Licensed to Kill - 'Officer Involved Shootings' is the New Euphemism for Police State Gun Violence

You have heard the term 'officer involved shooting' and you probably think it means that the police have been forced to engage a dangerous criminal with their service weapon.

In short, no, it has become the new euphemism for cavalier suspect (we hope, not always even that clear) suppression with a deadly weapon.

I think it is clear whose side these thugs are on and it is not ours. It is their side, their gang.

We are just the 'mob' to be controlled through the use of the only tool they have at their disposal, violence.

Licensed to Kill: The Growing Phenomenon of Police Shooting Unarmed Citizens

I’m not talking about a situation so obviously fraught with risk that there is no other option but to shoot. I’m talking about the run-of-the mill encounters between police and citizens that occur daily. In an age when police are increasingly militarized, weaponized and protected by the courts, these once-routine encounters are now inherently dangerous for any civilian unlucky enough to be in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Hence, it is no longer unusual to hear about an incident in which police shoot unarmed individuals first and ask questions later. This is becoming all too common. For example, on September 14th alone, there were two separate police shootings of unarmed individuals, resulting in death and/or injury to innocent individuals—and those are just the shootings that happened to make national headlines.

Later that same day, in New York’s Times Square, police officers shot into a crowd of tourists, aiming for a 35-year-old man who had been reportedly weaving among cars and loosely gesturing with his hands in his pockets. The cops missed the man, who was unarmed, and shot a 54-year-old woman in the knee and another woman in the buttock. The man was eventually subdued with a Taser.

reply to post by greencmp


The book Government of wolves referenced in the article looks interesting.

reply to post by greencmp


Well as a LEO I do agree with you. There has been an obvious increase in cases were officers have shot innocent bystanders and or unarmed individuals. In a lot of the cases IMHO a firearm should of NEVER been considered as the tool to take control of the situation.

The question is, is what is causing the increase? I will share with you my theory. I believe we are seeing a lack of qualified officers entering the profession. I also believe we are seeing a huge increase in "good" officers leaving the profession. Finally we are seeing officers with little to no experience themselves training new ofifcers.

I believe there are several reasons for this.

1. Pay. Just like a majority of people in other career fields, our pay has been cut to the bone. No raises in years, blah, blah you guys understand because you are going through it too.

2. Retirement. Although I believe that defined benefit style retirements are not only unfair to the tax payers (I pay the same taxes as everyone else), they are unsustainable. Ours have been cut to the bone and will probably be non existent in the not to distant future.

3. The constant emotional abuse that the "good" cops receive takes a toll on us. I get it on a daily basis. In person, in the media, on the radio. All the names, threats, acusations after time beat you down mentaly. They make you question as to why you continue to do your job if people hate you, if they dispise you.

So how does this cause an increase in abuse, bad shootings, corruption? Well there has been a decrease in applications from quality candidates. Departments have lowered their hiring standards quite a bit. I have seen it! You just aren't getting "good" people who want to work for the decreased pay, retirement, constant emotional abuse and stress.

Also you are seeing "good" officers leaving the profession because they are tired of being put through the emotional abuse. They are tired of being called corrupt, and immoral. Tired of the constant bashing. Couple that with the decrease in pay and retirement and they are bowing out of the profession. I am one of them. I am constantly trying to leave the profession soley for these reasons.

The cops that remain are either not as moraly sound as they should be or have been trained by other officers that have barely any experience themselves. That not only leads to an increase in police abuse cases, but cases were an officer who may be "good" but was trained by someone who didn't know what they were doing makes a mistake. For example, pulling their gun when they shouldn't or making an arrest with insufficent probable cause.

And I will stop anyone who is going to say well if the "good" cops took care of the bad cops then we wouldn't have this problem. The statement in itself is absolutely TRUE! However, I as a local city cop can only do so much. I have not witnessed any true corruption in my department. I have never had to cover for anyone. We did have an officer that was sleeping with prostitutes on duty and within days of the complaint made the ARREST and FIRED the officer. We did our job.

If something occurs in a different state there is nothing I can do about it. I do not have jurisdiction. Though I have written emails to departments when an incident occured to voice my opinion.

I am also a member of Oathkeepers and spread the word about police abuse all the time. I have done my job. Yet everyday I am emotionaly abused or accused of something.

I do want to let the blanket cop bashers know that in a way they are directly contributing to the increase in poor police candidates. In no way am I saying they are contributing to the increase in police abuses. Individuals are responsible for their own actions.

I am not looking for any kind of sympathy. Just thought I could shed some light on why I think we are seeing an increase in police abuses.

reply to post by TorqueyThePig


Just to add a few things.

Also we are seeing a huge decrease in "good" experienced officers applying for Field Training Officer (FTO) positions. They are the officers that train new officers.

Alot of departments have severely reduced or taken away the incentive pay to take on this stressful position. Therefore they are turning to officers with very little exprience to perform the training of new officers.

For example at my department we have a couple of FTO's who only have one (1) year of experience working as LEO's! FTO's should have a bare minimum 5 years experience but prefebly more. SCARY AND UNREAL!

Also a friend of mine in the military said he is seeing the same thing. A decrease in good candidates and an increase in poor candidates due to cuts and increased workloads/requirements.

reply to post by TorqueyThePig


I think it just comes down to repercussions. You hear story, after story, after story, of police and officials who never face repercussions for murder and ill actions. This is nothing new or even isolated to police. The difference is police are on home turf not in a battlefield, so of course people care more.

Here's one close to home. None of these agents were in uniform and neither was their vehicle. Also in case you don't know, TABC is the "Texas Alcoholic Beverages Commission".

www.kxan.com...

Also

www.drugwarrant.com...

There's hordes of other stories. Until police are tried for murder like everyone else who does these sort of things, people will continue to see police in a bad light, and for good reason.

reply to post by OrphanApology


Agreed! If an officer breaks the law he should be tried like everyone else. Hell I would say if found guilty levy a punishment higher than normal. An officer should know better.

Write your politicians demanding laws to be passed!

However I can't do anything about what happened in Texas. I don't live their and have no jurisdication. I can only speak out against it.

Why should I be criticized for something someone else did or didn't do?

People don't want officers to treat everyone as a potential criminal, but it's okay for them to treat every cop as being a corrupt, jack boated thug.

reply to post by TorqueyThePig


If I hear more about how police are underpaid I'm going to vomit. They negotiate like mafia and end up with 50% of general fund or more in some cases even though the cities are going bankrupt.

Why do LEOs resist transparency measures such as audio and video? If there are "good cops" as you assert, why aren't they advocating more transparency?

I believe the reason is PD's run like the mafia with a license to kill. It's a big joke for authoritarians. People literally laugh. When in doubt, take them out. Dead men are the best witnesses chuckle, chortle, dribble coffee. LEO feels bad? you die. How can this be?

Power corrupted LEO's absolutely dominate 'good" ones in numbers and with their corrupt institutional norms.

Oath keepers? Let me ask you who in their right mind would want lawless Fascists/anarchists grouping and gunning up in secret societies. Anyone who thinks oath keepers aren't KKK and police state fasicsts looking for an excuse to impose more corrupt control over people, yer nuts. Hey but I'm white, they won't come for me... ROLMFAO!

reply to post by TorqueyThePig


When you're in a position where you have a gun and have authority, the citizens have the right to hold you under intense scrutiny. It is your job to do the opposite.

In regard to getting laws changed, writing congressmen and squeaking at corrupt politicians to change laws does very little if nothing. The only thing that would change the laws is if around 4000-10000 people got together and protested paying taxes for a year or two. Follow the money.

Either way, the system isn't changing and most police officers are above the law. You rarely see police convicted of what citizens would be, even though as you said they should be held to a higher standard.

Even if there are good cops out there, many aren't good cops.

Plus the very nature of the job is criminal as most of the job description is pulling people over and issuing citations to bleed them of funds for erroneous things like having a light out.

If people think of cops more as thugs than security then that assessment would be more spot on, most of the time they do more citations and arrest people for non-violent crimes (getting arrested for public intoxication when you're walking home to avoid driving drunk is one great example I can think of) than protecting the public from super dangerous people.

InverseLookingGlass
reply to post by TorqueyThePig

 

If I hear more about how police are underpaid I'm going to vomit. They negotiate like mafia and end up with 50% of general fund or more in some cases even though the cities are going bankrupt.

Why do LEOs resist transparency measures such as audio and video? If there are "good cops" as you assert, why aren't they advocating more transparency?

I believe the reason is PD's run like the mafia with a license to kill. It's a big joke for authoritarians. People literally laugh. When in doubt, take them out. Dead men are the best witnesses chuckle, chortle, dribble coffee. LEO feels bad? you die. How can this be?

Power corrupted LEO's absolutely dominate 'good" ones in numbers and with their corrupt institutional norms.

Oath keepers? Let me ask you who in their right mind would want lawless Fascists/anarchists grouping and gunning up in secret societies. Anyone who thinks oath keepers aren't KKK and police state fasicsts looking for an excuse to impose more corrupt control over people, yer nuts. Hey but I'm white, they won't come for me... ROLMFAO!

I make $39,000 a year after being at my department for 10 years. I pay my insurance and into my retirement. I also have a degree. I said we have seen pay cuts like everyone else. I am making now what I did back in 2008. I never said we were underpaid. I said that our pay has decreased.

At our agency it is mandatory to use our audio and video. I am also a strong supporter of lapel mounted cameras for every officer being mandatory. I am on a committee trying to get it approved at my department.

I have pulled my gun many times but never killed anyone.

Do you have statistics to back up your claim that power corrputed LEO's dominate good cops?

Do you have any facts to back up your claim that Oathkeepers are KKK or facists?

reply to post by TorqueyThePig


Everyone in the US is making what they made in '89 thanks to inflation. Except bankers which are in a different category.
www.zerohedge.com...

"Do you have statistics to back up your claim that power corrputed LEO's dominate good cops?"
That's an odd question given the current state of civilian police in the US. BTW, I don't have proof that extremist Muslims dominate the "good" ones either.

"Do you have any facts to back up your claim that Oathkeepers are KKK or facists."
No, but it's a secret society so that makes sense right? Every time I catch someone claiming to be one, They are spouting Libertarian rubbish, advocating sedition or asserting white entitlement of some kind.

I don't deal in absolutes but I see the trends. This trend of power corrupted, arrogant police urgently needs to be reversed.

reply to post by TorqueyThePig


I was 13 the first time I was beaten bloody by the "boys in blue". I was 15 when I was given a bag of drugs and told "if I smoked it before I got to the precinct they would let me go". I will admit that I have not trusted a cop since then. I know there are probably good cops out there. Hell, you might even be one.

But ask yourself:
Do you really think you are going to change this guys mind? Do you think he has the ability to back up ANY of the rant he spouted against the police? Of course not. He obviously has his mind made up against the police and nothing you or anyone says will change that. Until he NEEDS the police for something, then they had better step to and make HIM a priority.

Sorry for the rant.

OrphanApology
reply to post by TorqueyThePig

 

When you're in a position where you have a gun and have authority, the citizens have the right to hold you under intense scrutiny. It is your job to do the opposite.

In regard to getting laws changed, writing congressmen and squeaking at corrupt politicians to change laws does very little if nothing. The only thing that would change the laws is if around 4000-10000 people got together and protested paying taxes for a year or two. Follow the money.

Either way, the system isn't changing and most police officers are above the law. You rarely see police convicted of what citizens would be, even though as you said they should be held to a higher standard.

Even if there are good cops out there, many aren't good cops.

Plus the very nature of the job is criminal as most of the job description is pulling people over and issuing citations to bleed them of funds for erroneous things like having a light out.

If people think of cops more as thugs than security then that assessment would be more spot on, most of the time they do more citations and arrest people for non-violent crimes (getting arrested for public intoxication when you're walking home to avoid driving drunk is one great example I can think of) than protecting the public from super dangerous people.

There is a huge difference between scrutiny and bashing an entire group. You seem smart enough to realize that.

I agree there have been many cases were an officer wasn't levied a fair punishment. If he was arrested and charged the police agency did their job. It is up to the judicial system to decide the punishment. There have been many cases involving people other than the police, where they have gotten away with minimal to no punishment for heinous crimes.

I do agree that there are some stupid laws on the books that need to be eliminated. I also believe that some departments do focus more on traffic citations and chicken crap arrests instead of the important stuff. That is wrong.

However if a person is going 50 MPH through a school zone don't you think he should be issued some kind of citation?

Also you only give one side of the example for someone being arrested for disorderly intoxication. If someone is just walking down the street and is arrested for disorderly intox it is a bad arrest. Just walking down the street does not encompass all of the elements of the crime. I know it happens I am just saying it is a bad arrest.

What if you are in the checkout line at the store and a drunk man walks up to you and begins yelling obscenties. He then walks up to the cashier and yells at her. Then he runs out of the store and starts yelling at cars passing in the parking lot. As an officer you stop him and he starts yelling at you. What do you do at that point? Remember another tax paying citizen called the police and asked for assistance in the matter.

reply to post by InverseLookingGlass


I still think the good police out weigh the bad. Then I again I don't have any facts to back that up either. I just think things would be a whole lot worse if a majority of us were bad.

That being said I do agree with you that we are seeing a negative trend emerge and it needs to be stopped. Staying on topic I gave my reasons as an active LEO as to why I believe we are seeing that trend. Instead of responding to my reasoning you went on an off topic rant.

Now that we agree on something (emerging negative trend) what do you think is causing it, and how do you think we can fix it?

Do you not agree that with decreased pay and benefits any type of job may see a decrease in good candidates?

Do you not agree that less experienced persons training new people contributes to mistakes being made in any job? Obviously mistakes in police work have more severe of an affect than forgetting a delievery of milk.

Do you not agree that constant emotional abuses may change someone's mind about wanting to work somewhere?

reply to post by 200Plus


I am so sorry you had such negative experiences with law enforcement. I hope karma catches up to who ever wronged you.

I promise if you lived in my town you wouldn't have to worry about that. Not ever agency is Chicago, NYPD, LA etc.

TorqueyThePig

OrphanApology
reply to post by TorqueyThePig

 

When you're in a position where you have a gun and have authority, the citizens have the right to hold you under intense scrutiny. It is your job to do the opposite.

In regard to getting laws changed, writing congressmen and squeaking at corrupt politicians to change laws does very little if nothing. The only thing that would change the laws is if around 4000-10000 people got together and protested paying taxes for a year or two. Follow the money.

Either way, the system isn't changing and most police officers are above the law. You rarely see police convicted of what citizens would be, even though as you said they should be held to a higher standard.

Even if there are good cops out there, many aren't good cops.

Plus the very nature of the job is criminal as most of the job description is pulling people over and issuing citations to bleed them of funds for erroneous things like having a light out.

If people think of cops more as thugs than security then that assessment would be more spot on, most of the time they do more citations and arrest people for non-violent crimes (getting arrested for public intoxication when you're walking home to avoid driving drunk is one great example I can think of) than protecting the public from super dangerous people.

There is a huge difference between scrutiny and bashing an entire group. You seem smart enough to realize that.

I agree there have been many cases were an officer wasn't levied a fair punishment. If he was arrested and charged the police agency did their job. It is up to the judicial system to decide the punish. There have been many cases were people other than the police who have gotten away with minimal to no punishment.

I do agree that there are some stupid laws on the books that need to be eliminated. I also believe that some departments do focus more on traffic citations and chicken crap arrests instead of the important stuff. That is wrong.

However if a person is going 50 MPH through a school zone don't you think he should be issued some kind of citation?

Also you only give one side of the example for someone being arrested for disorderly intoxication. If someone is just walking down the street and is arrested for disorderly intox it is a bad arrest. Just walking down the street does not encompass all of the elements of the crime. I know it happens I am just saying it is a bad arrest.

What if you are in the checkout line at the store and a drunk man walks up to you and begins yelling obscenties. He then walks up to the cashier and yells at her. Then he runs out of the store and starts yelling at cars passing in the parking lot. As an officer you stop him and he starts yelling at you. What do you do at that point? Remember another tax paying citizen called the police and asked for assistance in the matter.

Scrutiny of an entire agency or company is completely normal behavior. If police departments were competing and it was up to the consumers in a given area to choose which company to go with, they would fire most of the ones out there. That's consumer behavior, and although law states that people aren't allowed to have consumer behavior, they still do because it's natural. When so many cops over so many years, so many police departments have abused their positions...people DO blame the whole bunch. Just like if I bought rotten meat on several occasions at Wal-Mart I would stop buying meat from all Wal-Marts.

Someone just walking down the street who is intoxicated is a completely legitimate arrest. The law is on the books written that way. It happens all the time, in many different areas. Again, this is just one example. There are hundreds if not thousands of ridiculous laws on the books that people get arrested for every day. Actually more people are arrested for stupid things than serious crimes.

Someone going 50 in a school zone should be given the same citation as anyone else driving over the speed limit. There have been no significant studies proving that school zones have prevented any deaths in school age children related to these zones. It is simply an excuse to cite and bleed people for even more money. Also many school zones are set up like speed traps, this is NOT a coincidence. If anything the only school zones that should be watched more carefully is stop signs in areas where children cross.

has this taken the place of, "STOP RESISTING" that has always been what was said when placing the cuffs on, like it was the not so secret signal, for every cop there to get a lick in, or a way to cover a single cop who was about to give a beating to a suspect.

and before any one says any thing there are some good cops out there, i use to know a few and know of one now.

OrphanApology

TorqueyThePig

OrphanApology
reply to post by TorqueyThePig

 

When you're in a position where you have a gun and have authority, the citizens have the right to hold you under intense scrutiny. It is your job to do the opposite.

In regard to getting laws changed, writing congressmen and squeaking at corrupt politicians to change laws does very little if nothing. The only thing that would change the laws is if around 4000-10000 people got together and protested paying taxes for a year or two. Follow the money.

Either way, the system isn't changing and most police officers are above the law. You rarely see police convicted of what citizens would be, even though as you said they should be held to a higher standard.

Even if there are good cops out there, many aren't good cops.

Plus the very nature of the job is criminal as most of the job description is pulling people over and issuing citations to bleed them of funds for erroneous things like having a light out.

If people think of cops more as thugs than security then that assessment would be more spot on, most of the time they do more citations and arrest people for non-violent crimes (getting arrested for public intoxication when you're walking home to avoid driving drunk is one great example I can think of) than protecting the public from super dangerous people.

There is a huge difference between scrutiny and bashing an entire group. You seem smart enough to realize that.

I agree there have been many cases were an officer wasn't levied a fair punishment. If he was arrested and charged the police agency did their job. It is up to the judicial system to decide the punish. There have been many cases were people other than the police who have gotten away with minimal to no punishment.

I do agree that there are some stupid laws on the books that need to be eliminated. I also believe that some departments do focus more on traffic citations and chicken crap arrests instead of the important stuff. That is wrong.

However if a person is going 50 MPH through a school zone don't you think he should be issued some kind of citation?

Also you only give one side of the example for someone being arrested for disorderly intoxication. If someone is just walking down the street and is arrested for disorderly intox it is a bad arrest. Just walking down the street does not encompass all of the elements of the crime. I know it happens I am just saying it is a bad arrest.

What if you are in the checkout line at the store and a drunk man walks up to you and begins yelling obscenties. He then walks up to the cashier and yells at her. Then he runs out of the store and starts yelling at cars passing in the parking lot. As an officer you stop him and he starts yelling at you. What do you do at that point? Remember another tax paying citizen called the police and asked for assistance in the matter.

Scrutiny of an entire agency or company is completely normal behavior. If police departments were competing and it was up to the consumers in a given area to choose which company to go with, they would fire most of the ones out there. That's consumer behavior, and although law states that people aren't allowed to have consumer behavior, they still do because it's natural. When so many cops over so many years, so many police departments have abused their positions...people DO blame the whole bunch. Just like if I bought rotten meat on several occasions at Wal-Mart I would stop buying meat from all Wal-Marts.

Someone just walking down the street who is intoxicated is a completely legitimate arrest. The law is on the books written that way. It happens all the time, in many different areas. Again, this is just one example. There are hundreds if not thousands of ridiculous laws on the books that people get arrested for every day. Actually more people are arrested for stupid things than serious crimes.

Someone going 50 in a school zone should be given the same citation as anyone else driving over the speed limit. There have been no significant studies proving that school zones have prevented any deaths in school age children related to these zones. It is simply an excuse to cite and bleed people for even more money. Also many school zones are set up like speed traps, this is NOT a coincidence. If anything the only school zones that should be watched more carefully is stop signs in areas where children cross.

Again scrutiny is fine. Bashing is not. So do you blame the Wal Mart cashier in Texas for the bad meat you bought from a Wal Mart in New York? That sounds kind of prejiduce to me.

Wow I don't know where you live but where I am from the statute specifically states that for disorderly/public intoxication the persons behavior must be "annoying or dangerous to others." If an officer arrests a person for simply walking down the street because they didn't want to DUI then it is a bad arrest. Again not saying it doesn't happen I am just saying that it's a bad arrest. IMHO not an example of a stupid law. Panhandling without a permit to me is a stupid law.

But do you agree that someone driving reckless should be given a citation? Would you want a young street racer in his "race car" speeding, tailgating and changing lanes eratically next to you when you're driving to work?

reply to post by TorqueyThePig


Even if only a small majority of cops are bad (I think it's a very large majority) you are going to get few people to sympathize with them. If we as average citizens have a bad day that's just what it is. If cops are having a bad day people get arrested or killed for no reason. No one can get behind that.

That's the reason people don't have any trust in your organization. Nothing personal but I wouldn't call the cops if gangs were storming my house and the mob was after my family. In my eyes LEOs are a much bigger danger and I don't trust them. Never have, never will.

reply to post by hounddoghowlie


I am sure there are plenty of officers who abuse the resisting charge. I can say that I almost lost my life to a suspect that was "resisting."

Not that anyone cares but I responded to a domestic violence call. I get on scene and speak to the wife who clearly has a broken nose. Obviously she tells me her husband did it. As I go outside to wave the paramedics in I see the husband on the sidewalk several houses down. I obviously ask him to come over to my location. When he doesn't, I start walking towards him at which he starts running.

I eventually catch him by grabbing the back of his shirt and take him to the ground with a front leg sweep. He lands stomach first with hands under him. I reach for his right wrist/hand and try to pull it behind his back to start the handcuffing process. He resists. He doesn't strike me, but he resists. He braces, tenses, and pulls in an effort to defeat me from gaining control of his hand/arm.

At this point I palm strike him several times with an open hand on the side of his head to distract him. Hence why we call the technique a "distractor." It works! I get his right hand slap the cuff on. Now on to his left. Again he resists. Not striking me but won't let his hand come out from under his stomach. Eventually another officer arrived and we were both able to pull his hand out from under him and cuff him.

A search incident to arrest produced a Jimenz .380ACP caliber semi automatic pistol in his waistband. No wonder this guy didn't want to give me his hands. In a post miranda interview he informed me that when I was on top of him he was thinking about using the gun on me. Nice feeling.

My point is that if someone came along with their cell phone camera and started filming as I was on top of his back it probably would of looked bad on my part. Also someone watching the video could not understand how the suspect was resisting if he was just lying there with his hands under him. It would just show the big bad cop striking him in the head.

Like I said I know police do bad stuff. I also understand there are a lot of times it's captured on video. However don't always believe the video is the 100% truth. A lot of the time it's friends of the suspect who cut and chop the video and are looking for some kind of pay day.

reply to post by Bassago


I have had bad days at work and have not illegaly arrested someone or killed anybody.

I guess I am just able to judge the individual and not the whole. I pride myself on that. It sucks that other people can't.

But I respect your opinion and your right to it. I do appreciate you being mature and not calling me a bunch of names.

And even though you don't want help from the police, if you lived in my town my hand would always be extended regardless of what you thought of me.