jump to last post 1-8 of 8 discussions (82 posts)

Life Lesson One to America's Youth !

  1. ahorseback profile image52
    ahorsebackposted 2 months ago

    Police encounter - If you simply obey the orders of a police officer  you will not be shot !

    What is so evil about obeying the simple  ,  systematic  standard directions of an officer in   situations of a police , civilian encounter ?    You cannot get away with the same poor behavior you're  used to encountering  with your parents  and friends , Why ?    Because most of life's encounters demand far more respect than you are used to showing in your lose  behavior !

    Any questions?

    1. PrettyPanther profile image86
      PrettyPantherposted 2 months ago in reply to this

      I have an autistic son who looks completely normal but in stressful situations might hesitate or freeze while being yelled at. It's nice to know you think it would be justified for a cop to shoot him for it.

      1. ahorseback profile image52
        ahorsebackposted 2 months ago in reply to this

        PP, Get real !,......saying  lousy and entitled behavior is unacceptable in the actual encounter where an officer alone has to protect him[her ] self as the defender of poor attitude and  general  rejection of  authority , I  do understand you're confusion .

        1. PrettyPanther profile image86
          PrettyPantherposted 2 months ago in reply to this

          So, you believe not moving fast enough when an officer barks an order is punishable by death?

          1. ahorseback profile image52
            ahorsebackposted 2 months ago in reply to this

            Actually I believe that police officers are there for the better good and TO PROTECT even the lowly enlightened protester !

            1. PrettyPanther profile image86
              PrettyPantherposted 2 months ago in reply to this

              Avoiding the question, as usual.  It would be really easy to say "of course not," but you can't even do that.

      2. wilderness profile image95
        wildernessposted 2 months ago in reply to this

        One of the things that often strikes me in the videos of violent confrontations is that there is often one, or several, cops shouting to "Lie down!" or whatever.  Repeated over and over in a long stream of shouted orders.

        Most people are not accustomed to drill sergeant tactics and it could very well be confusing.  Before they've even processed the order and begun to act, another order, screamed out in anger and/or fear, is received.  I can fully understand why some people get confused and don't react by promptly obeying. 

        I often wonder if a quiet request wouldn't be more effective.  Sure, to those that aren't going to cooperate it won't make any difference but for the people who are willing to follow orders if the cop just doesn't scare them to death and confuse them with rapid fire orders it might help a lot.

        1. PrettyPanther profile image86
          PrettyPantherposted 2 months ago in reply to this

          A reasonable position. My son would very likely freeze or run if screamed at the way I've seen cops do in so many videos. I don't think he needs to die because of that.

          I recently watched a video where an officer tased an elderly woman because she didn't jump when screamed at. An elderly person can be easily confused and could also suffer grave effects from being tased. It looked to me like the officer could have easily detained her without violence. She was just standing there crying in confusion.

          I think training in nonviolent tactics is sorely needed.

          1. wilderness profile image95
            wildernessposted 2 months ago in reply to this

            I understand the adrenaline is pumping and the cop is afraid for his life.  I understand it is imperative that weapons be dropped, that the suspect stay away from anything that is being mistaken for a weapon, and anywhere a weapon might be obtained.  I get all that, and I get the anger of a cop when orders are not followed.  I get that it takes a fraction of a second to kill a cop - that seconds are incredibly precious to both cop and suspect wishing to cause harm.  I get that it's all too easy to blame the cop because we, sitting in our arm chair and second guessing his motives and actions with almost no information to go on, make calls that cops have neither information or time to make.

            Still, it does seem that calm must prevail and that orders, at least initially, need to be calm requests rather than screamed out.  In so many cases that only transfers the cops fear and confusion to the suspect.  It could also be that we're missing the initial requests in these videos, that a quiet voice is not being picked up, but I doubt it.  In the cases where it goes wrong it think the first words are an excited scream from a cop, intended to produce instant obedience, and it doesn't work.

            1. ahorseback profile image52
              ahorsebackposted 2 months ago in reply to this

              Why ,........... "it doesn't work " .......is more often than not the behavior problems of our youth !

            2. PrettyPanther profile image86
              PrettyPantherposted 2 months ago in reply to this

              Yes, I've seen police remain calm and professional during extremely stressful times.  I realize they are human beings and will lose their cool and make mistakes.  However, as in any job, if you lose your cool and make mistakes, consequences should ensue.  Think about a bank teller who gets frustrated with a customer and punches them or something.  That person would likely get fired.  I know a janitor who laid hands on a kid who was mouthing off.  It wasn't his job to do so, and he got fired.  Cops shoot somebody and the system often (not always) protects them.  Not only that, cops who repeatedly show their inability to carry out their duties professionally remain on the job, or if they are fired, get a job in another city. 

              Again, I appreciate the difficulty of their job and the dangers they face.  It is time for good cops to weed out the bad ones.  The only way the system will change is from within.

              1. wilderness profile image95
                wildernessposted 2 months ago in reply to this

                About all I'd disagree with is that the system "often" protects cops when it shouldn't.  It happens, but I think it's quite rare and getting rarer.

        2. ahorseback profile image52
          ahorsebackposted 2 months ago in reply to this

          We have , in America , raised a couple of generations of spoiled youth who instantly  reject any self -protective police  order ,    Too much pride , ego and rebellious nature  isn't good for anyone !   Got to "teach your children well "actually means that !  Not to teach them to assume an entitlement and anarchy in behavior.

      3. Billie Kelpin profile image89
        Billie Kelpinposted 2 months ago in reply to this

        Pretty Panther...your son or any of my former students who are deaf who might try to sign to a state patrol officer or police officer and are misunderstood- The death sentence should not be given to a deaf young deaf man so afraid of the police because of past experiences that he drove home and was shot to death in front of his  house in aug 2016 in North Carolina. Why is shooting someone dead an option when an encounter is a few min long? Something is very very wrong. Many teachers are in situations everyday that could escalate to tragic ends in a second. They know how to diffuse and de-escalate. I once stood between two 6 ft seniors ready to get into a fight that would ending in unpredictable consequences.. My physical being was in danger. I diffused it by breaking the students' animal-like eye contact with each other. It's not equivalent, but I simply don't see ANY attempt in recent encounters  to diffuse  situations - only a lot of escalating! The point you made Pretty Panther is excellent.

        1. ahorseback profile image52
          ahorsebackposted 2 months ago in reply to this

          Here's a point  for ALL  to THINK about ;

          Police procedure ,  A cop encounters people at every stop that they make in their career ,    They are placed in potential danger at all of these stops , NOT JUST THE ONE YOU SEE ON TV  .     That is why they have a procedure  that protects both them and the possible perpetrator in a stop ,   ---Roll down your window , show your hands  ,  don't make any fast moves ,  don't argue ,  don't show attitude ,
          You don't do stupid things until the cop  feels safe .    Guess what people , it isn't a book , it's a gun ! Why the procedure is so hard for people sitting safely at home watching the nightly news , is SO hard to understand , baffles a lot of people,.

        2. wilderness profile image95
          wildernessposted 2 months ago in reply to this

          Standing between two big boys does not put your life in imminent danger.  It is very likely that neither one actually wanted to fight each other, and certainly neither one had a burning desire to kill you.  Neither one was armed - any damage they do will take some time.

          To equate that to someone with a gun and an intent to murder a cop, that requires a fraction of a second to do that, is silly.  There is no comparison at all between you breaking up a fight between two bruisers still in the "insult" stage or their shouting match and a cop facing someone that is armed, high on drugs and wanting to kill a cop.

          1. PrettyPanther profile image86
            PrettyPantherposted 2 months ago in reply to this

            I think she was equating it more to cops who shoot unarmed suspects because they "fear for their life."

            1. wilderness profile image95
              wildernessposted 2 months ago in reply to this

              So am I.  Of course there is the small matter of hindsight showing "unarmed" vs the necessary assumption during the heat of an altercation that a suspect IS armed.  Somehow that requirement always seems to get lost in the shuffle.

          2. Billie Kelpin profile image89
            Billie Kelpinposted 2 months ago in reply to this

            hmm... If you read closely, I stated that it is not equivalent - merely an example of de-escalation. There is sonething one can do about de-escalation - nothing that can be done to change either your mind nor mine about the need to have a systemic cultural change of mindset.

            1. wilderness profile image95
              wildernessposted 2 months ago in reply to this

              De-escalation of two kids arguing and de-escalation of a situation of someone a half second away from murder have nothing in common with each other.  Do you feel that they are similar somehow or do you include the example for another reason?

              1. PrettyPanther profile image86
                PrettyPantherposted 2 months ago in reply to this

                Wilderness? You are doing it again. You are mischaracterizing her point to make it easier to argue against. There are plenty of clear-cut instances of cops choosing to escalate a relatively benign situation. Do you really have to bark orders at a small elderly woman who is standing there crying in confusion then taser her when she doesn't jump at your command? Do you really have to shoot an unarmed mann in the back while he is running away?? Really?

                I think we can hold our police, who are servants of the people, to a reasonable standard of conduct and still respect the difficulty of their job.

                1. wilderness profile image95
                  wildernessposted 2 months ago in reply to this

                  I remember that!  He was shot while running away, and that was near the beginning of the whole BLM thing! 

                  Except he wasn't running away, was he? 

                  It's a popular call, isn't it?  Ignore danger to the cop and surrounding population: far more important to "de-escalate" some whacko on PCP with unknown weapons in his pockets.  It's a great sounding word - de-escalate - until someone (except the cop - his death won't matter as that's what we pay him for) gets killed.  And so easy for arm-chair arguments after the fact, too!

                  1. PrettyPanther profile image86
                    PrettyPantherposted 2 months ago in reply to this

                    1) Police sometimes have to make split-second decisions to injure or kill a citizen and are completely justified in doing so.

                    2) Sometimes police are bad at their jobs and their unprofessional behavior results in unnecessary death or injury to citizens.

                    These statements are both true.

                2. Billie Kelpin profile image89
                  Billie Kelpinposted 2 months ago in reply to this

                  PrettyPanther, Yes!  I would modify #2 by saying that "Sometimes the training of police officers and state patrol officers is not consistent across the board in all states or counties and it APPEARS as if the curriculum involved in various programs is deficient in training officers in specific methods that the fields of psychology, sociology, and criminal justice have found statistically effective; nor do all  programs include training on recognizing and understanding the needs of various communities, including the mentally ill and people with physical and psychological challenges.  In addition, understanding the cultural characteristics of various communities seems lacking. It is that lack of training that SEEMS to result in unnecessary death or injury to citizens. 
                  When I was working for the Bureau of Hearing Impaired in Madison, Wisconsin we had counselors who also did consistent training with Wisconsin State Patrol on recognizing and approaching deaf people as well as training citizens within the deaf community as to how to respond when approached by an officer. This is one example of the kind of dedicated outreach that has to occur consistently "across the board" . That means purposeful, directed involvement of communities with the law enforcement agencies in the US. I have known of hearing and deaf parents of deaf kids who have taken it upon themselves, to approach the police community and pass out brochures about deafness or actually give little talks.  Unless this is a system wide procedure for all communities, we will have mistakes made that shouldn't be made.  Since the use of cell phone video, however, incomplete as those fractured pieces of evidence might be, one thing seems obvious and indisputable : WE CAN DO BETTER!

                  1. wilderness profile image95
                    wildernessposted 2 months ago in reply to this

                    There is a problem here.  You want your cop to be thoroughly trained in psychology, sociology and criminal law in all its nuances.  You want him trained in hearing disability and, presumably, all the other possible disabilities we see in our country (blindness, diabetes, missing limbs, heart conditions and everything else that affects how people behave).  You want him to be an expert on not only mental illness, but the physical effects of those illnesses.  He must be expert in all drugs, legal and illegal, and the effects they have on people both mental and physical.

                    Others want cops to carry 50 pounds of equipment while retaining the ability to subdue a PCP addict without harming them.  They must be in better physical condition that 99% of the population in order to chase suspects until they drop rather than using force to stop them.  We want every cop under constant video surveillance all the time they are on duty, with zero privacy and with zero errors being made. 

                    A fine and noble goal, but there aren't a dozen people in the entire country with those abilities, or even with the ability to learn all these things before old age.  And we need nearly a million cops!  You will have cops spend their entire career simply training without ever stepping foot into the street.

                    Like it or not, cops have limited ability, limited training and are not perfect.  Nothing is ever going to change that, and we're never going to even approach the goals you would set up.

    2. colorfulone profile image88
      colorfuloneposted 2 months ago in reply to this

      I think a big problem within the police force is that over recent years the bar has been lowered on entrance exams and IQ's, etc.  That is not good use of common sense for the service and safety of the citizens.

      I hear about people needing to site their legal rights to inform an officer of the law as to what they are. I'm not sure how common that is, but its good to know your legal rights.   

      Anyway, shell we call for higher entrance standards for police officers?
      I believe the majority of officers would appreciate that.
      Who would you want to have your back?
      We see too many Barney Fifes coming out police academies these days.

      1. wilderness profile image95
        wildernessposted 2 months ago in reply to this

        "Anyway, shell we call for higher entrance standards for police officers? "

        If we do, will we still have people to hire and train?  I know I wouldn't be a cop in today's atmosphere if the standards were a warm body and it paid triple what it does.

        1. colorfulone profile image88
          colorfuloneposted 2 months ago in reply to this

          Boy howdy, I hear your there!  Its gotten much more dangerous out there for cops in the past couple of years, once again.  Too many shot and killed!

          This bad enough.  ~~>  My son in-law is a fireman.  He recently got called to the scene of an accident to find one of his best friends mangled and no longer with us.

    3. DavidRam0s profile image79
      DavidRam0sposted 2 months ago in reply to this

      You must obviously be a cop

  2. ahorseback profile image52
    ahorsebackposted 2 months ago

    Police brutality  is rare  , rare too is  the situational , systematic bias of a police stop turning violent BY the cop  .    An intentional police shooting of an innocent  man who did nothing is rare  too ,

    In fact how many police shootings has the media falsely hyped up the  'facts  " by falsely implying  a wrong doing  by the police , when the outcomes of investigations almost always shows that the cop acted in a professional and  procedurally correct manner  ?

    Most police shootings ARE justified -   But THAT doesn't  show in the continual media attack , It doesn't fit the agenda of the left , it doesn't fit of the minority desire for projecting a jack-booted  false image of police.

    Question ---Who  continues the conversation about  these  incidents when the "man holding a book " turns out to actually be a man  " holding , brandishing  and then  threatening with  a gun "?

    No one ! -- Have you thanked a cop lately ?

  3. ahorseback profile image52
    ahorsebackposted 2 months ago

    What seems obviously lost in this debate is that Police aren't out to shoot anyone and;   

    -That we live  in a nation of law and order that has to be upheld or anarchy rules.
    -That the media has  sensationalized  a small fraction of reality into the majority of police shootings
    -That the naiveté'  of the young public believes the sensationalized falsehood.
    -That in truth almost all police shootings ARE eventually justified.
    -That criminals live under a different set of values and ethics
    -That  many here in the forums have fallen ,and always will , for these media lies.

  4. Kathryn L Hill profile image84
    Kathryn L Hillposted 2 months ago

    Cops can have bad attitudes just as easily as anyone else. Sometimes they try to push your buttons. They test you to see if you will disrespect them. Then they will let you have it. Why?
    Because they can. Sometimes women are meaner than men. They are the most irritating. There is no way to fight these types. You just have to go with it and maintain respect even if you are totally acting.

  5. ahorseback profile image52
    ahorsebackposted 2 months ago

    I'll say one thing that is true about some people who always run to the  conspiracy  connection - They shouldn't be allowed near key boards .

  6. TorontoCaricature profile image62
    TorontoCaricatureposted 2 months ago

    Life Reality Lesson to America's Youth
    There are idiots in the USA who think everyone shot by police did something wrong.
    There are idiots who have not seen videos of people obeying police orders getting murdered anyway.
    There are idiots who think that an unarmed not threatening citizen deserves to get murdered and gunned down in the USA while most other civilized nations have professional cops who are not trigger happy killers but actually calmly use their brains in handling situations that don't result in needless killing.
    If you are a youth become empowered and know the law and work in some way in your life to overhaul the racist and prejudiced American policing/ justice system.
    So kids - get used to idiots who routinely excuse immoral, law-breaking police conduct by trying to blame victims. Change the system so that the idiots become extinct.

    1. wilderness profile image95
      wildernessposted 2 months ago in reply to this

      You forgot that there are idiots that think no police shooting is justified.

      1. DavidRam0s profile image79
        DavidRam0sposted 2 months ago in reply to this

        And there are idiots who think every shooting is justified

  7. ahorseback profile image52
    ahorsebackposted 2 months ago

    A lot of people should just plain grow up , Contrary to popular belief and even  your opinions  , An officer of the law CAN shoot a suspect- in many circumstances , Even a fleeing suspect ,   Even an unarmed suspect ,   A suspect doesn't even have to be armed ,    In my opinion  and in my experiences in life  , IF A COP HAS TO HAVE ON A BODY CAM  ;

    -So too should the following people ?
    -Convicted Violent Felons
    -Sexual predators
    -Rapists
    -Child abusers and rapists
    -Organized  Protest marchers

    The liberties  of the public are far , far more apt to be negatively perpetrated  than those of the police authorities.   Why is it that all of a sudden and in the last very few years  ,  the constant scrutiny of  police procedure  is constantly an issue ,   are we not just a society on the verge of  anarchy ?

  8. Credence2 profile image87
    Credence2posted 2 months ago

    Other people need to consider the option of critical thinking over playing the role of your local, neighborhood kneejerk rightwing reactionary.

    I don't pay the bad guys my tax money to preserve and protect as opposed to law enforcement personnel. So much of that post is considered absurd from very moment that the ink hits the paper.

    If the officer can and does shoot, he or she better be able to support the necessity of the shootings, the camera is just another form of evidence toward that end.

    Tyrants always use the fear of anarchy as an excuse...

    1. wilderness profile image95
      wildernessposted 2 months ago in reply to this

      "...he or she better be able to support the necessity of the shootings...

      This seems to be a major problem, as so very many find that the only "necessity" consists of the suspect spewing bullets directly at them. 

      Got a school shooter?  Run up close and taze him, but don't shoot - he might have a bad home life or be on drugs.

      Got an arsonist in a riot?  Pile on a dozen cops (taking them from protecting that store over there that has the windows broken out), but don't shoot him - he's just angry and burning the neighborhood won't hurt anyone.

      Got a suspect with a record of violence that is waving what appears to be a gun in the dark?  Ask him to pretty please put the gun down (for the 20th time) - it might not be a gun, he might be deaf or mentally disabled and therefore won't pull the trigger.

      I can remember only one police shooting where the public, or at least part of it, thought it was "justified".

      1. Credence2 profile image87
        Credence2posted 2 months ago in reply to this

        Is it all or nothing? Wilderness, contrary to your persistent opinion in this matter, I never said that there were not situations where use of lethal force is justified. These matters need to be decided by the courts and administrators, not public opinion. If you are doing your job the way that you are supposed to, what is there to hide?

        1. wilderness profile image95
          wildernessposted 2 months ago in reply to this

          Agreed - you didn't say that.  But the population in general does - every time there is a shooting (at least of anyone with dark skin) the immediate cry goes up to hang the cop - that (s)he should not have fired.  It's all over social media, it's all over the news.  It has gotten to the point that it is almost impossible to get a fair hearing or even trial.

          I'd also ask..in your opinion should camera videos be quickly released to the public or only after a trial?  If released, will they promote a fair trial or prevent one?  If released (and you know as well as I do that the public will claim whatever it wants without regard to any video), and an investigation finds a cop innocent of wrongdoing, will they still have a reasonable life and job, or will it be destroyed by public outcry?

          But how many of the shootings we've heard about in the past year were justified in your opinion?  Of those that hit the news, that BLM complains about before ANY facts are known (let alone all of them), how many were justified in your opinion?

          1. Credence2 profile image87
            Credence2posted 2 months ago in reply to this

            OK, but these cases are not decided by the population, but by due process of law. A man and his career cannot be subject to the whim of mobs, but subject to orderly process of determining if the use of force was justified. I presume that if you want me to just take the word of the cop and be done with it you also have faith in the courts and the legal process?

            That is what I like, everyone held accountable for the things that they do or fail to do. That is part of any job. Nobody just gets to do what they want, that goes for the cop as well as the criminal element.

            I am willing to let the court decide which of these many shootings were in fact unjustified or not.

            1. wilderness profile image95
              wildernessposted 2 months ago in reply to this

              "A man and his career cannot be subject to the whim of mobs"

              I presume that you would keep all body cams sealed forever then?  Or will you release them to that mob, who will see in them whatever they want to?

              While I like cams overall, I do see this as a big, big problem.  The recent shooting of a man surrounded by cop cars, with a video from a helicopter, is a case in point - my local TV station repeated the mob claim that his hands were up even as the chopper video they were showing plainly showed they were down.  That's the crap every cop will face in either investigation or trial, and it will inevitably become more of a political action than a search for truth.  A sacrificial lamb to keep the mob placated.

              Would you, too, seal the videos or turn them to the mob either before any trial or after?  You say the cop should held accountable for his actions - do you also want him accountable for what he did NOT do but the mob claims he did?

              1. Credence2 profile image87
                Credence2posted 2 months ago in reply to this

                You are missing it. The body cams are not public property, in a contentious case, I consider the video record as evidence. The decision as to whether a specific shooting is out of line belong to the court and its deliberations.

                I reiterate the "decision' is not to be made the mob. Only impartial and proper authorities can take the video evidence in concert with other evidence not necessarily seen on the surface to make the proper determination of guilt or no.

                The courts and administrators are there to insure that it is a search for truth, rather than a political action.

                What is your alternative, that we simply take the word of the cops all of the time without challenge? Is that not just the extreme in the opposite direction?

                There is no requirement to release sensitive video evidence to the public that could compromise the officer receiving a fair hearing, but I do want it properly considered as evidence by the proper and impartial authorities.

                Whatever I want the officer held accountable for and where he or she fell short is to be determined by the courts. This protects both the rights of the officer and that of the public, or mob as you say.

                1. wilderness profile image95
                  wildernessposted 2 months ago in reply to this

                  "The decision as to whether a specific shooting is out of line belong to the court and its deliberations."
                  "I reiterate the "decision' is not to be made the mob."

                  I will add that there is no valid reason to give it to the mob, either.  Although you did not indicate, can I assume then that you would seal those tapes forever, outside of a courtroom and/or investigations by proper authorities that could lead to an indictment?  That they are never to be released to the media or public?

                  If so, that only leaves the minor matter of the continued additional requirements added to police officers.  Minor, at least, in the matter of a camera and ignoring additional costs.  What would be your suggestion there?

                  1. Credence2 profile image87
                    Credence2posted 2 months ago in reply to this

                    It is not new to seal evidence from public access, how long was the Zapruder film  kept from public view? But that review of information and the determining of the sealing of evidence cannot be determined by just the police departments. That ultimate determination needs to be made from an IMPARTIAL and overriding court authority just to make sure the departments are not covering things up. The same reason why the police need to warrants to search and invade privacy and private property.

                    I don't see the introduction of a body cam as an intolerable additional burden considering the role that it plays. I have never advocated that police are to be otherwise, overburdened. With the nature of our litigious society, this camera is almost as essential as the service revolver. There is a little chance that an officer would be forced to use his weapon, but the camera could record contacts with the civilian community and determine if a law officer is acting appropriately even when use of a firearm is not involved. How do the officers behave, are they respectful and courteous? Is there animosity from the civilian community toward cops that is not justified?  Good managers should be aware of these sorts of issues

 
working