Does Police protocol encourage police to kill anyone brandishing a "weapon?"

Originally posted by CosmicCitizen
reply to post by CosmicCitizen

Hidden weapons


Cell Phons Gun


The average deadly force encounter happens in the blink of an eye. Viewing video that shows a situation, and then developing an opinion off that video, does not mean the person is familiar with how this line of work works.

A person is approximately 25 feet away from you with a knife in their hand. Would you be justified in shooting that individual if he refuses to comply with orders to drop the knife?


How about if the person is walking at you with a belt buckle?


How about if the guy is walking towards you with a pen in his hand?


What if the person has a wallet in their hand?


What of the elderly person has a cane?


How about a book?


You sure thats a knife?


She only has a lipstick container in her hand, shes safe.


The guy has a cigarrette and lighter in hand, no worries.


I can continue but you get the idea. Almost all of the objects above are items that can kill from a distance, even a golfclub. When we point a weapon and give verbal commands, its not because we are over reacting, but because we want to go home and back to our families at the end of the night. All it takes is being complacent on one occasion and thats it, another statistic and entry on the Officer down memorial page.

The number of items that are converted into ranged weapons, from items that are everyday non ranged items is staggering. Law abiding citizens dont think about these types of things, because their mindset is not to break the law. Criminals on the other hand will use items in such a manner, that if they have brief officer contact, they wont be discovered with a weapon.

Just food for thought.

Originally posted by SirMike
reply to post by WJjeeper

 

Easy, I charge you with resisting: Resisting or obstructing a peace officer, firefighter, or correctional institution employee. A person who knowingly resists or obstructs the performance by one known to the person to be a peace officer, firefighter, or correctional institution employee of any authorized act within his official capacity commits a Class A misdemeanor

And I cant tell you how many time I have heard "honest .. its not pot ... its just a cigarette". I could care less if people get high, just don’t do it behind the wheel of a car.

Granted, there are easier ways to get people out of the car. I had a guy who gripped the steering wheel and wouldn’t let go, strong grip too, so I began flicking his ear until he took his hands off the wheel to swat at me.

An LEO tells you to do something, then do it. If you think you were violated somehow, get a lawyer, call the ACLU or file a complaint. There are channels to go through, even if you find them expedient.

roflmao, thats funny as #, flicking his ear, reminds of having to babysit! dont get me wrong, i know a lot of cops, i only know a few Peace Officers though. i have never resisted arrest except once in 8th grade. i have never been arrested after that either. i AM a respectful individual, but please think about this. in the above situation- i really have no marijuana, and the only crime i DID commit was speeding and not agreeing to the enforcement of arbitrary statutory law.. as a person, wouldnt you feel bad about inflicting pain on someone along with ruining their day and portion of their life for no REAL reason? not only that but you would be putting your life and safety at risk for nothing, while wasting taxpayer money to go through the process of a trial.You wouldnt cut someone slack after you just beat the holy # out of em for no reason?
I have been stopped by the cops and they have smelled marijuana, i usually tell the truth too- yes sir, i have some marijuana but i have not ingested any in the last 4 hours. even if im high off my ass they dont screw with me about it (i do have a medical doctors reccomendation). I understand your doing a job, but do you truly understand how much # you guys cause in an innocent persons life? or do you just not care?

reply to post by WJjeeper


Out of curiosity, when a person violates the law, why is it the cops fault they did?

Originally posted by Xcathdra
reply to post by CosmicCitizen

 

As an officer

The reason for law enforcement involvement is almost always because a situation has devolved to a point where rational thought has left the scenario, laws have been violated, and possible injuries to others has occured.

The reason for involvement is because of the UNCONSTITUTIONAL DRUG LAWS, UNCONSTITUTIONAL GUN LAWS,UNCONSTITUTIONAL TAX LAWS,UNCONSTITUTIONAL PROSTITUTION LAWS,ETC, 75% of the people
in prison are there for drug related crimes including, theft,prostitution and drug related violence.
ITS A POLICE EPIDEMIC.
And the real crimes of rape,violence,murder,fraud,political corruption are given little notice
because there is no HO's and no BLO.


1 in 4 US adults now have a criminal record

how do you not shoot to kill? if your firing a weapon you better be ready to kill and you also better be ready to burn for it

reply to post by RRokkyy


Riight.. because cops gear up, head to their patrol cars and decide that they are going to go house to house to find drugs. Has it ever occured to you people that the bulk of our drug encounters is from 911 calls or traffic stops that that had nothing to do with the drugs in the first place?

Care to point out in the Constitution where it says drugs are legal? Care to point out in the Constitution where it says they cannot tax people?

While I share some of your concerns, the use of drugs is a personal choice, not forced. Maybe it would be beneficial to get stoned out of your gord in the privacy of your own home and not while driving around, riding around, or doing it in public? Maybe if people werent stoned out of their gord they would not be pulled over for a traffic violation.

Education is important, if for no other reason than it would allow people like you to make a valid argument, instead of arguing the police are to blame for these problems. The Police DO NOT, nor have we ever, had anything to do with prosecuting an individual for a law violation. Its nowhere near our job description. We investigate, and send a report to the PA, who then reviews it and decides if THEY are going to prosecute as is, change the charge to something lesser or higher based on the information and current case law, offer a plea deal, accept a plea deal from the defense. Then its up to the JUDGE who decides on jail time and fines if any.

NOT the Police.

A law is not unconstitutional because you dont agree with it. When I make an arrest for drug possession, I am not enforcing federal law, but state law, where if I am not mistaken the US Constitution says any authority not specifically granted to the FEderal Government, is reserved to the States.

So again, how are these things unconstitutional?

Originally posted by mrjones7885
how do you not shoot to kill? if your firing a weapon you better be ready to kill and you also better be ready to burn for it

Because LEO's dont shoot a person in an effort to kill them, but shoot in an effort to stop the threat. If we "shoot to kill" and the shot doesnt kill the person, are they then allowed to sue because we didnt kill them when we are "supposed" to?

Originally posted by Xcathdra
reply to post by WJjeeper

 

Out of curiosity, when a person violates the law, why is it the cops fault they did?

at what point did i mention fault? i asked if he felt bad for enforcing arbitrary laws laws upon truly innocent citizens, which in turn can ruin a life and turn a productive member of society into a "criminal". we all know once you get in the sytem, you dont get out.

Originally posted by WJjeeper

Originally posted by Xcathdra
reply to post by WJjeeper

 

Out of curiosity, when a person violates the law, why is it the cops fault they did?

at what point did i mention fault? i asked if he felt bad for enforcing arbitrary laws laws upon truly innocent citizens, which in turn can ruin a life and turn a productive member of society into a "criminal". we all know once you get in the sytem, you dont get out.

edit on 24-3-2011 by WJjeeper because: typo

From this portion right here -

Originally posted by WJjeeper

I understand your doing a job, but do you truly understand how much # you guys cause in an innocent persons life? or do you just not care?

We are not the ones who screw over a persons life, as we are not the ones who force a person to violate the law. Going further, while LEO's enforce the law, we dont prosecute the crime, which means we have nothing to do with what the person is charged with, if the PA decides to go with a different charge that is higher or lesser, to offer a plea, accept a plea from the defense.

Even then its up to the judge to decide if there ios jail time or fines involved, not the police.

The Police have nothing to do with people having their lives ruined, especially when people make their own decisions.

reply to post by Xcathdra

If you double or triple tap someone center mass at close range with .40 s&w hp (or 9mm or .45acp for that matter) you are defacto shooting to kill. To say you are not is like me going hunting for pheasant and saying I am just shooting to knock them down for the dogs to get and not shooting to kill the birds. Not to put shooting a human on the same level as bird hunting but.....you get the point.

reply to post by holtdani


like the police?

Originally posted by CosmicCitizen
reply to post by Xcathdra

 

If you double or triple tap someone center mass at close range with .40 s&w hp (or 9mm or .45acp for that matter) you are defacto shooting to kill. To say you are not is like me going hunting for pheasant and saying I am just shooting to knock them down for the dogs to get and not shooting to kill the birds. Not to put shooting a human on the same level as bird hunting but.....you get the point.

I understand what you are saying, but there is a difference. We dont shoot to kill because that is not what our ultimate goal is. We do no shoot to wound because that is not what our ultimate goal is.

Our primary goal is to stop the threat. If we shoot someone center mass 3 times, it does not mean that person will die, and many people have survived those types of shots. It also does not mean the person will go down either, even more so if the person has body armor on, or our bullets fail (which they do).

Our goal is to shoot in an effort to stop the threat. Its possible we can shoot and miss, and the person decides to drop the weapon and surrender.

Hence, we dont shoot to kill, we shoot to stop the threat.

As a side note, when you go hunting, you are shooting to kill, and most hunters know where to aim to drop the animal in one shot. The reason LEO's shoots center mass, is because when you look at the human body, its the largest, and safest, area to aim for to:
A - Hit the person
B - avoid sending rounds downrange that could hit an onnocent bystander.

Originally posted by Xcathdra

Originally posted by WJjeeper

Originally posted by Xcathdra
reply to post by WJjeeper

 

Out of curiosity, when a person violates the law, why is it the cops fault they did?

at what point did i mention fault? i asked if he felt bad for enforcing arbitrary laws laws upon truly innocent citizens, which in turn can ruin a life and turn a productive member of society into a "criminal". we all know once you get in the sytem, you dont get out.

edit on 24-3-2011 by WJjeeper because: typo

From this portion right here -

Originally posted by WJjeeper

I understand your doing a job, but do you truly understand how much # you guys cause in an innocent persons life? or do you just not care?

We are not the ones who screw over a persons life, as we are not the ones who force a person to violate the law. Going further, while LEO's enforce the law, we dont prosecute the crime, which means we have nothing to do with what the person is charged with, if the PA decides to go with a different charge that is higher or lesser, to offer a plea, accept a plea from the defense.

Even then its up to the judge to decide if there ios jail time or fines involved, not the police.

The Police have nothing to do with people having their lives ruined, especially when people make their own decisions.


really? YOU are the ones who "enforce" the laws that screw everyone, you are the ones who go and bust people doors down at 3am for god knows what TRUE reason, you are the ones who violate constitutional amendments on a daily basis. You guys work under a very #ed system, you enforce small crimes to the fullest extent, simply to put a person in a situation that is harmful to themselves and you. you then use this as an excuse to arrest and detain said individual; knowing damn well they will be thrown in jail for what was originally an infraction. you justify the enforcement of this system, and you probably sleep just fine at night. #ing makes me sick.

Some years back I owned a small construction/remodeling company, and we decided to make a little extra money selling off some tools and equipment that we didn't need. We printed up some fliers announcing the sale, and my business partner drove around town sticking them up on telephone poles and such.

Unfortunately for him, there was a wanted fugitive who had the same name as he did (pretty common name), and when a police car got behind him and ran his plates, they thought they had found the outlaw. He was totally oblivious to their presence, but when he stopped on the side of the road to hang up a flier, staple-gun in hand, he was greeted with a lot of yelling and guns pointed his way. He went to raise his hands, confused, but still holding the staple-gun. That's when he said he heard safeties clicking off, and luckily had the presence of mind to immediately drop the staple-gun. A very tense moment followed, but they eventually figured out they had the wrong guy and let him go.

He later told me he just about sh#t his pants. I didn't blame him. I think he's lucky they didn't gun him down on the spot.

Originally posted by WJjeeper
really? YOU are the ones who "enforce" the laws that screw everyone,

They are the ones who violate the law

Originally posted by WJjeeper
you are the ones who go and bust people doors down at 3am for god knows what TRUE reason,

Grasping at straws I see, which is to say you are lumping ALL law enforcement into the same camp, regardless of how ridiculus it is. If you want, I can lump you in with all criminals or woul that be just as absurd?

Originally posted by WJjeeper
you are the ones who violate constitutional amendments on a daily basis.

From a FEderal standpoint I am required to comply with 42 USC 1983. Aside from that, I do NOT enforce federal law, but State and Local, so please explain to me how I am violating the Constitution, especially when it says and authority not granted to the FEderal Government, is reserved to the States?

Originally posted by WJjeeper
You guys work under a very #ed system, you enforce small crimes to the fullest extent, simply to put a person in a situation that is harmful to themselves and you.

Again, we dont put anyone into any situations. The people we are forced to deal with have placed themselves into that situation. Contrary to popular belief, I cant just stop a person for no reason and shake them down. Contrary to popular belief, if I have no grounds to make contact with a civilian, that civilian is within their rights, and free to exercise that right, by walking away and ignoring me.

Enforcing a law and prosecuting a law are 2 completely different issues, please learn them then make your argument again.

Originally posted by WJjeeper
you then use this as an excuse to arrest and detain said individual; knowing damn well they will be thrown in jail for what was originally an infraction. you justify the enforcement of this system, and you probably sleep just fine at night. #ing makes me sick.

I think the reason this makes you sick is because you are woefully ignorant on how the system works, what your rights are under the FEdreral Constitution and the State Constitution, the mindset that law enforcement is part of the judicial system, etc.

If I catch a person with less than 35grams of Marijuana, they get a citation. Do they go to jail? Depends on the overall situation. Generally speaking enforcement of municipal ordinance does not require us to lock a person up. technically speaking, I am not required to arrest a person who just killed 3 people. Contrary to popular belief, I can arrest a person, who is then charged, tried, convicted and sentenced to death without ever reading a person their Miranda warnings.

I dont mind people having issues with the system. I do take exception though when the argument is based on nonesense and lack of education about how the system works.

Please explain to me whats unconstitutional about our job and what we enforce, and please cite your sources as well as giving me a valid argument, and not because you say it is.

Look up "Use of force model". Answers all your questions.

sorry- i have trouble with these damn quote things

"They are the ones who violate the law"-

you choose to enforce these arbitrary laws in trade for financial compensation.


"Grasping at straws I see, which is to say you are lumping ALL law enforcement into the same camp, regardless of how ridiculus it is. If you want, I can lump you in with all criminals or woul that be just as absurd?"

you would like to lump all "criminals" together wouldnt you? As said before, i dont respect LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS or the laws they enforce, i respect PEACE OFFICERS.

"From a FEderal standpoint I am required to comply with 42 USC 1983. Aside from that, I do NOT enforce federal law, but State and Local, so please explain to me how I am violating the Constitution, especially when it says and authority not granted to the FEderal Government, is reserved to the States?"

i wouldnt expect your pig ass to actually know what the constitution says and doesnt say- read this

The Fourth Amendment (Amendment IV) to the United States Constitution is the part of the Bill of Rights which guards against unreasonable searches and seizures, along with requiring any warrant to be judicially sanctioned and supported by probable cause. It was adopted as a response to the abuse of the writ of assistance, which is a type of general search warrant, in the American Revolution. Search and arrest should be limited in scope according to specific information supplied to the issuing court, usually by a law enforcement officer, who has sworn by it (the constitution).

In Mapp v. Ohio, 367 U.S. 643 (1961), the Supreme Court ruled that the Fourth Amendment applies to the states by way of the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

Yes, Due process clause... maybe you should read the law Mr. "LEO"



"Again, we dont put anyone into any situations. The people we are forced to deal with have placed themselves into that situation. Contrary to popular belief, I cant just stop a person for no reason and shake them down. Contrary to popular belief, if I have no grounds to make contact with a civilian, that civilian is within their rights, and free to exercise that right, by walking away and ignoring me."

but then im not complying with a "police investigation" and therefore am obstructing justice. cant talk you way out of that one. what police investigation? you know, you saw me doing that one illegal thing and i just kept walking away- obstructing justice.

"Enforcing a law and prosecuting a law are 2 completely different issues, please learn them then make your argument again."

did i say anything about LEOs prosecuting individuals?


"Contrary to popular belief, I can arrest a person, who is then charged, tried, convicted and sentenced to death without ever reading a person their Miranda warnings."

im sure Internal Affairs would love to hear about that.could i get your badge number please?

Originally posted by g146541
the badge is usually for the good.
Not always but sometimes.

that's not very
reassuring.

Originally posted by WJjeeper
you choose to enforce these arbitrary laws in trade for financial compensation.

As any person is financially compensated for doing their jobs.

Originally posted by WJjeeper
you would like to lump all "criminals" together wouldnt you? As said before, i dont respect LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS or the laws they enforce, i respect PEACE OFFICERS.

I see once again your lost.

Originally posted by WJjeeper
i wouldnt expect your pig ass to actually know what the constitution says and doesnt say- read this

Apprently you have no clue what the constitution says or how it works.

Originally posted by WJjeeper
The Fourth Amendment (Amendment IV) to the United States Constitution is the part of the Bill of Rights which guards against unreasonable searches and seizures, along with requiring any warrant to be judicially sanctioned and supported by probable cause. It was adopted as a response to the abuse of the writ of assistance, which is a type of general search warrant, in the American Revolution. Search and arrest should be limited in scope according to specific information supplied to the issuing court, usually by a law enforcement officer, who has sworn by it (the constitution).

And the 4th amendment applies to the Government, and not the individual. The 4th amendement also has exceptions to it, which would be consent to search, contraband in plain sight, exigent circumstances and a warrant. Its also allowable to take action to seize evidence to prevent its destruction prior to securing a search warrant. Once secured, we are required to stop what we are doing and await that warrant.

If you are going to quote the constitution, then please quote it and not add your interpretation of it. I also suggest you learn what else is allowed under the 4th amendment.

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Originally posted by WJjeeper
In Mapp v. Ohio, 367 U.S. 643 (1961), the Supreme Court ruled that the Fourth Amendment applies to the states by way of the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

Yes, Due process clause... maybe you should read the law Mr. "LEO"

Reading and understanding are 2 different things.. You apparently can read, but your understanding / comprehension skills are lacking. The 4th amendment applies to the states, however not the individual, but the government. As I stated above, there are exceptions to the 4th amendment.

However if you want to go with a plaintext reading of the Constitution then you can be the one to e3xplain to black people why they only count as 3/5 of a person.

Originally posted by WJjeeper
but then im not complying with a "police investigation" and therefore am obstructing justice. cant talk you way out of that one. what police investigation? you know, you saw me doing that one illegal thing and i just kept walking away- obstructing justice.

Hmmm.. if there is no investigation, there is no obstructing justice or hindering prosecution. Again, either learn the law and how it works, or keep quiet since you are now making a fool out of yourself.

Originally posted by WJjeeper
did i say anything about LEOs prosecuting individuals?

When you went on your rant about leo's screwing innocent people over and forcing them to have a criminal record, you did.

Originally posted by WJjeeper
im sure Internal Affairs would love to hear about that.could i get your badge number please?

And internal affairs would laugh you out of the office.

Miranda is only required when a person is in custody and being asked guilt seeking questions. Quit watching TV and take some time to learn how your government operates, both at the FEderal and State/local level, as well as how the Constitution works and how its applied, and what you can and cannot do while being detained by law enforcement for a valid reason.

Maybe then you can come back and make an argument that is not absurb, serving no other prupose than to reinforce to the rest of the world that Americans are stupid because they dont know how their own government / laws work.

As a side note, if you want to quote something you place left bracket [ the word quote then right bracket ] before the section you are quoting, and at the end you place left bracket forward slash / the word quote then right bracket. If your not following that part, just click quote to this post, and you can see how I quoted your segments for an easier visual aid. If I actually place it here, it wont show.

Originally posted by Xcathdra
reply to post by RRokkyy

 

Riight.. because cops gear up, head to their patrol cars and decide that they are going to go house to house to find drugs. Has it ever occured to you people that the bulk of our drug encounters is from 911 calls or traffic stops that that had nothing to do with the drugs in the first place?

Care to point out in the Constitution where it says drugs are legal? Care to point out in the Constitution where it says they cannot tax people?

While I share some of your concerns, the use of drugs is a personal choice, not forced. Maybe it would be beneficial to get stoned out of your gord in the privacy of your own home and not while driving around, riding around, or doing it in public? Maybe if people werent stoned out of their gord they would not be pulled over for a traffic violation.

Education is important, if for no other reason than it would allow people like you to make a valid argument, instead of arguing the police are to blame for these problems. The Police DO NOT, nor have we ever, had anything to do with prosecuting an individual for a law violation. Its nowhere near our job description. We investigate, and send a report to the PA, who then reviews it and decides if THEY are going to prosecute as is, change the charge to something lesser or higher based on the information and current case law, offer a plea deal, accept a plea deal from the defense. Then its up to the JUDGE who decides on jail time and fines if any.

NOT the Police.

A law is not unconstitutional because you dont agree with it. When I make an arrest for drug possession, I am not enforcing federal law, but state law, where if I am not mistaken the US Constitution says any authority not specifically granted to the FEderal Government, is reserved to the States.

So again, how are these things unconstitutional?

edit on 24-3-2011 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

When you stop believing in the inalienable rights of the people you cease to be human.
This country was founded on that principle of inalienable rights and the idea of freedom.
If you dont have the basic freedom of your own body then you are a slave.
The collecting of taxes to fund Unconstitutional Undeclared Wars of Aggression like the Vietnam
Conflict in which 5,000,000 ( five million is no misprint) southeast Asians were murdered makes those taxes illegal.
Of course you are only following the orders of those in power.

"The enumeration in the Constitution of certain rights shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people." That's the 9th Amendment, this lays out that whole idea of rights existing apart from the Constitution. And then we have: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." That's the 10th Amendment and that has to do with delegation of powers and the idea of limited government.

www.druglibrary.org...

Your position is the states can do anything they want. They can make tobacco,alcohol, coffee illegal and
impose any sentence on users. That is an absurd position. It is your rationalization of your guilt.