Black teenager with knife killed by Chicago PD

[BIGREDIOWAN]

Mods, why did the title of the thread get changed?

I can guess why, but I personally didn't change it. All it was going to do was rile things up by the title alone.

[BIGREDIOWAN]

 

 

You're using the term "cops" as a blanket statement and I take offense to that. Whether you like it or not 99% of the cops out there are good cops, but you're basically saying we're all bad in my mind. That's not a surprise to me though at this point. It's obvious to me you just hate cops.

Originally I was referring to rogue cops, in the minority, but I don't want to keep typing "rogue" whenever I talk about cops. Assume I'm talking about "rogue" cops. But I also believe the authority and use of lethal force in the hands of all cops is an issue that has to be redressed.

 

maybe if they criminal element didn't exercise their authority to shoot, stab,slash, run over, or use any other deadly force available to them the cops wouldn't need to have such authority

 

Exactly! Again, I don't agree it's only the cops that need to change, maybe society should take a look at itself as well. Just saying...........

[cornographic]

 

 

 

You're using the term "cops" as a blanket statement and I take offense to that. Whether you like it or not 99% of the cops out there are good cops, but you're basically saying we're all bad in my mind. That's not a surprise to me though at this point. It's obvious to me you just hate cops.

Originally I was referring to rogue cops, in the minority, but I don't want to keep typing "rogue" whenever I talk about cops. Assume I'm talking about "rogue" cops. But I also believe the authority and use of lethal force in the hands of all cops is an issue that has to be redressed.

 

maybe if they criminal element didn't exercise their authority to shoot, stab,slash, run over, or use any other deadly force available to them the cops wouldn't need to have such authority

 

Exactly! Again, I don't agree it's only the cops that need to change, maybe society should take a look at itself as well. Just saying...........

 

We can agree on that.

[cornographic]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Using the word thug in the title is just asking to rile up tensions, from all sides. You called the man a perpetrator in the actual post, why not use that? I feel like thug is almost synonymous with the n word at this point, after all the media coverage of the different riots / police brutality debates, and it doesn't do any good to start with it. It is seen as a blanket statement for any black criminal, the way cops are seen as evil doers after reports like this. As for the actual story, I believe the number of shots was a bit excessive, don't disagree with the initial shooting. Also, the use of martial arts as a different means of defending ones self is a bit flawed, IMHO. Yeah, you might be taught that way in martial arts - but the difference is martial arts is contest. The worst thing to happen is you lose your match. Police officers face worse case scenarios of possibly losing ones life and not all suspects are going to respect the authority, or even value a cop's life. So in that case, if I'm an officer I'm going to make sure I have enough protection to reasonably ensure my safety.

The kid wasn't charging the cop. I reiterate, there has got to be a better way to deescalate the situation. This shouldn't have been a death sentence for the young man.

Deescalating situations only works when both parties agree to it. In this instance, that might have been the case or it might not have. We don't know, but I am willing to bet the house that there is no way on god's green earth that every situation between a cop and suspect can be deescalated. There are too many variables to go into interactions between cops and civilians to write a text book response and expect everyone to abide by it. Hell, think about the stories of individuals either on drugs or severely intoxicated that require multiple cops to get under control. You're going to tell me that the cops should just work to deescalate the situation? Just to clarify, I do think the cop is wrong in this situation.

Yeah, I tend to think that if someone is is not wielding a gun, then deescalation/containment must be the an option. How many cops were at this scene, 6 or so? 6-8 cops can't contain a guy with a 3" blade? I don't get it. The police are unrealistically authorized to use lethal force, is my take.

Your's is the unrealistic expectation.

 

Two situations, one of which that doesn't end with a criminal being shot;

 

A) Suspect with a knife, 6-8 officers on site, suspect is ordered to drop knife. Instead suspect turns in a threatening manner towards officers. Guess what should happen 100% of the time.

 

B) Suspect with a knife is ordered to drop the knife and he does. No one is shot.

 

Why is this so f'ing hard for you to figure out?

 

How about cops figure out how to capture guys with knives w/o killing them, especially when they are nowhere near them? I know, it's tough, because cops have shown they will kill kids with toy guns and such.

 

 

So you're saying the cops should just figure out how to capture him. What if he takes 3-4 cops out before the "figure out" how to capture him, without escalating the tension?

 

Uh, this is why they are supposedly looking at their training protocol and use of lethal force.

 

You know, they have bomb suits for those who disable bombs. Maybe cops could where more protective gear in these situations, but that's not really what I'm talking about here.

 

Surround him, deescalate, wait it out, like a hostage situation, nobody gets hurt, hopefully. Shoot him with a tranquilizer, how about that? They even do that for animals in the wild. what a concept. Non lethal, IOW. I'm sure the best and brightest minds can figure this out. This kid was murdered within 30 seconds of the cop showing up. There's got to be a better way of accosting, containing, capturing, there has to be.

 

 

I've actually never thought about this. Interesting concept, would imagine its sort of the premise behind tasers too.

 

Well, tasers have been shown to be lethal as well, especially when the "well trained" cop tases someone over and over again(in the news a week ago). Not a fan of tasers either.

 

 

Its taken a couple of pages for me to finally understand, Next time, just come out and say it on page one so I don't fall into the trap of thinking I was actually getting somewhere.... you're not a fan of cops in general.

 

Its a darn shame that citizens of this fine country don't instinctively know the difference of right and wrong and choose to follow the former.

 

I'm not a fan of cops who kill unarmed, unthreatening people with guns or tasers or clubs or whatever. Call me "radical". I'm also not a fan of private prison slave labor and the targeting of commuinties for revenue generation via bogus citation writing. I'm also not a fan of Sheriffs dpts doing hiway robbery of migrant farm workers paychecks. I'm also not a fan of the various "seisure" practices(legalized theft) practiced by police dpts. These are things that I consider "wrong", I call it "corruption", "malpractice", and it's not the citizens doing them. If you support these things, then that's on you.

 

As far as the honest cops go, I'm good with that.

 

so if you have an inmate in prison, it costs money to keep this trash in a dumpster understand? why not put them to work? if the state or prison and make some money back great . its not like they are busy. as far as prisoners getting in house jobs in a state prison, they EARN it by good behavior. Jobs are not given to anyone who doesn't put effort into getting it. just like we do out side.

 

The deal is, that both public and private prisons contract with private companies and use the prisoners as a source of essentially free labor for private profiteering. This is a type of slavery. Modern type of Gulag or whatever. If they want to pay them a fair wage, minimum wage, then that's a different story. You may not have a problem with it, but many do and there is a good deal of push back on the system.

 

There are those in prison serving inflated sentences for misdeamer or those who have served a few years waiting for a trial, i.e., haven't been convicted yet. That's a fair amount of your prison slave labor force.

[cornographic]

 

 

You're using the term "cops" as a blanket statement and I take offense to that. Whether you like it or not 99% of the cops out there are good cops, but you're basically saying we're all bad in my mind. That's not a surprise to me though at this point. It's obvious to me you just hate cops.

Originally I was referring to rogue cops, in the minority, but I don't want to keep typing "rogue" whenever I talk about cops. Assume I'm talking about "rogue" cops. But I also believe the authority and use of lethal force in the hands of all cops is an issue that has to be redressed.

 

maybe if they criminal element didn't exercise their authority to shoot, stab,slash, run over, or use any other deadly force available to them the cops wouldn't need to have such authority

 

My discussion centers around "perps" that aren't presenting any threat--or little threat--and end up dead.

[I AM FOOT FOOT]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Using the word thug in the title is just asking to rile up tensions, from all sides. You called the man a perpetrator in the actual post, why not use that? I feel like thug is almost synonymous with the n word at this point, after all the media coverage of the different riots / police brutality debates, and it doesn't do any good to start with it. It is seen as a blanket statement for any black criminal, the way cops are seen as evil doers after reports like this. As for the actual story, I believe the number of shots was a bit excessive, don't disagree with the initial shooting. Also, the use of martial arts as a different means of defending ones self is a bit flawed, IMHO. Yeah, you might be taught that way in martial arts - but the difference is martial arts is contest. The worst thing to happen is you lose your match. Police officers face worse case scenarios of possibly losing ones life and not all suspects are going to respect the authority, or even value a cop's life. So in that case, if I'm an officer I'm going to make sure I have enough protection to reasonably ensure my safety.

The kid wasn't charging the cop. I reiterate, there has got to be a better way to deescalate the situation. This shouldn't have been a death sentence for the young man.

Deescalating situations only works when both parties agree to it. In this instance, that might have been the case or it might not have. We don't know, but I am willing to bet the house that there is no way on god's green earth that every situation between a cop and suspect can be deescalated. There are too many variables to go into interactions between cops and civilians to write a text book response and expect everyone to abide by it. Hell, think about the stories of individuals either on drugs or severely intoxicated that require multiple cops to get under control. You're going to tell me that the cops should just work to deescalate the situation? Just to clarify, I do think the cop is wrong in this situation.

Yeah, I tend to think that if someone is is not wielding a gun, then deescalation/containment must be the an option. How many cops were at this scene, 6 or so? 6-8 cops can't contain a guy with a 3" blade? I don't get it. The police are unrealistically authorized to use lethal force, is my take.

Your's is the unrealistic expectation.

 

Two situations, one of which that doesn't end with a criminal being shot;

 

A) Suspect with a knife, 6-8 officers on site, suspect is ordered to drop knife. Instead suspect turns in a threatening manner towards officers. Guess what should happen 100% of the time.

 

B) Suspect with a knife is ordered to drop the knife and he does. No one is shot.

 

Why is this so f'ing hard for you to figure out?

 

How about cops figure out how to capture guys with knives w/o killing them, especially when they are nowhere near them? I know, it's tough, because cops have shown they will kill kids with toy guns and such.

 

 

So you're saying the cops should just figure out how to capture him. What if he takes 3-4 cops out before the "figure out" how to capture him, without escalating the tension?

 

Uh, this is why they are supposedly looking at their training protocol and use of lethal force.

 

You know, they have bomb suits for those who disable bombs. Maybe cops could where more protective gear in these situations, but that's not really what I'm talking about here.

 

Surround him, deescalate, wait it out, like a hostage situation, nobody gets hurt, hopefully. Shoot him with a tranquilizer, how about that? They even do that for animals in the wild. what a concept. Non lethal, IOW. I'm sure the best and brightest minds can figure this out. This kid was murdered within 30 seconds of the cop showing up. There's got to be a better way of accosting, containing, capturing, there has to be.

 

 

I've actually never thought about this. Interesting concept, would imagine its sort of the premise behind tasers too.

 

Well, tasers have been shown to be lethal as well, especially when the "well trained" cop tases someone over and over again(in the news a week ago). Not a fan of tasers either.

 

 

Its taken a couple of pages for me to finally understand, Next time, just come out and say it on page one so I don't fall into the trap of thinking I was actually getting somewhere.... you're not a fan of cops in general.

 

Its a darn shame that citizens of this fine country don't instinctively know the difference of right and wrong and choose to follow the former.

 

I'm not a fan of cops who kill unarmed, unthreatening people with guns or tasers or clubs or whatever. Call me "radical". I'm also not a fan of private prison slave labor and the targeting of commuinties for revenue generation via bogus citation writing. I'm also not a fan of Sheriffs dpts doing hiway robbery of migrant farm workers paychecks. I'm also not a fan of the various "seisure" practices(legalized theft) practiced by police dpts. These are things that I consider "wrong", I call it "corruption", "malpractice", and it's not the citizens doing them. If you support these things, then that's on you.

 

As far as the honest cops go, I'm good with that.

 

so if you have an inmate in prison, it costs money to keep this trash in a dumpster understand? why not put them to work? if the state or prison and make some money back great . its not like they are busy. as far as prisoners getting in house jobs in a state prison, they EARN it by good behavior. Jobs are not given to anyone who doesn't put effort into getting it. just like we do out side.

 

The deal is, that both public and private prisons contract with private companies and use the prisoners as a source of essentially free labor for private profiteering. This is a type of slavery. Modern type of Gulag or whatever. If they want to pay them a fair wage, minimum wage, then that's a different story. You may not have a problem with it, but many do and there is a good deal of push back on the system.

 

There are those in prison serving inflated sentences for misdeamer or those who have served a few years waiting for a trial, i.e., haven't been convicted yet. That's a fair amount of your prison slave labor force.

 

as inmates in a prison you give up a lot of rights you understand this don't you?? and im not sure you go to prison to wait on a trial. that would be a county or city jail.

[Moiraine]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Using the word thug in the title is just asking to rile up tensions, from all sides. You called the man a perpetrator in the actual post, why not use that? I feel like thug is almost synonymous with the n word at this point, after all the media coverage of the different riots / police brutality debates, and it doesn't do any good to start with it. It is seen as a blanket statement for any black criminal, the way cops are seen as evil doers after reports like this. As for the actual story, I believe the number of shots was a bit excessive, don't disagree with the initial shooting. Also, the use of martial arts as a different means of defending ones self is a bit flawed, IMHO. Yeah, you might be taught that way in martial arts - but the difference is martial arts is contest. The worst thing to happen is you lose your match. Police officers face worse case scenarios of possibly losing ones life and not all suspects are going to respect the authority, or even value a cop's life. So in that case, if I'm an officer I'm going to make sure I have enough protection to reasonably ensure my safety.

The kid wasn't charging the cop. I reiterate, there has got to be a better way to deescalate the situation. This shouldn't have been a death sentence for the young man.

Deescalating situations only works when both parties agree to it. In this instance, that might have been the case or it might not have. We don't know, but I am willing to bet the house that there is no way on god's green earth that every situation between a cop and suspect can be deescalated. There are too many variables to go into interactions between cops and civilians to write a text book response and expect everyone to abide by it. Hell, think about the stories of individuals either on drugs or severely intoxicated that require multiple cops to get under control. You're going to tell me that the cops should just work to deescalate the situation? Just to clarify, I do think the cop is wrong in this situation.

Yeah, I tend to think that if someone is is not wielding a gun, then deescalation/containment must be the an option. How many cops were at this scene, 6 or so? 6-8 cops can't contain a guy with a 3" blade? I don't get it. The police are unrealistically authorized to use lethal force, is my take.

Your's is the unrealistic expectation.

 

Two situations, one of which that doesn't end with a criminal being shot;

 

A) Suspect with a knife, 6-8 officers on site, suspect is ordered to drop knife. Instead suspect turns in a threatening manner towards officers. Guess what should happen 100% of the time.

 

B) Suspect with a knife is ordered to drop the knife and he does. No one is shot.

 

Why is this so f'ing hard for you to figure out?

 

How about cops figure out how to capture guys with knives w/o killing them, especially when they are nowhere near them? I know, it's tough, because cops have shown they will kill kids with toy guns and such.

 

 

So you're saying the cops should just figure out how to capture him. What if he takes 3-4 cops out before the "figure out" how to capture him, without escalating the tension?

 

Uh, this is why they are supposedly looking at their training protocol and use of lethal force.

 

You know, they have bomb suits for those who disable bombs. Maybe cops could where more protective gear in these situations, but that's not really what I'm talking about here.

 

Surround him, deescalate, wait it out, like a hostage situation, nobody gets hurt, hopefully. Shoot him with a tranquilizer, how about that? They even do that for animals in the wild. what a concept. Non lethal, IOW. I'm sure the best and brightest minds can figure this out. This kid was murdered within 30 seconds of the cop showing up. There's got to be a better way of accosting, containing, capturing, there has to be.

 

 

I've actually never thought about this. Interesting concept, would imagine its sort of the premise behind tasers too.

 

Well, tasers have been shown to be lethal as well, especially when the "well trained" cop tases someone over and over again(in the news a week ago). Not a fan of tasers either.

 

 

Its taken a couple of pages for me to finally understand, Next time, just come out and say it on page one so I don't fall into the trap of thinking I was actually getting somewhere.... you're not a fan of cops in general.

 

Its a darn shame that citizens of this fine country don't instinctively know the difference of right and wrong and choose to follow the former.

 

I'm not a fan of cops who kill unarmed, unthreatening people with guns or tasers or clubs or whatever. Call me "radical". I'm also not a fan of private prison slave labor and the targeting of commuinties for revenue generation via bogus citation writing. I'm also not a fan of Sheriffs dpts doing hiway robbery of migrant farm workers paychecks. I'm also not a fan of the various "seisure" practices(legalized theft) practiced by police dpts. These are things that I consider "wrong", I call it "corruption", "malpractice", and it's not the citizens doing them. If you support these things, then that's on you.

 

As far as the honest cops go, I'm good with that.

 

so if you have an inmate in prison, it costs money to keep this trash in a dumpster understand? why not put them to work? if the state or prison and make some money back great . its not like they are busy. as far as prisoners getting in house jobs in a state prison, they EARN it by good behavior. Jobs are not given to anyone who doesn't put effort into getting it. just like we do out side.

 

The deal is, that both public and private prisons contract with private companies and use the prisoners as a source of essentially free labor for private profiteering. This is a type of slavery. Modern type of Gulag or whatever. If they want to pay them a fair wage, minimum wage, then that's a different story. You may not have a problem with it, but many do and there is a good deal of push back on the system.

 

There are those in prison serving inflated sentences for misdeamer or those who have served a few years waiting for a trial, i.e., haven't been convicted yet. That's a fair amount of your prison slave labor force.

 

as inmates in a prison you give up a lot of rights you understand this don't you?? and im not sure you go to prison to wait on a trial. that would be a county or city jail.

 

 

That doesn't mean prisons should be for profit. Prisoners don't, and shouldn't, lose all rights. And when companies make money by keeping jails full, they're going to do everything they can to keep jails full.

[commando]

 

 

 

You're using the term "cops" as a blanket statement and I take offense to that. Whether you like it or not 99% of the cops out there are good cops, but you're basically saying we're all bad in my mind. That's not a surprise to me though at this point. It's obvious to me you just hate cops.

Originally I was referring to rogue cops, in the minority, but I don't want to keep typing "rogue" whenever I talk about cops. Assume I'm talking about "rogue" cops. But I also believe the authority and use of lethal force in the hands of all cops is an issue that has to be redressed.

 

maybe if they criminal element didn't exercise their authority to shoot, stab,slash, run over, or use any other deadly force available to them the cops wouldn't need to have such authority

 

My discussion centers around "perps" that aren't presenting any threat--or little threat--and end up dead.

 

you have mind reading ability to know what the mad dog black hunting thug cop had in mind....can you ride along with the cops and use your mind reading skills to tell them which knife wielding person is safe to approach and which is a rabid thug intent on hurting someone?

[cornographic]

 

 

 

 

You're using the term "cops" as a blanket statement and I take offense to that. Whether you like it or not 99% of the cops out there are good cops, but you're basically saying we're all bad in my mind. That's not a surprise to me though at this point. It's obvious to me you just hate cops.

Originally I was referring to rogue cops, in the minority, but I don't want to keep typing "rogue" whenever I talk about cops. Assume I'm talking about "rogue" cops. But I also believe the authority and use of lethal force in the hands of all cops is an issue that has to be redressed.

 

maybe if they criminal element didn't exercise their authority to shoot, stab,slash, run over, or use any other deadly force available to them the cops wouldn't need to have such authority

 

My discussion centers around "perps" that aren't presenting any threat--or little threat--and end up dead.

 

you have mind reading ability to know what the mad dog black hunting thug cop had in mind....can you ride along with the cops and use your mind reading skills to tell them which knife wielding person is safe to approach and which is a rabid thug intent on hurting someone?

 

If you can make an argument as to how and why wielding a knife at a distance should be an automatic, immediate death sentence, w/o any other options in detainment, I'm happy to listen. But I've already listed a number of those who have been unarmed and shot dead by rogue cops. How about that unarmed guy who they cuffed and then tased to death a few weeks back? Maybe you can explain that one to me.

[cornographic]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Using the word thug in the title is just asking to rile up tensions, from all sides. You called the man a perpetrator in the actual post, why not use that? I feel like thug is almost synonymous with the n word at this point, after all the media coverage of the different riots / police brutality debates, and it doesn't do any good to start with it. It is seen as a blanket statement for any black criminal, the way cops are seen as evil doers after reports like this. As for the actual story, I believe the number of shots was a bit excessive, don't disagree with the initial shooting. Also, the use of martial arts as a different means of defending ones self is a bit flawed, IMHO. Yeah, you might be taught that way in martial arts - but the difference is martial arts is contest. The worst thing to happen is you lose your match. Police officers face worse case scenarios of possibly losing ones life and not all suspects are going to respect the authority, or even value a cop's life. So in that case, if I'm an officer I'm going to make sure I have enough protection to reasonably ensure my safety.

The kid wasn't charging the cop. I reiterate, there has got to be a better way to deescalate the situation. This shouldn't have been a death sentence for the young man.

Deescalating situations only works when both parties agree to it. In this instance, that might have been the case or it might not have. We don't know, but I am willing to bet the house that there is no way on god's green earth that every situation between a cop and suspect can be deescalated. There are too many variables to go into interactions between cops and civilians to write a text book response and expect everyone to abide by it. Hell, think about the stories of individuals either on drugs or severely intoxicated that require multiple cops to get under control. You're going to tell me that the cops should just work to deescalate the situation? Just to clarify, I do think the cop is wrong in this situation.

Yeah, I tend to think that if someone is is not wielding a gun, then deescalation/containment must be the an option. How many cops were at this scene, 6 or so? 6-8 cops can't contain a guy with a 3" blade? I don't get it. The police are unrealistically authorized to use lethal force, is my take.

Your's is the unrealistic expectation.

 

Two situations, one of which that doesn't end with a criminal being shot;

 

A) Suspect with a knife, 6-8 officers on site, suspect is ordered to drop knife. Instead suspect turns in a threatening manner towards officers. Guess what should happen 100% of the time.

 

B) Suspect with a knife is ordered to drop the knife and he does. No one is shot.

 

Why is this so f'ing hard for you to figure out?

 

How about cops figure out how to capture guys with knives w/o killing them, especially when they are nowhere near them? I know, it's tough, because cops have shown they will kill kids with toy guns and such.

 

 

So you're saying the cops should just figure out how to capture him. What if he takes 3-4 cops out before the "figure out" how to capture him, without escalating the tension?

 

Uh, this is why they are supposedly looking at their training protocol and use of lethal force.

 

You know, they have bomb suits for those who disable bombs. Maybe cops could where more protective gear in these situations, but that's not really what I'm talking about here.

 

Surround him, deescalate, wait it out, like a hostage situation, nobody gets hurt, hopefully. Shoot him with a tranquilizer, how about that? They even do that for animals in the wild. what a concept. Non lethal, IOW. I'm sure the best and brightest minds can figure this out. This kid was murdered within 30 seconds of the cop showing up. There's got to be a better way of accosting, containing, capturing, there has to be.

 

 

I've actually never thought about this. Interesting concept, would imagine its sort of the premise behind tasers too.

 

Well, tasers have been shown to be lethal as well, especially when the "well trained" cop tases someone over and over again(in the news a week ago). Not a fan of tasers either.

 

 

Its taken a couple of pages for me to finally understand, Next time, just come out and say it on page one so I don't fall into the trap of thinking I was actually getting somewhere.... you're not a fan of cops in general.

 

Its a darn shame that citizens of this fine country don't instinctively know the difference of right and wrong and choose to follow the former.

 

I'm not a fan of cops who kill unarmed, unthreatening people with guns or tasers or clubs or whatever. Call me "radical". I'm also not a fan of private prison slave labor and the targeting of commuinties for revenue generation via bogus citation writing. I'm also not a fan of Sheriffs dpts doing hiway robbery of migrant farm workers paychecks. I'm also not a fan of the various "seisure" practices(legalized theft) practiced by police dpts. These are things that I consider "wrong", I call it "corruption", "malpractice", and it's not the citizens doing them. If you support these things, then that's on you.

 

As far as the honest cops go, I'm good with that.

 

so if you have an inmate in prison, it costs money to keep this trash in a dumpster understand? why not put them to work? if the state or prison and make some money back great . its not like they are busy. as far as prisoners getting in house jobs in a state prison, they EARN it by good behavior. Jobs are not given to anyone who doesn't put effort into getting it. just like we do out side.

 

The deal is, that both public and private prisons contract with private companies and use the prisoners as a source of essentially free labor for private profiteering. This is a type of slavery. Modern type of Gulag or whatever. If they want to pay them a fair wage, minimum wage, then that's a different story. You may not have a problem with it, but many do and there is a good deal of push back on the system.

 

There are those in prison serving inflated sentences for misdeamer or those who have served a few years waiting for a trial, i.e., haven't been convicted yet. That's a fair amount of your prison slave labor force.

 

as inmates in a prison you give up a lot of rights you understand this don't you?? and im not sure you go to prison to wait on a trial. that would be a county or city jail.

 

You are correct, prisoners are not allowed to have rights. I'm adding that they are also used as free slave labor for private profit, which I don't think is right. If you think it is right, well, nobody can stop you from thinking that.

[cornographic]

 

 

 

 

Well, tasers have been shown to be lethal as well, especially when the "well trained" cop tases someone over and over again(in the news a week ago). Not a fan of tasers either.

Uh, this is why they are supposedly looking at their training protocol and use of lethal force.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Deescalating situations only works when both parties agree to it. In this instance, that might have been the case or it might not have. We don't know, but I am willing to bet the house that there is no way on god's green earth that every situation between a cop and suspect can be deescalated. There are too many variables to go into interactions between cops and civilians to write a text book response and expect everyone to abide by it. Hell, think about the stories of individuals either on drugs or severely intoxicated that require multiple cops to get under control. You're going to tell me that the cops should just work to deescalate the situation? Just to clarify, I do think the cop is wrong in this situation.

Yeah, I tend to think that if someone is is not wielding a gun, then deescalation/containment must be the an option. How many cops were at this scene, 6 or so? 6-8 cops can't contain a guy with a 3" blade? I don't get it. The police are unrealistically authorized to use lethal force, is my take.

Your's is the unrealistic expectation.

 

Two situations, one of which that doesn't end with a criminal being shot;

 

A) Suspect with a knife, 6-8 officers on site, suspect is ordered to drop knife. Instead suspect turns in a threatening manner towards officers. Guess what should happen 100% of the time.

 

B) Suspect with a knife is ordered to drop the knife and he does. No one is shot.

 

Why is this so f'ing hard for you to figure out?

 

How about cops figure out how to capture guys with knives w/o killing them, especially when they are nowhere near them? I know, it's tough, because cops have shown they will kill kids with toy guns and such.

 

So you're saying the cops should just figure out how to capture him. What if he takes 3-4 cops out before the "figure out" how to capture him, without escalating the tension?

 

 

You know, they have bomb suits for those who disable bombs. Maybe cops could where more protective gear in these situations, but that's not really what I'm talking about here.

 

Surround him, deescalate, wait it out, like a hostage situation, nobody gets hurt, hopefully. Shoot him with a tranquilizer, how about that? They even do that for animals in the wild. what a concept. Non lethal, IOW. I'm sure the best and brightest minds can figure this out. This kid was murdered within 30 seconds of the cop showing up. There's got to be a better way of accosting, containing, capturing, there has to be.

 

 

I've actually never thought about this. Interesting concept, would imagine its sort of the premise behind tasers too.

 

 

Its taken a couple of pages for me to finally understand, Next time, just come out and say it on page one so I don't fall into the trap of thinking I was actually getting somewhere.... you're not a fan of cops in general.

 

Its a darn shame that citizens of this fine country don't instinctively kn

as inmates in a prison you give up a lot of rights you understand this don't you?? and im not sure you go to prison to wait on a trial. that would be a county or city jail.

 

 

That doesn't mean prisons should be for profit. Prisoners don't, and shouldn't, lose all rights. And when companies make money by keeping jails full, they're going to do everything they can to keep jails full.

 

This is correct. There is an incentive, a quota system of sorts.

[BigRedBuster]

Sorry if I don't cry any tears over prisoners being put to work. The way I look at it, they are getting a living wage just sitting there.

[I AM FOOT FOOT]

they do get paid! it mite not be much but they get out of the cell for a bit and get some money to buy stuff while inside and possibly learn a job skill that could help when they get out.

[Moiraine]

Sorry if I don't cry any tears over prisoners being put to work. The way I look at it, they are getting a living wage just sitting there.

 

That isn't the issue (at least not in my opinion). People shouldn't be stuck in there for minor infractions for a long time in order to make money for a company. It's a completely corrupt system. They should be there for a time specified based on the crime they commit and what they do while they're there. A longer sentence should not be making someone more $. That incentivizes keeping them in there as long as possible regardless of whether they should still be there. In addition to that it might be costing taxpayers more than it saves.

 

http://guardianlv.com/2014/03/private-prisons-profit-from-taxpayer-dollars/

[jsneb83]

 

 

 

You're using the term "cops" as a blanket statement and I take offense to that. Whether you like it or not 99% of the cops out there are good cops, but you're basically saying we're all bad in my mind. That's not a surprise to me though at this point. It's obvious to me you just hate cops.

Originally I was referring to rogue cops, in the minority, but I don't want to keep typing "rogue" whenever I talk about cops. Assume I'm talking about "rogue" cops. But I also believe the authority and use of lethal force in the hands of all cops is an issue that has to be redressed.

 

maybe if they criminal element didn't exercise their authority to shoot, stab,slash, run over, or use any other deadly force available to them the cops wouldn't need to have such authority

 

Exactly! Again, I don't agree it's only the cops that need to change, maybe society should take a look at itself as well. Just saying...........

 

Screw that. It's easier to just say that other people need to change instead of ourselves needing to change.