Officer Involved Shootings

[noozeyeguy]

I'm sure simply snagging the keys sounds like a great option when you are standing next to the family mini van that just got broadsided during the pursuit.

I know that's one potential outcome, but from my perspective that falls more under "strategic," i.e., preventing a potential threat to public safety. My question was much more immediate in thrust. The car is being started or has been started, seems to me reaching into the window exposes the officer to unnecessary risk of serious injury or death. No value judgment is being made otherwise, by me anyway. Just curious to know what people think.

[SansSouci]

pacrat,

I've interpreted your assertion that something "apparently fishy" was afoot as a conclusion that the cop was somehow at fault, which would be a conclusion.

[Gawernator]

I am glad I am retired. Lot's of political BS going on these days, and officers are suffering because of it. If I was still working I would not want to be in a uniformed position, especially not patrol. If I was in patrol it would be radio calls only. Why risk your freedom and the well being of your family by doing proactive police work?

My command doesn't want us riding motorcycles in camo fatigues or wearing the uniform blouse while driving now supposedly. Paranoia or smart? You tell me. Crazy times...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[SansSouci]

micro,

What Ferguson and Baltimore have revealed to Americans is that 250 years of American jurisprudence has been replaced by placating thugs and special interest group justice. Due process now means by what process will thugs receive what they think is their due.

[IrishJoe3]

I know that's one potential outcome, but from my perspective that falls more under "strategic," i.e., preventing a potential threat to public safety.

See though, thats what cops do. Stop threats to public safety, even if that means going into harms way themselves.

My question was much more immediate in thrust. The car is being started or has been started, seems to me reaching into the window exposes the officer to unnecessary risk of serious injury or death. No value judgment is being made otherwise, by me anyway. Just curious to know what people think.

Everything is a risk. You weigh the risk vs gain and make a decision. Unfortunately sometimes you only have a fraction of a second to make that decision. Unfortunately sometimes none of your options have a good outcome.

If you can turn the ignition off and prevent a dangerous high speed pursuit (And therefore prevent the very real possibility of injury / death to you, suspect and/or innocent bystander), isn't it worth it? Is it safe to reach into a car? Nope. Is a high speed pursuit safe? Nope. Is a traffic stop safe? Nope.

[RedVines]

See though, thats what cops do. Stop threats to public safety, even if that means going into harms way themselves.



Everything is a risk. You weigh the risk vs gain and make a decision. Unfortunately sometimes you only have a fraction of a second to make that decision. Unfortunately sometimes none of your options have a good outcome.

If you can turn the ignition off and prevent a dangerous high speed pursuit (And therefore prevent the very real possibility of injury / death to you, suspect and/or innocent bystander), isn't it worth it? Is it safe to reach into a car? Nope. Is a high speed pursuit safe? Nope. Is a traffic stop safe? Nope.

Scenario 1, I expose myself to some risk, like reaching into a car for some keys, to possibly prevent a high speed pursuit. I not only risk getting dragged to death, I risk getting charged with murder when I use deadly force to defend myself by some DA who decides to throw Graham v Conner out the window, I risk my name being dragged through the mud on national TV, I risk losing everything I own in a civil trial because every single juror has been tainted by the 24/7 news coverage.

Scenario 2 I do nothing and bad guy takes off in the car. I stand watching him drive off and broadcast last known direction. bad guy TCs and kills a family in a minivan. I followed my department policy by not pursuing for failure to yield, I have no use of force, and according to the Supreme Court I am not liable for the death of the family in the minivan. As much as this scenario goes against every cop instinct i have, it's hard to argue that this isn't the more prudent choice.

The problem is nowadays is that the risk vs gain curve has become so skewed it's simply not worth it to put myself out there for the purpose of doing police work. All the controversial shootings as of late have one thing in common: all the officers involved were trying to do proactive police work. The OGs in my dept have a jaded saying, "If you do nothing, you can do nothing wrong". As much as I hate to admit it, I'm starting to see the wisdom in that.

[IrishJoe3]

The problem is nowadays is that the risk vs gain curve has become so skewed it's simply not worth it to put myself out there for the purpose of doing police work. All the controversial shootings as of late have one thing in common: all the officers involved were trying to do proactive police work. The OGs in my dept have a jaded saying, "If you do nothing, you can do nothing wrong". As much as I hate to admit it, I'm starting to see the wisdom in that.

Sadly, you are absolutely right.

Pairs nicely with Prop 47 and AB-109 doesn't it?

And as always, the public gets the short end of the stick.

[R Dale]

Scenario 1, I expose myself to some risk, like reaching into a car for some keys, to possibly prevent a high speed pursuit. I not only risk getting dragged to death, I risk getting charged with murder when I use deadly force to defend myself by some DA who decides to throw Graham v Conner out the window, I risk my name being dragged through the mud on national TV, I risk losing everything I own in a civil trial because every single juror has been tainted by the 24/7 news coverage.

Scenario 2 I do nothing and bad guy takes off in the car. I stand watching him drive off and broadcast last known direction. bad guy TCs and kills a family in a minivan. I followed my department policy by not pursuing for failure to yield, I have no use of force, and according to the Supreme Court I am not liable for the death of the family in the minivan. As much as this scenario goes against every cop instinct i have, it's hard to argue that this isn't the more prudent choice.

The problem is nowadays is that the risk vs gain curve has become so skewed it's simply not worth it to put myself out there for the purpose of doing police work. All the controversial shootings as of late have one thing in common: all the officers involved were trying to do proactive police work. The OGs in my dept have a jaded saying, "If you do nothing, you can do nothing wrong". As much as I hate to admit it, I'm starting to see the wisdom in that.

I am not a a officer but but in my way of thinking if someone is willing to run from a traffic stop that was made for a minor offense you have wonder why and what will they do next, Will they go
around the block and try to car jack someone or what?

[RedVines]

Sadly, you are absolutely right.

Pairs nicely with Prop 47 and AB-109 doesn't it?

And as always, the public gets the short end of the stick.

Oh well, the public voted for it so that's on them. Didn't the Supreme Court say something like it is not the responsibility of the government to protect its citizens from the outcome of their own political choices? Don't get mad at me when I tell you the tweaker that boosted your car will never see a jail cell.

The public doesn't want cops to do police work. Go look on social media: all the videos of "good cops" are cops playing ball with kids, cops dancing at a festival, cops buying a homeless guy a meal. Not saying those are bad things, but that's not actual law enforcement. All the "bad cop" videos are of cops actually doing police work. Traffic enforcement is revenue generation. Drug enforcement is the manifestation of the prison industrial complex. Gang enforcement is racist oppression. Crowd control is trampling civil liberties. This society doesn't want cops, they want social workers that can magically enforce laws, maintain order and prevent crime without offending or using using force on anyone.

I might as well drive right past the guys rolling 4 deep in the G ride, turn a blind eye to the dingleballs on the mirror, and take the inevitable cold 459 or home invasion 211 later. I get paid just as much either way.

[1CavScout]

Oh well, the public voted for it so that's on them. Didn't the Supreme Court say something like it is not the responsibility of the government to protect its citizens from the outcome of their own political choices? Don't get mad at me when I tell you the tweaker that boosted your car will never see a jail cell.

The public doesn't want cops to do police work. Go look on social media: all the videos of "good cops" are cops playing ball with kids, cops dancing at a festival, cops buying a homeless guy a meal. Not saying those are bad things, but that's not actual law enforcement. All the "bad cop" videos are of cops actually doing police work. Traffic enforcement is revenue generation. Drug enforcement is the manifestation of the prison industrial complex. Gang enforcement is racist oppression. Crowd control is trampling civil liberties. This society doesn't want cops, they want social workers that can magically enforce laws, maintain order and prevent crime without offending or using using force on anyone.

I might as well drive right past the guys rolling 4 deep in the G ride, turn a blind eye to the dingleballs on the mirror, and take the inevitable cold 459 or home invasion 211 later. I get paid just as much either way.

Well said...

[pacrat]

pacrat,

I've interpreted your assertion that something "apparently fishy" was afoot as a conclusion that the cop was somehow at fault, which would be a conclusion.

5 posts, now 6, many paragraphs, and hundreds of words. In none of which I imply, infer, or allude to any guilt or fault, on the part of the officer involved.

Yet you have chosen to pick just 2 words, out of all that. Which "you" Mis-interpret, and assign out of context meaning to. Just so you can claim that I've made an "invalid conclusion of guilt" on the part of the officer involved.

When LtJim made the original "something fishy" comment. I do not believe he was referring to the officer involved doing anything fishy. Due to the context of how it was used. Nor more than I did when I agreed with him.



But, you go ahead and believe anything you choose. You have obviously made up your mind, that it is not what I actually say that defines the context of my posts. Only what you "think I might of said", that matters.

JM2c

I said good day

[SansSouci]

pacrat,

I'm sorry. I screwed up. Somehow I got the wrong impression that you posted that the cop had done something wrong.

I hope you accept my apology.

[pacrat]

pacrat,

I'm sorry. I screwed up. Somehow I got the wrong impression that you posted that the cop had done something wrong.

I hope you accept my apology.

Done, and forgotten. We're good.

One of the facets of this U of Cincinnatti incident I do have an opinion on. Is that I believe the DA is using him as a scapegoat to further his political career. Possibly averting a riot in the process. But that is not the fault of the officer.

I'm not one to mince words much. So if I truly believed the officer had acted other than properly. I would have said so in no uncertain terms.

JM2c

[micro911]

I just hope that all the facts are revealed for the U of Cincinnati officer's shooting and justice is served based on the facts.

Rodney King incident officers were originally acquitted, but later convicted in a federal court on civil rights violation. I didn't understand that part either.

[TrailerparkTrash]

2. Eula Love (LAPD)
3. Kelly Thomas (Fullerton PD)

WOW, Eula Love.... The famous "knife wielding foaming at the mouth" crazy woman! Now there's a blast from the past! I have the hard-back book about that controversial shooting. It's called "The other end of the gun" and it's authored by the officer that shot her. His life was almost totally ruined by that incident. After the incident, he was no longer a cop. It was the "Ferguson" incident back in the day of Mayor Tom Bradley and Chief Daryl Gates. I'm positive 99% of the members here have never heard of her nor that shooting.

On a side note, I'm always astounded when I ask new cops if they've ever heard of the "Onion Field" incident and they look at me like a deer in headlights. Most academy instructors don't even know that incident anymore either. And I'm not even 50 yet!

"Kelly Thomas." I just remember that his dad is an "A #1" azzhole, that NEVER cared for his son, until only after he was killed.