Cop in America doing a bad job, again

Not the best, but a slowed down video shows police planting the gun

 
So predictable it's almost sad.

We can all post media, videos, articles etc that fit our agenda.

I could post the many dozens of peaceful protests that don't make news headlines, or white people who pull out guns on police or don't comply when asked, or both and don't get killed.

Or we can actually talk rationally about a problem that affects both sides without feeling the need to attack the other with childish retorts & sarcasm.
 
vi1lain said:
So predictable it's almost sad.

We can all post media, videos, articles etc that fit our agenda.

I could post the many dozens of peaceful protests that don't make news headlines, or white people who pull out guns on police or don't comply when asked, or both and don't get killed.

Or we can actually talk rationally about a problem that affects both sides without feeling the need to attack the other with childish retorts & sarcasm.
Click to expand...

I assume you're referring to me? I'm not trying to push any agenda, nor do I need to.

I have no issues talking rationally, even in threads with biased titles about how all American cops are the same. All I did was highlight other areas of the issue in which people decide to take any chance they get to go out and cause destruction and beat people for no reason. I didn't even question the potential race bias behind any of the attacks that were filmed, because they're disgusting acts regardless of the races involved in the acts.

My point in bringing that up is that just like people on here have mentioned that nothing will change as long as all police stay quiet, I also think reactions of people like this at "protests" do more to harm any potential message being brought up. Why aren't these acts highlighted in the media and people standing against the violence and looting at these events?

Rather than trying to force one side to change and pointing out all their faults, both sides need to speak out against the ones who are driving these issues and dividing everyone. That includes the media, some officers, and some "protestors".
 
vi1lain said:
So predictable it's almost sad.

We can all post media, videos, articles etc that fit our agenda.

I could post the many dozens of peaceful protests that don't make news headlines, or white people who pull out guns on police or don't comply when asked, or both and don't get killed.

Or we can actually talk rationally about a problem that affects both sides without feeling the need to attack the other with childish retorts & sarcasm.
Click to expand...

You kidding right? If you come to the us I will give you $1000 if you pull a gun (fake or not) on police, but for you to get the money you need to survive.
 
berbatrick said:
The 1st video is very clear, what that cop drops doesn't look like a glove at all.
Click to expand...

Which first video? The one that's zoomed in on a tv screen?

Watch the officer putting his gloves on before something appears on the ground. Then again a couple of moments later.

Have you dropped a gun before? It wouldn't drop and stay in place like that.
 
Skizzo said:
I assume you're referring to me? I'm not trying to push any agenda, nor do I need to.

I have no issues talking rationally, even in threads with biased titles about how all American cops are the same. All I did was highlight other areas of the issue in which people decide to take any chance they get to go out and cause destruction and beat people for no reason. I didn't even question the potential race bias behind any of the attacks that were filmed, because they're disgusting acts regardless of the races involved in the acts.

My point in bringing that up is that just like people on here have mentioned that nothing will change as long as all police stay quiet, I also think reactions of people like this at "protests" do more to harm any potential message being brought up. Why aren't these acts highlighted in the media and people standing against the violence and looting at these events?

Rather than trying to force one side to change and pointing out all their faults, both sides need to speak out against the ones who are driving these issues and dividing everyone. That includes the media, some officers, and some "protestors".
Click to expand...

My question is, who's forcing one side to change? You won't find one person in this thread who thinks the all cops in America are bad, and everything is entirely their fault etc. In my earlier comments I was talking about possible outcomes that both sides need to be open to, and even acknowledging and thanking the cops for their hard work that's often thankless.

Putting "protests" in quotation marks only serves to come across as though you question the legitimacy of them, or are unaware of the many peaceful "protests" that don't get news coverage, or the many legitimate protestors who are doing so and lamenting those who resort to violence.

This is why I said it's predictable, not just by you, it's easy to resort to the media, the media are trying to ignite a race war and continue to deflect the important issues that both sides face.
For example, peaceful protests don't get news coverage, footage of BLM protestors & police officers engaging in debate and hugging don't get news coverage. College sports fans who decided to burn parts of their community because their team lost last night, don't get news coverage, I could go on.

barros said:
You kidding right? If you come to the us I will give you $1000 if you pull a gun (fake or not) on police, but for you to get the money you need to survive.
Click to expand...

What does do to disprove what I said?
Just because I will probably get shot for it, doesn't mean that others haven't done it and haven't been shot for it.
You're missing the reason for me saying it in the first place - and that's that we could all come in here and post whatever report, article, video etc that suits our opinion/side, but what does that ultimately prove? And how does that allow us to become open to change in the future or to understand both sides?
 
I can't imagine what cops would have gotten away with in the 60s/70s/80s in the US. Or basically pre-internet.
 
Organic Potatoes said:
Footage released of the 6-year old killed accidentally after a car chase buy gunfire. The father who was driving survived. They're more concerned about finding someone who has gloves (protecting from blood borne diseases; first-responder class 101-you should always have gloves) than helping the victims.

https://news.vice.com/article/video-police-fatally-shooting-6-year-old-autistic-boy-jeremy-mardis
Click to expand...

FFS even that is racist. And yeah, most cops have stab/cut proof gloves available.
 
Are these cops not trained to shoot to incapacitate? Why do they always shoot to kill? It's like a blind panic, bang bang bang bang, unload the whole fecking gun?
Who trains these pricks? Rambo?
 
MoBeats said:
Are these cops not trained to shoot to incapacitate? Why do they always shoot to kill? It's like a blind panic, bang bang bang bang, unload the whole fecking gun?
Who trains these pricks? Rambo?
Click to expand...

Well the thinking is that if you are in a situation where you have to use your weapon then it has to be with deadly force. I think the law says that somebody drawing a weapon on you is using deadly force and that you can do the same back (I'm not certain of this though).

Trouble is you always see a gaggle of cops standing pointing their guns and yelling at these suspects. Everybody is amped up and a barrage ensues. There's rarely an attempt at de-escalation. They've already got their weapons drawn and it seems they are just waiting for the inevitable.
 
Exactly, there's no calm, it's a panicked situation every time. Cops screaming, completely out of control.
 
MoBeats said:
Are these cops not trained to shoot to incapacitate? Why do they always shoot to kill? It's like a blind panic, bang bang bang bang, unload the whole fecking gun?
Who trains these pricks? Rambo?
Click to expand...
1.no
2.you don't shoot to kill. The politically correct term used now is shoot to "stop a threat". You do that because a person presents a deadly threat or a deadly weapon is involved. If you've shot a gun before, you would know how ridiculous it is to aim for the legs, arms, or wherever youtube experts say.
3. Police officers train police officers.
 
choiboyx012 said:
1.no
2.you don't shoot to kill. The politically correct term used now is shoot to "stop a threat". You do that because a person presents a deadly threat or a deadly weapon is involved. If you've shot a gun before, you would know how ridiculous it is to aim for the legs, arms, or wherever youtube experts say.
3. Police officers train police officers.
Click to expand...
1 they should be, they're supposed to uphold the law, protect and serve, not kill everyone.
2 I have shot a gun before. If someone is trained to fire a weapon they can aim, it's ridiculous to suggest otherwise. What's target range shooting for then?
3 not trained very well then, massive panic, shitting themselves and unloading their whole weapon. It's all a bit Die Hard isn't it.
 
MoBeats said:
1 they should be, they're supposed to uphold the law, protect and serve, not kill everyone.
2 I have shot a gun before. If someone is trained to fire a weapon they can aim, it's ridiculous to suggest otherwise. What's target range shooting for then?
3 not trained very well then, massive panic, shitting themselves and unloading their whole weapon. It's all a bit Die Hard isn't it.
Click to expand...

If you've shot a gun before, you should realize how ridiculous it is to try and suggest someone, who is in a situation where they could be killed, has seconds to react to a moving target, to try and shoot an arm or leg.
 
Skizzo said:
If you've shot a gun before, you should realize how ridiculous it is to try and suggest someone, who is in a situation where they could be killed, has seconds to react to a moving target, to try and shoot an arm or leg.
Click to expand...
Aim small, miss big. Aim big, miss small.
 
Skizzo said:
If you've shot a gun before, you should realize how ridiculous it is to try and suggest someone, who is in a situation where they could be killed, has seconds to react to a moving target, to try and shoot an arm or leg.
Click to expand...
Not to mention the effect that adrenaline has on a situation. The perp might not even react to being shot in the arm or leg.
 
Not in one clip in this thread is there a civilian that is a threat, you telling me all these cops are reacting well? And the way they are trained? That they're so fecking panicked they can't aim at an unarmed and/or surrendering man/child/disabled guy, and shoot his leg?
Really?
 
hobbers said:
Nobody, and I mean nobody, would bother aiming at a limb if they were a cop dealing with someone who was in the process of aiming/firing a weapon at them.

There are obviously systemic problems with the police in the states but the use of lethal force is not one of them. Every single call out you have the possibility, and in some situations probability, of facing someone who is armed and dangerous.
Click to expand...
They've got their fecking arms in the air in most of the clips!
 
MoBeats said:
Not in one clip in this thread is there a civilian that is a threat, you telling me all these cops are reacting well? And the way they are trained? That they're so fecking panicked they can't aim at an unarmed and/or surrendering man/child/disabled guy, and shoot his leg?
Really?
Click to expand...

It's more baffling that you still think it's a viable option :lol:
 
Skizzo said:
It's more baffling that you still think it's a viable option :lol:
Click to expand...
Something inherently wrong with policing in the states then. I don't know how they cope in other countries.
Still think they're all cowboys obviously, that's what's baffling.
 
MoBeats said:
Are these cops not trained to shoot to incapacitate? Why do they always shoot to kill? It's like a blind panic, bang bang bang bang, unload the whole fecking gun?
Who trains these pricks? Rambo?
Click to expand...
Well depends if they shoot someone back or like the case of the guy holding something in his hand, only in the movies cops can shoot someone on their hands or something like that, now when someone has a knife and the cop is more than 10 feet away and they shoot to kill is abusing the power.
 
barros said:
now when someone has a knife and the cop is more than 10 feet away and they shoot to kill is abusing the power.
Click to expand...
You know the training actually states that if a knife wielding person is within 21 or so feet and your gun is holstered, you lose. It's the "Tueller Drill" or "21 foot rule". It's kinda controversial because of all the variables it takes for granted, but as far as I know, it's been the rule for a couple of decades.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.