Liberals, what would YOU do?

[Lursa]

I read what I posted in a news report.

I believe that you are also ASSuming! Since you nor I were there it seems anything we say should be with that in mind.

So you make alot of ASSumptions AND you think shallow lol.

:shrug:

And I'm discussing the OP, not that event. Your puddle of a though process is quickly drying up! :lamo

This is the barely coherent and grammatically inept speech of a man who desperately wants to be able to claim that he "cured coronavirus."

That's it, in a nutshell. When we do get a handle on this crisis, he wants to be able to pull out footage and declare "I called it! I said use this! I said try this! I told them to do this, it was my idea!" He's just doing it with lots of stupid stuff because he doesnt want to miss an opportunity. He's afraid 'the big one' will be mentioned and he wont get credit for it.

It's all about declaring himself the savior of the cv crisis and we'll hear all about it, esp in his campaign. (Which is basically each of his press briefings these days) --- Lursa

 

[OlNate]

Yea it sounds bad when you just say it like that. But obviously I am not advocating cops shot criminals every time they diobay any order. It’s only when thst disobeying presents a serious potential threat.

Cop says keep your hands in the air, and perp reaches behind his back, he might be just scratching his arse, but I will not ask a cop to wait and find out.

See, I will. You should research involuntary reactions to stress and biological reactions to stress. I can't link right now, not convenient to do so, but I will try to find a few for you... The fact is, sometimes failure to comply isn't voluntary, and if that's true, then it's on the cops to find a way to take that into consideration - at least to where people aren't dying from something they can't necessarily control. I'll find you those links as soon as I can, I think you'd appreciate them, as despite staying on message, you do seem to have an open mind on this one. I feel like this might change your mind, or at least bend it a bit to allow for a less binary opinion.

 

[Simpletruther]

In today's world, a black man disobeying a simple order is a death threat.
The black dude in the parking lot that was shot, they had his wallet, his keys, his car. Yet they had to kill him for being stupid and drunk.

No, in today’s world, anecdotes are used to build fake narratives, it’s why I post my “another black guy attacks white” OPs to try to help people see the folly in using single examples. I can find one example after another and flood the board with black kills white examples. That works in many people’s minds, they see it enough to equate it with overall reality. It’s a false reality.

 

[Simpletruther]

See, I will. You should research involuntary reactions to stress and biological reactions to stress. I can't link right now, not convenient to do so, but I will try to find a few for you... The fact is, sometimes failure to comply isn't voluntary, and if that's true, then it's on the cops to find a way to take that into consideration - at least to where people aren't dying from something they can't necessarily control. I'll find you those links as soon as I can, I think you'd appreciate them, as despite staying on message, you do seem to have an open mind on this one. I feel like this might change your mind, or at least bend it a bit to allow for a less binary opinion.

By the same token, firing at someone who is reaching behind their back is probably involuntary in many cases, the realization of the potential threat creates a chain reaction in the brain. Its one reason I go easy on cops, depending on the situation.

Someone reaching behind their back, who is a known dangerous felon (a key aspect) after being ordered hands up, i am going to let that go, if the cop shots. Maybe an exceptional cop has the ability to hold out another second and se what developments though.

Same situation and it’s a girl, not a known felon, I question the cops ability more, he Might want to look for another’s career.

 

[Lursa]

See, I will. You should research involuntary reactions to stress and biological reactions to stress. I can't link right now, not convenient to do so, but I will try to find a few for you... The fact is, sometimes failure to comply isn't voluntary, and if that's true, then it's on the cops to find a way to take that into consideration - at least to where people aren't dying from something they can't necessarily control. I'll find you those links as soon as I can, I think you'd appreciate them, as despite staying on message, you do seem to have an open mind on this one. I feel like this might change your mind, or at least bend it a bit to allow for a less binary opinion.

People who study self defense and self defense shooting learn all about tunnel vision, adrenaline dumps, etc. It's also part of police training, that's why they try to find ways to add stress to their training scenarios. They're also taught the Tueller Drill. I dont know why it's always assumed other gun owners/carriers arent aware of this stuff...some of us have trained with LE. Or do the same drills, simulate the pressure, etc. It's amazing how little pressure can bring on that stress, esp. at first.

I know that when I ran the Conflict and Resolution Training for new park rangers in Central Park, we went thru this kind of stuff. How to think clearly when there was violence around you, people screaming at you, etc. It takes practice to keep control and think clearly, focus, etc. And yeah, I got my training from NYPD.

This is the barely coherent and grammatically inept speech of a man who desperately wants to be able to claim that he "cured coronavirus."

That's it, in a nutshell. When we do get a handle on this crisis, he wants to be able to pull out footage and declare "I called it! I said use this! I said try this! I told them to do this, it was my idea!" He's just doing it with lots of stupid stuff because he doesnt want to miss an opportunity. He's afraid 'the big one' will be mentioned and he wont get credit for it.

It's all about declaring himself the savior of the cv crisis and we'll hear all about it, esp in his campaign. (Which is basically each of his press briefings these days) --- Lursa

 

[dairyair]

If you wait till you see it you'll likely be dead real life isn't movies.

If there is no weapon, which at this point in time, there isn't, then it's attempted murder by shooting one in the back. 7X.

 

[CLAX1911]

If there is no weapon, which at this point in time, there isn't, then it's attempted murder by shooting one in the back. 7X.

If you were able to tell whether or not someone is reaching for a weapon you need to teach that skill to the police. not doing so is causing people to be killed. How many more people have to be killed before you do?

 

[holbritter]

That was not the situation at all according to witnesses. But of course you think all black people are bad and Kyle Rittenhouse was a good little boy

So much wrong in two sentences. Amazing.

 

[jnug]

If you were able to tell whether or not someone is reaching for a weapon you need to teach that skill to the police. not doing so is causing people to be killed. How many more people have to be killed before you do?

Those three to four cops on the scene at the Blake shooting got it wrong all the way from the passenger back corner of the vehicle where they had Blake surrounded all the way around to the drivers side door. Not sure what they were doing before they had Blake surrounded at the back of the vehicle. However everything from there forward was a complete ****-up. So teaching cops how and when to identify if somebody is going for a weapon is a tempest in a teapot as it relates to the Kenosha PD which has not really showered itself in glory in any of this all the way from Blake to Rittenhouse and back again.

 

[Citizen]

So much wrong in two sentences. Amazing.

How so

 

[OlNate]

People who study self defense and self defense shooting learn all about tunnel vision, adrenaline dumps, etc. It's also part of police training, that's why they try to find ways to add stress to their training scenarios. They're also taught the Tueller Drill. I dont know why it's always assumed other gun owners/carriers arent aware of this stuff...some of us have trained with LE. Or do the same drills, simulate the pressure, etc. It's amazing how little pressure can bring on that stress, esp. at first.

I know that when I ran the Conflict and Resolution Training for new park rangers in Central Park, we went thru this kind of stuff. How to think clearly when there was violence around you, people screaming at you, etc. It takes practice to keep control and think clearly, focus, etc. And yeah, I got my training from NYPD.

Yes, these are exactly the things I'm talking about. Does that training extend to determining if a suspect is falling under the same effects? Because all of those very natural, biological responses could make compliance difficult. Tunnelled senses in general could get someone killed, as it impacts hearing as well, which makes following commands rather difficult.

 

[OlNate]

By the same token, firing at someone who is reaching behind their back is probably involuntary in many cases, the realization of the potential threat creates a chain reaction in the brain. Its one reason I go easy on cops, depending on the situation.

Someone reaching behind their back, who is a known dangerous felon (a key aspect) after being ordered hands up, i am going to let that go, if the cop shots. Maybe an exceptional cop has the ability to hold out another second and se what developments though.

Same situation and it’s a girl, not a known felon, I question the cops ability more, he Might want to look for another’s career.

As Lursa pointed out, police receive training on what to do when it happens to them. If they don't, they should, because training is available. That's how understood this phenomenon is. I would expect a trained police force, paid by the citizens they are expected to protect, to have a level of training higher than the average citizen. If this happens to them, they should be able to recognize it, and seek to de escalate, or at least act with it in mind. Going easy on the cops here means people who shouldn't be killed get killed. Not sure if that's the best place to spend your lenience, and not sure being able to navigate this should be reserved for "exceptional" cops...this should be pretty basic, I'd think, given how well it's understood and the consequences of not taking it into consideration.

But, for the sake of our discussion, let's say you do...if you can acknowledge that a trained police officer, from a place of authority, carrying a gun, can fall victim to this kind of phenomenon, why can't you extend that same understanding to someone who is being yelled at, all to often from multiple people at the same time, with guns drawn, often already winded from a chase or high stress situation? Yes, I know, they are criminals, but even criminals have rights under your constitution.

I promised a link, so here's one that describes tunnelled senses, and it has nothing to do with this issue, so hopefully that eliminates bias concerns.

Understanding Stress - Part 5: Tunnel Vision - Situational Awareness Matters!™.

I would also suggest that there shouldn't be a distinction between the type of suspect, in terms of how they approach, as a girl can pull a trigger, and there's always a first time for everything. This kind of training and focus doesn't only protect criminals...it protects cops too, which is also important. Yes, they assume a degree of danger when they take the job, but that doesn't mean anyone expects them to fall on their swords for no reason. Better training and procedure protects everyone, which is why I find it so strange that any of this is controversial at all.

 

[CLAX1911]

Those three to four cops on the scene at the Blake shooting got it wrong all the way from the passenger back corner of the vehicle where they had Blake surrounded all the way around to the drivers side door. Not sure what they were doing before they had Blake surrounded at the back of the vehicle. However everything from there forward was a complete ****-up. So teaching cops how and when to identify if somebody is going for a weapon is a tempest in a teapot as it relates to the Kenosha PD which has not really showered itself in glory in any of this all the way from Blake to Rittenhouse and back again.

Your people keep saying that but they can explain why. If you don't want to get shot by the police don't make it look like you're reaching for a weapon.

 

[holbritter]

How so

But of course you think all black people are bad and Kyle Rittenhouse was a good little boy

Both are false.

 

[Citizen]

But of course you think all black people are bad and Kyle Rittenhouse was a good little boy

Both are false.

But you continue to jump to conclusions about who is right and who is wrong when you know nothing about either of the cases. Always black people are wrong and white people are right. What am I supposed to think

 

[holbritter]

But you continue to jump to conclusions about who is right and who is wrong when you know nothing about either of the cases. Always black people are wrong and white people are right. What am I supposed to think

??? Do you even remember what our back and forth was about? It was about the dumb idea to just let the guy go home, they can arrest him later, and your statement that they do that for a white person. I think you're confusing me with someone else you are disagreeing with. Have nice day.

 

[vegas giants]

You are a cop responding to a violent perp breaking a restraining in order. You know he has violent history and outstanding warrants.

He had physically attacked you, you apply a taser which and he still resists. You and partner draw your weapons and he continues to ignore you and walks to his car.

You are quite aware and have seen in training of dash cam films of fellow cops being killed by perps after “reaching in Their car”.


the perp reaches into the car.

What do you do? It takes about half a second for him to turn and fire. Do you wait and “take your chances” ?

What would you do?

You are also aware of the loss of small motor skills under extreme pressure that nearly everyone suffers (google if you doubt that).

You do not shoot until you see a weapon in his hand. That is standard police protocol everywhere in the US.


Deadly force is only authorized when you have EVIDENCE of a threat to life

 

[Simpletruther]

You do not shoot until you see a weapon in his hand. That is standard police protocol everywhere in the US.


Deadly force is only authorized when you have EVIDENCE of a threat to life

According to sources quoting experts, there are exceptions to this, though it is generally true. There are times when there can be s reasonable threat of bodily harm or death without seeing a weapon.

 

[vegas giants]

According to sources quoting experts, there are exceptions to this, though it is generally true. There are times when there can be s reasonable threat of bodily harm or death without seeing a weapon.

Cite your evidence and how it applies in this case.


You do not shoot someone on suspicion of a deadly threat....you need direct evidence. If he was attacking them even with his hands you have a case. But not moving toward his car

 

[Citizen]

??? Do you even remember what our back and forth was about? It was about the dumb idea to just let the guy go home, they can arrest him later, and your statement that they do that for a white person. I think you're confusing me with someone else you are disagreeing with. Have nice day.

It just happened in LA Cops let white man go

COPS LET FALLING DOWN WASTED MAN LEAVE
After He Hit 3 Cars!!!

LAPD Cops Let Blatantly, Visibly Intoxicated Man Walk Away from Crash Scene

 

[holbritter]

It just happened in LA Cops let white man go

COPS LET FALLING DOWN WASTED MAN LEAVE
After He Hit 3 Cars!!!

LAPD Cops Let Blatantly, Visibly Intoxicated Man Walk Away from Crash Scene

:2brickwal

 

[Daddyo]

Those three to four cops on the scene at the Blake shooting got it wrong all the way from the passenger back corner of the vehicle where they had Blake surrounded all the way around to the drivers side door. Not sure what they were doing before they had Blake surrounded at the back of the vehicle. However everything from there forward was a complete ****-up. So teaching cops how and when to identify if somebody is going for a weapon is a tempest in a teapot as it relates to the Kenosha PD which has not really showered itself in glory in any of this all the way from Blake to Rittenhouse and back again.

3 or 4 cops vs one guy. Sounds like easy peasy doesn't it? I watched an average sized white guy high on something fend off 6 cops. Ate the taser and pepper spray. They finally piled on top of him and got him handcuffed. He wasn't even punching or kicking just squirming and running. Had he become violent he probably would have lasted much longer before being cuffed.

People don't factor in sweat or instant explosive violence or movement. Nor do they factor in future action.....for example had police known that this would lead to a shooting they would have used more force early on before the perp made the situation rise to the level of deadly force. Another way to look at it.......because these police didn't know the future they didn't work as hard as they could have to end it early. In a dynamic often changing event you simple cannot know what the bad guy is going to do. This is why police often use more force than necessary to subdue a suspect. Because when you don't they can change the dynamics. In a 3 or 4 against one situation this may look like accessive force.

If you have never tried to subdue a violent, drug filled, sweaty, powerful human being, you probably shouldn't be busting the cops chops. In criminal justice we were tasked with arresting each other. We had to resist without violence. It was very tough to say the least. I could never be a cop its just to dangerous and as you can see here you are damned if you do and if you don't.

 

[Simpletruther]

3 or 4 cops vs one guy. Sounds like easy peasy doesn't it? I watched an average sized white guy high on something fend off 6 cops. Ate the taser and pepper spray. They finally piled on top of him and got him handcuffed. He wasn't even punching or kicking just squirming and running. Had he become violent he probably would have lasted much longer before being cuffed.

People don't factor in sweat or instant explosive violence or movement. Nor do they factor in future action.....for example had police known that this would lead to a shooting they would have used more force early on before the perp made the situation rise to the level of deadly force. Another way to look at it.......because these police didn't know the future they didn't work as hard as they could have to end it early. In a dynamic often changing event you simple cannot know what the bad guy is going to do. This is why police often use more force than necessary to subdue a suspect. Because when you don't they can change the dynamics. In a 3 or 4 against one situation this may look like accessive force.

If you have never tried to subdue a violent, drug filled, sweaty, powerful human being, you probably shouldn't be busting the cops chops. In criminal justice we were tasked with arresting each other. We had to resist without violence. It was very tough to say the least. I could never be a cop its just to dangerous and as you can see here you are damned if you do and if you don't.

Excellent response thst brings up a new point.

It’s easy for me to Monday morning quarterback and say the cops let it go too far, which I did say. But the reality is they didn’t expect that kind of escalation. And yes, had they applied heavy force assuming the worst to avoid the scenario that unfolded, , leftists would cry police brutality and riot anyway. They can’t win.

 

[Deuce]

3 or 4 cops vs one guy. Sounds like easy peasy doesn't it? I watched an average sized white guy high on something fend off 6 cops. Ate the taser and pepper spray. They finally piled on top of him and got him handcuffed. He wasn't even punching or kicking just squirming and running. Had he become violent he probably would have lasted much longer before being cuffed.

People don't factor in sweat or instant explosive violence or movement. Nor do they factor in future action.....for example had police known that this would lead to a shooting they would have used more force early on before the perp made the situation rise to the level of deadly force. Another way to look at it.......because these police didn't know the future they didn't work as hard as they could have to end it early. In a dynamic often changing event you simple cannot know what the bad guy is going to do. This is why police often use more force than necessary to subdue a suspect. Because when you don't they can change the dynamics. In a 3 or 4 against one situation this may look like accessive force.

If you have never tried to subdue a violent, drug filled, sweaty, powerful human being, you probably shouldn't be busting the cops chops. In criminal justice we were tasked with arresting each other. We had to resist without violence. It was very tough to say the least. I could never be a cop its just to dangerous and as you can see here you are damned if you do and if you don't.

They didn’t try anything like that.