The Shooting Gallery: Police Violence MEGATHREAD

[The Brain]

Given that earlier today you weren't even aware that there are countries where cops aim at legs, are you sure you have thought this whole thing through enough?

I concede I was not aware that police were are allowed to shoot in your country when other options are still available.  The fact that Sweden has a daft use of force rule is grounds for one of us to reconsider if they have thought this through, but I don't think it is me.

I don't know why you think Swedish cops shoot people when other options are available.

[DGuller]

I think the problem is that the "deadly force" is not the best name.  I think a more accurate descriptor would be "potentially deadly incapacitating force", because that's what it really is.  When you start shooting, you do it because you have to incapacitate someone immediately and you have no softer options, even if that carries the risk of death.  You don't do it because you now decided that someone needs to be killed. 

When you think of it as an incapacitating force, it seems to make more sense that maybe it would be a good idea to try to not make it more deadly that it has to be.  Maybe you give up slightly on the incapacitation score when you try to drive down the potentially deadly score, but that doesn't strike me as an unreasonable choice for a society to make.

[chipwich]

Do Swedes know what arteries are?

[Barrister]

I think the problem is that the "deadly force" is not the best name.  I think a more accurate descriptor would be "potentially deadly incapacitating force", because that's what it really is.  When you start shooting, you do it because you have to incapacitate someone immediately and you have no softer options, even if that carries the risk of death.  You don't do it because you now decided that someone needs to be killed. 

When you think of it as an incapacitating force, it seems to make more sense that maybe it would be a good idea to try to not make it more deadly that it has to be.  Maybe you give up slightly on the incapacitation score when you try to drive down the potentially deadly score, but that doesn't strike me as an unreasonable choice for a society to make.

You want the precise legal language it is "force that is intended or is likely to cause death or grievous bodily harm". s. 25(4) Criminal Code.

[The Brain]

Do Swedes know what arteries are?

If this is about leg shots sometimes being lethal then I already mentioned that.

[crazy canuck]

Dude, it says right there "significant threat of death or serious bodily harm"  not just to posing a danger to the public, which is what I said would be a surprising result.  If the test was that low the police could shoot pretty much anyone fleeing.

Dude, I mentioned this in the context of the story about a Lakewood shooting of four cops, and a likely attempted ambush of another cop that ultimately killed the suspect.  I thought it was clear enough from the context what I meant by "danger to the public" that I did not have to tediously elaborate, and I still think that it was.

Its like you forgot what you claimed to be the rule.

Goodbye.

[DGuller]

Dude, it says right there "significant threat of death or serious bodily harm"  not just to posing a danger to the public, which is what I said would be a surprising result.  If the test was that low the police could shoot pretty much anyone fleeing.

Dude, I mentioned this in the context of the story about a Lakewood shooting of four cops, and a likely attempted ambush of another cop that ultimately killed the suspect.  I thought it was clear enough from the context what I meant by "danger to the public" that I did not have to tediously elaborate, and I still think that it was.

Its like you forgot what you claimed to be the rule.

Goodbye.

Huh? 

[The Brain]

I was curious so I checked the Wiki list of the number of people killed by law enforcement in different countries per capita. Sweden typically has 1 person killed per year and 10 million people. There is certainly room for improvement, but at least it's a lot lower than the countries of North America. Many factors come into play in these numbers, different police techniques is just one of them. My guess is that there are things to be learnt/taught in many directions for different aspects of this problem, certainly not just from "lower to higher". Seems to me though that keeping an open mind about the countries that are low on the list makes sense, even if certain techniques go against the observer's own traditions.

[Berkut]

Comparing Sweden and the US when it comes to how to handle potentially violent criminals as a law enforcement officer  is just silly . The threat profile is not remotely similar.

[Valmy]

Yeah how many Swedes are open carrying AR-15s and are part of a local militia?

My elderly uncle in Colorado is currently stocking up on ammunition and weapons sure that the Trumpreich Proud Boys Einsatzgruppen are about to launch a violent uprising once Joe Biden wins.

[Eddie Teach]

Which side will he join?

[Barrister]

Which side will he join?

Exactly what I was wondering... 

[Valmy]

Which side will he join?

He is a leftwing guy...which is why I found it weird even he was stockpiling for the big militia war.

[The Brain]

Comparing Sweden and the US when it comes to how to handle potentially violent criminals as a law enforcement officer  is just silly . The threat profile is not remotely similar.

Not sure if serious.

[Barrister]

Comparing Sweden and the US when it comes to how to handle potentially violent criminals as a law enforcement officer  is just silly . The threat profile is not remotely similar.

Not sure if serious.

Pretty sure he's serious.

Let's see.  You have gun licensing, US does not.  US has 120 guns per 100 people, Sweden has 23.  US has a large minority that has faced historic racism and persecution, which has led to much higher crime rates.  Sweden was historically ethnically homogenous and while it has taken in some refugees, most foreign immigrants have been high skilled.