So .... this is meant to be reassuring?

[Pak Asam Manis]

This:

http://www.sun-sentinel.com/local/miami-dade/sfl-s-20160720-story.html


followed by this:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/ct-charles-kinsey-shooting-north-miami20160722-story.html

 

[Pak Asam Manis]

So, the officer was attempting to shoot the autistic man sitting in the street ("armed" with a small toy truck, about which one of the officers can actually be heard on tape saying "he's reloading his weapon" before shots are fired) in order to protect the safety of the autistic man's caretaker (the other unarmed man, who is lying on his back with his hands raised in the air, saying "don't shoot, this man is autistic, I am his caretaker" and telling his charge (who pays no attention, unsurprisingly, since he's autistic) to lie down ... but the officer (a member of the S.W.A.T. team??) misses and hits the ... yep ... unarmed black man, by "mistake".

The North Miami police officer who shot an unarmed mental health worker caring for a patient actually took aim at the autistic man next to him, but missed, the head of the police union said Thursday.

It was a stunning admission from the police officer and from John Rivera, who heads Miami-Dade’s Police Benevolent Association. But it was one meant to calm the fears of a nation besieged with cellphone videos of police shooting and sometimes killing unarmed black men.

In this case, Rivera said, the officer ended up wounding the man he was trying to save.
“I couldn’t allow this to continue for the community’s sake,†Rivera said Thursday during a hastily called news conference at the union’s office. “Folks, this is not what the rest of the nation is going through.â€

So, the officer who did the shooting is not a racist, or at least the shooting is probably not racially motivated in any way .. okay, that's good ... the officer was actually trying to SAVE the life of the unarmed black man, by shooting the dangerous individual next to him (the other unarmed man playing with a toy truck). So the officer was apparently just confused, unaware of / jumping to conclusions about the reality of the situation, impatient, poorly trained, and / or visually impaired and / or a poor marksman?

Retired firearms expert Robert Hoelscher, who spent 50 years with the Miami-Dade Police Department, said it’s hard to perceive how the situation was misjudged, but it was — grossly.

“I wish there was something positive I could say. You arrive on scene and a guy’s playing with a toy truck. Why do you bring out the assault rifle?†Hoelscher asked. “You can’t get enough training when you’re dealing with lethal force. This is as bad a situation as I’ve ever seen. It’s a good thing he was obviously a lousy marksman.â€

Sorry, no, I don't feel reassured.

 

[HappyMan]

Thanks for condensing that. I've been avoiding the story since I first saw it in the news feeds. Somewhat relieved to see that the major outcome is a national face-palm. Unless you happen to be the gentleman who was randomly shot in the leg by someone... nevermind, that was going to be an insensitive comment.

 

[Bad_azz]

Just out of curiosity... do Canadian police carry guns?
& if so being as they are such close neighbours, do they have similar stats in gun crime & death by cop?

 

[Pak Asam Manis]

Just out of curiosity... do Canadian police carry guns?
& if so being as they are such close neighbours, do they have similar stats in gun crime & death by cop?

I don't know much about police and law enforcement north of the US border, but I think it is far closer to the British model than that of its southern neighbor. And I believe those statistics are similarly low for Canada compared with the US.

To me this incident highlights the fact that this "crisis" with regard to police shootings in the US is about more than just race.

Although racism and profiling certainly are a part of it (as evidenced by another recent story concerning the arrest of a young black woman in Austin, Texas, in which no one was shot, but in which the woman was thrown violently to the ground by a cop, and a perfect example of basically being arrested simply for not complying with the officer's commands in a way the officer felt suitable, thereby warranting arrest - ? - at which point what was a simple pull-over for speeding over the limit was turned - by the police officer - into a violent confrontation, completely bewildering the young woman, who was then essentially arrested for "resisting arrest" ... and further evidenced by another officer's comments to her as she sat in the back of his car on the way to the jail, about why "white people are rightly afraid of black people (their 'violent tendencies'").

But the problem is not just about racial issues and discrimination. It's also about how police are trained, or at least, which PART of that training seems to sink in and dominate the mindset and psychological outlook of certainly not all, but at least a significant (obviously) number of cops out on the streets. It is one in which they are expecting danger and confrontation with "criminals" and "dangerous people" to such an extent that they do not take the necessary time to assess situations accurately, do not - in a significant number of cases - take steps or make serious attempts to defuse even potentially violent situations is a peaceful way, and in many cases which keep coming lately in successive waves of media attention, fail to act in the most appropriate manner, leaving basically innocent people dead simply for having "the wrong cops" respond to a call which they did not handle properly ... and then, in the vast majority of such cases, they, the police, are either never charged or eventually absolved of criminal responsibility. And then they are surprised and hurt by the current pubic reaction, the resentment and anger?

Sure, there are many excellent men and women of pure heart and good character among the police in the US. And absolutely true that cops have to deal with real bad guys and criminals, many of them face dangerous and potentially life-threatening situations regularly, sure they are charged to protect other citizens and themselves.

But to shoot and kill a twelve year old kid playing with a toy gun in front of a bus stop? Choke a homeless man selling loose cigarettes outside a subway station, until he "can't breathe"? Shoot another for selling home-made mix CD's in front of a corner store, and maybe copping a surly attitude? And a guy pulled over for a speeding ticket, reaching for his wallet, after correctly telling officers that he was - legally - carrying a gun? A caseworker attending to an autistic man with a toy truck? And yes, all of the people in these instances were black, but police of all races shoot innocent people of all races, so it is not just about race ... and there is something very wrong with this picture, to the point that even Americans are shocked and horrified.

Surely it's true that there are many confrontations, conflicts, situations which can't be resolved by simply talking, responding, assessing rationally, etc. Surely the police have to deal with many situations in which they interact with people who could be or may be dangerous, and who may not be in a rational or reasonable state of mind, in fact with many individuals who may be emotionally or mentally unstable and in some cases ARE dangerous ... but a young man sitting in the street with a shiny / metal object in his hand, it HAS to be a gun?

Makes me think the police need scrutiny for their mental and emotional stability at least as much as the rest of the general public do ... and watch out, cos if Americans are really dumb enough to vote in the Oompah-Loompah From Hell currently painting himself as the "law and order" candidate, it's only going to get worse ... much, much worse.

 

[Nimbus]

It's a very complex issue, but let me start by giving you one piece of the puzzle: in their quest to reduce government spending, federal and state legislatures are cutting police spending as well. When budget is tight, the first cut is invariably training.

 

[Pak Asam Manis]

Nothing complex about it, apparently (if you listen to the Oompah Loompah):

"You've only gotta ask yourself one question: 'Do I feel lucky?' Well, punk ... do ya?"

Well, yeah, cutting training, because that is obviously a waste of taxpayer dollars ... just give 'em a few hours on a firing range, get a gun in their hands and get 'em out on the street, so they can shoot bad guys and / or ordinary citizens ... er, I mean, protect and serve the public.

 

[HappyMan]

There is a problem with police violence. There is also one major step that is necessary as a precursor to reducing it. People need to start giving up their guns. As long as police officers are afraid of being shot by any random person they encounter while performing their duties, they will continue to make these mistakes. The fear is the problem. Take a way that very logical reason for police officers to fear for their lives and you will remove with it the major problem with our police force today.

 

[nosox]

Canadian police do carry guns. A sidearm and a shotgun in the car
Don't know the stats but the Canadian populace is less likely to be carrying
Also Canadians are really nice

 

[kimdub]

Media reporting suggests that every person shot by the police is black and that it is the cops that are the problem. Yes, there are mistakes made by the cops and unfortunately, some are deadly. But I believe many of the problems could be avoided by simply fully complying with a police order and calmly trying to explain why you think the police are wrong instead of resisting.

The following sheds some light on the statistics.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2016/07/18/police-shootings-and-race/

I also believe that the only way progress will every be made is if people actually address the economic and educational problems of the inner cities instead of just paying lip service to the problems every election cycle.

To edit/add

http://www.nleomf.org/facts/enforcement/

Use whatever numbers you want to pick. On a statistical basis, a law enforcement officer is more than twice as likely to be killed as any Black person.

 

[Euc-]

Use whatever numbers you want to pick. On a statistical basis, a law enforcement officer is more than twice as likely to be killed as any Black person.

Be that as it may, why do American coppers shoot to kill, not to disable? A kneecap would probably be just as effective to eliminate immediate danger towards the officers' life yet not as lethal for the alleged perpetrator.

 

[Anglian]

Be that as it may, why do American coppers shoot to kill, not to disable? A kneecap would probably be just as effective to eliminate immediate danger towards the officers' life yet not as lethal for the alleged perpetrator.

Easier said than done, if a person has a gun you aren't going to mess about shooting him the legs, he isn't incapacitated, he can still shoot you, I suppose more use of the Taser or some other device which renders the person incapacitated, without killing them.

 

[Euc-]

Easier said than done, if a person has a gun you aren't going to mess about shooting him the legs, he isn't incapacitated, he can still shoot you, I suppose more use of the Taser or some other device which renders the person incapacitated, without killing them.

Enough stories where officers are attacked with various kind of weapons that would not do any damage from a distance, think knifes/bats/etc, yet shot to kill. Not talking about situations where the officer has a gun pointed at him/her, that is obviously a different story.

 

[HappyMan]

Enough stories where officers are attacked with various kind of weapons that would not do any damage from a distance, think knifes/bats/etc, yet shot to kill. Not talking about situations where the officer has a gun pointed at him/her, that is obviously a different story.

I really don't see why a police officer should exercise restraint when someone intends to assault them with a deadly weapon. We could argue about the odds of the officer being killed, versus killing the assailant and various arbitrary guidelines... It comes down to this, I value the life of the police officer more than the life of the person who intends to assault him/her. If there is a chance of one of the two dying, I'd rather that the police officer live, and the person who intends to assault the police officer die.

Of course, my ultimate preference is that people just not attack police officers...

 

[Euc-]

I really don't see why a police officer should exercise restraint when someone intends to assault them with a deadly weapon. We could argue about the odds of the officer being killed, versus killing the assailant and various arbitrary guidelines... It comes down to this, I value the life of the police officer more than the life of the person who intends to assault him/her. If there is a chance of one of the two dying, I'd rather that the police officer live, and the person who intends to assault the police officer die.

Of course, my ultimate preference is that people just not attack police officers...

That's probably the difference; I don't value anyone's life over that of any other human being, regardless of that persons actions. Just because that person happens to be an officer his life is worth more than someone else? No way.

 

[R Cameron]

Be that as it may, why do American coppers shoot to kill, not to disable? A kneecap would probably be just as effective to eliminate immediate danger towards the officers' life yet not as lethal for the alleged perpetrator.

American police should definitely choose non-lethal force more often, which I think is the core of your question, but using their firearm aimed at a knee is a very poor solution.

 

[HappyMan]

That's probably the difference; I don't value anyone's life over that of any other human being, regardless of that persons actions. Just because that person happens to be an officer his life is worth more than someone else? No way.

Wait, if you prefer to take a chance with the officer's life... that is a preference for the life of the assailant. You did lay out a scenario where the officer was being assaulted with a deadly weapon. If one of the two people has to die, it should be the assailant. This would be still be true for me if the scenario were reversed. If the police officer were the one assaulting a person with intent to kill them, I'd support that person's right to defend themselves from the officer, even by killing him/her. I'm placing less value on the life of the assailant, and more on the life of the victim.

 

[Anglian]

In the UK the weapon of choice is the knife, I don't know the statistics but every day somebody gets stabbed, I policeman friend of mine reckons he would sooner be shot than stabbed, he has a chain mail vest he can wear, don't know how often he wears it though

 

[Pak Asam Manis]

Wait, if you prefer to take a chance with the officer's life... that is a preference for the life of the assailant. You did lay out a scenario where the officer was being assaulted with a deadly weapon. If one of the two people has to die, it should be the assailant. This would be still be true for me if the scenario were reversed. If the police officer were the one assaulting a person with intent to kill them, I'd support that person's right to defend themselves from the officer, even by killing him/her. I'm placing less value on the life of the assailant, and more on the life of the victim.

Hmm , let's see ... nope, I didn't post a thread here about cops shooting "assailants" in self-defense or to protect other members of the public, nor about individuals, in general, killing "assailants" in genuine self-defense. That also certainly happens quite a lot, but it wasn't what I intended this thread to be about at all.

It was more about police shooting citizens or residents of various American communities who were NOT assailants, who may be acting strangely or may or may not have caused some disturbance to society or broken some law ...(including selling untaxed, loose cigarettes on the street or driving over the speed limit or with a broken tail light, hardly offenses invoking the death penalty in the USA) ... but have NOT been proven to have assaulted nor assailed any police officers nor others, being either shot by officers or arrested with such violent force that, in some cases, the arrested individual died on the scene or shortly thereafter (Eric Garner, Freddie Gray, et al) ... or in the case highlighted in my OP, a group home caseworker trying to assist and protect an autistic client, being shot by "accidentally" by an officer trying to "protect him" from ... the autistic client with the toy truck in his hands. It's not exactly the same thing, is it?

Who was the assailant in the Eric Garner case? Who did Freddie Gray assault the day he died, before he was attacked by several of Baltimore's finest? Who was the "assailant" in either of the two cases mentioned in my OP (both "caught on tape")? I'll tell you who the assailants were in these cases, Happy. They were cops. Result of these four cases:

two unarmed men assaulted by cops in the act of arresting them for misdemeanor offenses, both now dead; a dedicated and professional caregiver who had done nothing to harm anyone and had broken no law, shot in the leg, and a young autistic man ostensibly traumatized by what happened after he ran into a street, sat down and started playing with a toy truck; and a young woman also traumatized and afraid of the police who are supposed to "protect and serve" her after being violently arrested for completely nonviolent failure to comply with an officer's commands to his satisfaction. (She was an elementary school teacher. She was being pulled over by the police for driving over the speed limit. She was not suspected of nor apparently had she committed any other crime at all ... though, she could actually be a serial killer ... we just don't know!)

Job well done, Go Big Blue?

 

[Anglian]

I do find it a very strange story, I cannot figure out why you would shoot someone lying on the ground with his hands in the air, also why arrest someone who isn't 100% who is just selling cigarettes, there doesn't seem much leeway, certain people seem to be arrested at the drop of a hat for minor offenses