The Great Police Work Thread

Kbrown · Nov 26, 2014

Jiggyfly said:
Of course you do, no "thug" has a right to live if he charges an officer, because they have no other recurse in that situation correct?

After the initial altercation, the officer is going to leave the vehicle with his sidearm drawn. He still doesn't know whether the suspect is armed at that point. So, in the matter of seconds it takes for the suspect to get back to him, he is supposed to holster his weapon and draw a taser he doesn' t have (again, tactical error), a baton, or try to bear hug him and wrestle. Or just stay in his car and risk a robbery suspect who has just assaulted a peace officer getting away. None of that is realistic.

Jiggyfly · Nov 26, 2014

Iamtdg said:
Painting with a broad brush as always. The dude went for his gun. This isn't a typical altercation. Had the thug gotten his gun, I have no doubt in my mind he would have shot the cop. It's not like the cop went after him first. He came into the vehicle after the cop. Deadly intent.

He was not going for the gun when he was shot nor was he in reach of the officer two totally different situations .

So him going for the gun should not have had any bearing on the shooting.

Cotton · Nov 26, 2014

Jiggyfly said:
He was not going for the gun when he was shot nor was he in reach of the officer two totally different situations .

So him going for the gun should not have had any bearing on the shooting.

So, the cop just resets his mind and pretends that it's a different guy with different intentions in those few split seconds. :lol

Good lord.

Jiggyfly · Nov 26, 2014

Kbrown said:
After the initial altercation, the officer is going to leave the vehicle with his sidearm drawn. He still doesn't know whether the suspect is armed at that point. So, in the matter of seconds it takes for the suspect to get back to him, he is supposed to holster his weapon and draw a taser he doesn' t have (again, tactical error), a baton, or try to bear hug him and wrestle. Or just stay in his car and risk a robbery suspect who has just assaulted a peace officer getting away. None of that is realistic.

Not going to continue going back and forth on this if you think deadly force was needed in this situation more power to you.

Just because you assault a police officer does not mean you should die, I mean why teach cops how to defend themselves if they feel threatened just empty a clip.

Jiggyfly · Nov 26, 2014

Iamtdg said:
So, the cop just resets his mind and pretends that it's a different guy with different intentions in those few split seconds.

Good lord.

Well yeah cops are taught to do that and its funny how you have this timeline all figured out.

Cotton · Nov 26, 2014

Jiggyfly said:
Well yeah cops are taught to do that and its funny how you have this timeline all figured out.

So, you figure it took him a few minutes to run back to the cop. What, was he skipping through the daffodils to get back to him? And, no, cops aren't taught to diffuse a situation when the thug that already tried to kill him is charging him. They are taught to shoot them. As well they should be. Just like any other citizen.

Clay_Allison · Nov 26, 2014

Iamtdg said:
From what I understand that police department doesn't supply their officers with tasers. I may be remembering that wrong, but I'm pretty sure I read that. I seem to remember people (rightfully) bitching about how a PD could possibly not have tasers.

Oh, not implying that you are saying this, but to be clear, the autopsy clearly showed that Brown was moving towards the cop when he was shot. So, no one can argue the cop shot him while he was trying to run away.

This just shows why there couldn't be a conviction, the protester side of the argument can't decide if Brown was running away or if Wilson was standing over him.

Kbrown · Nov 26, 2014

Jiggyfly said:
Not going to continue going back and forth on this if you think deadly force was needed in this situation more power to you.

Just because you assault a police officer does not mean you should die, I mean why teach cops how to defend themselves if they feel threatened just empty a clip.

I don't care if you want to respond or not.

Again, I gave the reason why the officer would exit the vehicle with his weapon drawn, and from there, under the specific circumstances , no other choice but to fire would have been a reasonable action. Again, under the specific circumstances of the moment.

You have been pulling this, "Since you said X, you must think Y is ALWAYS true!" silliness a lot more lately. I think you know better.

Cotton · Nov 26, 2014

Kbrown said:
I don't care if you want to respond or not.

Again, I gave the reason why the officer would exit the vehicle with his weapon drawn, and from there, under the specific circumstances , no other choice but to fire would have been a reasonable action. Again, under the specific circumstances of the moment.

You have been pulling this, "Since you said X, you must think Y is ALWAYS true!" silliness a lot more lately. I think you know better.

He has no other argument but to try to paint with a broad brush and make it fit this case.

Rev · Nov 26, 2014

Jiggyfly said:
If he feels his life is in danger and the perpetrator is not harming anyone else yes?

Do you understand the precedent this sets, with this rational an officer can kill anybody just because he felt threatened, that should be scary for anybody.

Do you understand the precedent this sets if he doesn't do something? I'm not saying just shoot but the person has to know that could be an option for his action. He is responsible for his actions.

Jiggyfly · Nov 26, 2014

Kbrown said:
I don't care if you want to respond or not.

Again, I gave the reason why the officer would exit the vehicle with his weapon drawn, and from there, under the specific circumstances , no other choice but to fire would have been a reasonable action. Again, under the specific circumstances of the moment.

You have been pulling this, "Since you said X, you must think Y is ALWAYS true!" silliness a lot more lately. I think you know better.

I don't see how anyone can think under these circumstances shooting is the only way to remedy the situation.
These are his owns words.

Wilson said he hoped to arrest Brown

Wilson told the grand jury his original goal was to arrest Brown, after identifying him as a possible suspect in a shop theft.
"My main goal was to keep eyes on him and just to keep him contained until I had people coming there," he testified.
"I knew I had already called for backup and I knew they were already in the area for the stealing that was originally reported. So I thought if I can buy 30 seconds of time, that was my original goal when I tried to get him to come to the car. If I could buy 30 seconds of time, someone else will be here, we can make the arrest, nothing happens, we are all good. And it didn't happen that way

He already said he was waiting for others before the altercation occurred why not just stay in car, this was not a homicide suspect.

Cotton · Nov 26, 2014

Jiggyfly said:
He already said he was waiting for others before the altercation occurred why not just stay in car, this was not a homicide suspect.

I don't know, because he had to keep eyes on him, and you can't keep eyes on someone that is running by following them in a car. If you think that's possible, then, well...

Kbrown · Nov 26, 2014

Jiggyfly said:
I don't see how anyone can think under these circumstances shooting is the only way to remedy the situation.
These are his owns words.

He already said he was waiting for others before the altercation occurred why not just stay in car, this was not a homicide suspect.

A police officer is paid to actively pursue suspects. "Keeping him contained" does not constitute sitting in his car and hoping that backup arrives before a strongarm robbery and assault suspect gets out of view. If you truly believe that a police officer choosing to exit his vehicle to engage a violent suspect and ensure he doesn't get away would be the reason for calling a shooting criminal manslaughter, then you're correct that we have no common ground.

Clay_Allison · Nov 26, 2014

Kbrown said:
A police officer is paid to actively pursue suspects. "Keeping him contained" does not constitute sitting in his car and hoping that backup arrives before a strongarm robbery and assault suspect gets out of view. If you truly believe that a police officer choosing to exit his vehicle to engage a violent suspect and ensure he doesn't get away would be the reason for calling a shooting criminal manslaughter, then you're correct that we have no common ground.

To be fair, Wilson had no idea that he was a robbery suspect, unless the official story on that has changed too. So, he was a jaywalking suspect.

Kbrown · Nov 26, 2014

A couple of asides... props to Brown's dad for maintaining a level of class and calm in his grief. On the other hand, I wouldn't lose sleep if the stepdad faced consequences for inciting violence. A mob has all eyes on you, you turn and yell, "Burn this motherfucker down!" and they start to burn the motherfucker down... Not saying it's worth actively pursuing, but I wouldn't cry.

I also wouldn't lose sleep if Darren Wilson were relieved of duty. You choose to take away a viable non-lethal option because it's not comfortable, and I don't know if you should be an officer.

Kbrown · Nov 26, 2014

Clay_Allison said:
To be fair, Wilson had no idea that he was a robbery suspect, unless the official story on that has changed too. So, he was a jaywalking suspect.

He says he spoke to them about being in the street, drove away, then it clicked that they fit dispatch's description, so he circled back. I think that's what I read from his testimony anyway.

Clay_Allison · Nov 26, 2014

Kbrown said:
A couple of asides... props to Brown's dad for maintaining a level of class and calm in his grief. On the other hand, I wouldn't lose sleep if the stepdad faced consequences for inciting violence. A mob has all eyes on you, you turn and yell, "Burn this motherfucker down!" and they start to burn the motherfucker down... Not saying it's worth actively pursuing, but I wouldn't cry.

I also wouldn't lose sleep if Darren Wilson were relieved of duty. You choose to take away a viable non-lethal option because it's not comfortable, and I don't know if you should be an officer.

Yeah, while I don't think he should have been indicted, I do think Wilson should have to go get another job.

Cotton · Nov 26, 2014

While I agree that he should have had a taser if it was available to him. Not sure how the department can fire him given they didn't make it a mandatory carry item to begin with.

L.T. Fan · Nov 26, 2014

Jiggyfly said:
Hell no, officers are trained to diffuse situations like this, deadly force is always a last resort.

Why did he have to do anything why not stay in his vehicle if he felt so threatened?

You don't accept the Grand Jury's verdict then?

Clay_Allison · Nov 26, 2014

Iamtdg said:
While I agree that he should have had a taser if it was available to him. Not sure how the department can fire him given they didn't make it a mandatory carry item to begin with.

I'd fire him for recklessly starting a confrontation that didn't need to happen just because he wanted to get in someone's face for walking down the street. Once the fight starts you might have to defend yourself, but Wilson was picking a fight and acting aggressive instead of professional, IMO. Doesn't make him guilty of murder, does make him an reckless hothead and we don't need reckless hothead cops.

The Great Police Work Thread

Not So New Member

Banned

One-armed Knife Sharpener

Banned

Banned

One-armed Knife Sharpener

Old Bastard

Not So New Member

One-armed Knife Sharpener

Good, bad, I'm the guy with the gun

Banned

One-armed Knife Sharpener

Not So New Member

Old Bastard

Not So New Member

Not So New Member

Old Bastard

One-armed Knife Sharpener

I'm Easy If You Are

Old Bastard