News piece on police use of force.

[oneshooter]

Perhaps a few more "community leaders" need to look at things from the other side.

http://www.fox10phoenix.com/clip/11014328/activist-critical-of-police-undergoes-use-of-force-scenarios

[MohRokTah]

1. .

[oneshooter]

2. So you have nothing to add to the discussion. n/t

[MohRokTah]

4. .

[demmiblue]

3. .

[bravenak]

5. ~

[billh58]

6. .

[Hutzpa]

7. Since your thread has no brief analysis

and I can't see the video you posted from the link, one can only assume based on your subject line that this is suppose to defend or show how difficult the job of a police officer is.

What you and others that are working hardest to defend the NY police officers actions, are failing to understand, is that their job is not to kill unarmed black citizens at first sight, their job is not to shoot first and ask questions later that is not their job, their job is to Protect and Serve their community regardless of it's ethnicity. Yes their job is hard, if you call making a precise decision harder, then let's agree it is hard based on that, but there are other police forces around the world that are doing the same job as their American counterpart every day whose job it is to protect their community there being paid to protect without the outcry of how hard their job is, why is it police officers in Britain can protect their community without the use of a gun yet are able to make an arrest most of the time without incidents?

These are the comparison that the police's forces in America has to address before they can be trusted again, using violence at first contact should not be the default policy in making a precise decision when it comes to dealing with blacks in America. The attitude of police officers in America needs to want to accept change before any changes can take effect and at present it is looking more unlikely with the level of insubordination we've seen toward their superior officers.

Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter

Dr Martin Luther King.

[Lurks Often]

8. Maybe you should have watched the video

When a civil rights activist, Rev, Jarrett Maupin, who has led protests against police shootings, goes through the sceanrios and says it changes his mind about things, you might want to listen.

[frylock]

11. how do these scenarios relate to the deaths of Eric Garner or Tamir Rice?

[Lurks Often]

12. Very little to the death of Eric Garner

As to the Tamir Rice tragedy, it does illustrate that police officers have to make decisions in a split second without always having all the information they or we would like them to have.

[frylock]

15. there was no split-second decision neccessary in the case of tamir rice..

the officer behind the wheel fucked up when he rolled up on Rice like he did. he should've hung back, awaited backup, and engaged the subject over his PA.

[Lurks Often]

18. That's your opinion

I don't know what standard policy & training for Cleveland PD is for circumstances like the Tamir Rice shooting and we don't know how crowded the park was.

I'm not saying the officers were right or wrong on how they handled that situation without a lot more information then is currently available.

I will offer an educated guess and say I suspect the response is a change in training on how to handle a POTENTIAL active shooter, which is to close in and be in a position to engage as soon as possible.

I remember there was a great deal of criticism of the police after Columbine because they waited for a negotiator and SWAT to arrive, which allowed the murderers to kill more people, instead of entering the building immediately.

[frylock]

19. yeah, whatever..

you go right ahead and continue to defend one of the most FUCKED UP PDs in the nation. go right on ahead and ignore the fact the the person who called 911 stated that he believed the weapon to be a toy, and this fuckwad pig used no precaution whatsoever when he rolled up on the kid like that. ignore the fact that the shooter was a mental basket case that washed out of the academy at a previous department because he couldn't handle the pressure. let's just throw all that down the shitter because cops have such a dangerous job that their on-the-job mortality rate doesn't even crack the top ten.

[Lurks Often]

22. Let's see

1. The dispatcher never told the cops that it might be a toy, so they were responding to a person with a gun call.
2. I don't live in Ohio, so I don't hear about everything Cleveland PD does, nor was I defending the department as a whole.
3. He passed Cleveland PD's entrance tests; is there any evidence that Cleveland PD has lower standards or had access to the HR memo from the prior police department?
4. What's Cleveland's PD training on how to handle that situation?
5. While being a police officer may not break the top ten in deaths per 100,000, doesn't mean it's not a dangerous job.

[frylock]

28. some light reading for you..

Justice Department wants sweeping changes in Cleveland Police Department; report finds "systemic deficiencies"

Cleveland officer who fatally shot Tamir Rice judged unfit for duty in 2012

[Lurks Often]

36. How about addressing the remarks I made to your post

[frylock]

38. sure..

1) The dispatcher was remiss to not relay information regarding the toy gun, and they should be summoned before their superiors and reprimanded for that oversight, or possibly removed from their position for incompetence

2) I provided you information to bring you up to speed.

3) How the hell would I know what the internal hiring policy is at CPD? Did they even bother to call his previous employer?

4) Again, how would I know?

5) No shit? Never said it wasn't. However, crime is down overall, and killing of police is at a 100 year low. The way the police and some folks act, a cop is being killed every 28 hours, when the reality is that cops are killing black men at that rate.

We good now?

[Lurks Often]

41. Regarding 1,3 & 4

1. Agreed, however the police responding would still have had to go by the possibility that it as a real gun, them being told that it MIGHT be a fake gun may not have made a difference.

3 & 4 are going to be relevant in any criminal or civil trial, presuming one occurs.
For 3: the officer passed all of Cleveland PD entrance exams and depending on how OH law is phrased, the former PD may not have been legally able to say anything other then that he was employed at the academy and did not complete the training, presuming of course that Cleveland PD was even aware of the former employment and chose to check up on it. That will come out at the trial.

4. If the officers followed department policy in their response to the dispatcher's call, then it is unlikely that they will be criminally charged. That will also come out at the trial.

Based on what is available NOW, I don't see those officers being criminally charged.

[Savannahmann]

23. If anything, it proves how totally inadequate the training is to real life.

In every scenario, the police officer begins at essentially point blank range. No cover, or concealment. For those who don't know the difference, cover stops bullets, concealment stops view. A rabbit in a bush in concealed, but not in cover until it gets to the hole in the ground it calls home.

Tamir Rice, the cop had all the time in the world to begin his contact further away. Instead he came up to point blank range and left himself with no time to assess the situation, and thus in his mind no choice but to use deadly force. From further away, he could have assessed the situation better, more accurately.

In the training scenarios in the video. No opportunity to step behind the cars and seek cover. No opportunity to do anything but draw and fire. It was a quick draw game from the late 1980's with little more usefulness than that.

Now, if we assessed police use of force incidents like we do aircraft accidents we could identify training deficiencies and fix them going forward. Instead, we as a society proudly line up and pat the cop on the back letting the poor training and policies go forward.

Tis better that a thousand innocent people die than one cop get a scratch seems to be our point of view. That is unacceptable. Now, we can keep going forward with this, but when whole communities lash out and attack the police, again, and again, and again, what do we do then? Give the cops even more guns that they are totally incapable of handling?

In another thread I said that it was insane. I stand by that. If your child burns down your house playing with a cigarette lighter, you don't give him a blowtorch for Christmas. And you damn sure don't give him a flamethrower and tell him to have fun.

[TexasMommaWithAHat]

24. But in none of those instances did the cop

Last edited Thu Jan 8, 2015, 04:54 PM - Edit history (1)

expect the perp to be armed.

Or are cops supposed to duck and cover every time they approach someone? That's the point, they interact with probably hundreds of thousands of people a day all over the country, with an expectation that the citizens are not going to pull a gun or attempt to harm them.

In the Tamir Rice case, the police KNEW he had a gun...or thought he knew that he had a gun, anyway. He could have protected his own life without shooting that child. He was wrong, and deserves some type of homicide charge, IMO.

I do hope that the minister in the video gets his message across - don't resist arrest. Meanwhile, cops can and should be undergoing better training. We can hope for change on both sides, imo.

[Lurks Often]

25. Things don't always go the way we want them to in real life

"In the training scenarios in the video. No opportunity to step behind the cars and seek cover. No opportunity to do anything but draw and fire." The purpose of the scenario was to show a potential worst case, something that happens in real life and little time a person has to assess the situation and make a decision. These things happen in real life and you don't always get a chance to seek cover.

"From further away, he could have assessed the situation better, more accurately." As I already posted I don't know what standard policy & training for Cleveland PD is for circumstances like the Tamir Rice shooting and we don't know how crowded the park was. What if it had been a real gun and Tamir Rice had started firing at the people in the park?

I will offer an educated guess and say I suspect the response is a change in training on how to handle a POTENTIAL active shooter, which is to close in and be in a position to engage as soon as possible.

I remember there was a great deal of criticism of the police after Columbine because they waited for a negotiator and SWAT to arrive, which allowed the murderers to kill more people, instead of entering the building immediately.

I'm not going to say the officers were right or wrong on how they handled that situation without a lot more information then is currently available.

And many law enforcement agencies do try to learn from past experiences. The FBI, NYPD and LAPD, along with some of the other cities, county sheriff's departments and state police tend to be the trend setters and leaders. Just because we don't hear about it doesn't mean it doesn't happen.

[Savannahmann]

33. Pfui.

We do hear. We hear about more cases of brutality, abuses, and more unarmed people getting murdered by police every year. The training changes, telling the officers to use different phrases to justify their actions, the actions themselves, haven't changed.

These officers for example, arrived, and started shooting right away. No threat was present, and in their report, they used the approved he lunged at me excuse. You watch the video, there was no motion towards the police. The mentally disturbed man backed up, stood up, and then fell down. No waving of a weapon, and no motion towards the cops.

The excuses have changed, the actions haven't. The training hasn't. If anything, the training has ramped up more aggressive action because one out of a thousand incidents might pose a threat. Which is why I said the focus has changed. It is better for a thousand innocents to die than one cop get a scratch.

I could post videos all day long. Abuses, brutality, excessive force. None of the cops get punished for these actions. None of them result in any training changes. Because the training is about how the cop can stay alive, not how the public can be kept alive.

My favorite part of that video is at 4:12. There you see a man fleeing. His van rolls over, he is thrown from the car. He hits the ground like a sack of potatoes. Then the police rush up, and start beating on the unconscious figure. He isn't resisting at that point. But the hyped up adrenaline fueled cops don't care.

Training hasn't changed. We go and tell the Police that beating a prisoner with a rubber hose is not allowed. They start using phone books. Because phone books were not prohibited under the decision. Phone books are prohibited, and the cops start using pepper spray to torture the prisoners.

Yes, I said torture. Using pain as a punitive measure is torture.

Training hasn't changed. What has changed is the euphemisms that the police use to justify their actions. Enhanced interrogations? A euphemism for waterboarding and other torture techniques. Resisting arrest, the words that have to be shouted to justify a beating, or worse.

It is exceedingly rare that we get a glimpse into this world of the thin blue li(n)e. But when we do, it's always because they didn't know there was a tape that showed the truth.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/crime/police-dash-cam-video-exonerates-nj-man-implicates-cops-article-1.1701763

The police are still doing all the things we objected to in the 1960's, 70's, and 80's. Nothing has changed. The training is in how to get away with doing it, not in stopping the practice.

When we do get that glimpse, we're told that it's a few bad apples. https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20140418/19545926965/five-illinois-cops-are-caught-lying-stand-when-defense-produces-recording-contradicting-their-testimony.shtml

When they're caught, we're told how dangerous, and tough the job is, and how we have to understand the pressure they face every day.

We can go on, and on, and on. These are not exceptions to the rules. These are the reality exposed. These are not bad apples. These are many cops in each situation who are all working together to plant evidence, lie, and with the rare exception, get away with it. The rare event is when the cop gets in trouble.

They lie, they lie constantly, and we want to believe them because we don't want to believe that uncle Frank, Dad, Mom, Sister, or brother or son/daughter are involved in things like that. They're good people, they would never do that.

http://www.wsvn.com/story/23070302/ticket-talk

This is the reality going on, and we have to change it in reality, not put a new facade on it and call it a new building.

[Lurks Often]

37. You go ahead and believe all cops are bad

[Hutzpa]

35. I think the most important question all of us should be asking

[p]which you touched on slightly is Why should police officers feel the need to draw first on every confrontation?

[oneshooter]

9. Link works fine, Are you sure you tried it? n/t

[Hutzpa]

31. Still not working for me

but I was able to find another way to see the police training video.

[uponit7771]

29. "..their job is not to kill unarmed black citizens at first sight..." The fact that this NEEDS ...

... to be said is gob smacking

[elias49]

10. FoxNews exoneration? ny

[oneshooter]

13. are you dissing the information, or the source.

[elias49]

16. Both. Reverend Maupin got suckered IMO. nt

[logosoco]

14. Watching this has me wondering: are police given training

where they are in situations and they have no access to lethal or less than lethal solutions? Perhaps putting someone in this type of scenario would help weed out some of the people who perhaps should not be in that sort of job?

The (latest) story about the cop shooting the dog makes me wonder this as well. I used to work with dogs, they can be aggressive in stressful situations. We never had to shoot one, because a gun was not one of our tools.

[Savannahmann]

21. Really though

I wonder if they devise the training around a joke I heard many many years ago.

There used to be a joke when I was a kid. It went something like this. The CIA was recruiting a new assassin. They had narrowed it down to three candidates. They needed to know who would be the best of the three candidates. They devised one last scenario. They sent the prospective assassin in to a room to kill the person inside with what he believed was a loaded gun. The first goes in, finds his wife waiting in the room. He comes out five minutes later and says he can't kill his wife. The second one comes out almost ten minutes later crying that he just can't kill the mother of his children.

The third goes in, and you hear a lot of bangs. Then a huge crash and several more sounds of pounding. The third candidate comes out and asks. "What idiot loaded that gun with blanks. I had to beat her to death with a chair."

Admittedly, he didn't say her in the original joke, but even without me using the derogatory term originally used you get the point. It's almost like we weed out options one and two in favor of option three in the police. We seem to want the guy who would grab the chair and beat them to death.

[Savannahmann]

17. Cool, I didn't see it mentioned in the story so perhaps you can help me.

How did the activist react to this use of force scenario?

The suspect was taken into custody. By in custody, I mean in handcuffs, with officer number one who was not nearly so fat and slow as the more brutal officer number two. Did the activist also kick the handcuffed, fully restrained, and fully in custody individual in the head and tase him? Or did he merely provide cover and back up for the officer who already had the suspect in custody?

Next one.

Did the activist also shoot the unarmed, handcuffed man laying on the ground?

Now, let me make sure I understand your point.

An untrained man with zero experience couldn't think of a better way to beat sucker scenarios and this proves that the cops should be given the benefit of doubt and understanding that they have a tough job. There used to be a principle that it was better that a thousand guilty men go free than one innocent man go to prison. Today, the defenders of the faith in the thin blue li(n)e argue that it's better for a thousand innocent people to die at the hands of police than one cop get a boo boo.

Anxious to hear how our activist behaved in those scenarios.

Oh, and a suggestion to the activist. Try moving and putting the car between you, and the prospective bad guy, so you can take the time to assess the situation instead of running right up to point blank range. Why didn't the training scenarios give that opportunity?

[frylock]

20. fuckin-a

[uponit7771]

30. Crickets from the OP...

[Savannahmann]

34. IN all fairness

He may be doing other things. For example, I'm leaving to run an errand shortly, and I'd hate my being offline to be taken as unwillingness to debate an issue. Or he may have me on ignore, which would be fair since I have several people on ignore. If so, it's impossible to respond to someone you can't hear.

I try to be reasonable, which is one of the reasons I didn't become a cop. The biggest reason is that my parents were married.

[NCTraveler]

26. While your method of making your point is antagonistic...

Many communities do get it right by way of police and community leaders working together. It happens all over the country. Why the fuck would you put "community leaders" in quotation marks?

[Ino]

27. "community leaders" ... your contempt is noted

The moral of these scenarios is comply or get shot.

Except sometimes you get shot even when you do comply. Or beaten. Or tazed.

When dealing with cops, one should always assume that they are trigger happy psychopathic bullies having a bad day and looking to punish someone.

Do not try to interact with them as though they are reasonable, normal human beings or you may die.

[Hutzpa]

32. This video still gets me every time. nt

[JaneyVee]

39. That was completely stupid.

And bears no similarities to cases being protested.

[saltpepperdoor]

40. excellent post

Should open a few eyes