yeah he was ice cool.
Cop in America doing a bad job, again
- Thread starter Sigma
- Start date
yeah he was ice cool.
I never said they were out of control.
I said that the comments that seem so normalised to endorse broad daylight gun shoot outs is simply nuts.
Fair enough.
They remained calm under a ridiculously high stress situation, one of which was shot in the leg at the time, and were able to minimize casualties.
If they were freaking out people would complain they weren’t trained properly.
Now the cops are freaking you out because they handled a situation in which someone robbed a store at gun point and shot an officer and a bystander, because they seemed so nonchalant about a daylight shootout.
No.
The whole situation freaks me out.
- Cops acting like soldiers in the streets of a Developed World country.
- Comments sections of the website finding it easier to praise someone than shot another person dead, than to sit and think "Is this how we want our society to look"
The subtext: America has too many fcuking guns and is subsequently a hellish nightmare at times. Albeit one that Americans romanticise.
Of course you are right. I bet that incident barely made the local news that night. US society is totally and utterly fecked and people just shrug and accept it.
A Sac PD deputy was shot and killed today on a road that I travel often.
And yet rather than take issue with the fact that an armed man robbed someone at gun point and shot two people, you mention the “cops freak you the feck out”
Even both things you mention there completely ignore the fact an armed man was robbing and shooting people.
I don’t disagree with you on the gun issue. There’s also plenty of instances here where cops have acted like dirt bags and worse. This seems a strange incident to decide to choose to say the cops are the ones that scare you when someone opened fire on them when they were flagged down for help.
Two shot, one killed. All from a call for service it sounded like too. Sad to hear.
Him failing to specifically mention it doesn't mean that he ignored it. People can opt to comment about the aspects of a situation that aren't blindingly obvious without that being indicative of their feelings on the blindingly obvious part. Personally I'd assume that most people see the bolded pretty much the same way...
Unless you feel a Clint Eastwood like quip about the perpetrators is needed to make it absolutely clear? Seems strange to pick a fight over imo.
Wasn’t picking a fight at all, was asking for clarification really. Although if my tone suggested otherwise then I apologize.
And why would I just assume what someone has taken into consideration when commenting on something online? That would be rather presumptive, and assuming someone’s stance would be more likely to cause a conflict, rather than asking exactly what someone was concerned about.
Even on the clarification he only mentioned two parts. The cops “acting like soldiers” and the comments on the video. Both of which can be attributed to the fact an armed man was actively shooting people.
There are some things that are safe to assume tho aren't there? For example its safe to assume that the cops are the good guys in the video you posted, and that most people would see it that way.
I get that you feel that a bunch of people in this thread are against you and what you do (the US police not you personally) but that's not the case...
Edit: I assumed that he didn't feel the need to comment on the perp while making observations about the police. How would that lead to conflict? Anyway hopefully you get my point.
It’s probably more a case of miscommunication or misunderstanding than having conflicting views. Like I said, I was just trying to clarify his view of “these specific cops terrify me”. That’s why I wanted to clarify
And I’ve learned not to assume anything in here anymore
Should add a second sentence for still using WinXP
Take that back.
Fair enough. Even tho it's safe to assume in some situations you're right tbf, I always say it myself. Better to not assume and just find out for yourself.It’s probably more a case of miscommunication or misunderstanding than having conflicting views. Like I said, I was just trying to clarify his view of “these specific cops terrify me”. That’s why I wanted to clarify
And I’ve learned not to assume anything in here anymore
FFS. READ!
Of course a criminal using a gun to shoot people and hold up a store is bad. But... Criminals gon' Criminal... I shouldn't have to mention that it's bad. If you need me to... Shooting people is bad.
My illustrative point is that it's normal for America.
Their society has jumped the shark to such an extent that the first thought is 'Thank god the officer was well trained and could kill the bad man'...
It's nuts. Not even a passing thought to 'Hmmm... maybe we have too many guns if people are pulling them out in 7/11's in broad daylight'
America has all of the wrong thoughts. Why is it even sensible to any American that there are shoot outs in Denver?
cops being dirt bags, no surprise
never trust a cop
Speaking of how fecking nuts this country can be at times, this incident happened not too far from where I reside (when not traveling the globe for work that is). Video was released after court order although the bit where the nutter guns down the sheriffs has been edited out and goes straight to a later vid of him flying out in full battle rattle to engage backup forces.
https://atlantablackstar.com/2018/0...oots-and-kills-deputies-coming-to-arrest-him/
https://atlantablackstar.com/2018/0...oots-and-kills-deputies-coming-to-arrest-him/
@Skizzo @choiboyx012 I don't get these chases. All these innocent persons placed in danger from a ridiculous pursuit.
Why is it not protocol to allow the suspect to leave the scene and send out BOLOs and other means to apprehend?
Why try a PIT maneuver on a road with other vehicles traveling about?
This video is time condensed but likely lasted many minutes with numerous persons lives at risk. And I'm not blaming the pursuers but seems so unnecessary to do such.
Why is it not protocol to allow the suspect to leave the scene and send out BOLOs and other means to apprehend?
Why try a PIT maneuver on a road with other vehicles traveling about?
This video is time condensed but likely lasted many minutes with numerous persons lives at risk. And I'm not blaming the pursuers but seems so unnecessary to do such.
@MrMarcello
Different departments have different policies, so I can’t speak for all of it. CHP is one of the few (if not only) department in our area that can pursue vehicles, mainly because we have a very strict policy on it. We cancel them if they go wrong way, take City streets and start driving dangerously, or depending on traffic conditions etc. I had two myself on Sunday night, however it was late, and there was minimal traffic on the freeway.
Letting vehicles just drive away from scenes and putting out a license plate is great in theory, and sometimes that works out and we can contact the party at their home later and file charges. Sometimes it’s a bad plate. If it’s a stolen vehicle then we have no idea where they’ll be later, but even then, if the risk becomes too great, we’ll cancel and hope they turn up again.
In that specific video, I’d be surprised if the officers didn’t get some paperwork out of it, because there’s a few places where it could have gone pretty badly. As for the PIT at the end, I’ve only watched it once, but didn’t they wait until traffic had cleared? You have to weigh your options, and letting someone continue to drive recklessly when you have a chance to end it is sometimes the chance you take.
Sometimes a decision is made in a split second that people will review and critique many times over. Not saying that’s what you’re doing here, but every pursuit we have is reviewed by upper management, and depending on the content, it goes even higher and can end up in paperwork, or worse. Although I like that to an extent because it keeps us held to a higher standard.
Different departments have different policies, so I can’t speak for all of it. CHP is one of the few (if not only) department in our area that can pursue vehicles, mainly because we have a very strict policy on it. We cancel them if they go wrong way, take City streets and start driving dangerously, or depending on traffic conditions etc. I had two myself on Sunday night, however it was late, and there was minimal traffic on the freeway.
Letting vehicles just drive away from scenes and putting out a license plate is great in theory, and sometimes that works out and we can contact the party at their home later and file charges. Sometimes it’s a bad plate. If it’s a stolen vehicle then we have no idea where they’ll be later, but even then, if the risk becomes too great, we’ll cancel and hope they turn up again.
In that specific video, I’d be surprised if the officers didn’t get some paperwork out of it, because there’s a few places where it could have gone pretty badly. As for the PIT at the end, I’ve only watched it once, but didn’t they wait until traffic had cleared? You have to weigh your options, and letting someone continue to drive recklessly when you have a chance to end it is sometimes the chance you take.
Sometimes a decision is made in a split second that people will review and critique many times over. Not saying that’s what you’re doing here, but every pursuit we have is reviewed by upper management, and depending on the content, it goes even higher and can end up in paperwork, or worse. Although I like that to an extent because it keeps us held to a higher standard.
This article combines statistics with interviews of ex-cops to examine who the "bad apples" are and why they persist:
JUST 6% OF COLUMBUS POLICE OFFICERS ACCOUNT FOR HALF OF ALL FORCE REPORTS
Between 2001 and 2017, the department justified officers in 99 percent of use-of-force cases, according to data released through a public records request.
https://theappeal.org/just-6-percen...ficers-account-for-half-of-all-force-reports/
JUST 6% OF COLUMBUS POLICE OFFICERS ACCOUNT FOR HALF OF ALL FORCE REPORTS
Between 2001 and 2017, the department justified officers in 99 percent of use-of-force cases, according to data released through a public records request.
https://theappeal.org/just-6-percen...ficers-account-for-half-of-all-force-reports/
America has a totally warped understanding of policing.
Unfortunately, so many are willing to tar the remaining force with the same brush as those 6%. feck I'd hate to be a cop in America.
The article should really use line officers, and maybe first-line supervisors like Sergeants, instead of all sworn personnel. Most lieutenants, captains, commanders, assistant chiefs/deputies are not "out in the field" and that skews the statistic. It's pretty accurate otherwise. The more aggressive and proactive officers are the ones that "bring in stats." Anyone who's watched The Wire is familiar with the numbers game, and it very much applies to law enforcement. If you bring in citations and arrests, you're making the Sergeants happy because they can impress the Lieutenant, who can impress the Captain and so on and so on. But once that officer gets into something questionable or brings in serious complaints and lawsuits against the dept, s/he will be thrown under the bus.
Unfortunately, that mindset of "you're not a real police officer unless you've generated multiple complaints/IA investigations" is pretty common.
All departments are going to have the hard-charger officers, and I have no problem with that as long as they're professional and do things legally and in policy.
I do have a problem with the term "bad apples". What exactly does it mean? What is the standard? I know officers who are very community-oriented, professional, and never get into trouble. But I would NOT be able to depend on them if I were getting in a fight or a shooting. I know officers that are lazy, bigoted, and assholes to the public. But if shit hit the fan I know they'll be running to back me up. My dept has been involved in an active shooter incident, and the guy who shot the suspect was an absolute feckin idiot who no one likes and is still one of the "problem childs" of the dept even though he's a decorated hero! Depending on how you define it, any one of our officers can be considered a "bad apple".
Has there been any effort to look at police reform in the states?
The police investigating themselves and found that they did nothing wrong?
Well, I am shocked.
Being able to back up your mate in a shootout shouldn't be the first or second or theird prerequisite for a good cop. He's probably better off in the armed forces.
The idea that the number of arrests a cop makes determines how successful an officer is, is so bankrupt.
Think America has to look at an overall body that ensures policing standards.
True. Though my greater point was that there are so many factors and traits of what an officer should be and does, and since they're human they will not excel in everything. There's also the differing opinions of what's important to fellow officers in contrast to the public. Being able and willing to get your hands in on a fight or a felony stop with guns out may not be important in the grand scheme of things. But if you were in my shoes and were on the ground with 2 other officers to get some drugged-out guy into custody, and you see a 3rd officer just standing around because s/he froze up out of fear, then you'd look at that officer as useless too with no business having a badge and carrying a loaded weapon.
I think this idea of good numbers = good employee is not at all inherent to the police force though. Plenty of industries still work with a rigid system of kpi's where there's little room for context.
It is rather archaic though.
I just don't know how it would work throughout the country. It's great in theory, but each state has their own laws and statutes.
The only way there is serious reform, imo, is the dept needs to go through its growing pains of big lawsuits and scandals. If it's not forced, then it won't reform on its own. Lapd has gone through Rodney king, the riots, OJ, and the rampart scandal. This all lead to the Fbi/doj getting involved and put lapd under consent decree. Now they are one of the most progressive and professional departments in the nation.
The LA sheriffs dept, in contrast, still has a reputation for being one of the more old school and "heavy handed" departments. It's only been in the recent past decade where they've finally had some big scandals and serious misconduct from the top- down. Now with the fbi involved the dept is finally starting to make changes in policy and procedure.
Prisons are big business and cheap labour, literal slavery.
The bond system (which should be illegal) keeps the poor & disenfranchised locked up until they can afford bail, or the rich pay the fees, which means easy money.
Also there are a lot of politicians and rich people who are on investor boards of prisons, so they have vested interests in keeping them full.
Plus the law changes state by state, so there would need to be an independent body for each state - which would be incredibly difficult & expensive to maintain.
The whole system is fecked and too many profit off it - which means it's not going to change any time soon.
Doesn't seem much will to change it anyway. Internally, politically or from the wider public. Which is equally fecked...
They don't care because it doesn't affect their communities.
Largely these things only exist on social media, and to a large majority that isn't *real* or tangible in their reality.
c.a.b
What's c.a.b?
Coppers Are Bastards? It was A(ll)CAB when I was a kid. My brother punk band was called ACAB.
Shocking lapse of procedure there. Disgraceful.
When the police are a danger to the community.
hell yeah. that makes up for the daily atrocities commited by police