Time to disarm our cops?

originally posted by: TorqueyThePig
a reply to: Xeven

Do you carry your weapon off of your property? Work, shopping, etc.

No not unless I am hunting which I do not do much anymore. I am not against law enforcement in anyway. Have a deep respect for those in the profession including my deceased brother. I am for safer and smarter use of lethal force by law enforcement.

Taking of a life is probably the worst possible thing one human can do to another. It should only happen with just cause. Ending the existence of someone should be done only when they have done something or will do something or highly likely will do something to end the existence of others. Like terrorists, armed robbers etc...not mean looking scary looking guys walking down the street.

Cops can get into physical altercations with people who might never harm anyone, such as a drunk, but the existence of the cops gun on scene can escalate a physical altercation into the death of someone due to police officer fearing the person might take it from them and use it or a drunk attempting to take it. Fear is not a good reason to kill someone. Remove the gun from the equation and you just have a fight between a police officer and a drunk to deal with rather than a funeral. Yes I know it is not always so cut and dry as my description but I am just showing how otherwise harmless person can end up dead due to gun being brought into a situation where it is not needed.

a reply to: Xeven

Down here in Memphis,we constantly have cops committing acts of rape,robbery,murder-and getting away with just a slap on the wrist.
They need to be tried and prosecuted and thrown in the general pop. in prison just like the rest of us.
I agree-take their guns away and see how long they continue to try to act like "bad asses".

a reply to: Xeven


Beat Cops should be Allowed to Carry ONLY Non Lethal Arms . Rubber Bullets , Electro Shock Weapons , to name a few . S.W.A.T. Team Police should be Allowed to Carry Lethal Weapons Only as a " Last Resort " to Apprehending Violent Criminals . That would Never happen though , so your Proposal is just Unrealistic in this Day and Age I am Affraid.........

a reply to: Xeven

Shoulds are useless really for most issues, but if you want to talk in moral absolutes, feel free. It makes sense to me that local police need to be armed to deal with violent criminals, but it makes no sense for them to be armed well enough to start a war if they so chose to. I think the real issue that is most commonly abused is the use of tasers. They were supposed to be an alternative to lethal force and now police use them to encourage compliance for even very benign issues like protestation. In my opinion any use of a taser outside of the confines of a life-threatening situation qualifies as torture.

a reply to: Nechash
Everything that I've read so far is missing the point! Cops are armed because it's a hostile environment out there just like a combat zone. They, in all probability, have PTSD just like soldiers but rather than serving a year in a combat zone they serve years. They are under sever stress continuously.

The solution is not to disarm them but to hire more of them so they'll have more time off and more vacation. They spend their days off in court and have little time to unwind. It's very difficult to see rapes, murders and endless domestic violence cases and not be affected in some way.

Can someone explain to me me why one black kid shot by a cop can cause riots and 20 black kids murdered in Chicago goes unnoticed. Does this sound stupid or what?

a reply to: crazyewok

There is another thread on ATS about the UK cops NOW carrying guns, and was asking why?

The answer in both countries is the same. The criminals will always have access to guns. And as long as they do? I will have mine at the end of my fingertips...and not a phone to the police station 3 miles away.

It is also the self-defense thing too. I do agree some cops...just like maybe I would...misjudge a situation and use deadly force. We can train, and study, and practice at the range.

But we never know what can set people off ...cops and everyone esle. And thats not the gun's fault.

a reply to: Nechash

Tasers were NEVER designed to be an alternative to lethal force!

The only and I repeat only time a Taser is even considered a viable option during a lethal force situation would be with a person weilding a blunt force type weapon or a knife.

Even then unless the officer with a Taser has another one covering him with a firearm the Taser would not and should not be used.

Please do not pass that false information around.

originally posted by: Nechash
a reply to: Xeven

Shoulds are useless really for most issues, but if you want to talk in moral absolutes, feel free. It makes sense to me that local police need to be armed to deal with violent criminals, but it makes no sense for them to be armed well enough to start a war if they so chose to. I think the real issue that is most commonly abused is the use of tasers. They were supposed to be an alternative to lethal force and now police use them to encourage compliance for even very benign issues like protestation. In my opinion any use of a taser outside of the confines of a life-threatening situation qualifies as torture.

There's reasonably compelling evidence that arming up the cops causes one-upsmanship among criminals. The 'drug war' is the main culprit, allowing liberties and privacy to be run over by cops looking for 'big scores', invading the wrong houses to find caches. If they break down the wrong door, they won't even replace it.

Disarm cops, stop the useless durg war and allow law abiding citizens to arm themselves and you'll find a continued decrease in violent crime everywhere.

The anti-firearms people talk about wanting to kill gun owners. That's evidence of mental health issues.

The politicians lie, stating that they are for firearm control, yet they have their own armed protection details.

Back it up, tone it down and things will improve.

originally posted by: TorqueyThePig
a reply to: Nechash

Tasers were NEVER designed to be an alternative to lethal force!

The only and I repeat only time a Taser is even considered a viable option during a lethal force situation would be with a person weilding a blunt force type weapon or a knife.

Even then unless the officer with a Taser has another one covering him with a firearm the Taser would not and should not be used.

Please do not pass that false information around.

That is correct. The Taser is not meant to take the place of a gun. There are definite uses for the Taser and most police departments have strict guidelines/rules of engagement for their use.

What I don't understand is why they have been used on unarmed kindergarteners and elderly persons.

Having through about this my idea is something that is sound and has validity to it.

Do not disarm the police, but at the same time make Internal affairs a separate office of the police. These are people, who are trained, by the same people who train the cops, but their training takes a different form, it is one where they have to undergo rigorous psych evaluations, and are held to a different standard, where they are a branch of the federal marshals office. Make it, as I stated, they are separated from the police department, having 0 affiliations from such organizations, with full policing power, to go after bad cops, to investigate and look at all police activities, with complete anominity. That means that the police are not allowed to know who the investigator is who will make the call, if it needs to go to trial or not. Also there needs to be a law in place that if an officer is guilty of misconduct, that he breaks the law, he loses everything, his job, his pension, and that as part of his penalty, his possessions are sold to make reparations to the victims of their crimes and misconduct. And that they suffer the max penalty under the law.

a reply to: buddah6

That as interesting point. As cops we generally work 20-30 years. 25 at my department.

I have been doing it for about 10 years now. I receive less than two weeks of vacation every year. That is NOT an exagerration.

It is also true that we spend a fair amount of our days off in court or working an overtime detail just to make ends meat. Contrary to popular belief the salaries collected by officers in states such as California and NY are the exception and most certainly not the norm.

Even when I am off I have to step in to take care of a situation if it arises. It does not happen very often but it absolutely does.

It is sometimes difficult for officers to leave the job at work. We pretty much are not allowed to.

As far as PTSD I can kind of understand that. While I have never shot anyone I have been shot at. I have seen numerous dead bodies ranging anywhere from decapitations, eviscerations, hangings, gun shots, stabbings etc. Sometimes they are children, one time it was a deputy who made a stop in my assigned patrol area. Sometimes the corpses are decomposed and sometimes they are in pieces.. It really does take a toll on you mentally. And sometimes I ABSOLUTELY see them when I lay my head down to sleep.

One thing I can truly say that has given me a small degree of PTSD is last summer when I pulled a guy off of the railing of an 8 story building. When I made contact with the man he looked at me and said you have to let me go. After saying that he turned around and straddled the balcony attempting to jump.

I quickly grabbed him and attempted to pull him back over the railing. I am pretty strong and he was not very heavy (150lbs) so I had a pretty good hold. However he began to try to pull off of me so I would drop him. In the process my body at the waistline began to bend over the railing. I truly thought we were both going over and coming to a sudden stop on the pavement below. Whether it was him pulling me over or the railing breaking (I am 240lbs) I was sure that my time was up.

Luckily my backup arrived and helped me pull the man back over. Even after pulling him over he continued to fight us. We were eventually able to subdue him with no harm. His wife and daughter were on scene when this occurred. They were extremely greatful.

I never had a fear of heights. Now I am absolutely terrified of stepping near a ledge. The thing I dislike most though is there are times when I will be sitting on the couch and the incident will "flash before my eyes." When this occurs the only thing different is the fact that the railing breaks and we go over. It usually makes me jump forward. I don't like it.

The thing is if you are an officer in any kind of decent sized city (50,000 +) you experience things like this on a fairly regular basis. For decades. There is no way that does not affect the human psyche.

a reply to: sdcigarpig

Well if there is an allegation of a serious crime an outside agency not affilated with the department that has arrest powers does conduct an investigation. They also do so when an officer involved shooting occurs.

For example in Florida if I was accused of a crime or involved in any kind of shooting the Florida Department of Law Enforcement (FDLE) will conduct an investigation.

The department that I work for will also conduct an investigation but it is generally for violations of standard operating procedures.

Generally speaking if FDLE finds me guilty or in the wrong so will my department.

If I am found guilty I will be fired, stripped of my certification and face whatever criminal charges the judicial system decides to hand out.

If an officer is fired for committing some kind of crime generally their pension is lost. I cannot speak for every situation but I know that is usually the standard operating procedure.

What I would like to see is a joint investigation done by an outside agency and a civilian oversight group. However that civilian oversight group needs to fully understand policing. I say that because upon reading a lot of comments on ATS I can see that many people have no clue about proper policing procedures. They think they do, but they don't.

TorqueyThePig's guide to better policing and community relations.

1. Better pay to attract better candidates. Also so many don't have to work OT just to make ends meat.
2. Mandatory body cameras for all officers
3. Civilian oversight
4. Legalization of a certain plant
5. 99% of no knock warrants eliminated. (Only reserved for the most serious situations)
6. Emotional survival and coping techniques taught more often and taken more seriously.

7. (This would be an extreme one and I am not sure it really is fair or it would work) To be an officer in a city you have to either live there or be from there.

Disarm? More like disband.

a reply to: butcherguy

Agreed completely. When I hear a story of a young chld or an elderly person being tasered I cringe. I have been a cop for about a decade and have NEVER tasered a person.

I am a big guy with a martial arts background so I do not mind going hands on though.

I expect that the taser is being utilized more frequently and in improper ways because of two reasons.

1. Like I previously stated the quality of officer being hired and trained has declined. This is creating officers that don't know how to properly judge a situation thus resulting in improper usage.

2. Say an officer goes to arrest a person, they fight and in the process the officer falls and breaks a bone. In my department the officer would only receive 50% of their salary on disability. From talking to friends in other departments the pay out is similar. So for example that would be $1000 for the month if I was injured. I am a somewhat frugal person and I know I could barely survive on that.

I think a lot of officers don't want to go hands on because the taser is easier, with less risk to themselves both physically and financially.

I am not saying that is the right way to think or act but it is human nature.

a reply to: BasementWarriorKryptonite

So you feel that American society would continue on without issue without any police?

a reply to: TorqueyThePig

1. Better pay to attract better candidates. Also so many don't have to work OT just to make ends meat. 2. Mandatory body cameras for all officers 3. Civilian oversight 4. Legalization of a certain plant 5. 99% of no knock warrants eliminated. (Only reserved for the most serious situations) 6. Emotional survival and coping techniques taught more often and taken more seriously. 7. (This would be an extreme one and I am not sure it really is fair or it would work) To be an officer in a city you have to either live there or be from there.

That is a good list.
I just wish that bad cops got 'outed' by their co-workers.
When I say bad cop, I mean a cop that breaks the law himself or allows others to break the law.
Letting a relative get away with breaking the law is wrong. Cops driving drunk with impunity is wrong. Using official means to gather information for a personal vendetta is wrong. These things happen far too often, from my personal experience.
But what can be done about it?

a reply to: butcherguy

I have given many a person a ride home after pulling them over and finding out they were drunk.

That being said an officer that does it should be punished. Like I said I agree in harsher punishment for an officer that truly violates the law.

Not all cops get away with it though. Here is an example from my county.

www.wesh.com...

That is why it is not fair to judge all police officers and departments.

I find fallacy in people that blanketly use the arguement "until you start ousting the bad cops." They are making the assumption that every department is allowing officers to get away with committing crimes. That is simply not true.

Also what am I an officer in Florida supposed to do about corruption in NY or CA? My jurisdiction does not run across state lines. The only thing I can do is speak out against corruption and offer solutions. Both things that I do. I am also a member of OathKeeprs. I am also on this site.

A lot of people never give the police credit where credit is due. It is always negative, negative, negative. Trust me if you want to find negative in anything you can do it.

a reply to: TorqueyThePig

Well, it's really not that difficult to find the negative in police. To be honest, it won't be a problem when the system finally collapses - likely in part brought on by a society so sick of being murdered by people they thought their taxes paid to protect them.

God help us all if that scenario ever does happen, though.

originally posted by: TorqueyThePig
a reply to: BasementWarriorKryptonite

So you feel that American society would continue on without issue without any police?

That would be a free ticket to every criminal out there.

I think I want the cops armed to the teeth when I call 911, they don't know what they are in for when they show up, and I am not calling unless it is absolutely necessary. If there is anything I have learned after shooting many combat handgun matches with police is this single most important thing. For the police I have met the gun is a tool, like a shovel is to a gardener. The public when owning forearms often times covet them as some kind of special possession. This is dangerous in my opinion, it is after all a tool, and nothing more.

Of course not all firearms owners in public do this but many do. I think it is a safety risk in many instances and a small segment is like this, but for police it is a tool, and I want them to have any tool they think they need.

If I call 911, don't call a judge, show up with every weapon you can get and take care of the bad guys.

Its a double.. shiot