RMK 3 #51 January 5, 2016 cvfd1399******QuoteOr things like sneak up right behind someone, shout "DON"T MOVE!!!! and then shoot them when they jump. I guess you surf the internet and watch a lot of TV. ... Florida, 2 years ago. 60 year old man in his own driveway. Fortunately, the cops shot about average for cops (like shit) and only hit him in the leg. 15 shots, two hits. There are tons of these kind of stories out there. How many shots per kill did the military get in ww2, Korea, Vietnam? I read it was somewhere around 50,000 bullets per kill.... Where do you get these odd comparisons? In wartime, the the bad guys are usually more than 10-30ft away from you when shooting."Pain is the best instructor, but no one wants to attend his classes" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cvfd1399 0 #52 January 5, 2016 It is two different situations for sure, just a shocking number I wanted to throw out there. It seems it has not gotten any better. In Iraq and Afghanistan that number has expanded to 250,000 rounds per insurgent killed. http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/world-news/us-forced-to-import-bullets-from-israel-as-troops-use-250000-for-every-rebel-killed-28580666.html Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ibx 2 #53 January 5, 2016 If you care about why this has happened I recommend the books of S.L.A. Marschall. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S.L.A._Marshall Super interesting but his work is seen by some as controversial. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cvfd1399 0 #54 January 5, 2016 Ok, will do thanks. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,465 #55 January 5, 2016 QuoteSo I'm sure you have all the relevant facts........ Which is exactly the problem with police involved shootings. It is near impossible to get the facts. Up until the prevalence of cameras, the police themselves got to make up the "relevant facts", sometimes blatantly. Sometimes just a little omissions or a slight skew to help a "brother", since the job is dangerous and you know his family and you are sure he didn't really mean to do that. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 226 #56 January 5, 2016 skycopOk. Still less than five, and I bet you read it on the internet or saw it on TV. So I'm sure you have all the relevant facts........ The only relevant fact that matters is that a cop killed a human. That should never ever happen, even if it means the life of the cop. That is the only fact that should ever matter, ever.I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,465 #57 January 5, 2016 turtlespeed***Ok. Still less than five, and I bet you read it on the internet or saw it on TV. So I'm sure you have all the relevant facts........ The only relevant fact that matters is that a cop killed a human. That should never ever happen, even if it means the life of the cop. That is the only fact that should ever matter, ever. Funny you post that, since at the current time the opposite seems to be true. The only relevant fact is that a cop shot a civilian and all you need to know is that it was justified cause somebody yelled gun and his hand was near his waistband....etc ...etc. Where we are trying to get is somewhere in the middle. Deadly force should be thoroughly investigated by a neutral party. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 226 #58 January 5, 2016 SkyDekker******Ok. Still less than five, and I bet you read it on the internet or saw it on TV. So I'm sure you have all the relevant facts........ The only relevant fact that matters is that a cop killed a human. That should never ever happen, even if it means the life of the cop. That is the only fact that should ever matter, ever. Funny you post that, since at the current time the opposite seems to be true. The only relevant fact is that a cop shot a civilian and all you need to know is that it was justified cause somebody yelled gun and his hand was near his waistband....etc ...etc. Where we are trying to get is somewhere in the middle. Deadly force should be thoroughly investigated by a neutral party. Perhaps we are looking at the wrong reform. It seems the legal system is more to blame. Maybe we should just ban all legal defense for cops. Here is a Colorado cop, and his legal gymnastics. How dare they? But, wait, in the Zimmerman/trey on case, they disallowed the text messages . . . How could they? I think we just remove the rights of the cop for any defense and you might be happy for a day.I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,465 #59 January 5, 2016 I see you have no interest in dialogue. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
normiss 851 #60 January 5, 2016 I've all but given up on that here. Apparently it's the wrong venue for dialogue. Thanks Obama. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,563 #61 January 5, 2016 QuoteI think we just remove the rights of the cop for any defense and you might be happy for a day. Why do you even bother posting anymore? I'm pretty sure I remember a time when you at least tried to present an opinion.Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mirage62 0 #62 January 5, 2016 Quote Sometimes just a little omissions or a slight skew to help a "brother", since the job is dangerous and you know his family and you are sure he didn't really mean to do that. In another post you mention (I think it was you) that all LEO shooting need to be investigated by a neutral third party. That really is a great answer, if "we the people" would pay for it. Also when they issue a fire arm to a LEO they should also issue a body cam. Again if " we the people" would pay for it. I've thought a lot about all this....I have a slanted view - my younger brother is a detective - but truthfully some of the people here seem to have never had a good experience at all with anyone in LE. OTOH I've never been treated poorly - even would I could have been. I know there are bad cops, that will never change but this position that it's just an out of control they are all doing it thing just doesn't add up. Yes - one is to many but what about the good ones? Most IMO by far are good. I replied to SkyDekker simply because occasionally we have two different views with some logic to both.....Kevin Keenan is my hero, a double FUP, he does so much with so little Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 226 #63 January 5, 2016 jakeeQuoteI think we just remove the rights of the cop for any defense and you might be happy for a day. Why do you even bother posting anymore? I'm pretty sure I remember a time when you at least tried to present an opinion. Your logic is off.I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,465 #64 January 5, 2016 QuoteYes - one is to many but what about the good ones? Most IMO by far are good Yes most are good. But I think for many people confidence in police is very low now that it has been shown how easy it has been for the bad apples to never get punished or dealt with. Quote Again if " we the people" would pay for it. Yup everything costs money. Though you have to wonder what the savings in lawsuit settlements would be. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 226 #65 January 5, 2016 SkyDekkerQuoteYes - one is to many but what about the good ones? Most IMO by far are good Yes most are good. But I think for many people confidence in police is very low now that it has been shown how easy it has been for the bad apples to never get punished or dealt with. *** Again if " we the people" would pay for it. Yup everything costs money. Though you have to wonder what the savings in lawsuit settlements would be. Very little. People would always find a way to sue them. It's a catch 22. The ones that are willing to take the risk are what you get when you have the rules you have. It doesn't make sense to become a cop now. You either are a glutton for punishment, or have control issues.I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,465 #66 January 5, 2016 QuoteVery little. People would always find a way to sue them. Willing to sue and getting multi million $ settlements or judgements are very different. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 226 #67 January 5, 2016 SkyDekkerQuoteVery little. People would always find a way to sue them. Willing to sue and getting multi million $ settlements or judgements are very different. To whom? The lawyers? BAH! Face it, no ,after what you do to limit them, the cops will always get a bad rap. Some people just can NOT abide any authority figures. With that in mind . . . If you give a mouse a cookie . . .I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JerryBaumchen 1,436 #68 January 5, 2016 Hi Sky, QuoteThough you have to wonder what the savings in lawsuit settlements would be. Not so much to wonder about; the facts are out there. This LEO cost the City of Portland millions in a settlement: http://www.wweek.com/2015/12/30/oregon-court-of-appeals-portland-must-re-hire-ron-frashour-police-officer-who-fatally-shot-aaron-campbell/ As long as they have the PBA working for them, there is little chance to actually get rid of them. Jerry Baumchen Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,070 #69 January 5, 2016 >Very little. People would always find a way to sue them. DZO's have learned that the best way to avoid lawsuits is to avoid fatal and crippling accidents. Police are no different. You're not going to get sued for shooting someone in the back if you don't shoot anyone in the back. > It doesn't make sense to become a cop now. Why not? They are safer than ever, and can apparently get away with quite a lot without facing any backlash. While prosecutions are up, still only about twelve cops a year face any charges at all for the ~800 police shootings every year - and most of those 12 are acquitted. Pretty good odds. https://www.aei.org/publication/is-there-really-a-war-on-cops-the-data-show-that-2015-will-likely-be-one-of-the-safest-years-in-history-for-police/ http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-police-idUSKCN0SK17L20151026 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mirage62 0 #70 January 5, 2016 Quote only about twelve cops a year face any charges at all for the ~800 police shootings every year - and most of those 12 are acquitted. That could be taken as a number that supports that most of the cops are doing a good job. But of course not in the current climate. 42 LEO died this year by gun fire.....some of these were shooting when they died. 776 people were killed by LEO in 2015. Of these 161 were unarmed. I get it can be better, it just isn't as bad as comments like the above are designed to make it look.Kevin Keenan is my hero, a double FUP, he does so much with so little Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,070 #71 January 5, 2016 >That could be taken as a number that supports that most of the cops are >doing a good job. Definitely. Most cops ARE doing a good job. The problem is that the small number of cops who aren't doing a good job is getting worse. Even though almost every crime statistic is down, shootings by police are going up. That's a problem that has to be addressed. http://theweek.com/speedreads/441954/fbi-violent-crime-down-but-police-killing-civilians Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Coreeece 2 #72 January 7, 2016 blue_bertQuoteLol, I'd love to see how your civil English etiquette wold fair against west side Chicago gangs - something from Monty Python I reckon. You have to be extremely stupid to think that. What? That it would be funny to see John moonlighting as a vigilante - cleaning up the streets of Chicago with his superior linguistic skills and a nightstick?Never was there an answer....not without listening, without seeing - Gilmour Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skycop 0 #73 January 8, 2016 Our armchair experts know American policing isn't dangerous, no, not at all............ http://6abc.com/news/images-released-from-ambush-shooting-of-phila-police-officer/1150918/ "Just 'cause I'm simple, don't mean I'm stewpid!" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,563 #74 January 8, 2016 It's when you make stuff up that no-one wants to listen to the rest of what you have to say.Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
normiss 851 #75 January 8, 2016 He just want to go home to his family at the end of his shift. You haven't been paying attention! STOP RESISTING!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
