PDA

View Full Version : Analysis of police shootings



Glenn E. Meyer
12-26-2015, 06:02 PM
http://www.washingtonpost.com/sf/investigative/2015/12/26/a-year-of-reckoning-police-fatally-shoot-nearly-1000/

Another FYI report. Just saw it.

jnc36rcpd
12-26-2015, 06:24 PM
I can't help but notice that the Post's series of hit pieces on police use of force has become perfunctory. It's almost like they realize that they and other mainstream media are responsible for the Ferguson effect.

That said, Alpert advocates that an officer assaulted during a domestic back off, calm the assailant down and then leave? I suspect he would be so sanguine about people shoving college professors.

voodoo_man
12-26-2015, 06:25 PM
Almost a thousand fatal police involved shootings.

A thousand.

1000.

You know how many citizen contacts LEO's in this country made through the whole year?

Of those contacts how many of them force was used against?

Then out of those how many were actually shot?

Then out of those how many actually died as a result?

I am no math student, but I'd wager a months check it's under .001 percent of all citizen-police contacts.

DpdG
12-26-2015, 06:28 PM
That said, Alpert advocates that an officer assaulted during a domestic back off, calm the assailant down and then leave? I suspect he would be so sanguine about people shoving college professors.


I don't know about all states, but mine has determined DV to be a manditory arrest when probable cause exists. I tuned out Alpert due to his clear lack of grip with such a reality. Too bad, maybe he had something worthwhile, but he lost me.

1slow
12-26-2015, 11:26 PM
I can't help but notice that the Post's series of hit pieces on police use of force has become perfunctory. It's almost like they realize that they and other mainstream media are responsible for the Ferguson effect.

That said, Alpert advocates that an officer assaulted during a domestic back off, calm the assailant down and then leave? I suspect he would be so sanguine about people shoving college professors.

So Alpert does not think "womens lives matter."

DpdG
12-27-2015, 01:15 AM
I truly believe there is a gross misunderstanding of the ultimate goal of LE in these conversations. I think those such as Alpert and many of today's most vocal believe (or want) the goal of LE to be avoiding any loss of any civilian (in the non-LE sense) life/limb at any and all costs (including sacrificing the lawful objectives the officer is trying to fulfill). The law, both statutory and case law, says the goal of LE is to preserve the greater peace, uphold the constitution, and enforce the laws enacted at the federal/state/local level. LEOs are currently stuck between a rock (statutory law) and a hard place (vocal public opinion).

The current statutory regulations (as reflected in NTOA guidelines) present the following priority of life:
1) hostages/victims
2) innocent bystanders
3) cops/first responders
4) suspects/subjects

Sometimes people make choices or exhibit certain behaviors that means their individual freedom must be restricted. The level of force necessary to restrict that freedom is entirely reactive, based on the actions of the person whose freedom is to be restricted.

Until this conflict between real and perceived goals is resolved at the legislative and judicial level, there will be continued conflicts between LE and certain segments of society. I personally hope those currently most vocal come to realize the legitimacy and validity of the traditional goals of LE. That role and resultant methodology has had 200 years of evolutionary refinement. I'm not saying LE is perfect, but these are fundamental and existential changes being advocated.

TGS
12-27-2015, 10:52 AM
Excellent post, DpdG.

Glenn E. Meyer
12-27-2015, 12:07 PM
I suspect he would be so sanguine about people shoving college professors.

Don't like that! Haha!

Nephrology
01-02-2016, 05:50 PM
The Guardian has a similar report on their website (their tally includes other non-firearm LEO uses of fore that result in death and is a little higher at ~1150). However, in scrolling through "The counted" and clicking on their names/faces, I can't help but notice that the vast majority of suspects killed by LEOs are total scum.

Here is one that I picked at random :

Terrozza Griffin, 24 y/o BM

"Authorities said Griffin was killed when he opened fire on police officers who entered a home that he had invaded. The officers raided the home following a two-hour standoff when fire and smoke was seen inside."

and another

Omar Ventura, 23 y/o LM

"Police said Ventura was shot as he walked with a knife towards his girlfriend, who was hiding behind a garbage can outside a home. The officer who fired had just been interviewing the girlfriend about two alleged domestic assaults by Ventura earlier in the day, when Ventura returned to the scene and refused to drop his knife as he approached the woman."

Erica Lauro, 22 y/o WF

"Officers were pursuing Lauro and two men she was with during an assault investigation, authorities said. When police caught up with group, Lauro and one of the men allegedly began shooting at officers. Police said Lauro was pronounced dead at the scene and both men were arrested."

etc.

Of course, the Guardian highlights in bright yellow their favorite sob stories, but the vast majority of the people in their database truly seem as if they were asking to get shot. I am sure there are a few people on that list who are victims in some sense of the word, but I can't say I am up in arms about any of this.

edit: Here is the link:

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ng-interactive/2015/jun/01/the-counted-police-killings-us-database#

Try playing a game - jump from person to person at random until you find someone who didn't commit a terrible crime. Might take you a bit.