a little shooty, then cops.....contribute to your defense fund?
[Fark user image 850x546]
was the donation made on behalf of the police department or as an individual with the right and freedom of speech (donations are free speech)?
Perhaps my snark was too subtle.
The donation is the punchline to the other person's bad escalation joke.
At issue is two situations of immediate, threatening violence, with two wildly different outcomes.
That said, freedom of speech is irrelevant in this case.
close