Another one for you cop-haters
- Thread starter MikeD
- Start date
Student/rolling paralegal
I disagree heartily. (If I'm reading you right...) No one with real experience fighting would take on an armed opponent without a weapon unless they absolutely had to, in order to save their lives in a last-ditch effort when all other attempts at escape or fighting from a distance had failed.
5+ years experience in fighting, especially off the mat, should tell you that it's all too easy to be killed to waste your life in a risky proposition like that.
Also, many police trainers discourage ground fighting, because a close fight increases the chance that a subject can access an officer's weapon(s). Lots of police trainers encourage breaking contact and gaining distance, and controlling using taser, OC spray, baton (still gives more standoff than a clinch) or presentation of a lethal weapon as appropriate for the situation.
And the problem with this line of thinking (trying to find ways for cops to use non-lethal force in lethal force situations) is that it reinforces the mistaken idea that cops are inherently wrong in using lethal force. "Well, officer, you've had 5 years in ju jitsu...why did you feel it was necessary to shoot my [knife wielding manaical] client?"
ed: plus, what if you're a 5'1" 90 lb cop responding to a 6'2" psycho? Your ju jistu fu might really not be a hell of a lot of help. Sure, I've seen small martial artists take down large, unskilled people, but working on a mat is one thing...real-world consequences are another, and cops shouldn't be obligated to load the dice in their opponents' favor.
If you oppose officers with lethal force, you will be met with lethal force. This simply shouldn't be so hard to understand.
I pretty much agree with your assessment, except just an FYI, there are plenty of submission skills that don't require going to the ground.
But my point really was that cops used to beat a guy into submission instead of shooting and killing him. It worked, yeah? Well, you can no longer beat a guy down.
So 4+ cops or 40+ cops, I don't think they'd react much differently, especially since Rodney King.
The guy smashed a cop car, they tased the guy and he still didn't go down. I have been tased (wasn't high school awesome). I can tell you if the crazy physco didn't go down to a taser and was still coming at me with a metal pipe encrusted with concrete. He would get about half the clip from my gun.
It's a sad situation to be sure, but the mom shouldn't have called the cops. It's obvious that she's the only one that could control him, when that was even possible and it's obvious that she wasn't going to press charges.
So really, it's her fault.
When was this? Prior to the invention of the firearm? When were these good old days when people facing the police with deadly force weren't shot??
Hell, man, some police departments used to allow you to shoot any fleeing suspect. See SCOTUS case Tennessee vs Garner; a cop shot a fleeing kid suspected of burglary in the back of the head. SCOTUS ruled that such action was, ahm, bad (unconstitutional), although the officer acted in compliance with his current state statutes and dept. policy.
(btw, deadly force CAN be used against someone whose back is turned to a cpp or is even fleeing, but only if the officer has PC to believe that the subject poses a significant threat of death or serious physical injury to the officer or others...ie, you shoot a person in front of a cop and start running, even if you drop the gun, it's presumed you're still going to be a threat later on down the line when the police try to come and get you, and you're taking one through the back of your head as you run. Don't like it? Stop and comply with the police...)
perfectly stated mike. people tend to forget that we are given guns for a reason.
LO. i personally prefer to go "hands on" instead of using my OC or baton (actually never used either in 4 years now but i've been sprayed by a fellow officer trying to hit a moving suspect
)i am confident with my grappling skills but i'm not stupid enough to try and "submit" a guy that has extended his reach by at least two feet. even your ju-jitsu instructor wouldn't advise that.
we do A LOT of defensive tactics training and we know how to fight/defend ourselves. this type of training also lets us know where our limits are and the realities of close quarters combat. lots of people think that they could "submit" someone with a blunt weapon...we'll i've tried it and lost numerous times in training. so if the day ever comes that i have to shoot someone who's coming after me with a metal pipe, i'll be able to testify to a jury why i knew my life was in danger and why that crazy bastard posed an imminent threat to my life.
cool promotional vid for the defensive tactics program we use...very realistic training
A problem, I think, is also the popularity of lawsuits against cops...if you do your job as a cop, you WILL be sued. They won't win if you're doing your job right, but it can be painful, expensive, and humiliating as you're raked over the coals for doing the right thing.
I think a lot of police hesitate to go hands-on or whip out a baton because they want to try and avoid a potential use-of-force suit, instead of immediately gaining physical control of a situation. This can let things escalate to a level which more immediate force might have contained.
Just speculating.
I know that in my short career in this sort of thing (I'm not a street cop or anything, just work in a law-enforcement/security-related field), I've found that some aggressive people try and do the whole alpha-male showoff routine prior to things getting to the breaking point, but if you simply take decisive physical action to detain/remove/subdue them without hesitating, they're often pretty overwhelmed, and it saves the situation from escalating further. They want a COPS-style drama scene, and they're shocked when all they get is a sudden calm, professional application of force.
I think a lot of police hesitate to go hands-on or whip out a baton because they want to try and avoid a potential use-of-force suit, instead of immediately gaining physical control of a situation. This can let things escalate to a level which more immediate force might have contained.
Just speculating.
I know that in my short career in this sort of thing (I'm not a street cop or anything, just work in a law-enforcement/security-related field), I've found that some aggressive people try and do the whole alpha-male showoff routine prior to things getting to the breaking point, but if you simply take decisive physical action to detain/remove/subdue them without hesitating, they're often pretty overwhelmed, and it saves the situation from escalating further. They want a COPS-style drama scene, and they're shocked when all they get is a sudden calm, professional application of force.
That's what I've been trying to say.
You lure a crazed suspect to a nearby alley and then surprise him with a wall ride. Shoot to kill.
lol...man.. you guys are on the ball with the search function tonight. 1.5 points for you because i just can't give you the full 2 points that silver got from recalling a 2003 debate.
i need to reshoot that spot w/ the new po-po bike and uniform. btw, my p2 in that pic was stolen 2 weeks ago. i got a haro singlespeed thread eight for pretty cheap to replace it though.
then i crashed on it at the skatepark on saturday and dislocated my shoulder 
i need to reshoot that spot w/ the new po-po bike and uniform. btw, my p2 in that pic was stolen 2 weeks ago. i got a haro singlespeed thread eight for pretty cheap to replace it though.
then i crashed on it at the skatepark on saturday and dislocated my shoulder 
hmm...now there's a good idea...D
So how would you rather see police use-of-force policy phrased?
Should officers not be able to use deadly force against a deadly threat?
-MD
Police should wear vests made of kittens. No one would hurt a kitten.
i'm stealing that for my sig
I was thinking an electro-vest.
Because a guy hitting you with a pipe would be funny.
Because his hair would smoke. And he would look surprised
You can't use puppies. What happens if you encounter Michael Vick?
I would have to do a lot of research before I answered that question....Cops in other countries aren't even armed so I'm sure there is a solution out there...I was more commenting on all the folks who were bitching about procedures but do nothing about it...D
Which country's police force is not armed? England? Japan? Sweden? (btw, I believe England and Japan are both arming their police now).
I hate solutions which compare countries without the diversity and turmoil which the US possesses to the US.
and in denver, gittin' it done:
Suspect killed in gunfight at DUI checkpoint
as my wife sez: "good; save the taxpayers' money" (she used to work at arapahoe co jail, & most likely would have in-processed the recently departed)
Suspect killed in gunfight at DUI checkpoint
as my wife sez: "good; save the taxpayers' money" (she used to work at arapahoe co jail, & most likely would have in-processed the recently departed)