Do Many Police Officers Look Forward To Shooting a Real Person?

April 12, 2018

I realize that police practice at shooting ranges, to hone their skills. But after watching the body-cam video of what happened to this lady up the road from me, I sense that the police were excited to shoot a real person, for a change.

On Friday, Elgin police released more than 30 unedited hours of footage showing the March 12 standoff that ended with the death of a 34-year-old black woman with mental health problems.

The bodycam and dashcam footage shows police officers trying to coerce Clements out of her truck on the shoulder of an Illinois interstate. Police officers can be heard discussing tactics as to how they planned to handle her once she exited the vehicle.

Then, seconds after Clements steps out of her car, three shots ring out, killing her at the scene.

Full Article w/Body-Cam Footage (shooting at the end of video): www.theroot.com...

As expected there were protests over this incident. One of the officers is still suspended while an investigation occurs.

I wonder what percentage of law-enforcement officers look forward to one day using their gun on a live target? Maybe that varies by geographic location too. Elgin, Illinois has some pretty "radical" cops on the force. They trumped up a fake charge on me one time.

-CareWeMust

a reply to: carewemust

I'm fairly certain some of them do. They are only people and people are flawed.

People are individuals, and we are all a varied lot. I wouldn't say it's out of the realm of possibility that there are some that look forward to this, but a rational compassionate mind does not wake up one morning and say "I'm going to kill someone today with my shiny new firearm!".

People like that shouldn't be in law enforcement, imo. Apparently, we should protest tighter psychological checkups and screenings for officers.

Mental health is still not getting the proper attention and being addressed in a pro-active manner, it is still taboo. That or government doesn't care about mental health as body-bags are cheaper and easier.

Most of them, no.
Some of them, yes.
Most sign on to serve and protect.
Then you have the occasional bad apple that just wants to get away with murder.
And they do.

originally posted by: carewemust
April 12, 2018

I realize that police practice at shooting ranges, to hone their skills. But after watching the body-cam video of what happened to this lady up the road from me, I sense that the police were excited to shoot a real person, for a change.

On Friday, Elgin police released more than 30 unedited hours of footage showing the March 12 standoff that ended with the death of a 34-year-old black woman with mental health problems.

The bodycam and dashcam footage shows police officers trying to coerce Clements out of her truck on the shoulder of an Illinois interstate. Police officers can be heard discussing tactics as to how they planned to handle her once she exited the vehicle.

Then, seconds after Clements steps out of her car, three shots ring out, killing her at the scene.

Full Article w/Body-Cam Footage (shooting at the end of video): www.theroot.com...

As expected there were protests over this incident. One of the officers is still suspended while an investigation occurs.

I wonder what percentage of law-enforcement officers look forward to one day using their gun on a live target? Maybe that varies by geographic location too. Elgin, Illinois has some pretty "radical" cops on the force. They trumped up a fake charge on me one time.

-CareWeMust

Some people do have a desire to shoot people.

About 2 years ago I worked with a bloke who was trained in the Australian militree as a sniper. I was told by one of the 2IC of the business that this bloke's only dream was to go to Afghanistan so he could shoot people.

Seems the millitree worked out he was a bit of a nut case. In the end, after working with this bloke, I reckoned that what he was too.

a reply to: carewemust

i dont know about many but for sure some.
has to be.

it has to be cause cops are people and some people are #ed up.

"do you want to be a cop or do you want to appear to be a cop? it's an honest question. some people just want to appear to be a cop. gun. badge. the whole thing"

"yeah and some people just want to slam a 'n-word's head through a plate glass window"

^^^pretty much sums it up

thank you staff sgt dignam

a reply to: carewemust

Just Murican ones. Eta: in the developed west.

a reply to: carewemust

Wow she came out of that vehicle with knives in both hands. If they wanted to kill her they had plenty of opertunities along the way. There hand was forced as she charged them with a knife. As unfortunate as thus is you can tell she was working her way up to killing a cop.

a reply to: carewemust

Donno if it has been posted already, but this is also cause for concern.
US sheriff once said it was 'financially better' to kill than badly injure suspects
www.theguardian.com...


Something is waay off in police culture.

well, after watching the decline of the US since 9/11, and this place turn into a completely over reaching police state for almost the past 20 years. I'd say yeah, probably about half the cops out there now wouldn't mind seeing themselves pull the trigger on someone. the US turned the guard dogs into wolf packs hungry for blood now it seems. but that's just my opinion...

Any ‘news’ Source who says ‘mental health’ problems, history, or so on, is just bad journalism.

1) people might be able to tell that someone is ‘off’ but why, in a life or death situation why that person is off, is really not relevant
Because
2)women with mental health kills 2 cops, doesn’t change the fact that two families will have to burry family members....

Many? I would hope not.
No doubt some do.
There could be many reasons for that. Years of seeing what they have to put up with, dealing with killers, rapists etc. They may feel that to kill one of those would be doing society a favour. Then there are also the psychopath, "Judge Dredd wannabees" who somehow make it through the screening process, who should never be given a gun, who scratch things like "Make my day" into the hand grip of their weapon.
I've also known of many retired police who say, with pride, that they never once had to draw their gun in all of their years of service.
I think most police hope they don't ever find themselves in a position where they are the ones to take a life.

Think about it for a moment, life isn't a movie, people are real. Taking a life is not like eating a chocolate bar, it's something that would haunt you for the rest of your own life no matter who it was.

a reply to: carewemust

I know a number of LEO's personally, and I've actually asked this question on a couple occasions. The answer was basically this:

Some do, and some don't. Nobody actually ever "wants" to shoot someone else, not in the sense like that's why they signed up, but some do have an authoritarian mentality where they get some ego satisfaction out of controlling others through fear. These are usually the 'bad-apple' types. They believe their badge shields them from accountability for their actions. However, the vast majority of LEO's are not like this. I had one officer put it to me like this:

'There are "law enforcement" officers and then there are "peace officers", I choose to consider myself a "peace officer". My greatest professional satisfaction is helping people, not "enforcing" laws.' I thought that was a pretty good way to characterize it.

He went on to say that he'd be the first person to tell me there are indeed some ego-maniacs out there in law enforcement, guys (and gals) who get off on thumping on people, it's a power-trip thing. He said those types make him ashamed of the profession because they make everyone look bad (and they very much do). He also correctly pointed out, for every incident you hear about in the news there are probably 1,000,000 incidents where something good happened that you don't hear about...because it's not what the blood-thirsty media wants to report on.

Regarding actually shooting people, the one thing I've heard almost universally from every LEO I've ever talked to is...while some officers may "think" they don't have an issue shooting someone, when it actually happens it's a far different matter, often involving deep regret and depression after the incident. Many times officers are not even able to recover from a shooting event and leave law enforcement altogether as a result. Not all, but some. These same officers play the hard-line and bravado right up until the real thing happens and then it's a different story.

Equally, there are some who are involved in more than one incident. These types, without going into a lot of detail, are usually reassigned to a different lower or no-threat environment for liability reasons. (Reading between the lines here, the departments realize there may be a psych issue with some of these types).

That's what I can tell you I've heard on the subject.

Finally, I really like the "Peace Officer" vs. "Law Enforcement Officer" distinction. I think that really puts it into perspective for everyone.

a reply to: Flyingclaydisk
You said it much better than I did.
That's what I've heard from people I know who have been or are still in the police force too.

The only difference (here in Australia) is that the 'good cops' still like to call themselves "police man".
Yes, they're all blokes that I know so that's OK. They just want to protect the peace amongst men (& women).
The trouble, they say, comes from the ones who like to call themselves "police officers" and that's been my experience too.

originally posted by: Flyingclaydisk
a reply to: carewemust

I know a number of LEO's personally, and I've actually asked this question on a couple occasions. The answer was basically this:

Some do, and some don't. Nobody actually ever "wants" to shoot someone else, not in the sense like that's why they signed up, but some do have an authoritarian mentality where they get some ego satisfaction out of controlling others through fear. These are usually the 'bad-apple' types. They believe their badge shields them from accountability for their actions. However, the vast majority of LEO's are not like this. I had one officer put it to me like this:

'There are "law enforcement" officers and then there are "peace officers", I choose to consider myself a "peace officer". My greatest professional satisfaction is helping people, not "enforcing" laws.' I thought that was a pretty good way to characterize it.

He went on to say that he'd be the first person to tell me there are indeed some ego-maniacs out there in law enforcement, guys (and gals) who get off on thumping on people, it's a power-trip thing. He said those types make him ashamed of the profession because they make everyone look bad (and they very much do). He also correctly pointed out, for every incident you hear about in the news there are probably 1,000,000 incidents where something good happened that you don't hear about...because it's not what the blood-thirsty media wants to report on.

Regarding actually shooting people, the one thing I've heard almost universally from every LEO I've ever talked to is...while some officers may "think" they don't have an issue shooting someone, when it actually happens it's a far different matter, often involving deep regret and depression after the incident. Many times officers are not even able to recover from a shooting event and leave law enforcement altogether as a result. Not all, but some. These same officers play the hard-line and bravado right up until the real thing happens and then it's a different story.

Equally, there are some who are involved in more than one incident. These types, without going into a lot of detail, are usually reassigned to a different lower or no-threat environment for liability reasons. (Reading between the lines here, the departments realize there may be a psych issue with some of these types).

That's what I can tell you I've heard on the subject.

Finally, I really like the "Peace Officer" vs. "Law Enforcement Officer" distinction. I think that really puts it into perspective for everyone.

My father was a cop for almost 30 years. He'd basically said the same thing to me when we had these conversations. He was clear to me that the vast majority of police were just trying to do their job and meant no harm to anyone. However, as a young black male, he made sure I understood though that a small minority of cops were in fact racists. Regardless, he taught me from an early age that even if I felt I was in the right, if I am pulled over or encounter a cop (of any race or gender), I am to STFU and just do what they say. Playing Johnny Cochran on the side of the road during a police stop is not an argument you are going to win.

Most police just want to make it home to their families. This is the thing I don't think a lot of armchair pundits and SJWs don't seem to understand. A lot of cops deal with the worst scumbags and dregs of society on a daily basis. It is a tough job mentally and physically. Too many of us pass judgment while being insulated from that part of society. It is easy to say a cop shoulda, coulda, woulda when it isn't your life that is on the line.

I'll never forget seeing the pain and concern on my father's face when one of his best friends and co-workers was shot during a routine arrest when the suspect got control of the officers weapon during a scuffle. Fortunately, he lived.

Another issue I've seen is that we've got too many 'roided up, buzz cut, tough guy cops whose first response to any situation nowadays is to beat someone into submission.

I see a lot of these guys when I am driving through west side of Chicago. Usually drug enforcement, plain clothes except the bullet proof vest on outside of their t-shirt. Basically "Herc" from the wire. Granted they deal with thuggish hoodrats and gang members, but one can't help but wonder if a softer approach could be more effective.

a reply to: Edumakated

Yeah, the "Rambo" type, you can see them from a mile away sometimes. 'Roided up' is actually a great term, I've actually had some LEO's use that same term in this discussion to describe some of the bad apples.

Absolutely not. It's a last resort.

a reply to: Kromlech

Well, that's not a universally true statement. Let's break your response down into two parts...

Absolutely not.

This may be true, after the fact anyway.

It's a last resort.

While this 'should' be true, it is not always the case. Factually, shooting someone should always be a last resort. However, in practice, this is not always the case in law enforcement. Numerous cases recently have shown this where a poorly or incorrectly (or even imaginary) threat resulted in an almost immediate gunfire response by authorities.

From my personal experience - you train at something enough you'll eventually want to apply it.