The Shooting Gallery: Police Violence MEGATHREAD

[DGuller]

I don't know. I am not a trained cop. I would imagine police would be trained to disable (rather than kill) children, even if they appear dangerous.

Yeah, in this situation, the cop should've definitely aimed for the leg.

[CountDeMoney]

Knock it out of his hand with a Bat Boomerang from his Bat Utility Belt.  What can't those things do.

[Ed Anger]

I wish I could shoot DG in the leg.

[DGuller]

I wish I could shoot DG in the leg.

[derspiess]

I suppose it would depend on the circumstances of each situation. In this one, if you tell the kid to put the hands up and instead he reaches for the gun, then you have to make a split second decision of whether or not he will try to shoot you.

What would you have done?

I don't know. I am not a trained cop. I would imagine police would be trained to disable (rather than kill) children, even if they appear dangerous.

Absolutely.  I can imagine that being a major topic they cover at the academy:

"Okay recruits, this morning we're going over the finer points on how to shoot kids..."

[mongers]

Really these cops are just feminists plying their divisive agenda to outlaw all toy weapons*.





* This assumes cops don't start shooting children armed with Barbie dolls.

[Syt]

I read one of the cops hurt his ankle and needed treatment. He probably walked backwards.

[derspiess]

I read one of the cops hurt his ankle and needed treatment. He probably walked backwards.

...into traffic.  He's lucky it was just an ankle.

[mongers]

It's an interesting heritage project, playing tribute to the the Vietnam war, free-fire playground zones. 

[11B4V]

Knock it out of his hand with a Bat Boomerang from his Bat Utility Belt.  What can't those things do.

No shit.

But, my sympathy to DG and Marty for being so ignorant.

[sbr]

I suppose it would depend on the circumstances of each situation. In this one, if you tell the kid to put the hands up and instead he reaches for the gun, then you have to make a split second decision of whether or not he will try to shoot you.

What would you have done?

I don't know. I am not a trained cop. I would imagine police would be trained to disable (rather than kill) children, even if they appear dangerous.

Cop should have tackled him.

[sbr]

I don't know how to feel that there wasn't even a mention here of the shooting at Florida State University last week, I guess no one but the shooter died so that's good.

I knew right away the shooter wasn't an FSU football player, otherwise the campus police would have never showed up to investigate.

[11B4V]

I suppose it would depend on the circumstances of each situation. In this one, if you tell the kid to put the hands up and instead he reaches for the gun, then you have to make a split second decision of whether or not he will try to shoot you.

What would you have done?

I don't know. I am not a trained cop. I would imagine police would be trained to disable (rather than kill) children, even if they appear dangerous.

Cop should have tackled him.

Naw, they should have disabled him. Contrary to DG and Marty's ignorance, cops are trained to disable perps with their service weapon. Just not how they think.

In most instances and contrary to popular belief, patrol officers don't shoot with the intent to kill.

[Barrister]

I suppose it would depend on the circumstances of each situation. In this one, if you tell the kid to put the hands up and instead he reaches for the gun, then you have to make a split second decision of whether or not he will try to shoot you.

What would you have done?

I don't know. I am not a trained cop. I would imagine police would be trained to disable (rather than kill) children, even if they appear dangerous.

Cop should have tackled him.

Naw, they should have disabled him. Contrary to DG and Marty's ignorance, cops are trained to disable perps with their service weapon. Just not how they think.

In most instances and contrary to popular belief, patrol officers don't shoot with the intent to kill.

Now I'm not a cop either, but I do work with them every single day of the week.

My understanding is that you're splitting hairs here.  No, police do not shoot with the intent to kill, however they do shoot with the intent to stop the assailant - which means hooting at the centre body mass.  Which of course has a very good chance of being lethal.

Marty - police are of course taught a great many forms of non-lethal force.  The use of deadly force is only to be used as a "last resort".  But guess what - a suspect who ignores directions and is reaching for what appears to be a firearm is such a "last resort" situation.

[11B4V]

I suppose it would depend on the circumstances of each situation. In this one, if you tell the kid to put the hands up and instead he reaches for the gun, then you have to make a split second decision of whether or not he will try to shoot you.

What would you have done?

I don't know. I am not a trained cop. I would imagine police would be trained to disable (rather than kill) children, even if they appear dangerous.

Cop should have tackled him.

Naw, they should have disabled him. Contrary to DG and Marty's ignorance, cops are trained to disable perps with their service weapon. Just not how they think.

In most instances and contrary to popular belief, patrol officers don't shoot with the intent to kill.

Now I'm not a cop either, but I do work with them every single day of the week.

My understanding is that you're splitting hairs here.  No, police do not shoot with the intent to kill, however they do shoot with the intent to stop the assailant - which means hooting at the centre body mass.  Which of course has a very good chance of being lethal.

Marty - police are of course taught a great many forms of non-lethal force.  The use of deadly force is only to be used as a "last resort".  But guess what - a suspect who ignores directions and is reaching for what appears to be a firearm is such a "last resort" situation.

Yes