It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: Boadicea
Turning a lethal weapon into a less lethal weapon is not the answer to your question.
For one, less lethal doesn't mean non-lethal. It means "less likely to kill a person than a bullet. Probably."
Two, officers already have multiple options for both less and non lethal devices.
Three, this requires an officer to stop paying attention to the threat that he's confronted with because now he or she is screwing around with their sidearm.
The answer to your question is better training, more training, coupled with better decision making and judgement in the comparatively small number of incidents where lethal force was used without justification.
originally posted by: sn0rch
a reply to: Boadicea
My first thought is, in 2015, a person searches on google for a weapons, ammunition and using "less lethal".
Shouldn't he be on a list? Cop or not?
eta - I swear the word decant means to escape also. Iused to listen to the old police scanner here before they went digital, and often it was reported that a suspect had decanted.
I cant see any reference to anything but wine. Bah, it means what I say it means.
originally posted by: Halfswede
a reply to: Boadicea
There has to be something small that could fire some kind of tranquilizer darts at close range. In most situations a 3/4 needle would penetrate any clothing. If they are armored, then it may be bullet time.
An officer could unload into a 'perceived' threat with the confidence that he has a 'wake-up' adrenaline (or whatever) shot handy as soon as they are cuffed and subdued, or EMT would be equipped for wake-up. It works on lions etc.
It isn't perfect, but I think it could save a lot of lives while adding minimal risk and equipment.
originally posted by: introvert
There are plenty of non-lethal options available already. What we need is a dialogue, a discussion in which officers and the people take a different approach.