Iris lilies, how are things in your hood?

[Tradd]

Sweet Jesus, Rob, the average cop isn't as much of a marksman as you would seem to believe. Many cops only shoot once a year, when they qualify with their duty weapon(s) and maybe the pistols their agency allows them to carry off-duty. Ammo is expensive (the cheapest I've found is $13/50 rounds of 9mm target rounds). Due to budget cuts, there isn't as much training as there might have been in the past. Cops often only shoot more if they're into firearms. I shoot more than the average cop.

Shooting at a kneecap on someone running at you? Danged difficult. The average "hit rate" of cops is something like 17% from the figures I've read.

Tasers don't necessarily immobilize someone.

Toxicology tests are always part of an autopsy.

Obviously, nothing said is going to change your mind. Cops are all hell bent on evil, to suppress the lower class is what I take away from your posts. Sounds to me like you would be thrilled if more riots broke out. After all, the "haves" would have their stuff/businesses destroyed and the "have nots" might get some more of the pie.

[bae]

You don't "shoot to kill" or "shoot to wound". You "shoot to stop". Handgun bullets have very poor performance, often multiple rounds are required to stop an aggressive person, often the stop doesn't occur immediately *if at all*, and you are trying to fire while under stress and avoiding being killed yourself.

Rob, I'll be happy to meet you at the Seattle Police range sometime, and run you through some drills with simulated training munitions. Guns don't work in real life like they do in the movies.

You are proposing a standard of performance that doesn't occur in real life.

I'll also show you some weapons retention drills, we can see how well you can access and deploy your taser while someone is grabbing for your gun. (Hint, most officers in-the-know carry a knife they can access with their off hand, so they can cut their assailant off the firearm, while keeping it firmly anchored in the holster with their strong-side hand.)

[gimmethesimplelife]

I'm sure they'll test for drugs.

Good. If he tests positive for something like meth, more of a clearer picture may emerge - at least in my mind - of what transpired. And I'd be a little more sympathetic to the officer involved. Rob

[gimmethesimplelife]

I just happened to think of an incident which occurred in the little town in the middle o' nowhere, where I once lived, that has practically no ethnic minorities--maybe a dozen or so individuals now; but that wasn't the case in this incident. Anyway, about 20 years ago, this local boy, who was prolly 6'4, about 280#, went on a rampage because he was mad at someone. He went to their home, and smashed the windows in their car, and barged into their house, and threatened them. After he left, the people called the police, and an officer intercepted the guy at an intersection. The guy got out of his car as the officer was getting out of his cruiser, and a confrontation ensued; Well, the cop didn't draw his gun; the big guy was not armed just BIG and HOSTILE--but the cop had this baton, that has a small handle on the side, and apparently some training in how to use it. Though the cop was considerably smaller than the "suspect", he was able to put the guy on the ground and handcuff him, simply by applying the baton across the guys knees. Or so it said in the newspaper accounts. Maybe they meant some other part of his anatomy. Ha. But, Everyone left the incident, still alive. It makes me think that the Ferguson Police, given that they apparently have to deal with belligerants MORE frequently than the small-town I was describing, could be better prepared to use non-lethal techniques to subdue individuals., in lieu of a gun as their first line of defense. This would hopefully keep the likes of certain opportunistic demagogues, as well as lawyers and the Media off their backs.

Thank you, Packy. I agree with this gist of your post here. Also about keeping the lawyers and media off their backs, too. Rob

[gimmethesimplelife]

Sweet Jesus, Rob, the average cop isn't as much of a marksman as you would seem to believe. Many cops only shoot once a year, when they qualify with their duty weapon(s) and maybe the pistols their agency allows them to carry off-duty. Ammo is expensive (the cheapest I've found is $13/50 rounds of 9mm target rounds). Due to budget cuts, there isn't as much training as there might have been in the past. Cops often only shoot more if they're into firearms. I shoot more than the average cop.

Shooting at a kneecap on someone running at you? Danged difficult. The average "hit rate" of cops is something like 17% from the figures I've read.

Tasers don't necessarily immobilize someone.

Toxicology tests are always part of an autopsy.

Obviously, nothing said is going to change your mind. Cops are all hell bent on evil, to suppress the lower class is what I take away from your posts. Sounds to me like you would be thrilled if more riots broke out. After all, the "haves" would have their stuff/businesses destroyed and the "have nots" might get some more of the pie.

Ummmm......consider me the one person on a jury who would hold everyone and everything up and question everything. That would be me in a case like this. And I don't believe all cops are bad, and I don't believe this cop started his day with the intention to kill someone, and I don't believe that all cops are hell bent on evil. Truly this statement here is true. That said, research has shown that folks in minority/lower income neighborhoods take more grief from the police and are sentenced for longer periods of time and are more often sent to jail/prison when innocent than better off folks are. This I deeply have issues with and we're talking about the loss of a life here, even if the deceased was a thug. What happened to this society's stance on rehabilitation that it once held when I was younger? Has society no compassion at all? And no, I would not be thrilled if more riots broke out - I'd be more embarrassed to be an American is what I'd be if this took place. Sad but true. Why on earth would you think I'd want riots to break out? As far as the have nots getting more of the pie, looting and rioting is not the answer, please believe me when I say I understand this.

As far as changing my mind - didn't I admit the deceased was a thug? Didn't I mention a few posts back that the authorities do have a right to state their case in court? Have you not seen some changes in my posts as more details have been revealed? Have I not said that I see huge missteps on BOTH sides? What you are seeing here in just typical lower class mistrust of the police and the legal system - I will always have that based on what I have seen in my days. BUT did I not say back during the OJ trial I sided with the prosecution? Nothing has changed there, today I would still side with the prosecution based on the evidence presented and the facts brought to light. It's always possible I may change my mind here, who knows? Based on what we know NOW, I say excessive force, especially with the militarization of the police after the death and due to the journalists being assaulted/arrested.

Consider me a breath of fresh air around here - I'm definitely one who is willing to take the unpopular stance and I'm also very true to my upbringing/class. Rob

[gimmethesimplelife]

You don't "shoot to kill" or "shoot to wound". You "shoot to stop". Handgun bullets have very poor performance, often multiple rounds are required to stop an aggressive person, often the stop doesn't occur immediately *if at all*, and you are trying to fire while under stress and avoiding being killed yourself.

Rob, I'll be happy to meet you at the Seattle Police range sometime, and run you through some drills with simulated training munitions. Guns don't work in real life like they do in the movies.

You are proposing a standard of performance that doesn't occur in real life.

I'll also show you some weapons retention drills, we can see how well you can access and deploy your taser while someone is grabbing for your gun. (Hint, most officers in-the-know carry a knife they can access with their off hand, so they can cut their assailant off the firearm, while keeping it firmly anchored in the holster with their strong-side hand.)

Tell you what, Bae - I'm applying for work next year at Olympic National Park, hoping to work the season there bartending with your state's incredible minimum wage and tips. I would spend a few days with a close friend in Seattle and then visit with another friend for a day and I'd have time to meet. If I get the job, do lets do this. I mean it.

You are right, I really know nothing about guns and weapons, and I don't have a problem admitting that. Have I not stated what took place when I was much younger and why that has turned me against guns as an adult? This is another reason it is such a big deal to me that this thug was unarmed. But no, I don't know much about guns and I do believe you do. Rob

[iris lilies]

Good. If he tests positive for something like meth, more of a clearer picture may emerge - at least in my mind - of what transpired. And I'd be a little more sympathetic to the officer involved. Rob

He's not going to test positive for meth. Maybe weed. Kids use those cigarellos things to stuff full of marijuana.

[gimmethesimplelife]

He's not going to test positive for meth. Maybe weed. Kids use those cigarellos things to stuff full of marijuana.

True...I'm told they do this in Phoenix, too. But with the video that was released, I'd understand the whole sequence of events better and see the officer's side more if he did test positive for some serious kind of drug. Meth comes to mind as it so often leads to violence in those that use it but other drugs have this effect, too. Rob

[bae]

Ummmm......consider me the one person on a jury who would hold everyone and everything up and question everything. That would be me in a case like this.

The nice thing about our jury system is that the accused is *innocent* until the jury decides he is guilty. So a lone holdout cannot convict - it generally takes the whole jury to do that.

The officer doesn't have to prove he is innocent. The prosecution has to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he was guilty. That's a pretty high burden of proof, as it should be. I don't think Twitter and Facebook work that way though.

[gimmethesimplelife]

Well, well, well.....I just googled and found out that the police in Ferguson have once again crossed the line and arrested two more journalists but let them go after two minutes and threatened one photographer with shooting him if he did not stop photographing. Uh huh. And we pay taxes for these people's pensions? And I'm supposed to be ok with this? No comprende. Also tear gas was used again and well before the midnight curfew. It seems as if this really is not going to go away and the authorities are bound and determined to make things as nasty as possible by throwing their weight around. Heaven help us as a country is all I can say. Not good and sure does not inspire much hope for the future. I'll keep plugging away and doing what I can but this makes me so ashamed of America - this is just going over the line. And what really gets me - don't these people know, on both sides actually, that their moronic behavior is going to be seen by the entire world? Heaven help this country, I think it's gone beyond mere mortals control sometimes. Such as now. Rob

PS Forgot to add that journalists claim they are being manipulated and corralled into certain set areas - this really scares me. What's going on that they don't want the world to know?