Officer Jitters Raises Questions

[livespive]

I have a question......

Now that we have all of these Shootings of unarmed people, my question is this, especially for Rob, and other gun nuts......

What are these cops doing in permit less carry states?

Not even talking race, but there was the cop that shot the guy with the wife/girlfriend and little girl in the car when he told the cop he had a concealed carry permit.

There are the shootings of unarmed people.

If I were to give them the benefit of the doubt most of the cops look very inexperienced. The oriental that shot the permit holder this lady that let the guy go back to the car etc.

How are the cops going to handle it as more and more states have Constitutional Carry?

 

[WAMO]

THATS A GOOD QUESTION LIVE. I THINK THAT FALLS UNDER THE TRAINING ISSUE IN ANOTHER THREAD. I WONT SPEAK FOR POLICE OR ROB, BUT I BET THERE ARENT LINES AROUND ANY POLICE BUILDING OF PEOPLE WANTING TO JOIN. ESPECIALLY NOT THE WAY THINGS ARE NOW.

 

[REVerse °]

http://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/local/crime/article103973781.html

 

[livespive]

This doesn't really have anything to do with my question, but there is another video out that shows the cop in the red shirt dropping something after the shooting??

Once again the question becomes when all 50 states, or just even those that have it now have a stop and they come up on someone with a gun that can have it what will they do???

They are shooting people that don't have guns. Like WAMO said training.

http://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/local/crime/article103973781.html

 

[REVerse °]

This doesn't really have anything to do with my question, but there is another video out that shows the cop in the red shirt dropping something after the shooting??

Once again the question becomes when all 50 states, or just even those that have it now have a stop and they come up on someone with a gun that can have it what will they do???

They are shooting people that don't have guns. Like WAMO said training.

Read the article.

 

[Scolai]

Yeah. I saw the video that alleges that cops planted a gun. The guy making the video is apparently an idiot who can't tell the difference between black police gloves (the latex crime scene ones) and a firearm.

 

[livespive]

Is this the same tape where they said that the cop in the red shirt dropped the gun?

Yeah. I saw the video that alleges that cops planted a gun. The guy making the video is apparently an idiot who can't tell the difference between black police gloves (the latex crime scene ones) and a firearm.

 

[livespive]

From neither vantage point – a police dashboard camera and a body camera worn by one of the officers on the scene – can it be determined whether Scott is holding a gun.


But police can be heard repeatedly shouting “Drop the gun!” at the 43-year-old Scott, who died from his wounds Tuesday as his wife stood nearby.

That is part of the plant. IF you are going to shoot someone you better have your shit straight.

Just like this chick, until her shit fell apart:

http://www.allbowling.com/threads/cop-lied-about-black-man-shooting-her.4044/

Read the article.

 

[Djarum300]

One of the questions circling the interwebs is whether possession is enough cause to fire. Someone i know in the military said they weren't allowed to fire unless the gun was pointed at them. Is the training that bad that firing for non compliance is the only way for the police to stay safe?

 

[Greg T.]

One of the questions circling the interwebs is whether possession is enough cause to fire. Someone i know in the military said they weren't allowed to fire unless the gun was pointed at them. Is the training that bad that firing for non compliance is the only way for the police to stay safe?

It's not the possession that matters. It's the refusal to disarm as being ordered that makes an issue. The cops have no idea if you intend to use the firearm you refuse to let go of, or if you're confused. At any rate, drop whatever the fuck is in your hands and stand there. Not that difficult.

 

[Robadat]

One of the questions circling the interwebs is whether possession is enough cause to fire. Someone i know in the military said they weren't allowed to fire unless the gun was pointed at them. Is the training that bad that firing for non compliance is the only way for the police to stay safe?

Rules for Military Engagement are very different than what the Rules are for Police.
As for the OP, better training for Officers and outreach programs into the communities to inform the citizen carriers of what is the proper procedures for the cops and the civilians during an encounter.

Rule #1 - The citizen must comply with all commands from the challenging officer.
Rule #2 - See Rule #1.

A cop's first duty is to ensure the safety of himself and any bystanders. Until the scene is secured to the point the officer no longer perceives threats to himself or any other person, any person the cop reasonably believes has a weapon can and will be considered a threat until that person is disarmed.

 

[livespive]

Yeah I agree totally, but we are having to many cases where they are shooting without cause and then they make shit up.
Many have been caught on tape.

Rules for Military Engagement are very different than what the Rules are for Police.
As for the OP, better training for Officers and outreach programs into the communities to inform the citizen carriers of what is the proper procedures for the cops and the civilians during an encounter.

Rule #1 - The citizen must comply with all commands from the challenging officer.
Rule #2 - See Rule #1.

A cop's first duty is to ensure the safety of himself and any bystanders. Until the scene is secured to the point the officer no longer perceives threats to himself or any other person, any person the cop reasonably believes has a weapon can and will be considered a threat until that person is disarmed.

 

[Robadat]

Yeah I agree totally, but we are having to many cases where they are shooting without cause and then they make shit up.
Many have been caught on tape.

A lot of that is media driven. In many of these instances the cops actually do have reasonable cause to fear for their safety. That may not be so in every incident but it is so in the vast majority of Police shootings. Still, I can agree that one innocent being shot is one too many, but I can't and don't expect any cop to surrender their personal safety or life when they legitimately feel it is being threatened.

 

[livespive]

" Still, I can agree that one innocent being shot is one too many, but I can't and don't expect any cop to surrender their personal safety or life when they legitimately feel it is being threatened."

I agree, but when you are shooting a guy on the ground with an autistic kid, and you hit the guy, and say that the kid was holding something, I call bullshit...

Shooting a guy in a car with his girlfriend and little girl in the car when he was doing what you said (taped live as he was being shot).
I call bullshit.

Making a pregnant lady sit on the ground when the husband told you he was taking her to the hospital.
I call bullshit.

To many of them, just to many of them.

A lot of that is media driven. In many of these instances the cops actually do have reasonable cause to fear for their safety. That may not be so in every incident but it is so in the vast majority of Police shootings. Still, I can agree that one innocent being shot is one too many, but I can't and don't expect any cop to surrender their personal safety or life when they legitimately feel it is being threatened.

 

[Djarum300]

Rules for Military Engagement are very different than what the Rules are for Police.
As for the OP, better training for Officers and outreach programs into the communities to inform the citizen carriers of what is the proper procedures for the cops and the civilians during an encounter.

Rule #1 - The citizen must comply with all commands from the challenging officer.
Rule #2 - See Rule #1.

A cop's first duty is to ensure the safety of himself and any bystanders. Until the scene is secured to the point the officer no longer perceives threats to himself or any other person, any person the cop reasonably believes has a weapon can and will be considered a threat until that person is disarmed.

If a citizen is not breaking the law or the officer doesn't have probable cause, then why must a citizen obey? Trying to let the courts sort it out and citizens hiring attorneys for bad arrests or police encounters isn't the answer either, as the citizen usually loses or can't afford an attorney.

 

[Good Times Good Times]

If a citizen is not breaking the law or the officer doesn't have probable cause, then why must a citizen obey?

Because it's only what the officer thinks/feels in the moment that matters. Sad, isn't it?

 

[Djarum300]

Also, why are the rules different for military? Is it training? Do individuals who encounter an individual with a weapon who are in the military feel more safe than police in the exact same circumstance?

 

[Robadat]

If a citizen is not breaking the law or the officer doesn't have probable cause, then why must a citizen obey? Trying to let the courts sort it out and citizens hiring attorneys for bad arrests or police encounters isn't the answer either, as the citizen usually loses or can't afford an attorney.

An Officer's first duty is make the situation safe for all. If the officer notices what may be a weapon on your person, his response is to secure that weapon so it can not be used against him or anyone else. The officer can not read your mind to know what you might or might not do with it. Voluntary relinquishment of the weapon from your person tells the officer you are not a threat.

You, as a citizen being stopped, may not know exactly why you're being stopped. You may believe he does not have probable cause, but until you are informed as to why you are being stopped, you don't know for sure. Maybe he's stopping you because you fit the description of someone who has committed an armed robbery, you just don't know... The cop is not going to get into a discussion about that until after he makes sure the scene is safe.

Bad arrests are tossed out all the time. Police Supervisors, State Attorneys, and Judges routinely dismiss cases when the evidence does not support the charges. People also have the right to be represented by an attorney whether or not they can afford one in court.

 

[Good Times Good Times]

Bad arrests are tossed out all the time. Police Supervisors, State Attorneys, and Judges routinely dismiss cases when the evidence does not support the charges. People also have the right to be represented by an attorney whether or not they can afford one in court.

Yes, yes they are. Amazing the charges can even exist when the evidence does not support them.

 

[Djarum300]

An Officer's first duty is make the situation safe for all. If the officer notices what may be a weapon on your person, his response is to secure that weapon so it can not be used against him or anyone else. The officer can not read your mind to know what you might or might not do with it. Voluntary relinquishment of the weapon from your person tells the officer you are not a threat.

You, as a citizen being stopped, may not know exactly why you're being stopped. You may believe he does not have probable cause, but until you are informed as to why you are being stopped, you don't know for sure. Maybe he's stopping you because you fit the description of someone who has committed an armed robbery, you just don't know... The cop is not going to get into a discussion about that until after he makes sure the scene is safe.

Bad arrests are tossed out all the time. Police Supervisors, State Attorneys, and Judges routinely dismiss cases when the evidence does not support the charges. People also have the right to be represented by an attorney whether or not they can afford one in court.

I live in an open carry state. If I'm minding my business with a gun in my holster, an officer has no right to order me to relinquish my gun unless there is probable cause. Keep in mind I never open carry, just using it as an example.