Idaho
continuity character
I can't conceive of seeing this as anything other than an unnecessary and illegal killing by police. We must have very different ways of seeing the world.
Swatting claims its first victim.
- Thread starter likesfish
- Start date
bemused
Well-Known Member
This is a consequence of policing an armed society. Over 120 police officers were killed this year in the USA. It isn't surprising that police with guns policing people with guns shot people.
edit: it's actually less than 40.
Last edited:
Spymaster
Plastic Paddy
We certainly do if you consider this to be murder. It's probably not even illegal if the cop who took the shot genuinely thought the victim posed a threat. Stop with the hysterical nonsense.
Ax^
Silly Rabbit
great get out of jail free card for the police eh
emanymton
A cat politely sat on the flaming gardener.
I think the idea is that the only time you should be shooting someone (in theory) is because they pose and immediate threat to you or someone else. In which case you either shoot to kill or you might as well not shoot at all.
DotCommunist
So many particulars. So many questions.
compared to 967 people shot dead by the police.
whats that, 6 dead for every one copper? seems like one side is winning, as it tends to do in virtual police states
First I’ve heard of this kind of ‘prank’
Idaho
continuity character
Describing my differing opinion as hysterical is inaccurate and very annoying. I can see why you are often involved in the more tedious urban bun fights.
cupid_stunt
Thank you for your attention to this matter!
Not sure about it being one-sided, you would need to know how times the cops were involved in situations where guns were involved, or suspected to be involved, then consider the number of deaths as a proportion, then know how many were justified & how many were 'accidents'.
Not wanting to defend cops in any particular situation, but I suspect the number of innocent people killed in such situations is tiny compared to the overall number of incidents.
andysays
Love and solidarity
An unnecessary and illegal killing isn't necessarily murder.
Don't know enough about this case to pontificate, but sounds like the original caller, the SWAT team members and the police department which trained and sent them into this situation all share a certain amount of responsibility.
DotCommunist
So many particulars. So many questions.
the number of cases that make it to a courtroom yes. We know how easy it is for a bag of crack to turn a dead black man into a dead drug dealer. We've already seen such shennanigans when they forgot to turn off a bodycam
likesfish
You can't park here sir
Dylan redefined has done the uk police pistol course and is trained infantry soldier who served in iraq.
The police and military have a very diffrent response.
Scenario police come round the corner actor dressed in paramilitary gear toting ak police response warnings followed by shoot.
Squaddies iraq veterans come round corner walk up to bloke engage bloke in conversation and have a smoke break
completely throw the actor playing the madman.
2nd scenario guy in house with shotgun police cordon negociator etc etc.
Squaddie smoke bloke out of house shoot many many times as he tries to run away
.
A us SWAT team can be highly trained professionals or can be regular coppers given the uniform and told your swat go shoot bad guys.
Police response is going to be very diffrent if you ring up saying I've murdered someone and I'm going to murder the rest of my hostages and everyone else I can they are going to come in expecting a gun fight
.
Swatting has been happening for awhile eventually it was going to have this result
The police and military have a very diffrent response.
Scenario police come round the corner actor dressed in paramilitary gear toting ak police response warnings followed by shoot.
Squaddies iraq veterans come round corner walk up to bloke engage bloke in conversation and have a smoke break
completely throw the actor playing the madman.2nd scenario guy in house with shotgun police cordon negociator etc etc.
Squaddie smoke bloke out of house shoot many many times as he tries to run away
.A us SWAT team can be highly trained professionals or can be regular coppers given the uniform and told your swat go shoot bad guys
.Police response is going to be very diffrent if you ring up saying I've murdered someone and I'm going to murder the rest of my hostages and everyone else I can they are going to come in expecting a gun fight
.Swatting has been happening for awhile eventually it was going to have this result
Idaho
continuity character
Yes I acknowledge that. But until the police are pressured to give citizens the benefit of the doubt, the rates of police killings will continue to increase.
bemused
Well-Known Member
At what point do you stop giving someone the benefit of the doubt if they suspect they may have a gun?
Should definitely be a murder charge for,the guy who called in the SWAT team - anyone would have known there was a reasonable chance of an innocent person being shot by trigger-happy cops under the circumstances.
Now somebody has to explain to a 2-year-old boy and a 7-year-old boy that their father ended up dead because of a stupid $1.50 bet between two strangers playing a video game...
Now somebody has to explain to a 2-year-old boy and a 7-year-old boy that their father ended up dead because of a stupid $1.50 bet between two strangers playing a video game...
Idaho
continuity character
I suggest that this case is a good example of too little benefit of the doubt.
UnderOpenSky
baseline neural therapy
DotCommunist
So many particulars. So many questions.
interesting isn't it, in a sick black mirror way. To demonstrate that you'd have to first evidence it that police are routinely trigger happy and brutal- something courts are loath to admit.
bemused
Well-Known Member
I have zero experience of approaching someone I suspect may be armed whilst being armed myself. It isn't a skill I need in my role of a professional counter. You seem to be saying that the police should give more benefit of the doubt before firing, in the scenario you believe that the person you're going to interact has a firearm as what point do you stop giving them the benefit of the doubt?
Pickman's model
sunset spires and twilight woods
In technical parlance, the biggest bit
Ax^
Silly Rabbit
i think you missing my point where as you would suspect the police to have more resolutions to a conflict situation than shoot the mother fucker
even the military have rules of engagement
one being use the minimum amount of force
i think
Pickman's model
sunset spires and twilight woods
This is a situation in which even nicholas parsons might not have given the benefit of the doubt, simply put yer man was set up to be killed.
Pickman's model
sunset spires and twilight woods
Mr.Bishie
pickled egg
They either have or haven't. Innocent folk will continue to be shot & killed unless plod change tactics regarding RoE. This is where the police/military difference lies.
bemused
Well-Known Member
So at what point would you stop giving the benefit of the doubt? As I understand it (very little) one of the reasons police now have body cameras is to record their interactions, which would appear to be a change in approach. It is okay saying that police have to change procedures but it does feel a little bit like armchair generaling in the context of interacting with someone you believe may have the means to kill you.
A380
How do I change this 'custom title' thing then?
A similar thing does happen here. It’s not unknown for nervous dealers who think rivals might be doing a drive by outside their house to call in anonymous reports of Street robberies with guns or knives to get a couple of ARVs driving round for a while...
Why do we obsess so much on American police shootings? It’s a completely different culture with a hugely different police culture within it.
European cops are all armed but there is nowhere near the level of shootings by, and of, the police.
Other European countries have moved to a two or three tier system. All officers will be armed with different levels of training but most forces will have a team of full time people trained to similar standards as British firearms officers and most countries will have some kind of national cadre of either military SF , civil police or, where they have one gendarmerie trained to a very high level.
With the exception of France* most European countries have adopted the ‘British’ model of resolution through negotiation, which is to contain and play the long game till everyone gets so bored that prison or (psychiatric hospital*) looks like the more preferable option than talking to ‘John, I’m with the police and am very dull’ for another minute.
As likesfish says. American swat teams vary from teams of a similar level to our SF or our specialist firearms officers ( The FBI have this capability as do some of the larger cities and some states). Other areas may have people trained to the level of our full time firearms officers whilst most police departments are less than 50 people and I would imagine swat team is an additional duty with probably a week or so training a year. I can’t imagine the smaller departments have enough people to generate enough people for an effective cadre of negotiatiors either.
But before we dismiss the yanks too much. It’s interesring that the article says that ‘swating’ Is really common, but this is the first reported fatality. Would suggest that even in Butfuk Illinois the 20 person police department aren’t fucking it up that often.
* Untill a couple of years ago the French approach to negotiating was basically a countdown... they are aligning more with the rest of Europe now TBF.
* A large percentage of sieges end with a medical intervention rather than in the criminal justice system.
Why do we obsess so much on American police shootings? It’s a completely different culture with a hugely different police culture within it.
European cops are all armed but there is nowhere near the level of shootings by, and of, the police.
Other European countries have moved to a two or three tier system. All officers will be armed with different levels of training but most forces will have a team of full time people trained to similar standards as British firearms officers and most countries will have some kind of national cadre of either military SF , civil police or, where they have one gendarmerie trained to a very high level.
With the exception of France* most European countries have adopted the ‘British’ model of resolution through negotiation, which is to contain and play the long game till everyone gets so bored that prison or (psychiatric hospital*) looks like the more preferable option than talking to ‘John, I’m with the police and am very dull’ for another minute.
As likesfish says. American swat teams vary from teams of a similar level to our SF or our specialist firearms officers ( The FBI have this capability as do some of the larger cities and some states). Other areas may have people trained to the level of our full time firearms officers whilst most police departments are less than 50 people and I would imagine swat team is an additional duty with probably a week or so training a year. I can’t imagine the smaller departments have enough people to generate enough people for an effective cadre of negotiatiors either.
But before we dismiss the yanks too much. It’s interesring that the article says that ‘swating’ Is really common, but this is the first reported fatality. Would suggest that even in Butfuk Illinois the 20 person police department aren’t fucking it up that often.
* Untill a couple of years ago the French approach to negotiating was basically a countdown... they are aligning more with the rest of Europe now TBF.
* A large percentage of sieges end with a medical intervention rather than in the criminal justice system.
Last edited:
Similar threads
- Poll
